Zelandakh Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I agree with this. If pard is going to accept anyway he might as well show the shortage. I don't think 4♦ is stronger than 4♠. The range for 4♠ is narrow enough that an accept is an accept.I think this depends a little bit on agreements. One popular treatment is for most accepts to bid 3NT here in case partner was making a slam try rather than a game try. In that case 4♠ should show a very bad hand for slam, which would make 4♦ stronger. Then your point would still stand but now for 4♦ not being better than 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 General principles, surely: For X in {partscore, game, small slam, grand slam} if you bid at a level such that the next bid of the agreed denomination is X, but have not made that bid itself, this shows some interest in playing a contract at a level above X. (This does apply to grand slam as well - 7NT being the next level up, consider for example bidding 7x on the way to 7S, looking for 7NT) Or to put it simply: 4D shows slam interest, since otherwise one could just bid 4S. If you've no slam interest, why give away information to opps? My point was - should one really be showing slam interest with a 10-count, when your hearts could be far better than they were (and partner is probably counting on that). Admittedly playing serious/frivolous 3NT helps to distinguish the different accepts further - for example, 3NT = good hand for slam based on good heart suit/good general values, 4D = good hand for slam based on diamond shortage, 4S = bad hand for slam. ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts