Subtle

[wyman]

I was given the following hand today:

 

Qxxxx AKx A9x A8

 

and the auction:

 

1D (2H) 2S (P)

3C (P) ?

 

 

and I bid 4D (considered 4N quant and 3H). But part of this is that I wasn't sure how continuations over 3H should go.

 

1D (2H) 2S (P)

3C (P) 3H (P)

?

 

What does partner bid with:

 

xx xx KQJxx KQJx

x Qxx KQJxx KJxx [what about ♥Jxx? or JTx?]

x xxx KQJxx KQJx

 

At another table, my hand bid 3H, and bid 6D over 4C, since my hand took from 4C the inference that partner had a stiff spade. I wasn't sure if I would take that inference.

 

If partner bids 3S over 3H:

 

1D (2H) 2S (P)

3C (P) 3H (P)

3S (P) ?

 

Is he showing 2 spades? Any two or just Hx? Or nothing about spades but half a heart stopper?

 

I know that somewhere along the line "standard" stops really being a thing. But what's the expert standard treatment here?

[kenrexford]

Excellent question.

 

I would assume that 3♠ is a feature bid of some variety. The question is whether 3♠ should show a spade card (maybe Queen is enough) or heart shortness. Contextually, 3♥ had expressed some interest in 3NT, which suggests that one of the minors is probably a fit, but then the question seems to be what the focus should be after 3NT is rejected. 3♠ clearly seems to reject that option.

 

One line of thinking could be that 3♠ assists in considering an alternative strain (the 5-2 major fit), whereas the other concern is that 3♠ as a pure pattern bid (xx ok) helps with minor-suit slam (and game) consideration. As Hx would work in either case, the question is whether simply xx works for a 3♠ call.

 

IMO, xx should be enough at this level. Partner always has the ability to bid 4♠ if xx works, 4minor to focus that strain, or 3NT to express continuing doubt as to strain. Thus, I think the partnership sequence to 4♠ where Opener needs Hx is ...3♠-P-3NT-P-4♠.

 

Thus, for me, 3♠ should have shortness-in-hearts as the primary point, not Hx, as that honor can be shown later fairly easily.

 

Assuming this, then, with the actual hand I would bid 4♦ after 3♠.

[SteveMoe]

I would expect 3!S to be a form of false preference showing 2 cards, brought on by the GF ♥ control bid.

3♠ would show the inability to bid 3N and to rebid either minor at the 4-level (denying 6+4 and 5=5). 2=2=5=4 is what partner should expect.

With 1=3=5=4 and weak ♥ I'd rebid 4♦ the least lie. With ♥Qxx in 1=3=5=4 I might let Marshall Miles inspire and try 3N.

[wyman]

Thanks to both of you for your responses.