[kfay]

Scoring: IMP

Uncontested Auction:
1♦-1♠
1NT-2♦
2♥-3♦
?

---

2♦ was GF artificial. You systemically show your 4cM over 3-card support first. You haven't discussed a lot of subjects pertaining to 2-way NMF.

[suokko]

3♥, What is the problem? This is huge hand - not any too light opening unless you play some mini-NT.

[Jlall]

4C

[dellache]

My hand is not as horrible as before the 3♦fit. I'd show my club Ace now (4♣).

[aguahombre]

I guess the debate is which cue to bid --3H or 4C, with this minimum which has grown into a monster now that we know partner really has diamonds. This is the first time H is a cue. Before, it was a suit. Therefore, I would think bypassing to bid 4C would deny the heart Ace.

The only reason for 4C would be if we are patterning, rather than cueing. But Pard already knows the pattern pretty much.

[billw55]

I bid 3NT. Partner has not necessarily shown slam interest yet and I do have a minimum. If he wants to go cuebidding over that, I'll play along.

[mikeh]

Are we supposed to cue clubs first because 3♥ will appear, initially, to be a probe for the right game, rather than a slam try? I certainly would take 3♥ as ambiguous, and the concern might be that responder, with spades controlled and club cards, may feel compelled to bid 3N out of fear that you have a slam-unsuitable hand, with slow heart values.

But, if we think this has become a monster or even a goodish hand, we clear up the ambiguity via 4♣ next.

I do agree with some cue...not that this hand has become truly slam positive.... for all you gung-ho types, compare it to say Kx Axxx Qxxxx Ax: now that's a hand that has really grown up. My reason for cueing is that we may have slam and when we don't there is some prospect that 5♦ is better than 3N. Picture AJxx KQx Kxxxx x.

So, maybe I'm too old-fashioned, but I cue my cheapest control, because I can cue both of them below 4♦, while if I start with clubs, I take up more space.... recognizing that this probably won't make any difference....it's not like I have a 3rd feature to cue below 5♦

[kfay]

Frankly I don't think that 3♥ says anything more about my hand. I'd be most convinced in it being 'partner I have good hearts' and he now has a chance to show good spades, etc.

I'm always afraid to make advance cuebids, which don't exist to me anymore. The way I like to play 3♥ is just strain-searching (and what I bid ATT).

[ONEferBRID]

3H ......cheapest control cue.

[Jlall]

Yeah definitely think 3H is misdescriptive and shows good hearts, it's not just a cuebid.

[ONEferBRID]

1NT shows a relatively balanced 12-14... make that 11 these days.
2D! is the same as in NMF except it is GF.
2H ... all it says is 4 cds, but may have 3 cds Sp
3D ... cancels interest in Sp and puts the focus on responder's real intent -- Diam ( just like in NMF which would establish GF, slammish. Here we are already GF.
3H ....cheapest cue; why on earth would you want to bypass this bid ?
Pard may have a 3S cuebid and then you can go 4C.

[Fluffy]

3♥ sounds to as lack of club stopper.

I must confess I might just bid 3NT at the table. being a problem I like 4♣, but probably 3NT would be my pick to slow down partner. Even when good, we still have only 11

[mike777]

kfay, on Nov 5 2009, 12:35 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

Uncontested Auction:
1♦-1♠
1NT-2♦
2♥-3♦
?

---

2♦ was GF artificial.  You systemically show your 4cM over 3-card support first.  You haven't discussed a lot of subjects pertaining to 2-way NMF.

1)4c cue, never 3h. Forward going towards slam. Pard could have rebid 2nt to slow me down and look for nt stoppers.


2) Good hand to discuss should we show 4h or 3s first. I vote 3s first but worth a discussion.

[655321]

4♣.

Even though we only have 11 HCP the hand is much better now than many balanced minimums we could hold.

3NT seems misguided to me. It should show something like xx AQxx Qxxx KQT, and to bid it on the grounds that we 'only' have 11 points seems wrong.

[aguahombre]

ONEferBRID, on Nov 5 2009, 07:48 PM, said:

1NT shows a relatively balanced 12-14... make that 11 these days.
2D! is the same as in NMF except it is GF.
2H ... all it says is 4 cds, but may have 3 cds Sp
3D ... cancels interest in Sp and puts the focus on responder's real intent -- Diam ( just like in NMF which would establish GF, slammish.  Here we are already GF.
3H ....cheapest cue; why on earth would you want to bypass this bid ?
        Pard may have a 3S cuebid and then you can go 4C.

You and I apparently agree that 3D is slammish in diamonds, and the gentle probe for the right strain is a train which has already left the station. Others disagree, and that is why these fora are interesting. It is not required that everyone agrees, only that our partners do.

Side note: with only 2C as the NMF, my partner would already know about the 11 or 12 count from the 2H bid, so 3D would be much more clear as slammish. but there are a lot of inferences involved which most have not discussed on follow-ups to NMF, so some will disagree with that, too.

[the hog]

I don't really understand this. Why can't responder have a minimum GF
6142 or perhaps a 5413 and be looking for the best contract? Why is 3D slammish? I would just bid 3NT on the opening hand.

[aguahombre]

It depends on whether you would rebid 1NT with a singleton. We wouldn't, so with 6 spades, the minimum game force would just bid 4S. 5413 would have bid 4H(after 2h). 51(43) non slammish would have bid 3NT. True, it helps for responder to know opener is not 2 4 5 2, but rather exactly 2443. Hence, the statement about using 2C and finding out everything immediately. Also, the agreement to open 1C with 2 3 4 4 eliminates that distribution at the outset.

[cherdanno]

The_Hog, on Nov 6 2009, 12:11 AM, said:

I don't really understand this. Why can't responder have a minimum GF
6142 or perhaps a 5413 and be looking for the best contract? Why is 3D slammish? I would just bid 3NT on the opening hand.

Why would a 6142 hand looking for the best strain not start suggesting what is the best strain 95% of the time?
(I assume 5413 is a typo.)

[Jlall]

The_Hog, on Nov 6 2009, 12:11 AM, said:

I don't really understand this. Why can't responder have a minimum GF
6142 or perhaps a 5413 and be looking for the best contract? Why is 3D slammish? I would just bid 3NT on the opening hand.

Partner can definitely have a 5143 or 5341 type hand just looking for the best game. I guess I don't understand why you'd think 3N is the best game with this hand?

[benlessard]

I like that responder has to bid 2Nt with all hands with at least half a stop. (here it doesnt matter but most of the time it help rightsiding the Hx)

But even if you dont play that way, responder holding a non-slammish with half-stop or + in club can/should bid 2Nt before 3D anyway. So 3D is either slammish or without clubs cards. So in both case you dont want to play 3Nt.

It playable that 3H show a nice 4 bagger but i play 3H as a cue.