Does 3NT assure a stopper here?

[Trumpace]

Matchpoints. None vul.

 

The following bidding sequence, you are South, North is dealer:

 

1C - 3D - X - P - 3NT

 

A couple of questions:

 

1) Is X of 3D game forcing?

2) Does 3NT assure a diamond stopper or is this something which would require an agreement?

 

 

[edit]Forgot to mention: We were playing SAYC, not 2/1.[/edit]

Edited May 5, 2005 by Trumpace

[pclayton]

1) No its not game forcing. Opener has to make a move if he holds better than a minimum.

 

2) Well, I've made the call plenty of times without the stop - or a 1/2 stop, or a full stop, or a double stop......

[Elianna]

My regular partners and I play that double as negative (we have negative doubles through a very high number listed on our cc) but of course, the higher the bid that you negative double, the better your hand should be.

 

I would interpret the auction as doubler saying "I have 9+ points, and fit for majors, where would you like to play if I'm minimalish". And opener says "Here: 3nt".

 

So to answer your questions:

No, the x is not game forcing, but it shouldn't be complete crap.

 

3NT is to play, so it would be nice for that hand to have a diamond stopper. But hey, maybe you'll scare them from leading that. ;) (j/k)

 

Anyway, I tend to play naturalish methods, and nothing too complicated. Others may have more indepth answers. :)

 

PS: I would take a bid by the doubler (instead of double) as a strong hand, forcing at least one round (unless something like clubs or NT, or other obvious stopping point) so I view the double as weaker than bidding a new suit.

[awm]

(1) Not necessarily game forcing. With a decent hand short in diamonds (and supporting the majors) it is often necessary to bid here. For example suppose you have 4414 shape and around 8-9 points. It is unlikely partner will be able to balance, but you could easily have a game available. I think 3♥/♠ from opener can end the auction on such a hand.

 

(2) 3NT is to play. I suppose it doesn't 100% guarantee a stopper, but usually opener should have one. Responder shouldn't pull the 3NT to some other contract based solely on the lack of a stopper in his own hand (of course if responder has freak shape or slam interest it's fine to bid on).

[inquiry]

DBL is not game force

 

3NT "implies" a stopper. That is, negative dbl will not run our of 3NT just because he lacks a stopper. Now if he has one or not, who knows?

 

ben

[PriorKnowledge]

100% agree with ben.

Dbl = Not game force, 11+ for a 3-level neg dbl, and 4 in at least one major

3N = implies a stopper and responder can pass without one

[Fluffy]

Double is game forcing becuase with

 

xxx

xxx

AQx

AQxx

 

or such trash, you are gonna bid 3NT.

 

 

3NT is a stopper hand obviously.

[Guest Jlall]

X isn't a GF you can still get out in 3M. It shows 10+ (maybe less with shape, like adam said 4414 8 is fine). Fluffy's point is valid, but the problem is when they preempt you cant be that precise esp at the 3 level. We also overcall 3N to a 3D opener with a balanced 17, but we know we may not make it. Sometimes you just have to stretch, and you will get to a no play 3N. But opener needs to bid with a decent hand to take pressure off of his pard and find major suit games.

 

Yes 3N shows a stopper. If opener doesnt have one thats his problem. I would not reccomend a 3N bid without one, leave that to the geniuses and MP players :o

[pigpenz]

old culbetson rule you play partner for 7-8 hcp and hope they are the right ones...now it depends on matchpoints or imps.

[han]

Double is not a game-force. The auction 1C-(3D)-Dbl-3M is not forcing, and opener has to jump to game with serious extras. Bidding 3NT here does not show extras though. Even though this promises a stopper, it is sometimes bid without.

 

Culbertson's rule does not apply here: we should NOT play partner for 7-8 points. With those hands partner would pass.

[whereagles]

I don't think it NEEDS a stopper. In that auction, if one holds

 

QJx

Kxx

xx

AQJxx

 

what will one bid? I can only think of 3NT... (pass anyone?)

[Chamaco]

Double is game forcing becuase with

 

xxx

xxx

AQx

AQxx

 

or such trash, you are gonna bid 3NT.

With such a hand, at equal vuln, I'd give a serious thought to passing pard's takeout....

[P_Marlowe]

- Double should be negative or optional,

promising 10+ HCP, hence the double is

not game forcing

- 3NT should promis a stopper, if you dont

have one and you still make the 3NT bid,

that is your problem ..., sometimes you need to

be brave, ... I am seldom brav in this kind of

situation

 

With kind regars

Marlowe

[Trumpace]

Hmm.. So it looks like most people play that 3NT implies some kind of stopper (or a lie :-) ), while there are some who say it need not imply a stopper as 3NT is a 'forced' bid. So this requires some kind of agreement.

 

The reason I asked if the double of 3D was forcing is, if it were forcing, we have a 4D bid available to bid 3-3 majors hands without a diamond stopper. Partner would probably have to play in a 4-3 fit, but that has a chance at least.

 

 

Follow up question:

 

Same sequence, 1C-3D-3S, partner opens 1C, pesky RHO bids 3D.

 

What should 3S mean here? Should it be forcing? Given that a double of 3D is a negative double with 10+ pts. (The reason I ask this is, some of you have said that 3S is a stronger bid than double of 3D).

 

Would the kind of scoring (and vulnerability) change the meaning of the bid?

 

Thanks,

TrumpAce

[Fluffy]

3♠ is forcing as well.

[cherdano]

Follow up question:

 

Same sequence, 1C-3D-3S, partner opens 1C, pesky RHO bids 3D.

 

What should 3S mean here? Should it be forcing? Given that a double of 3D is a negative double with 10+ pts. (The reason I ask this is, some of you have said that 3S is a stronger bid than double of 3D).

It is definitely forcing! By default, new suits by responder are forcing. Even if you have agreed negative free bids, most play them only between 2♣-3♦.

 

I think the only question is whether you can get out in 4♣ after your sequence. I would just take 3♠ as 100% game forcing.

 

Of course, sometimes the 3♠ will be a stretch, with a hand that would only have invited without the 3♣ interference.

 

Arend

[han]

Agree with Arend, as usual.