[Chamaco]

MP, say all vuln (Vuln is not really the issue here)

RHO deals and opens 3♣, you bid 3♦, LHO passes, pard bids 4♦.

RHO YOU LHO PARD
3♣ 3♦ p 4♦

a ) Is it forcing, showig fit and willingness to cuebid to slam ?
b ) Is it invitational to 5♦ ?
-----------------------------------
As usual, obviously anything could be agreed with a partner, but I'd like to know:

1) what would be the expected bid in a pickup partnership (e.g. undiscussed)
2) what meaning is most efficient according to the BBO gurus

Thanks !!

[42]

I am no BBO-Guru but dare to answer ;-)

I think it is an invitational bid (next opp passed), slam interest must go over a cue bid. The 3♦ bidder told his story: at least opening strength up to 16(17) and a good ♦suit.

Caren

[inquiry]

At matchpoints, where we all have to pay SPECIAL attention to possible 3NT contracts, there is a reasonable arguement that 4♦ should be forcing on this auction. Big ♦ fit, and overcaller unlimited, and yet responder did not make any effort to get into 3NT (no 3♥ or 3♠ bid which will both be forcing)...and risked turning a possible +110 into -100.

However, I believe in a pickup partnership with no special arrangement, 42 is absolutely correct, this is "invintational".

[luis]

I think an invitational bid doesn't make any sense in this context so I'd take 4d as forcing, slam oriented with support for diammonds. This will start a control exchange sequence ending in 5d, 6d or 7d.

[joker_gib]

Hi all,

I agree with Luis, slam try but probably without ♣ control (I will cue bid ♣ with the control)

Alain

[Free]

Yes it's forcing, and slam oriented imo, opps both bid weak (or a penalty pass perhaps, but that's not obvious)... In my partnership i'd interpret it as minorwood. It's NOT invitational at all, because you have the 4♣ bid available for that.

[WGF_Flame]

I disagee with the most here. (including better players then i)
3D has a long range of hands.
Id bid 3D with
XX
AXX
AKQXX
AXXX
and maybe stronger hands.
but also with
XX
XXX
AKQXXXX
XX
and maybe weaker hands.
for this resson i dont think 4d should not be forcing, i would pass 4d with a minimum hand cue bid with a stronger hand. there is an easy 4c to show stronger hands.

[OSH]

Hi all.

The actual hand was:
♠AQxx
♥ATxx
♦A86
♣xx

with the correct meaning of 4♦, it is possible to verify the ♣control.
Instead, if you bid 4♣, there could be problems after pard's 4♦....

[inquiry]

Welcome to the BBF with your first post OSH.....

This was a simple question... not what SHOULD 4♦ mean if you had your way with the bid, but what does it mean with

1) what would be the expected bid in a pickup partnership (e.g. undiscussed)
2) what meaning is most efficient according to the BBO gurus

I still contend that what it means with a pickup partnership is "invite", as I posted earlier. HOWVER, at matchpoints, if you have an invitational hand and a diamond fit, you simply can not invite to 5♦ and give up on 3NT... heck if 5♦ makes and if your partner bids it, you still lkely to get a zero anytime he has a ♣ stopper.

So with a "thinking partner" and at Matchpoings the 4♦ is forcing bid has right (I will agree with myself and the BBO guru's who reached the same conclusion). If I were playing this auction with any "gold star" I would assume, without concern, that 4♦ was forcing. Now the question becomes, what should you bid with the hand in question, and should 4♣ also be forcing or should it be invintational as free suggested, and should 4♦ deny or promise a ♣ control.

Well, 4♣ can't be invintational for the same reason that 4♦ can't be... at matchpoints you can't afford that luxury. So 4♣ can be a lot of other things, I would think it shows a control (cue-bid).

Now as to the actual hand, bid a forcing 3♥. Partner will pay special homage to a ♣ stopper here. If he raises to 4♥, bid 4♠ hoping to get help on rather to play 5♦ or 6.

Ben

[OSH]

inquiry, on Mar 23 2004, 11:33 AM, said:

Welcome to the BBF with your first post OSH.....

This was a simple question... not what SHOULD 4♦ mean if you had your way with the bid, but what does it mean with

1) what would be the expected bid in a pickup partnership (e.g. undiscussed)
2) what meaning is most efficient according to the BBO gurus

.....

Now as to the actual hand, bid a forcing 3♥. Partner will pay special homage to a ♣ stopper here. If he raises to 4♥, bid 4♠ hoping to get help on rather to play 5♦ or 6.

Ben

Ok Ben, I was only saying that I was Chamaco's pard in the a.m. hand , and this hand is the reason why he posted the question.
Now I agree that 4♦ should be forcing, I didn't realize it at the table.

I didn't consider 3♥, because if pard now bids 3NT, he shows the ♣ control that I'm looking for. I think it is a good reason to try for a slam.

Bye

[42]

Hi experts!
I still do not see why 4♦ is stronger than 4♣.
What is 4♣ in "common sense"?
What is your weakest hand for a 3♦-overcall?

