[awm]

Suppose you open a weak two bid. You've agreed to play ogust and raise only non-force, without any further discussion. Partner bids 2NT ogust, you respond 3♣ (bad/bad) and partner bids a new suit. Assume partner is a good player (not a random pickup) but you haven't had a lot of discussion of this auction. How would you take the new suit call? What do you think it "should" mean if you have time to discuss?

[Elianna]

I don't know what it SHOULD be, but it's definitely forcing. "Why is it forcing?" you may ask. My answer would be "It fits into the category of bids that I don't know what they mean, so I definitely won't pass". And I would be rather annoyed at a partner who passed without agreement that this was nonforcing. Annoyed enough to make sure to discuss this sequence at the dinner break between sessions.

[HeartA]

I voted for natural and forcing. Direct new suit is also natural and foring, but denies support for pd's suit. Since opener had a bad suit, she is trying to get support for her suit now.

[mikeh]

I know what it means in my partnerships (an asking bid in the new suit, but 3♦ asks if the opening was a 5 card suit: for us 3♣ = either bad/bad or 5 cards, with 3♦ asking) but that is not the same as saying what it 'should' mean in an undiscussed partnership. For one thing, why should partner assume that we will be on the same wavelength with respect to the response structures? I use two different structures in different partnerships myself

But I agree that, whatever partner means, I am not passing. Passing has one way to win and several ways to lose... plus I am far, far better positioned in the post-mortem if I bid (a joke, in case anyone took me seriously)

[csdenmark]

New suit after Ogust won't be an option by me. No matter the values - we play openers major.

If I have own major I bid that with good values and not Ogust.

Any bid of minor will be signoff.

[han]

I agree with Elianna in that I would never pass in an undiscussed auction.

Now, as for what it "should" mean, let's consider some options:

1. Natural, forcing, one-suited. This one seems unnecessary since we play new suits as forcing.

2. Natural and non-forcing. This one seems too tight, apperently we were going to game if partner showed a good suit, and now we are suggesting to play in a partscore in a different suit. I reject this one too.

3. Forcing, natural but different games in mind. This seems like the only reasonable natural possibility. Showing a decent suit, perhaps xx in partner's suit and game-going values. We could play in either of the two suits or even in 3NT.

4. Slam try in partner's suit with a good suit. Possible, but doesn't excite me.

5. Some asking bid. Seems better than 4. In particular, it seems useful to go through Oghust before making an asking bid (such as a control in that suit).

I'm sure that there are more options. I would play either 3 or 5. When undiscussed with a partner I trust a lot, I would assume we are playing 3.

[mcphee]

I voted before reading all the options, picking natural and forcing, but how natural is really not so clear, but passing is a non option

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I voted for control showing, requesting control
bids from partner, since I dont play asking bids
generaly, I wont play them in this special situation.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pigpenz]

i voted for Forcing and control or cue bid
if partner didnt have fit would have bid forcing suit of his own originally

[Gerben42]

Control Asking Bid, if you are playing "Preempts from A to Z" methods. If not probably a control showing bid, which is what I voted for.

[zasanya]

The answer depends upon when do you use Ogust.
Ogust is used or should be used when responder has at least 2 card support for openers suit and so depending on partners reply he can place the final contract.Responder must also have 3 and half tricks or more.
With a minimum or slightly better hand responder would usually sign off in 3 of openers suit after a bad/bad reply.So if he bids a new suit not only must it be natural but also a game force.He is simply asking opener to show/deny support for his suit so that final game contract could be no trump or in openers suit or in responder's suit.

[pclayton]

I don't know what it would be in a new partnership. I don't play in pickup partnerships often enough for issues like to arise.

In my partnerships, Ogust AGREES trump. Why mess around with it if you have another strain in mind?

Accordingly, a new suit after Opener's response shows a control. It may have a real suit behind it, but responder definitely has a fit for opener.

[adhoc3]

Quote

I don't know what it would be in a new partnership. I don't play in pickup partnerships often enough for issues like to arise. 

In my partnerships, Ogust AGREES trump. Why mess around with it if you have another strain in mind?

Accordingly, a new suit after Opener's response shows a control. It may have a real suit behind it, but responder definitely has a fit for opener.

Agree!

New suit AFTER Ogust, not simply new suit after to weak 2. I would take as slam interests, Forcing, control/second suit showing, agreed major trump.

Regards,

Jack

[cherdano]

pclayton, on Apr 14 2006, 08:25 PM, said:

I don't know what it would be in a new partnership. I don't play in pickup partnerships often enough for issues like to arise.

In my partnerships, Ogust AGREES trump. Why mess around with it if you have another strain in mind?

Accordingly, a new suit after Opener's response shows a control. It may have a real suit behind it, but responder definitely has a fit for opener.

I wouldn't put it that strongly. Often, opener's suit quality will be the most important information for the right choice of strains, so why not allow partner to find that out and then suggest a different strain? It should certainly imply tolerance, however.

Arend

[pclayton]

cherdano, on Apr 17 2006, 10:05 AM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 14 2006, 08:25 PM, said:

I don't know what it would be in a new partnership. I don't play in pickup partnerships often enough for issues like to arise. 

In my partnerships, Ogust AGREES trump. Why mess around with it if you have another strain in mind?

Accordingly, a new suit after Opener's response shows a control. It may have a real suit behind it, but responder definitely has a fit for opener.

