[rogerclee]

IMPs

♠Qxxxx ♥KQx ♦Jx ♣xxx

2♣ - 2♦
3♦ - 3♠
3NT - ?

2♣ was strong, 2♦ was GF.

[mike777]

editl

[gwnn]

Go play 2♠=8-10 bal.

Otherwise you should bid 4N now.

[whereagles]

Too many ifs here. Opposite a 2♣ opener by me, pass is 200% clear-cut

[P_Marlowe]

I would go with 4NT.

2D being game force means, that declarer did
not promise a gameforcing hand with 2C?

Which may imply, that 3NT may still be something
around 21-22 with a strong 6 card diamond suit?

More precise, would it have been possible to sign
off in 3D?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

Let's transfer the blame. 4NT. Second choice pass.

[ewj]

Definitely not going to pass, I might not have bid 3S last time around...Choice between 4D and 4NT now for me.

[brianshark]

Closer to 6NT than Pass. But I'll probably just try 4NT.

[ArtK78]

It depends upon this 2♣ bidder's style.

If his style, like mine, is that an opening 2♣ bid is a last resort - a hand just too strong to risk opening a one bid - then 4NT makes sense. Slam is a possiblity.

If his style is like so many players that I see who use 2♣ openings on almost any 20 count because it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy, then I pass and I hope 3NT makes.

By the way, assuming that 2♦ was a positive response, I would not criticize my partner for this bidding if he held:

x Jx AKQTxxx AKQ

[skjaeran]

I'm very close to bidding 6NT here, but I'll just give partner a little push with 4NT.

[blackshoe]

Pass is wimpy. 4NT.

[skjaeran]

blackshoe, on Sep 10 2008, 09:00 PM, said:

Pass is wimpy. 4NT.

Pass isn't wimpy, it's unbelievable.

[mikeh]

Quote

It depends upon this 2♣ bidder's style.

If his style, like mine, is that an opening 2♣ bid is a last resort - a hand just too strong to risk opening a one bid - then 4NT makes sense.  Slam is a possiblity.

Quote

By the way, assuming that 2♦ was a positive response, I would not criticize my partner for this bidding if he held:

x Jx AKQTxxx AKQ

I see these as inconsistent statements: is there ANY real prospect of the auction going 1♦ P P P when we hold 19 hcp, and 3 cards in the majors????

Not to mention the lack of anything resembling a stopper in the suit the opps rate to lead.

However, I agree with 4N and with the criticism addressed to those hosts of bad players who don't understand how to bid and thus announce 2♣ mostly as a means of celebrating a big hand (and also to try to mastermind the auction).

[mike777]

As a nonexpert, 2c followed by 3d shows a long D suit and 3 loser hand with lots of controls.

I may have 2 winners in my hand....so cannot pass.

I understand 4nt but I think another option is 4d which would allow partner to bid a rkc 4h for D or start cuebidding.

[kenrexford]

IMO, 4NT describes the hand well, and was my first inclination, but I think 4♦ has more to offer. We should have a fit. Opener does not bid 3♦ without six of them (presumably). Therefore, I can set trumps low enough for lots of options, including perhaps 4♥ as RKCB, which would allow me to bid 4♠ to show slam interest but no key cards, all below 4NT. BTW, I think that 4NT by Opener in this sequence as his next call should be passable -- thoughts?

As an aside, this would be a good auction for me with the tools I would like. As 3♦ would deny a four-card major, 3♠ by Responder would promise five spades but would deny five hearts (else, Responder would bid 5-5 majors up-the-line). Therefore, 4♥ would unambiguously be a cue in support, which might be even better.

[whereagles]

kenrexford, on Sep 10 2008, 08:28 PM, said:

but I think 4♦ has more to offer. We should have a fit.

should have a fit? u gonna stick your head on what should be true? you willing to put that much trust in pard??

j/k. If you wanna bid, I agree 4♦ is superior to 4NT. Opener might well be something like 1363 with a mini-monster.

[mike777]

"Therefore, I can set trumps low enough for lots of options, including perhaps 4♥ as RKCB, which would allow me to bid 4♠ to show slam interest but no key cards, all below 4NT. BTW, I think that 4NT by Opener in this sequence as his next call should be passable -- thoughts?"



