North's 3♦ shows limit raise of ♠ or better, now is South's hand worth a try for slam? If to try, what's the proper re-bid for south? 3♥?4♣? or4♦? For the partnership who play "serious 3NT "over major fit, is this conventional 3NT still applied here after partner's 3♦?
Second suit or cuebid?
#1
Posted 2007-April-20, 17:52
North's 3♦ shows limit raise of ♠ or better, now is South's hand worth a try for slam? If to try, what's the proper re-bid for south? 3♥?4♣? or4♦? For the partnership who play "serious 3NT "over major fit, is this conventional 3NT still applied here after partner's 3♦?
#2
Posted 2007-April-20, 17:59
I would take 3♥ and 4♣ as natural (game) slam tries, so if I want to try with this hand (and I do), I have to bid 4♦.
#3
Posted 2007-April-20, 18:01
bid_better, on Apr 20 2007, 06:52 PM, said:
Play 2/1
S W N E
1♠-(2♦)-3♦-pass
-?
I'll try the questions in order.
Quote
Absolutely. Axxx Kxx xx xxxx is not even a limit raise. Not that I would reach slam opposite it anyway, but it only goes to show how likely slam is.
Quote
4♦. 3♥ is natural and I think would cause partner to misevaluate. 4♣ would get partner too excited over the club king. I think bidding 4♦ and then signing off over a 4♥ bid unless partner can keep going is about the right level of enthusiasm. I do not agree that it denies club control.
Quote
Not on auctions like this, I would take 3NT as an offer to play. The overcall may have changed the situation and make opener want to play 3NT with a major suit fit.
#4 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 18:06
#5
Posted 2007-April-20, 18:21
Jlall, on Apr 20 2007, 07:06 PM, said:
Maybe I'm a wimp but how is 3♥ artificial! It's after a limit raise, you don't have a vague re-invite, what would it ask partner how many jacks he has? It probably would have gone 1♠ p 3♠ p ? if they didn't interfere.
#6 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 18:38
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 07:21 PM, said:
A better analogy might be if you played 1S p 3D as a limit raise. I know several good pairs who play 3H here as a game try. I don't see why you wouldn't want to be able to invite.
#7
Posted 2007-April-20, 19:02
#8 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 19:09
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 08:02 PM, said:
With a modern expert partner I would assume he would think if he bid 3S I could pass. As such it's a game try. It cannot be a specific game try given that I only have 1 bid between 3D and 3S. If he would think 3S was forcing I guess we'd have a problem since I am going to take inferences based on whether he bids 3S or 4S or 4x just based on that. If he thinks I have hearts I don't care much. I just want to see how good his hand is.
#9
Posted 2007-April-20, 19:33
Jlall, on Apr 20 2007, 08:09 PM, said:
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 08:02 PM, said:
With a modern expert partner I would assume he would think if he bid 3S I could pass. As such it's a game try. It cannot be a specific game try given that I only have 1 bid between 3D and 3S. If he would think 3S was forcing I guess we'd have a problem since I am going to take inferences based on whether he bids 3S or 4S or 4x just based on that. If he thinks I have hearts I don't care much. I just want to see how good his hand is.
You lost me lol. With the logic that is.
So 1♠ 2♣ 3♣ p 3♦ p 3♥, 3♥ is an artificial game try since 3♠ can be passed? The bid below 3 of our major is always artificial now unless we are in a game force.
#10 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-April-20, 19:38
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 08:33 PM, said:
right!
#12
Posted 2007-April-21, 07:31
I think 3♥ is ok, though. Seems weired to me that 4♦ could be the only slam try available. And 3N is surely natural. With values in diamonds you could easily be afraid of a ruff.
Whatever you do, don't bid 4♣. That would make partner upgrade his ♣KJT. Unless 4♣ specifically shows a singleton. Which it probably doesn't, at least not with a ranodm pick-up.
#13
Posted 2007-April-21, 12:32
Qxx KQxx xxx KJx
And the 5 level is in serious jeopardy, in fact on a terrible day 4 could go down. Or we could have 2 keycards without the queen and you don't know if partner has Axx or Axxx of spades. I like involving partner in this decision.
#14
Posted 2007-April-21, 12:42
I'm more concerned about p's constructive raise being based mainly on a void diamonds. In that case, we could easily loose a heart trick. Ideally, we could find out if p has a heart control. If so, we're satisfied with four keycards. Otherwise, we need all five.
#15
Posted 2007-April-21, 12:47
jdonn, on Apr 20 2007, 08:01 PM, said:
Quote
Definitely.
Quote
First I'll comment on the Josh-Justin debate. I think that 3♥ in this auction is an artificial game try since the 3♦ bid can be anywhere from a 10-count 3-card limit raise to a real 4-card limit raise. That's actually a pretty wide range; it's a lot wider than if partner had bid 3♦ Bergen LR for example.
Second, I don't think the hand is good enough to blast keycard. I think that I should bid 3♥ and then try for slam one more time (4♦) if partner signs off in 3♠. If partner signs off again I'm done. I don't think I've bid the hand strongly enough if I bid 4♦ here and then sign off over 4♥.
Quote
If undiscussed I would assume no, but it's a good idea to discuss when serious is on. WIth casual partners I play it is on only for known 9-card or better fits.
#16
Posted 2007-April-21, 13:02
#17
Posted 2007-April-21, 13:17
helene_t, on Apr 21 2007, 12:42 PM, said:
I'm more concerned about p's constructive raise being based mainly on a void diamonds. In that case, we could easily loose a heart trick. Ideally, we could find out if p has a heart control. If so, we're satisfied with four keycards. Otherwise, we need all five.
If partner has 3 trumps and 2 diamonds, it is very likely that you can't ruff both diamond losers. I don't think this hand is as good as you think, unless partner has 4 trumps. Opposite a 4-card limit raise, I might agree with keycards.
#18
Posted 2007-April-21, 13:18
jdonn, on Apr 21 2007, 03:02 PM, said:
My point was that the OP's auction is a lot wider ranging than these auctions; enough to warrant the existence of the game try.
If 3♦ showed for instance only a 4-card LR then I agree with you Josh.
#19
Posted 2007-April-21, 13:27
Apollo81, on Apr 21 2007, 02:18 PM, said:
jdonn, on Apr 21 2007, 03:02 PM, said:
My point was that the OP's auction is a lot wider ranging than these auctions; enough to warrant the existence of the game try.
If 3♦ showed for instance only a 4-card LR then I agree with you Josh.
3 or 4 card support is already taken into account in the decision of whether or not to make a limit raise. You might think Kxx Axxx QJx xxx is not one but Kxxx Axx QJxx xx is one, for example, or no for QJx Kxxxx x Qxxx but yes for QJxx Kxxxx x Qxx. It's redundant information since responder already used it to value his hand.
Even if in a partnership 1♠ p 2♠ denies four trumps, they still generally play 3♦ 3♥ is an artificial game try.
#20
Posted 2007-April-21, 14:23
The issue I see is a cue bid forced on responder with a good limit raise since Opener can have a wide variety of hands?
I am of the opinion that if Opener is interested in slam, that he shouldn't start with 3♥, and that 3♥ is specifically a game try.

Help
Play 2/1
S W N E
1♠-(2♦)-3♦-pass-
?