[pclayton]

One more:

♠x
♥KTx
♦Kxx
♣QTxxxx

Red / White. RHO passes, you pass, LHO opens a weak 2♠. pard doubles and RHO bids 3♠.

Say you bid 4♣. I don't think it's clear you should, but lets say you do.

Pard now bids 4N.

Now what?

[rogerclee]

I assume 4NT is asking about spade control, which I have. Unfortunately, I don't have anything else.

I bid 5C; I'm chicken. If partner tables xx AQxx AQxx AKx, he wins the post-mortem.

Edit: This is also sort of a safe action that covers a couple different meanings from partner. Keycard? Don't have any. 4NT to play? I think 5C is possibly better.

[awm]

Umm... it depends on what 4NT means? I think 4♣ is pretty clear by the way.

Seems like it could be any of:

(1) Keycard. So I'll respond to keycard.
(2) Suggesting to play 4NT. Seems fine to me, I'd pass.
(3) Asking for a spade control. I would bid 6♣ over this, showing spade control and no side control. I'm not embarrassed by my 4♣ bid.

My normal preference would actually be (2), using 4♠ to show a club slam try regardless of spade holding. But obviously this is a matter of agreement.

[joshs]

Well I think I have to pass, although I am not confident about this making....

[Echognome]

Partner doubled then bid NT. He didn't bid 2NT over 2♠. He's not doubling with a weak NT. What do we think he has?

He has a hand too good to bid a direct 2NT. He doesn't have a trick taking hand (he bids 3NT over 2♠).

[kenrexford]

4♠ would also be a club move for me -- RKCB though. 4NT, accordingly, asks for spade control. I have it, and I like my hand. Because I do not have a void -- 6♣.

[jdonn]

4♣ was beyond obvious. Now I bid 6♣, trying to survive no matter how partner meant 4NT. If 4NT was natural I would bid 6♣ anyway, not that I'm completely confident it would make but I'm at least as confident as I am that 4NT would make.

[Halo]

Happy with 4C.

The rest depends on agreements. For me this is RKCB and 5C from me.

It's more logical for 4S to be RKCB, but less simple.

[Apollo81]

I think I mostly agree with Adam and jdonn

[whereagles]

I take it 4NT is RKCB. Can't really see what else it should be...

I just bid the canonical 5♣ and that's it.

[Fluffy]

I didn't ever heard of that asking for spade control thing.

IMO 4NT as natural has no sense, at this point of the bidding you are gonna play in clubs or maybe in a red suit, nothing else.


That leaves only blackwood, and I just answer with the right bid on our methods.

[pclayton]

I have never heard of the spade control ask either.

Anyway, I held the component hand. I didn't bid 4N because I wasn't sure what it meant. I plodded with 4♦ with:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

We ended in 5♣. Got a 4-1 trump split. He's absolutely cold but flat murdered the play to go -1.

[whereagles]

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

[rogerclee]

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 08:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

I don't think so. I'm not sure what the most popular agreements are, but I like to x with a flexible hand such as that which can play both 3NT and 4H.

[pclayton]

rogerclee, on Dec 29 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 08:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

I don't think so. I'm not sure what the most popular agreements are, but I like to x with a flexible hand such as that which can play both 3NT and 4H.

Holding 4♥ was incidental. This is a 20 count which is just too good for 2N.

[rogerclee]

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Dec 29 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 08:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

I don't think so. I'm not sure what the most popular agreements are, but I like to x with a flexible hand such as that which can play both 3NT and 4H.

Holding 4♥ was incidental. This is a 20 count which is just too good for 2N.

Yeah, I understand. I mean x'ing to find 4 hearts from partner, as opposed to gunning it out with 3NT directly. This hand is always going to game.

[Cascade]

pclayton, on Dec 30 2007, 07:44 AM, said:

rogerclee, on Dec 29 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 08:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

I don't think so. I'm not sure what the most popular agreements are, but I like to x with a flexible hand such as that which can play both 3NT and 4H.

Holding 4♥ was incidental. This is a 20 count which is just too good for 2N.

The suggestion was to jump to 3NT.

I would jump to 3NT with a hand too good to bid 2NT and without the flexibility to double. In practice this usually means a minor oriented hand - one or two suited.

Normally I would double with four hearts but with xxxx maybe I would consider 3NT - I can see problems with both double and the leap to 3NT. I think I would probably just double and hope to survive.

[CSGibson]

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

A 3NT overcall should be a running tricks and a stop in the bid suit, not a balanced 20 count. Double is right, obviously, and 4 NT natural seems right also, since you have a 4 spade cue bid for all hands interested in club slams, although I understand that others may assign a special meaning to the 4NT bid, like a spade ask.

[Fluffy]

Actually 3NT shows (incredibly) a hand that wills to play 3NT opposite a normal hand form partner.

[pclayton]

CSGibson, on Dec 29 2007, 06:12 PM, said:

whereagles, on Dec 29 2007, 05:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 29 2007, 06:01 AM, said:

♠AKx
♥98xx
♦AQTx
♣AK

If 4N is natural (and why shouldn't it be, as Matt suggests) isn't this the perfect call?

no. that's a perfect direct 3NT overcall

A 3NT overcall should be a running tricks and a stop in the bid suit, not a balanced 20 count. Double is right, obviously, and 4 NT natural seems right also, since you have a 4 spade cue bid for all hands interested in club slams, although I understand that others may assign a special meaning to the 4NT bid, like a spade ask.

I agree. This hand is wrong for 3N. We'll be goaded into it frequently when pard Lebensohl's but that's life.

As Wayne mentioned - I missed the comment - I thought it referred to a 2N overcall.