NOOOOOO


4nt is a Queen trump ask. 4d=4h(rkc)=4s(0-3)=4nt(trump Q ask).......

Playing kickback you just need to give up ever playing 4nt/5nt as natural after start of kickback auction.

[ArtK78]

mikeh, on Sep 10 2008, 03:13 PM, said:

Quote

It depends upon this 2♣ bidder's style.

If his style, like mine, is that an opening 2♣ bid is a last resort - a hand just too strong to risk opening a one bid - then 4NT makes sense.  Slam is a possiblity.

Quote

By the way, assuming that 2♦ was a positive response, I would not criticize my partner for this bidding if he held:

x Jx AKQTxxx AKQ

I see these as inconsistent statements: is there ANY real prospect of the auction going 1♦ P P P when we hold 19 hcp, and 3 cards in the majors????

Not to mention the lack of anything resembling a stopper in the suit the opps rate to lead.

However, I agree with 4N and with the criticism addressed to those hosts of bad players who don't understand how to bid and thus announce 2♣ mostly as a means of celebrating a big hand (and also to try to mastermind the auction).

Sure there is a chance that the auction will go all pass.

I am not going to open 1♦ with 10 tricks in hand. It makes no sense to me. Opening 1♦ on x Jx AKQTxxx AKQ will not allow me to describe my hand any better than by opening 2♣. What magical rebid are you going to come up with to announce 10 tricks in hand after a 1♦ opening (again, assuming that you will have the opportunity to make a rebid)?

There are many strong hands which are easier to describe by opening a one-bid. This is not one of them.

[mikeh]

Those who opt for 4♦, in my view, are heading for trouble... it may not arise, but I think you are certainly risking it.

Why?

4♦ suggests that your hand is suit oriented: that it affords at least a chance of scoring a ruffing value... while in reality, diamonds is your shortest suit.

It is also an unlimited bid. That, in itself, will usually not become an issue, but when you combine it with suggesting a ruffing value, partner may get too carried away, expecting a more useful hand even after or especially after cue-bidding or keycard (and I don't like keycard in these auctions, since both hands are so ill-defined that merely knowing the keycard situation rarely solves anything, but I recognize that 100% of bad players and 90% of good ones are addicted to the method).

As for those who think that 4♦ will allow us to play 6♦ rather than (I assume) 6N..... when opener has a monster 1=3=6=3, as an example... just how weak a player is your partner???? You bid 2♦ then 3♠. Just how strong a spade suit did you promise? He KNOWS you don't have AQ or AK or KQ... and you did invite in notrump, which hardly sounds like a stiff or void in diamonds to me. If 6♦ is best, you should trust partner to bid it. If, instead, you fear that partner is unable to bid properly, then misdescribing the 'suitability' of your hand for a diamond contract is not the best way to avoid trouble.

[kenrexford]

I have to disagree with you, Mike.

First, if I have shortness in the true sense (stiff or void), then 3♠ was a really bad bid. 3♦ was a huge call. If I have a stiff or void on the side, and diamond support, I have a clear splinter over 3♦, IMO, or at least an immediate raise. Majors are nice, but you don't pass up showing fit plus shortness after the 3♦ call. Thus, I would expect 4♦ to probably show 5332 shape.

Second, I don't think 4♦ should say that I am "suit oriented." My hand is irrelevant. Partner has the monster and the shape. 4♦ simply announces fit plus willingness to bypass 3NT.

Third, because of these two, 4NT should actually, IMO, deny a diamond fit.

Where I tend to agree is that 4♥ as RKCB may not be ideal. Perhaps the best use is simply a cue. If cues are in use here, then 4NT by Responder should, IMO, be a negative cue, suggesting poor trump contribution.

I also would note that the reason to bid 4♦ is not to get to 6♦. The reason to bid 4♦ is to create space for more "here's what I have" bidding. If 6♦ is the end contract, it will be a more informed end contract.

In practice, if I bid 4♦ and partner cues 4♥, I can now bid 4NT to (1) deny either the Ace or King of spades and (2) deny one of the top three diamonds. If partner bids 4♠, instead, I can bid 4NT to deny a top diamond. Either way, partner has a better picture of my hand.

Tweak my hand to Qx in diamonds, and I can complete either pictuire by bidding 5♦ instead to add the message that I have no club control but that I do have one of the top three diamonds.