Hanoi5 Posted November 14, 2012 Report Share Posted November 14, 2012 All white, Cavendish: ♠Ax♥QTxx♦Jx♣Kxxxx 1♦-(1♠)-X-(Pa)4♦-(Pa)-??? What would 3♦ show? What about repeating diamonds after a cue-bid? What do you bid here? Is partner's jump total insanity or could it show 'something'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunemPard Posted November 14, 2012 Report Share Posted November 14, 2012 A hand that really wants to play in diamonds...playing strength...forcing to game? Giving me a chance to show something interesting. Not the most common bid...but that is how I would take it if partner and I have never discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 4♥, 6/7♦, good hand. I'd RKC. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FM75 Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 All white, Cavendish: ♠Ax♥QTxx♦Jx♣Kxxxx 1♦-(1♠)-X-(Pa)4♦-(Pa)-??? What would 3♦ show? What about repeating diamonds after a cue-bid? What do you bid here? Is partner's jump total insanity or could it show 'something'? That the "???" seat was not paying attention to the bidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayin801 Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 If you have phil's agreement over 1♦-1♥-4♦ then that's what this is. I guess Qx, AKJx, AQTxxxx, - would be a really bad hand for partner to have, but any hand with both red AKs will probably have play for slam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 Yep, if we agree to rebid as if there had been a 1♥ response (and we do), then 4D is indeed that convention with no name. Thought I was going to have to battle that, but apparently not. That hand suggested by Kayin801 is just barely slammish enough to be a 4♣ rebid, rather than 4D. But it is close to just 4♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 Hard to say without the context. 1. If you play forcing free bids, you may x with a long suit on your own. Would you double with say (Xx,XXX,JX,AKJxxx)?2. If you play the "outfashioned" way of showing the unbid suits, 4 ♣ would be a much different hand then agua would expect- this would change the meaning of 4 ♦- but just slightly.3. If you play any kind of semiforcing opening (Acol twos, or Benjamin or others..) 4 ♦ could never be natural.4. If you have no semiforcing opening, parter may simply tried to show a semiforcing with diamonds? Anyway, the most likely bid is the CWNN, so I KC for hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 I play 4♦ as natural slam try and I have an easy 4♠ bid now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 I play 4♦ as natural slam try and I have an easy 4♠ bid now. Natural for me too but it could just be a game try. I'm accepting with 4♠. The hands Phil suggests can get wherever they belong with a spade cue instead of pre-empting pard and making them guess our black suit holdings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 Natural for me too but it could just be a game try You understand that partner had 3♦ avaible right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted November 15, 2012 Report Share Posted November 15, 2012 Somewhat analogous poll at BridgeWinners show the "CWNN" is on in competition. Agree Neg Double = ♥. So 4♦ is CWNN. Somewhat bemused by "CWNN" - this seems to be a very early instance for Fit Jump - though perhaps that's unacceptable for this narrow construct. We used to call it a Source of Tricks Major Raise, not knowing any better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.