[kgr]

1NT-2D-(3C)-
3H-3S

1NT: 15-17
2D: transfer
(3C): natural
3H: accept of transfer (3+ H)
How do you play 3S here?
- control bid (we play 1st or 2nd)
- 4 card Spade and GF

[FrancesHinden]

I would play it the same as after a super-accept without the intervention.
My style is that it is a (slam) trial-bid, so 'natural' but may be only a 3-card suit.

With a pick-up partner I would assume a cue bid, as hearts have been clearly agreed.

[kgr]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 7 2006, 06:38 PM, said:

I would play it the same as after a super-accept without the intervention.

Except that a superaccept ussually promises 4-card support and looking for a 4-4 Spade fit is less interesting then.

Quote

My style is that it is a (slam) trial-bid, so 'natural' but may be only a 3-card suit.
With a pick-up partner I would assume a cue bid, as hearts have been clearly agreed.

First time I hear about a slam trial-bid. I don't really see the advantage of it. Isn't it easier then to promise at least 4-card or to promise a control? Is this slam trial-bid a bad suit without control or should it have a control (A or K) or undefined.

Thanks,
Koen

[kenrexford]

A cuebid, showing slam interest and first-round or second-round spade control, possibly shortness.

I briefly considered whether 3♠ should also imply a diamond control (partner failed to bid 3♦ as a super-acceptance), but it seems that 3♦ probably should show a maxi-super and 3♥ a competitive super. If this distinction is not available, then 3♠ seems to also show a diamond control.

One further logical possibility is that 3♦ does show a "maxi" super, with "maxi" defined as club control. This makes perhaps the best sense. If this is the case, then 3♠ should show spade control and club control (KQ or A or stiff).

However, the one-under cue as the only available cue makes more sense as a denial cuebid (where you would want a transfer rejection to make the 3♣ bidder lead away and into instead of receive through).

This leads me back, then, to 3♥ suggesting a club control, in which case 3♠ has no secondary meaning.

However, it illuminates a good treatment. When only one cuebid is available between the overcall and super-acceptance of the transfer, that call should super-accept the transfer and deny control of the opposition suit, to right-side the contract. If the auction progresses, Opener should avoid bidding the trump suit first, such that "LTTC" by Opener is off, being rather a simple re-transfer.