[Fluffy]

dogsbreath, on Jan 23 2006, 01:30 AM, said:

hi
Isnt 4C Gerber?

Rgds Dog

Yeah, right, sadly you never knwo if the ♠A is there or not

[han]

inquiry, on Jan 19 2006, 04:16 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 19 2006, 04:08 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jan 19 2006, 11:58 AM, said:

I think 5♣ or 6♣ is the only choice. My gut feeling is 5[cll] willl be almost cold and 6♣ will have a much better than average chance to make on this auction. And remember, 5♣ does not end the auction.

Chances are we have a heart loser, and maybe a club loser, in addition to whats happening in the diamond suit.

It seems more prudent to me to see what pard does over 4♣.

If you are paranoid about 4♣ (it should be, but there are some that would say it isn't), then a balst would be in order.

Paranoia is not the problem with 4♣. If you are going to force to 5♣ anyway, that will be fine. But for me, 4♣ should leave the door open for 4♠. I would rather bid 4♦ and then pull 4♠ to 5♣ to imply a tolerance for diamonds but strong preference for clubs than bid 4♣ and then 5♣ (with only mild preference for clubs, you could bid 4♦ then bid 4NT assuming partner would figure this is not RKC for spades on this auction after he rebids spades twice).

I am not willing to play in spades even though partner might be willing to bid them again, thus no 4♣ bid. Maybe someone who is clever at it can set up a simulation... 5♣ must be nearly cold, and 6♣ requires little more than diamond Queen and a red ace in partners hand .....

Ben

Ben, let me just check if I got this right... You play that 4C shows at least willingness to play in spades, and 4C followed by 5C is a slam try with very good clubs and spade tolerance?

That definitely sounds playable, but it would not have occurred to me. I can't imagine that you have discussed this specific auction, so what is the general rule here? Is it that slow auctions suggest more than one strain?

BTW, would you play 4D as a cuebid or as natural?

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Jan 23 2006, 12:58 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jan 19 2006, 04:16 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 19 2006, 04:08 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jan 19 2006, 11:58 AM, said:

I think 5♣ or 6♣ is the only choice. My gut feeling is 5[cll] willl be almost cold and 6♣ will have a much better than average chance to make on this auction. And remember, 5♣ does not end the auction.

Chances are we have a heart loser, and maybe a club loser, in addition to whats happening in the diamond suit.

It seems more prudent to me to see what pard does over 4♣.

If you are paranoid about 4♣ (it should be, but there are some that would say it isn't), then a balst would be in order.

Paranoia is not the problem with 4♣. If you are going to force to 5♣ anyway, that will be fine. But for me, 4♣ should leave the door open for 4♠. I would rather bid 4♦ and then pull 4♠ to 5♣ to imply a tolerance for diamonds but strong preference for clubs than bid 4♣ and then 5♣ (with only mild preference for clubs, you could bid 4♦ then bid 4NT assuming partner would figure this is not RKC for spades on this auction after he rebids spades twice).

I am not willing to play in spades even though partner might be willing to bid them again, thus no 4♣ bid. Maybe someone who is clever at it can set up a simulation... 5♣ must be nearly cold, and 6♣ requires little more than diamond Queen and a red ace in partners hand .....

Ben

Ben, let me just check if I got this right... You play that 4C shows at least willingness to play in spades, and 4C followed by 5C is a slam try with very good clubs and spade tolerance?

That definitely sounds playable, but it would not have occurred to me. I can't imagine that you have discussed this specific auction, so what is the general rule here? Is it that slow auctions suggest more than one strain?

BTW, would you play 4D as a cuebid or as natural?

In a competive auction, 4♦ would be natural.

Since we can agree that 4♣ is forcing, then 4♣ followed by 5♣ should tell a story different from an immediate 5♣.

Now as to whether 4♣ shows a willingness to play in spades, the answer is no. What I was trying to say, is I would bid it IF playing in spades was an option, but I mgith bid it in other situations as well. That is, it doesn't promise a willingness to play in spades, it is just forcing. But my point was, with a willingness to play in spades if partner rebids them a third time, I would bid 4♣. Here I have no such willingness.

