[joshs]

That is correct. In some auctions (1C-1H-3C or 1S-1N-3S where you count your points and you length and strength in partner's suit your hand evaluation is not as precise as after 1N-4N or 1C-1S-3D(mini-splinter) when you know whichs cards are working and which aren't. But its still esentially a quantitative evaluation. I honestly think most auctions in bridge involve the answering the question, do I have a better hand for partner than what I have shown previously, and if so, how much better....

BTW Luis, I apologize for the tone of my previous post. I am writing from work, and often trying to get in a quick post between work assignments, and sometimes just blurt something quickly, perhaps in frusteration that I haven't been getting my point across.

On a final matter, I e-mailed my regular partner (Marc Umeno) and at least we were in sink on what bids meant. It doesn't mean we are right, but its good to be in sink with your partners.

He said over 1C-P-1D-3D

"3h,3s, 4c, 3nt are natural; 4d is a heart raise or a good hand with a lot of clubs, X is cards".

OK he could have said more, like how strong 3S is for instance. I suspect we would be in sink there also, but let me find out...

Hey Fred, with Brad does 4D agree hearts, or can it be a moose with Clubs as well?

[luis]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 11:26 PM, said:

BTW Luis, I apologize for the tone of my previous post. I am writing from work, and often trying to get in a quick post between work assignments, and sometimes just blurt something quickly, perhaps in frusteration that I haven't been getting my point across.

We are cool, just talking bridge bro :-)
It's a pitty my name is not Josh, otherwise we can form a club of Joshes and rule the world, imagine you Jdonn and me...

[Kalvan14]

4♣ must be forcing also to lighten up the burden on 4♦ (which, in standard usage certainly agrees hearts). Why should anyone be willing to put all the slam tries into a single bid (4♦) just to keep the (remote) possibility of stopping on a dime in 4♣? Provided that there is a clear agreement on what is the range for 4♣, obviously.

[cherdano]

luis, on May 4 2006, 11:23 PM, said:

joshs, on May 4 2006, 07:40 PM, said:

luis, on May 4 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

No opener doesn't want to play 4C he wants to be able to invite game on a hand the would have opened 1C and rebid 3C (a very common hand). That player doesn't want to play 3C either. He wants to invite a game without forcing to game. So you are giving him the choice between overbidding by 2 levels or selling out?

I don't believe in invitations when pd doesn't have the information he needs to take an educated decision.
If 4♣ is an invitation when is pd supossed to pass and when is he supossed to bid 5 ? Maybe he flips a coin or something?
Invitations may be fine when you ask pd to pass or accept based on some criteria, I hte general invitations, pd will always bid game when in doubts and since he will always be in doubt in this auction then the 4♣ bid becomes forcing.

Luis

I like the principle, but opposite a hand that is completely unlimited? If 4C shows s.th. like good 15-18, then partner will pass with 5 out of queens and jacks and that will usually be right, and he will raise with 10 containing an A, K or two. If in doubt, he will raise with good support and pass with misfit... Is that really too small a target??

Arend

[joshs]

luis, on May 4 2006, 10:12 PM, said:

joshs, on May 4 2006, 11:26 PM, said:

BTW Luis, I apologize for the tone of my previous post. I am writing from work, and often trying to get in a quick post between work assignments, and sometimes just blurt something quickly, perhaps in frusteration that I haven't been getting my point across.

We are cool, just talking bridge bro :-)
It's a pitty my name is not Josh, otherwise we can form a club of Joshes and rule the world, imagine you Jdonn and me...

Well Josh-Josh-Luis already form a cool team. I think we need a second Luis, and then play as a team

[jdonn]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 06:26 PM, said:

On a final matter, I e-mailed my regular partner (Marc Umeno) and at least we were in sink on what bids meant. It doesn't mean we are right, but its good to be in sink with your partners.

He said over 1C-P-1D-3D

"3h,3s, 4c, 3nt are natural; 4d is a heart raise or a good hand with a lot of clubs, X is cards".

OK he could have said more, like how strong 3S is for instance. I suspect we would be in sink there also, but let me find out...

You two must really be in sync with each other to find yourselves together in the sink so often

hehehe

[joshs]

Up the creek with no paddle you mean?

[hutchau]

without discussion I would have thought that here any bid but 4♥ would be a slam try,suit bids are cue bids where
[1]4♠=Ace of ♠,may or may not have a ♣ control, but highly likely to have one
[2]5♣=Ace of ♣ and K of ♠ as without ♠ control I would have bid 4♥
[3]5♦=K♠,K♣,A♦......as no Bwood

[moysian]

I like bidding 4s, which should show partner all he knows to search for slam. The K should be welcome news whether or not he holds the Ace. Results from blackwood (or not) should reveal the best contract.

[Salokin]

In my opinion 4♦ shows just a good 4♥ Bid and says that we want to win 4♥. This sets up a forcing pass.
Here a 4♠ cue is possible, but I could live with a small underbid of 4♥.

Salokin

[Winstonm]

I would think one should bid 4S here. I agree with MikeH that 4D cannot always show a diamond control but rather a very powerful hand in support of hearts. It may be that spades is the suit over which partner has concerns: xx, AKQx, Ax, KQ109x.

Winston