That annoying 1D-(2C) auction

[Free]

After our obvious 3♣ cuebid, LHO doubles and partner surprisingly bids 3♠.

 

Whatever it means, we have found a clear fit and now 4♦ is a cuebid with ♠ support. Partner bids 4♥ playing LTTC:

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq5hk6daqj63ct4&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1d2cd(takeout)p3cd3sp4d(cue%20with%20S%20fit)p4h(we%20play%20Last%20Train)p]133|200[/hv]

We were wondering:

1. Does the 3♠ bid show 5♠-4♥, or rather 4♠-3♥?

2. Can partner ever signoff in 4♠ holding a ♣ control? (in other words: is partner obligated to bid something other than 4♠ whenever he holds a ♣ control?)

3. What do you expect in partner's hand?

4. What is your next move?

[lalldonn]

I don't think 4♦ is a cue bid. Why isn't it natural? It sounds like after the double you had a game force with long diamonds. Anyway since it was understood as a cue bid I will go with that.

 

1. I don't think you should bid 3♠ with 5-4 since partner doesn't know if you have hearts or not. But I could imagine different opinions since the double of 3♣ gave you more options.

2. I don't think partner should sign off when he has a club control.

3. A club control and four spades and enough to double.

4. I think we have an easy RKC bid. The ace of clubs and nothing else gives us a little bit of play. Also I don't think he is ever moving with such bad trumps if we sign off, so it's up to us.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I don't think 4♦ is a cue bid. Why isn't it natural? It sounds like after the double you had a game force with long diamonds.

I'm glad someone ( with some clout ) questioned the 4D bid .

Before I read the explanations, the sequence looked like a GF w/ ♦ .

[the hog]

Why is 4D regarded as a cue bid? It would not be so for me. Did 3C promise 4S in your system, Free?

[Free]

4♦ was also a bit dubious indeed. We both presumed it showed ♠ support, but I wonder since the forum clearly disagrees. Perhaps I went a bit too fast and should've asked what to do after the 3♠ bid first ;) . So what would you guys do after the 3♠ bid?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

4♦ was also a bit dubious indeed. We both presumed it showed ♠ support, but I wonder since the forum clearly disagrees. Perhaps I went a bit too fast and should've asked what to do after the 3♠ bid first ;) . So what would you guys do after the 3♠ bid?

Your 3C-cue showed a GF hand needing direction, and says nothing about ♣.

 

After partner's 3S, you need to establish an unambiguous ♠ fit.

 

Options are: 4S, 4NT ( RKC ) , or 5S :

 

4S not the best since partner won't make a move with his poor trumps .

 

4NT may not be good since you are missing a ♣-Ctrl.

 

That leaves 5S which asks for at least 2nd Rnd Ctrl in opps' suit .

[gnasher]

So what would you guys do after the 3♠ bid?

I'd bid 4♣. That's the only way to agree spades and show slam-interest, so it doesn't show a control.

[Codo]

I guess I prefer 4 ♦ as a second cuebid in support to spades to 4 ♣ as the only GF cuebid with spades. If 4 ♣ does not promise the control, it will get quite tricky to find out at a convienient level about all controls...

And this is no situation like (3♣) 3 ♠ (pass) where the room was limited anyway, here I had a chance to act already.

 

To bid 1 ♦ 3 ♣ 4 ♦ with a diamond one suiter looks like quite a big hand for a 1 ♦ opening. I guess I will put these hands into my 2 ♣ (semiforcing) openings or rebid 5 ♦ at some point of the bidding. Do someone mind to post a hand where this does not work?

[cloa513]

After our obvious 3♣ cuebid, LHO doubles and partner surprisingly bids 3♠.

 

Whatever it means, we have found a clear fit and now 4♦ is a cuebid with ♠ support. Partner bids 4♥ playing LTTC:

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq5hk6daqj63ct4&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1d2cd(takeout)p3cd3sp4d(cue%20with%20S%20fit)p4h(we%20play%20Last%20Train)p]133|200[/hv]

We were wondering:

1. Does the 3♠ bid show 5♠-4♥, or rather 4♠-3♥?

2. Can partner ever signoff in 4♠ holding a ♣ control? (in other words: is partner obligated to bid something other than 4♠ whenever he holds a ♣ control?)

3. What do you expect in partner's hand?

4. What is your next move?

I think 3S should show 5♠-4♥, With 4♠-3♥, he should bid 3♦ as he has to have some support for diamonds could be just two. With 4-4 majors he should bid hearts.

[PhilKing]

I think 3S should show 5♠-4♥, With 4♠-3♥, he should bid 3♦ as he has to have some support for diamonds could be just two. With 4-4 majors he should bid hearts.

 

Did you see that 3♣ was doubled?

[gwnn]

To bid 1 ♦ 3 ♣ 4 ♦ with a diamond one suiter looks like quite a big hand for a 1 ♦ opening. I guess I will put these hands into my 2 ♣ (semiforcing) openings or rebid 5 ♦ at some point of the bidding. Do someone mind to post a hand where this does not work?

This is like asking 'I think natural invitations after 1NT are useless and I just want to pass-or-blast. Would someone mind to post a hand where this does not work?' Of course for any given hand you will either force to game or pass 1NT and if your judgement is good enough, you will come close. You can just agree that you pass all 8-counts and raise to 3NT with all 9 counts. So there will not be hands where 'this does not work' since you filled all gaps. But having 3 options instead of 2 is an improvement, your auctions will be more accurate (actually this is not a great example since sometimes you will give away info or go down 1 in 2NT but these do not apply to the auction in this thread).

[PhilKing]

This sequence is a mess. Just play:

 

3♦ = invitational. Not forcing, since 5♦ is a long way off if partner cannot bid 3NT

3M = forcing. Whilst there may be the occasional hand where we want to jump but wouldn't mind if partner passed, I just do not like that approach and would rather be in game if I have extras and a major.

3♣ = forcing with long diamonds (circa 8 playing tricks, but possibly even higher for me)

[Codo]

This is like asking 'I think natural invitations after 1NT are useless and I just want to pass-or-blast. Would someone mind to post a hand where this does not work?' Of course for any given hand you will either force to game or pass 1NT and if your judgement is good enough, you will come close. You can just agree that you pass all 8-counts and raise to 3NT with all 9 counts. So there will not be hands where 'this does not work' since you filled all gaps. But having 3 options instead of 2 is an improvement, your auctions will be more accurate (actually this is not a great example since sometimes you will give away info or go down 1 in 2NT but these do not apply to the auction in this thread).

 

I totally agree that you give up on finetunning your semiforcing one suiters in diamonds for a way to show or deny a club control below 4 spade is reached. Looks like a serious net win to me- but I have no statistics to back this up.