Phil Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Secondary transfers are pretty useful here. 1N - 2♥2♠ - 2N3♣ - 3♦ Is commonly used to show at least 12 non heart cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction. Agreed as far as finding a side 4-4 fit, but it seems pretty common to want to pattern out and ask opener to evaluate his honor holdings for slam. Is it as useful as starting a cuebidding sequence? Given that responder has already shown an unbalanced hand and that opener has implied scattered honors everywhere, maybe it's even more useful. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Finding the 4-4 fit is fine, but using a 3rd or 4th suit after showing 2 already as natural at the 4 level is strange to me in any auction. I mean, in the auction 1S-2H-2S-3D-3M all by us we might still have a 4-4 club fit if opener is 0544 but it's not like 4C is natural. Likewise if it goes 1S-2H-2S-3S we might still have a 4-4 minor suit fit and that might be the best spot to play, but 4m is still a cuebid. 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction.I agree with much of this. However, I don't think it is fair, as a matter of theory, to look to auctions that begin 1♠ 2♥ as analogous to strong 1N auctions. In the former, opener is so ill-defined in terms of strength and shape, compared to a 1N opening bid, that (in the absence of relay) it is simply not possible to have as precise and complete an information exchange as can happen over 1N. We have to be ready to accept more compromises in the major suit auctions than we may have to in the strong notrump auctions. I am not, by saying that, necessarily arguing that we shouldn't choose, in the OP sequence, to compromise by giving up on natural bidding. I happen to think that we can actually have it both ways here. I think that it is possible to cater to both cuebiddng and natural bidding here. We can accept, I hope, that responder is not looking to play 5♣ even if opener has clubs. 4♣ is a slam try, and the only permissible contracts are some number of spades, ranging from 4 to 7, or a club slam/grand slam. It is difficult to construct a hand that would offer 6♣ without possession of a club control. Therefore, the distinction between cue and natural isn't yet important. Opener's first duty is to show slam suitability by cue-bidding. Both players assume, for the moment, that spades are agreed. However, responder will sometimes be able to bring clubs back into the mix via 5N, and opener via a jump to 6♣. Which would indeed be my choice were partner to sign off in spades over my red suit cue. Keeping open the possiblity that 4♣ might be natural allows for clubs to be considered as part of the mix later, in some (but not all) auctions. Maybe I have peered so deeply into this narrow issue so as to lose sight of something basic, but this seems to make sense to me, at least for the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Once you are in a gf in one suit trying to back into another suit is a pretty advanced bidding problem. Here:1) we have agreed spades2) thinking about game or slam in spades3) now adding another issue, should we bid slam in another suit is an advanced/expert bidding issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Add me to the 4♦, wtp bidders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I agree with much of this. However, I don't think it is fair, as a matter of theory, to look to auctions that begin 1♠ 2♥ as analogous to strong 1N auctions. In the former, opener is so ill-defined in terms of strength and shape, compared to a 1N opening bid, that (in the absence of relay) it is simply not possible to have as precise and complete an information exchange as can happen over 1N. We have to be ready to accept more compromises in the major suit auctions than we may have to in the strong notrump auctions. I am not, by saying that, necessarily arguing that we shouldn't choose, in the OP sequence, to compromise by giving up on natural bidding. I happen to think that we can actually have it both ways here. I think that it is possible to cater to both cuebiddng and natural bidding here. We can accept, I hope, that responder is not looking to play 5♣ even if opener has clubs. 4♣ is a slam try, and the only permissible contracts are some number of spades, ranging from 4 to 7, or a club slam/grand slam. It is difficult to construct a hand that would offer 6♣ without possession of a club control. Therefore, the distinction between cue and natural isn't yet important. Opener's first duty is to show slam suitability by cue-bidding. Both players assume, for the moment, that spades are agreed. However, responder will sometimes be able to bring clubs back into the mix via 5N, and opener via a jump to 6♣. Which would indeed be my choice were partner to sign off in spades over my red suit cue. Keeping open the possiblity that 4♣ might be natural allows for clubs to be considered as part of the mix later, in some (but not all) auctions. Maybe I have peered so deeply into this narrow issue so as to lose sight of something basic, but this seems to make sense to me, at least for the moment. This what you wrote is logical and playable with agreements. However OP says "2-3 times played pdship a decent partner" So i assume some of the further developments of your suggestion (which makes it playable) would not be available with this pd since he wouldnt act as he is supposed to act without agreements. Would you really give it a try at the table with this pd and without agreements ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Justin hit the nail on the head: " 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction. " 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 What puzzles me is just how any of the 'spades are agreed at the 3-level' players ever get to clubs on say Axxxx void AJxx KQJx opposite Qxx Axx KQx A10xx? With a slam-going hand, 5 bad spades and 2 good 4-card minors I would be very tempted to call the hand 4144 and use the systemic splinter route. If we are going to slam then I think it should be easier to get spades back in the picture with KQx opposite than to get the other minor back after starting with 2♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 With a slam-going hand, 5 bad spades and 2 good 4-card minors I would be very tempted to call the hand 4144 and use the systemic splinter route. If we are going to slam then I think it should be easier to get spades back in the picture with KQx opposite than to get the other minor back after starting with 2♥. I surely wouldn't.But with 5044 I surely would rebid 3 Club after 1 NT 2♥ 2 ♠, so I cannot have 5044 anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 What puzzles me is just how any of the 'spades are agreed at the 3-level' players ever get to clubs on say Axxxx void AJxx KQJx opposite Qxx Axx KQx A10xx? Responder doesn't bid 3D on these 5044s, he bids 3C after 1NT-2H-2S.I think you are overcomplicating this auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts