1N-2H,2S-3D

[ron_ron]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa3ha85daj64cq962&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1np2hp2sp3dp]133|200|what now, at matchpoints? at IMPs? why? thanks.

[/hv]

[mike777]

3h cue agree D.

 

No problem yet.

[Flameous]

What Mike said.

 

If partner suggests 3NT by bidding it next, I will not push further.

[Quantumcat]

Cues always agree the second suit. So 3♥ is no problem.

[Fluffy]

Maybe it took 11.000 post from both of us, but finally I can say... I agree with mike

[whereagles]

4♦ for me because I'm 100% not sure pard won't take 3♥ as a 5 carder, something which is becoming more and more common these days (1NT with 5M332).

[menggq]

P 1N P 2H

P 2S P 3D

P ?

 

3H=cue bid means D FIT promised D4+

3S=confirm S contract promised S3+

3N=no S/D FIT means S2 and D3- probably.

 

I dont agree with 4D bidding which is over 3N.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Here is a variation of the IanD method that I've posted before for such an auction:

 

South

A x

A x x

A J x x

Q 9 x x

 

1NT - 2H

2S - 3D ( GF, slammish , 5+s/4+d )

??

...3H! = cheapest new suit = agree Diam( 4 or 5 cards ); only 2 cards Sp

...3S = agree Sp, 3 cards Sp; no 4 cards Diam

...3NT = agree neither

...4C! = agree BOTH: 3s/4 or 5d ( Sweet ! )

 

So I would rebid 3H! agreeing Diam, but not necessarily a Ctrl cue .

[gnasher]

I don't think 3♥ promises primary diamond support. What are you supposed to bid with Kx AKJx AJx xxxx?

[Quantumcat]

4♦ for me because I'm 100% not sure pard won't take 3♥ as a 5 carder, something which is becoming more and more common these days (1NT with 5M332).

 

He has 9+ pointy cards, he probably doesn't much care whether we have a five card suit.

[Quantumcat]

I don't think 3♥ promises primary diamond support. What are you supposed to bid with Kx AKJx AJx xxxx?

 

3NT. 3NT says you have two cards in his first suit and three in his second. If you don't want to bid 3NT, you have to pretend you have three spades and bid 3♠.

[gnasher]

3NT. 3NT says you have two cards in his first suit and three in his second.

So you play in 3NT with Axxxx xx KQxxx x opposite Kx AKJx AJx xxxx. What a marvellous system.

 

If you don't want to bid 3NT, you have to pretend you have three spades and bid 3♠.

It's playable for 3♠ to show either 3-card support or doubt about strain. That swaps accuracy in investigating spade slams for accuracy in investigating diamond slams.

 

 

The real problem with this auction is that people use this sequence on hands where they're not actually interested in a diamond fit - they're just bidding the second suit as away of making sure than any 5-3 spade fit is reached. Because of that, opener is reluctant to go past 3NT even on a hand that's quite suitable for diamonds. In order not to lose a diamond fit when responder really is interested, you want 3♥ to promise diamond support.

 

It's much better to have a way for responder to say "I have five spades, and if you have three of them I definitely want to to play in 4♠." Then 1NT-2♥;2♠-3♦ can say "I have spades and diamonds, and if you have a suitable hand for diamonds I'm happy for you to go past 3NT. Then 1NT-2♥;2♠-3♦;3♥ can say "I'm quite suitable for a suit contract, but I'm not sure. What do you think?"

[karlson]

I'm with gnasher. I strongly feel that the primary goal in this sequence should be for opener to show concentration of values (or for responder to show shortness) so that it can be determined whether 3n is playable. If it's not, then it will be easier to figure out whether to play 4♠ vs 5♦ vs 6♦.

 

On this hand I would be happy to play in diamonds (or perhaps 4♠) no matter which rounded suit partner is short/weak in, so I would just bid 4♦. If partner has 5242 with strong doubletons and no slam try, then he should jut bid 3n over 2s (or some other method that forces opener to bid 4s with 3 as gnasher suggests).

[Siegmund]

So you play in 3NT with Axxxx xx KQxxx x opposite Kx AKJx AJx xxxx. What a marvellous system.

 

Yeah. And make an overtrick when they lead the unbid major, beating all the poor suckers in 5D. B-) Though if you make responder's hand any better he'll pull 3N to 4D, and then we'll get to 6D.

 

I am with the first 4 posters in the thread.

 

"Playability of 3NT" isn't so much the question, as non-playability of either of the two suits responder has proposed (who may well have wished for a slam in one of them.)

[han]

Andy, sounds like you want to play that 3C shows diamonds, so that you can do both.

[gnasher]

Andy, sounds like you want to play that 3C shows diamonds, so that you can do both.

That's one way to solve the problem.

 

Another is to play 3♣ as two-way or multi-way. For example, you could play 3♣ as either minor, or a hand that's looking for 3-card support. If opener doesn't have three of the major, he bids 3♦ to ask for the minor.