I wouldn't put it that strongly. Often, opener's suit quality will be the most important information for the right choice of strains, so why not allow partner to find that out and then suggest a different strain? It should certainly imply tolerance, however.

Arend

Arend: what is 'tolerance' in response to a weak 2? I think a doubleton is support, so is tolerance a stiff honor?

If you are looking for game; the partnership can sort things out easily enough; frequently 3N or 4M will only be the options, because of the differentiation in the major suit quality will be evident. Its certainly logical for:

2♠ - 2N - 3♦ - 4♠, and:

2♠ - 2N - 3♥ - 3N to coexist with the same responding hand.

But: 2♠ - 2N - 3♥ - 4♣ doesn't make sense to play as natural. Sure, responder knows there is a problem with the spade suit. But to carry this over and say that clubs must be better, or that 3N can't be an option doesn't seem to playable to me.

Wouldn't you rather have 4♣ (in the above sequence) to show a hand like: ♠AQx, ♥xx, ♦AQxx, ♣AKxx; where we already have spades agreed, but a hand that really wants to hear a heart cue? Otherwise if opener holds: ♠KJxxxx, ♥Qx, ♦ xx, ♣Qxx, he might need to 'support' clubs, if 4♣ could be taken as natural.

[cherdano]

pclayton, on Apr 17 2006, 08:22 PM, said:

cherdano, on Apr 17 2006, 10:05 AM, said:

pclayton, on Apr 14 2006, 08:25 PM, said:

I don't know what it would be in a new partnership. I don't play in pickup partnerships often enough for issues like to arise. 

In my partnerships, Ogust AGREES trump. Why mess around with it if you have another strain in mind?

Accordingly, a new suit after Opener's response shows a control. It may have a real suit behind it, but responder definitely has a fit for opener.

I wouldn't put it that strongly. Often, opener's suit quality will be the most important information for the right choice of strains, so why not allow partner to find that out and then suggest a different strain? It should certainly imply tolerance, however.

Arend

Arend: what is 'tolerance' in response to a weak 2? I think a doubleton is support, so is tolerance a stiff honor?

If you are looking for game; the partnership can sort things out easily enough; frequently 3N or 4M will only be the options, because of the differentiation in the major suit quality will be evident. Its certainly logical for:

2♠ - 2N - 3♦ - 4♠, and:

2♠ - 2N - 3♥ - 3N to coexist with the same responding hand.

But: 2♠ - 2N - 3♥ - 4♣ doesn't make sense to play as natural. Sure, responder knows there is a problem with the spade suit. But to carry this over and say that clubs must be better, or that 3N can't be an option doesn't seem to playable to me.

Wouldn't you rather have 4♣ (in the above sequence) to show a hand like: ♠AQx, ♥xx, ♦AQxx, ♣AKxx; where we already have spades agreed, but a hand that really wants to hear a heart cue? Otherwise if opener holds: ♠KJxxxx, ♥Qx, ♦ xx, ♣Qxx, he might need to 'support' clubs, if 4♣ could be taken as natural.

I mostly agree about game-level. I would even say that opener is allowed to pull 3N after Ogust when his hand calls for it. (He should never pull a direct 3N.)
Another example would be 2♠-2N-3♣-3♥. I think this is still suggesting 4♥ as a place to play.

In slam auctions, I would think for example that 2♥-2N-3♣-4♣ (cuebid for hearts) 4♦-6♣ is an offer to play, opener can correct to 6♥.

However, this is all guessing, I don't have such clear agreements with any of my partners.

Arend

[Elianna]

This topic came up because at nationals, I held AKxxx Axxx AQx A, or something like that. (I don't remember very well anymore, but I definitely have ♦ and ♠ right.)

The bidding (we were red, don't remember what they were) went 2d-2NT-3c-3s-pass (opps passing the whole time). I was not very pleased.

My partner's hand was xx x KJTxxx xxxx (or something like that. His stiff was opposite my A-empty, I've definitely got the pointys right).

There was some good news and some bad news.

The good news was that 3s made
The bad news is that it made game (don't remember if 4, or more)

More good news is that we didn't miss 6d
More bad news is that we missed 7d.

[han]

That's quite funny Elianna, given your first post. A little exercise in logic leads me to the conclusion that you were annoyed enough to bring it up over dinner break!

[awm]

Another amusing thing about this hand is that Elianna started asking people what this sequence meant. When she got to four opinions collected, she had four different answers. Of course eventually we got some duplication, but I thought it'd be interesting to put up a poll.

[blackshoe]

I would think that bidding 2NT (Ogust) over partner's weak 2 bid agrees his suit, at least tentatively.
If I have a fit for partner, then 2NT is (at least) a game try in that suit, and so a new suit after Ogust, whatever it means, must be forcing.

Since I can bid my own suit (forcing) if I don't like partner's suit, then if I go through Ogust (whether or not it guarantees a fit), I must be considering a slam, because otherwise I can just bid game in my suit. Again, a new suit after Ogust must be forcing.

I can't think of any other situation in which I would respond 2NT (Ogust) to a weak two bid, unless I were psyching, in which case a new suit afterwords is still forcing.

IMO, a necessary meta-agreement in any partnership is that a bid whose meaning you don't know is forcing.

All the above considered, the bid in question is forcing, and to pass it is clearly an error.