[FrancesHinden]

hatchett, on Sep 4 2007, 12:20 AM, said:

If 2♥ forced to 3♦ then I would assume that pass shows non-minimum and 3♦ is the weakest action.

This is indeed what we play.

3D is the weakest action and does not imply more than four diamonds.

[mike777]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 4 2007, 05:09 AM, said:

hatchett, on Sep 4 2007, 12:20 AM, said:

If 2♥ forced to 3♦ then I would assume that pass shows non-minimum and 3♦ is the weakest action.

This is indeed what we play.

3D is the weakest action and does not imply more than four diamonds.

you bid 3d with only4...but pass with 5 or 6????????

edit.

[skjaeran]

mike777, on Sep 4 2007, 12:22 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Sep 4 2007, 05:09 AM, said:

hatchett, on Sep 4 2007, 12:20 AM, said:

If 2♥ forced to 3♦ then I would assume that pass shows non-minimum and 3♦ is the weakest action.

This is indeed what we play.

3D is the weakest action and does not imply more than four diamonds.

you bid 3d with only4...but pass with 5 or 6????????

This seems insane

Sure she does. So do I (I've used that same principle as far as I can remember), and the Arend-Han partnership does too. To me it's a 'natural' principle that pass is stronger than bidding to the forced level.

[mikeh]

I move. I don't mind not having splintered. By pulling 3N to 4♣, I convert the stopper-showing 3♥ into a cuebid... if I pulled to 4N instead, that would simply be quantitative, but by making an obvious cue, I am looking for 6♦ not 6N, and so the 3♥ has to have been the start of a cuebidding sequence.

Over 4♠ by partner, I bid 5♣.... and partner can place me with reasonable trumps, the ♥A and the ♣AK... the only thing she doesn't know is the stiff spade, but I have to have something extra, because what I have shown so far isn't enough, by itself, to be slam enthusiastic.. which my sequence clearly is.

And I fully agree with the concept that 3♦ was the weakest call... it is a very useful rule, and indeed, I would simply assume that any expert would play it this way without discussion.


Just as [1♣] 1♠ [P] 2♣ [x] 2♠ is the weakest call I could make as the overcaller.

[FrancesHinden]

I haven't told you what happened on the hand.

My partner, who held the hand, passed 3NT.
He now thinks that was wrong.

It is indeed correct to move, as partner has

J10xx
KQx
AQxx
xx

at the other table they had an uncontested auction to 3NT.

[1eyedjack]

Perhaps bid 3S over 3H?
If you had great Spades you would bid 3NT
If you had appalling Spades you would not offer 3NT as an option.
On this hand, if partner has stiff Spade, 3NT may make, but is unlikely to be a better spot than 5D, and you do then have slam interest.

[Fluffy]

If there is a perfect minimum it ust be partner's hand

[han]

Thanks for posting. I think that 3NT was crystal clear. Of course you would have been very excited had partner bid 4C now, or splintered earlier.