[jillybean]

Partner opens the bidding 1nt and you hold
x
KTx
AQx
KQxxxx

(P) 1nt (P) 2♣
(2♠) 3♥ (P) ?

Would you be reasonably confidant that partner would understand 4♣ here as natural and forcing or is it a cue for ♥?
Or yet another one for discussion.

[gwnn]

I'm in a somewhat bad position here.

In absolute simplistic std. 2♣ will promise a 4cM. 2♠ I believe is takeout in a minor, weak. So both of those are out. I think 3♣ is forcing natural and slam interest. So that would be it. If only stayman and weak t/o in a minor was agreed, I'd just bid 4NT quantitative.

Anyway, if 2♣ promised a 4cM then 4♣ should be a qbid in support of hearts (NOT gerber). If it didn't promise a 4cM, 4♣ is natural, slam interest.

[han]

Erm, why did I bid stayman, I don't have a 4-card major.

[goobers]

han, on Feb 7 2008, 05:25 PM, said:

Erm, why did I bid stayman, I don't have a 4-card major.

Don't some people bid stayman and then rebid in a minor to show a single suited slammish hand?

[vuroth]

In SAYC, 3♣ is invitational to 3NT. (Don't even ask what 4♣ is in SAYC....)

If you're playing SAYC, I think you might be constrained to bidding 5♣ on this one - I don't see any other way to force game in a minor.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong....

[han]

goobers, on Feb 7 2008, 05:32 PM, said:

han, on Feb 7 2008, 05:25 PM, said:

Erm, why did I bid stayman, I don't have a 4-card major.

Don't some people bid stayman and then rebid in a minor to show a single suited slammish hand?

OK, this is relevant in this discussion. If this is indeed the agreement then 4C should be natural.

I know it is often thought of as "advanced" but I have always considered 4-suited transfers to be simpler.

[jdonn]

4♣ is natural. 3♠ is the only strong slam try for hearts, although it's vague since it could also be a 3NT bid with no spade stopper.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Feb 7 2008, 05:48 PM, said:

4♣ is natural. 3♠ is the only strong slam try for hearts, although it's vague since it could also be a 3NT bid with no spade stopper.

I'm not disagreeing, but I sure hope my partner reads it that way.

Here's a question for you...

1NT P 2♣ 2♠
-P- P

Forcing or not forcing?

If it's forcing, I'll just bid 6♣, and pray that we're not off two aces. I'm that scared that 4♣ will be misinterpreted. If it's not forcing...jeez, I don't know what I'm going to say that can't be misinterpreted as showing hearts.

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Feb 7 2008, 06:08 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 7 2008, 05:48 PM, said:

4♣ is natural. 3♠ is the only strong slam try for hearts, although it's vague since it could also be a 3NT bid with no spade stopper.

I'm not disagreeing, but I sure hope my partner reads it that way.

Here's a question for you...

1NT P 2♣ 2♠
-P- P

Not forcing. You could be, for example, a 3451 yarb.

[jillybean]

han, on Feb 7 2008, 03:25 PM, said:

Erm, why did I bid stayman, I don't have a 4-card major.

Well, I think 1n:2♣ 2y:3m is the SAYC method to show slam interest with a long minor.

1n:3m is invitational with 6
1n:4♣ is of course that baby food

What are the pro's and con's of 4suited tranfers?

[vuroth]

You're right, jillybean. The question is - does the stayman sequence still require a 4cM? I would have thought that it did, but maybe I'm wrong....

I would guess that the advantage of 4-way transfers is that you can transfer with a weak OR strong hand, just like jacoby transfers.

V

[Cascade]

The SAYC notes that I have say:

"2C is "non-forcing" Stayman ... If responder rebids three of either minor, it shows slam interest and at least a five-card suit."

Nothing in this statement suggests that Stayman promises a four-card major. Given that there is no other forcing bid available in a minor I think this would be a reasonable agreement - Stayman then 3minor is natural and forcing with no major promised.

I suppose lots of 'standard' SAYC pairs do not discuss how to slam in a minor after 1NT.

Given this I think 4♣ now is natural and forcing and slammish but I wouldn't expect a pick-up partner to necessarily agree or know that. I might therefore just bash 5♣ or 6♣.

Like a lot of situations this shows the advantage of having firm partnership agreements.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Feb 7 2008, 06:10 PM, said:

jtfanclub, on Feb 7 2008, 06:08 PM, said:

Here's a question for you...

1NT  P  2♣  2♠
-P-  P

Not forcing. You could be, for example, a 3451 yarb.

I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. Let me rephrase.

What does 3♥ actually show?

I do not play that the auction
1NT P 2♣ 2♠
P

denies 4 hearts, and I think that's standard (that's really what I meant to ask). After all, there's a whole slew of hands where it's likely that 3♥ is bad...

-I could have that 4351 or 3451 Yarborough and we have no business being at the 2 level, let alone 3.
-I could have 4 spades and 2-3 hearts, and a nice penalty double.
-I could be 4-4 in the majors but not enough points to go to game.
-I could have the GF hand with a minor, and can no longer show that minor below 3NT.

So if I'm right, the fact that he bid 3♥ should imply something. And the one thing it implies to me is that he doesn't have slow winners in spades. After all, defensive/no-trump tricks in spades makes it less likely that 2♠ will make, less likely that 3♥ will make, and less likely that ♥ is the right strain. So I think that's a factor in favor of bidding more clubs. After all, if he has 16 points outside of spades then 6♣ is virtually a lock, and if he has the ace of spades and 12 points outside of spades then 6♣ has good odds.

And if he has the AK of spades and we're off two cashing aces, um, oops. But I'll take my chances.

[jillybean]

vuroth, on Feb 7 2008, 05:56 PM, said:

You're right, jillybean.  The question is - does the stayman sequence still require a 4cM?  I would have thought that it did, but maybe I'm wrong....

Not the way I learned it but then its not a common sequence and doesnt seem to
be well defined or understood.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Feb 7 2008, 04:55 PM, said:

Partner opens the bidding 1nt and you hold
x
KTx
AQx
KQxxxx

(P) 1nt (P) 2♣
(2♠) 3♥ (P) ?

Would you be reasonably confidant that partner would understand 4♣ here as natural and forcing or is it a cue for ♥?
Or yet another one for discussion.

#1 Unless 2C was explicitly agreed to be something
else than ordinary Stayman, you are dead.
... and you would also be in this position without
the interference.
=> Bid something else than 2C, either 3C or 3NT
#2 now bid 3NT and hope
Whatever 4C means, it is a guess, and you wont
be able to control the auction

With kind regards
Marlowe

[brianshark]

If you have agreed with your pard that 2♣ is either asking for a major or a slam try in a minor, then 4♣ in this position should show a slam try with ♣s and not a cue-bid in support of ♥s.