[han]

I agree with Kenberg that the auction 1D-1S-3D-3H-4D is passable (the 3D bidder has already limited her hand), so technically 3H did not set up a gameforce.

I agree with Josh that any bid over 1D-1S-3D is gameforcing (except for the example above).

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Feb 7 2006, 03:03 PM, said:

I agree with Kenberg that the auction 1D-1S-3D-3H-4D is passable (the 3D bidder has already limited her hand), so technically 3H did not set up a gameforce.

I agree with Josh that any bid over 1D-1S-3D is gameforcing (except for the example above).

I disagree. 3♥ established game force (not quasi game force), so 4♦ is 100% forcing.

I am having trouble imagining opener's hand where he can jump to 3♦ and then over 3♥ rebid 4♦ (not 3NT, not 4♣, not even 3♠). If I had to guess, I would guess 4♦ (suit bid three times once with a jump) denies any intrest in ♠, but of course responder might trott out 4♠ in an attempt to rescue self from diamonds. Here after these 3♦ bids, diamonds are turmps, and if I was responder and I had a club control, I would be thinking about possible slam in diamonds regardless of my diamond support.

So any bid by responder is now a cue-bid agreeign diamonds. The contract will be 5, 6 or 7 ♦.... five diamonds if responder lacks a club control (and that bid will come now over 4♦), and with a club control, responder will cue-bid major suit control at this point.

I would guess 5♦ with responder raising on a void in dimaonds and no club control, making.

[han]

Ben, I agree that 3H in theory creates a gameforce, and that the auction 1D-1S-3D-3H-4D is very unusual. Opener has denied Hx or better in spades, a club stopper, 4 hearts as well as serious extras for diamonds.

Given that opener has limited himself already, isn't it possible that responder decides to pass 4D after all this negative information? Have you never passed a GF auction below game after I had limited my hand and it became clear that our hands were terribly unsuitable for game? I think that such passes are possible and not a breach of partnership discipline.

[cherdano]

Hannie, on Feb 7 2006, 10:30 PM, said:

Ben, I agree that 3H in theory creates a gameforce, and that the auction 1D-1S-3D-3H-4D is very unusual. Opener has denied Hx or better in spades, a club stopper, 4 hearts as well as serious extras for diamonds.

I don't agree opener has denied all of this. Why can't opener have a hand that is maximum for 3D, and KNOWS he wants to play in diamonds, and wants to start cue-bidding, but make a strong statement about strain before doing so? Ax xx AKQJxxx Kx? (Yes 3♦ was an underbid, but 3NT is also a little flawed with the heart weakness.)

I don't think I would ever pass this, simply because 3D is a little wide-ranging, and I don't think 4D shows a minimum for the 3D bid, I think it just shows diamonds.

Arend

[han]

Opener can't have Kx in clubs, this is a clear 3NT bid over 3H (and yes, 3D was an underbid). With club shortness you could cuebid 4C (this can't be natural as you would bid 3NT), so 4D basically guarantees 2 club losers off the top. The hand you showed also has Hx in spades, which is quite unlikely (especially for you and me). I think that it will be tough for you to construct a reasonable hand that has slam interest and rebids 4D.

[Kalvan14]

luke warm, on Feb 7 2006, 06:33 AM, said:

Kalvan14, on Feb 6 2006, 08:32 PM, said:

Not again a hand where opener gets cold feet: whatever the outcome (even 4♦ just made), I'll refrain from playing again with anyone who passes 4♦

evidently your partner(s) have never made bidding mistakes... and evidently, neither have you

Mistakes are what makes bridge interesting. IMHO, there is a limit to everything: I'm going further, and repudiating any partner who passes a Stayman 2♣

[Elianna]

Ok, I was A.

My hand was ♠AKx ♥KQx ♦KT9xxx ♣x

Yes, my diamond suit was not the strength that it should be, but a funny thing, even if I had the QJ it would have made no difference in the results.