[luis]

42, on Mar 23 2004, 05:06 PM, said:

Hi experts!
I still do not see why 4♦ is stronger than 4♣.
What is 4♣ in "common sense"?
What is your weakest hand for a 3♦-overcall?

"I still do not see why 4♦ is stronger than 4♣. "

It's not. I think that the 4cl cuebid in this context looks for a second suit (a major) by the overcaller. Without a second suit he just bids 4d. The idea is to make strong balanced hands with a 4 card major able to find a fit for slam or grand-slam.

What is 4♣ in "common sense"?

An unassuming cuebid also known as "what else pd"

What is your weakest hand for a 3♦-overcall?

Something like: xx, Kxx, AKxxx, QJx

[Trpltrbl]

4♦ is one thing for sure, not interested in 3 NT I play it forcing in regular pdships, with some as Minorwood ( RKC in ♦ ), with others I want to find out about slam but I don't have ♣ control.
But I guess in a pick-up game it can be just not interested in 3 NT but invitational for 5♦, possibly more.

Mike

[the hog]

"I disagee with the most here. (including better players then i)
3D has a long range of hands.
Id bid 3D with

XX
AXX
AKQXX
AXXX

and maybe stronger hands.
but also with

XX
XXX
AKQXXXX
XX

The first hand is not a 3D but a 3N bid. Partner's 4D which by passes 3N imho sets the suit but denies C control.

[WGF_Flame]

The_Hog, on Mar 23 2004, 04:31 PM, said:

XX
AXX
AKQXX
AXXX


The first hand is not a 3D but a 3N bid.

I am not sure at all that 3nt here is better then 3d.
but just in case put the A of clubs in spades instead.

[the hog]

"I am not sure at all that 3nt here is better then 3d."

I am! If you are not going to bid 3N do you expect your partner to bid it with a singleton? 5m is a LONG way off.
You will be ok if pd bids 3H over 3D but if she bids 3S you have snookered yourself. a 3N bid by you now will show either grave doubts about your C stopper or long Ds and 4H. Either way you have misdescribed your hand.

[WGF_Flame]

The_Hog, on Mar 23 2004, 06:30 PM, said:

"I am not sure at all that 3nt here is better then 3d."

I am! If you are not going to bid 3N do you expect your partner to bid it with a singleton? 5m is a LONG way off.
You will be ok if pd bids 3H over 3D but if she bids 3S you have snookered yourself. a 3N bid by you now will show either grave doubts about your C stopper or long Ds and 4H. Either way you have misdescribed your hand.

that hand was just an example of a strong hand, maybe i shoudlnt have given examples cause it take u out of the point, which is there is a large range of hands which will overcall 3d here, the space is very limited and in this situation i prefer to use this space to check for game rather then have more more tool for slam bidding. therefore 4d imo should be an invitation to game rather then forcing.

[the hog]

"therefore 4d imo should be an invitation to game rather then forcing. "

Look, I sympathise with this viewpoint but there is one major flaw in the argument; by bidding 4D invitational you are gambling on making exactly 10 tricks if partner passes - not 9, not 11. This is trying to stop on the head of a pin. I would rather bid 5 and hope to make on a misdefence if need be. What the posters who advocate 4D being forcing are saying is that we need the extra room to investigate game or slam and that this treatment is more useful than being able to stop at 4m.

The topic is analogous with this sort of sequence:

1D (2S) 2N

where 2n is played as invit, about 10-11 with a S stopper. Again imho this is a futile bid; if pd passes you are gambling that you will make EXACTLY 8 tricks. That is why more and more players are using 2N here in some sort of artificial way - either a raise, or perhaps even as lebensohl. (A treatment popular in Poland).

Ron

[mishovnbg]

1. inv
2. transfer for ♥

3.14=self killing pre preempt playing with Ben

Misho

[flytoox]

Chamaco, on Mar 23 2004, 01:52 PM, said:

MP, say all vuln (Vuln is not really the issue here)

RHO deals and opens 3♣, you bid 3♦, LHO passes, pard bids 4♦.

RHO YOU LHO PARD
3♣ 3♦ p 4♦

a ) Is it forcing, showig fit and willingness to cuebid to slam ?
b ) Is it invitational to 5♦ ?
-----------------------------------
As usual, obviously anything could be agreed with a partner, but I'd like to know:

1) what would be the expected bid in a pickup partnership (e.g. undiscussed)
2) what meaning is most efficient according to the BBO gurus

Thanks !!

I thnk it should be invitational. Cant imagine a hand with slam interest but without control. If pd has slam interest in D, he can always cuebid Major first and then return to D. This sequence always show slam interest. After Opp's preempt, you dont have so much space for slam biddding. It mainly rely on judgement rather than science. With pd's hand as you gave above. He should bid 3H, if pd raise to 4H, then you will return to 5D. This clearly shows you are interested in slam but without club control.