Thus, 5♣ is unidirectional.. I have given up on spades even if partner could bid them a third time. I have enough to be sure of game, and not enough to be sure of slam. I realize partner could have a seven card or longer spade suit. I have no interest in diamonds. Exactly the picture I want to paint.. What does 4♣ paint? If partner bids 4♠, are you passing (I bet the answer is no). If partner bids 4♦, do you trust this is not just some sort of waiting bid? Will partner know of your great clubs if his hand is suitable for slam except for no real club support? The answer is no. Tell him about your hand with 5♣ (or maybe 4♦).

[pclayton]

Ben, I think you are reading too much into 4♣ vs 5♣ with regards to spade tolerance.

If anything, 5♣ says "I want to play 5♣". 4♣ 'might' have a tolerance for other strains, but also might have en eye on bigger and better things. There are certainly fast arrival implications.

My biggest question is 4♦ by pard a cue for clubs, or is it a secondary suit?

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Jan 23 2006, 02:13 PM, said:

Ben, I think you are reading too much into 4♣ vs 5♣ with regards to spade tolerance.

If anything, 5♣ says "I want to play 5♣". 4♣ 'might' have a tolerance for other strains, but also might have en eye on bigger and better things. There are certainly fast arrival implications.

My biggest question is 4♦ by pard a cue for clubs, or is it a secondary suit?

The problem with 4♣ then 5♣ is that it doesn't get across the quality of the club suit.

what if the bidding goes, for instance, 4♣-4♥-5♣... will partner know a singleton club is enough? I think not. Fast arrival is nice, I use it. but here you want to paint a very clear picture. I think 4♣ muddies the water. I am willing to go 4♦ then 5♣, or 5♣. Period. I never said 4♣ then 5♣ promises a spade tolerance, only that 5♣ immediately closes the door on spades.

[han]

If partner bids 4♦, do you trust this is not just some sort of waiting bid?

Yes I do. I may be wrong, but I expect that partner is showing something in diamonds when he bids 4D.

Will partner know of your great clubs if his hand is suitable for slam except for no real club support? The answer is no.

I think that 4C followed by 5C shows more slam interest than a direct 5C, and I'd better have great clubs for bidding them 3 times after partner has bid spades 3 times. 5C does not bar partner from bidding, true, but it does not sound like slam interest to my ears.

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Jan 23 2006, 02:55 PM, said:

If partner bids 4♦, do you trust this is not just some sort of waiting bid?

Yes I do. I may be wrong, but I expect that partner is showing something in diamonds when he bids 4D.

Will partner know of your great clubs if his hand is suitable for slam except for no real club support? The answer is no.

I think that 4C followed by 5C shows more slam interest than a direct 5C, and I'd better have great clubs for bidding them 3 times after partner has bid spades 3 times. 5C does not bar partner from bidding, true, but it does not sound like slam interest to my ears.

I think you miss the point of the pressure that the heart bid has placed on the auction. We all will agree that 3♠ is forcing. Some agree it is so forcing that 4♦ still shows a cue=bid is support of spades. But a lot of us (me included) play that in this auction, 4♦ is trying to find a place to play the contract and is not a cue-bid. The reason why is is diamonds on this auction is that you can't afford to leave this descriptive bid to cue-bid and support simply because you do have to bid something without spade support and heart stopper.

This also applies to 4♣. Now then, if the auction had been slower, 4♣/5♣ would follow good old fast arrival principles. Nothing could be simplier. But over 3♠, you will not be fortunate enough to always know what the correct stain will be. Should it be clubs? Should it be diamonds? Should it be spades? It might even be notrump, should partner surprise you later in the auction. When you don't know where you are going, what are you going to bid? Surely not 5♣'s. You will bid 4 clubs or 4 diamonds. Now you might stumble into 5♣ should partner support you, or maybe 4♠ if partner persist, or even 4NT or 5♦. You are plucking along trying to find the right spot. I think 5♣ should be reserved for hands where you know, not guess where to go.

There is a clear arguement that if you bid 4♣ and pull partners 4♠ to 5♣ you have a good hand (since you could have bid 5♣ before. The problem is what if partner doesn't cooperate but rather rebids 4♦ or 4♥. Would 5♣ do justice to this hand then? And what if you had the I need to find a place to land hand (rather than this I know where we are going hand). So just as the preempt has affected the meaning of 4♦, I think it has affected the meaning of 4♣ and 5♣.

Ben