My thoughts at the table (as the auction happened):

1♦ - 1♠
"Well, I have support for spades, and would REALLY like to be in game, but i'm uncomfortable forcing to game on this hand. Maybe she can find a bid over 3♦, then we're heading to game if not slam"
3♦ - 3♥ "Wow! Is she 5-4? Is she showing her stopper (A of ♥?) Either way my hand just got WAY better, i'll bid 3♠ and let her know about our potential fit."
3♠ - 4♦ "WOW! We have a double fit? I'm really interested in slam, but i'm a total coward. Plus she could just be cuebidding, or not believe that I have three REALLY GOOD spades. I'll just bid 4♠ (because really, i'm a wimp) and assume that she's going on from there"
[4s]-5♦ "Hmm, this is somewhat confusing. Was she cuing before? Now I think that she was trying to sign-off, but that seems ridiculous. Granted, my hand is ridiculous for my 3♦ bid, but I think that we could still have a slam, I just don't know what in, but I hope that she will":
6♦ - pass

And the winner of the guessing game (but for different reasons):

Chamaco said:

If I had to guess a potential disaster, that would be that A misinterpret the 4D bid as slam interest rather than simply a way to keep 4S in the picture, and we end up in 6D down 1/2 when 4S was making.

Yes, I thought it was slam interest, but I was ok playing 4♠. <sheepish grin>

Partner's hand was J9xx Jxx Kxxx xx

Partner basically was hoping that I would have a club stopper, and was trying to get to (a very greedy) 3NT. She didn't want to play 4♠ in a 4-3 fit with bad trump, when a 6-4 or better fit was available. I think that it was understandable, if illadvised.

[Elianna]

Ok, I was A.

My hand was ♠AKx ♥KQx ♦KT9xxx ♣x

Yes, my diamond suit was not the strength that it should be, but a funny thing, even if I had the QJ it would have made no difference in the results.

My thoughts at the table (as the auction happened):

1♦ - 1♠
"Well, I have support for spades, and would REALLY like to be in game, but i'm uncomfortable forcing to game on this hand. Maybe she can find a bid over 3♦, then we're heading to game if not slam"
3♦ - 3♥ "Wow! Is she 5-4? Is she showing her stopper (A of ♥?) Either way my hand just got WAY better, i'll bid 3♠ and let her know about our potential fit."
3♠ - 4♦ "WOW! We have a double fit? I'm really interested in slam, but i'm a total coward. Plus she could just be cuebidding, or not believe that I have three REALLY GOOD spades. I'll just bid 4♠ (because really, i'm a wimp) and assume that she's going on from there"
[4s]-5♦ "Hmm, this is somewhat confusing. Was she cuing before? Now I think that she was trying to sign-off, but that seems ridiculous. Granted, my hand is ridiculous for my 3♦ bid, but I think that we could still have a slam, I just don't know what in, but I hope that she will":
6♦ - pass

And the winner of the guessing game (but for different reasons):

Chamaco said:

If I had to guess a potential disaster, that would be that A misinterpret the 4D bid as slam interest rather than simply a way to keep 4S in the picture, and we end up in 6D down 1/2 when 4S was making.

Yes, I thought it was slam interest, but I was ok playing 4♠. <sheepish grin>

Partner's hand was J9xx Jxx Axxx xx

Partner basically was hoping that I would have a club stopper, and was trying to get to (a very greedy) 3NT. She didn't want to play 4♠ in a 4-3 fit with bad trump, when a 6-4 or better fit was available. I think that it was understandable, if illadvised.

[han]

Hmm, yesterday you told me partner had Jxxx xxx Axxx xx, the current one is even weaker! Although 4D is understandable, I think that partner should bid 5D over 3S.

Congrats Mauro!

[Elianna]

Yes, you're right, partner had the ♦A. (Since we can't both have the K!!!) I'll fix that in my above post.