[Echognome]

Scoring: XIMP

(3♣) - ?

---

This hand came up at our last session and it lead to quite an interesting post mortem. That is to say, the nice kind where you discuss what methods make sense rather than blame partner for a bad result. (That was saved for other hands.)

You have a nice distributional hand and the opponents jam the auction already with 3♣.

1) What is your bid with your favourite partner? I.e. what are your methods here?

2) Supposing you play 4♦ as showing D's plus a major, otherwise you are pretty much natural, do you bid 4♦, 4♠, or something else?

3) If you play the 4♦ as we do, what follow-ups do you have for it? I was thinking of a multi-like structure where 4♥ is pass/correct to 4♠, 4♠ is pass or correct to 5♦, and 4NT is a strong enquiry. Any other thoughts? (please respond to this part, even if you would have bid some number of spades to start with.)

Thanks,
Matt

[kenrexford]

Over 3C, the default of 4C for both majors and 4D for diamonds and a major seems to unduly cramp space. However, reversing these does not solve the problem, because you would want 4D after 4C (if 4C shows diamonds and a major) as natural, not as an asking bid.

A better solution is flags. 4C shows diamond and hearts (lower major), 4D showing then diamonds and spades.

This leaves out, of course, both majors. However, the both-majors hand is less problematic, as a simple double will cover this better than a diamond-major two-suiter.

[whereagles]

Opposite favourite pard: 4♦ diam + major (think this is called 'world convention')

Opposite expert pard with no methods discussed: 4♣, intending to correct 4♥ to 4♠ showing a good spade/diamond hand and hoping he'll understand.

Opposite other players: 4♠.

[keylime]

Tough hand for RJO's, with the six-five shape. I probably bid 4♦ and correct to 4♠ next.

[Free]

Easy start: 4♣ showing ♦ and a Major.

Depending on my partner's bid, I'll have to show my extra strength, which is only 1 loser, so I'll probably bid 5♠ to make it easy on partner... We should probably discuss followups in such situations

[mikeh]

In a casual partnership: 4♠. It may not be best, but it rates to be okay most of the time: it is about right on playing values: the jump shows a GOOD hand, and I will later claim that I thought I was AKJ10xxx x AKxx x. I would never try 4♦ in a casual partnership, not matter how expert my partner.

As for an established partnership, I do not usually play 4♦ as ♦ and a major over 3♣. I am not sure I'd use it here anyway: I see the ♠ suit as too attractive.

There is some argument for double, if you play that 4♠ over 4♥ clearly denies ♥ and shows a flexible hand: ie at least two places to play. But I can see more danger from double than from either 4♠ or 4♦.

[pclayton]

I think I'd just settle for 4♠.

Like Mike, I play RJO's, but the call usually doesn't show 6-5 with spades.

[pbleighton]

4S. A 2 suited bid won't show the spade suit. I might miss a diamond slam (or maybe a laydown game) this way, but I would much rather try to make 10 tricks than 11.

This could easily be wrong, but in competitive auctions I have found that the obvious simple bid is right a lot of the time.

I bow to those with super methods

Peter

[tonedown]

3 ♠ showing ♠+♦

We use Karate, more or less the same over preempts, promising nice hand.

[olegru]

1. 4♣ - strong two suiter with an expert partner.

Quote

2) Supposing you play 4♦ as showing D's plus a major, otherwise you are pretty much natural, do you bid 4♦, 4♠, or something else?

Just curiouse. What does "pretty much natural" 4♣ bid mean here? Majors? And 4♠ after Partners 4♥ is a cue-bid on agreed ♥'s?
If it is a case - 4♠