 

With 3-card support for the major, opener bids 3M. Now if responder wanted to make a slam try, he can bid his second suit, but otherwise he bids 4M without revealing his side suit.

 

This even gives you a spare 3♦ bid which you can use for something else, like a one-suited slam try that wants to initiate cue-bidding.

[phil_20686]

There is another (better) solution. Just exchange the meaning of 4!d and 3!s, then you can agree diamonds below 3N. The downside is that when you agree spades you will never play in 3N, but that isn't very much of a downside as partner will typically not introduce a 4 card minor without some interest in playing in a suit, and if I am very unsuitable I can bid 3N rather than agree spades anyway. It would also make 4c/4h= cue agreeing spades. SO to be clear I am suggsting:

 

3H = Naturalish

3S = 4+ diamonds

3N= To play

4C = Cue in spades

4d = Agree spades but not enough to cue.

4H = agree spades, suitable hand for slam, no club cue.

4S = Both spades and diamonds in an unsuitable hand

 

You could edit the bids above 3N to make it more efficient, but this is simple and works pretty well.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 

Another is to play 3♣ as two-way or multi-way. For example, you could play 3♣ as either minor, or a hand that's looking for 3-card support. If opener doesn't have three of the major, he bids 3♦ to ask for the minor.

 

With 3-card support for the major, opener bids 3M. Now if responder wanted to make a slam try, he can bid his second suit, but otherwise he bids 4M without revealing his side suit.

 

Interesting idea.

 

So for this hand:

South

A x

A x x

A J x x

Q 9 x x

 

I'm assuming these initial follow-ups:

 

South

1NT - 2H!

2S! - 3C! ( 5s and 4+ of either minor )

3D! ( only 2 cards ♠ but at least one 4 card minor; could have a 5 card minor ) - ??

3H! =

♣

3S! =

♦

3NT! = both ( must be 5 0 4 4 )

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I wonder what Responder's actual hand was on this deal ?

[whereagles]

He has 9+ pointy cards, he probably doesn't much care whether we have a five card suit.

 

maybe he doesn't care, but I certainly do care to play in hearts if pard happens to have a 4351.

[ahydra]

maybe he doesn't care, but I certainly do care to play in hearts if pard happens to have a 4351.

 

do you mean a 5341 (transfer shows 5 spades)?

 

Playing 3H = cue bid agreeing D is a nice agreement here, but in absence of that, I'd bid 4D. After 4D, as we'd hope responder could cue 4S if not 4H there's something to be said for playing 4NT natural and showing only a minimum slam try, which I'd pass with the OP hand.

 

ahydra

[whereagles]

sorry, I meant 5341 of course.

[JLOGIC]

Playing 3N after partner bids 3D is awful, you don't need any system when your hand is this easy. If your partner is bidding 3D because he has shortness in hearts and is unsure about 3N, well, we have Axx and prime cards, why would we want to play 3N? If he has short clubs and is unsure about 3N, we have Q9xx of clubs and prime cards, why would we want to play 3N? If he has 5-5 and choice of games, we have a hand that would never play 3N. If he has a slam try, we have a fantastic hand for slam, and would never play 3N.

[P_Marlowe]

Cues always agree the second suit. So 3♥ is no problem.

No.

 

It makes sense to play that the cue showes primary support for the

first suit, and that bidding the first suit agrees the 2nd, ...

as long as you remember this.

 

The reason is simple - from a frequncy point of few, you are more

likely to have 3 cards than 4 cards, and you usually prefer to play

the major.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mike777]

No.

 

It makes sense to play that the cue showes primary support for the

first suit, and that bidding the first suit agrees the 2nd, ...

as long as you remember this.

 

The reason is simple - from a frequncy point of few, you are more

likely to have 3 cards than 4 cards, and you usually prefer to play

the major.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

 

no

 

You want to be able to support one suit or the other at a low level.

 

3h is a cue for d and 3s is spade agreement.

 

btw pard could have 5 or even 6 card d support but only 2 or 3 spades (no superaccept).

[phil_20686]

Playing 3N after partner bids 3D is awful, you don't need any system when your hand is this easy. If your partner is bidding 3D because he has shortness in hearts and is unsure about 3N, well, we have Axx and prime cards, why would we want to play 3N? If he has short clubs and is unsure about 3N, we have Q9xx of clubs and prime cards, why would we want to play 3N? If he has 5-5 and choice of games, we have a hand that would never play 3N. If he has a slam try, we have a fantastic hand for slam, and would never play 3N.

 

Are we to infer that in your style partner virtually never bids diamonds if 5242? Clearly if partner is always 5431 then missing 3N is a worry, but some people always bid diamonds if they have 5-4. Personally I prefer only to bid diamonds if I might want to play there, so if 5422 would expect honours in the suits with small doubletons typically, but partner of course has some leeway.