[ArtK78]

Scoring: MP

1♠ - (P) - 1NT* - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - ?

* Forcing

---

You are South, and you were intending to make a limit spade raise but the auction took an unexpected twist.

What is your call over 4♣?

[pclayton]

4♥. This hand isn't quite as good as it looks. With a medium 5-5, pard could have bid 4♥ instead of 3. With a 5=4=3=1 or heavy 5=4=2=2, pard could have doubled 3♣.

Partner probably has 2 maybe 3 clubs, so our chances of hitting diamonds as a source of tricks are diminshed. I don't think our ♠xxx is particularly good news either.

I wouldn't surprised if the real question comes on the next round if the opponents sac.

[TimG]

Wouldn't 1♠-P-1N-3♣; DBL be for penalties, or at least strongly suggest penalties?

[pclayton]

TimG, on Oct 3 2008, 07:55 AM, said:

Wouldn't 1♠-P-1N-3♣; DBL be for penalties, or at least strongly suggest penalties?

I don't think there's a consensus.

[mikeh]

I agree with 4♥, but disagree with Phil's comment about the hands on which partner would have bid 4♥. We responded 1N, and partner needs a GOOD hand to bid 4♥ opposite a limited and possibly weak/misfitting hand. I don't mean a big hand in terms of hcp, but certainly he'd have to be 5-5 with chunky suits... AKQxx KQJx Jx xx wouldn't be enough, and slam isn't bad opposite this.

I consider 4♥ to be very conservative, justified by the lack of internal spots and the odds of a spade loser...to go with the club loser we rate to have.

BTW, I would like to know the EW agreement about 4♣. Personally, my preference is to play this as a bid that suggests a save if west thinks he has sufficient shape, but some play it as assuming captaincy.. often based on an expectation of defeating game. I think it is losing bridge to play that 4♣ merely shows some club length... it should be a definite statement.. either transferring or assuming captaincy, and partnerships should discuss this concept. Having said that, there is no doubt but the call worked well for the opps, by depriving us of a cue-bid... we had an easy 4♣ call... so maybe my ideas are wrong

However, many partnerships and just about all pickup partnerships will have no agreement, so we, and they, have to guess. One thing is, I think, clear.. absent agreement that 4♣ invites a save, only weak opponents would now save... by doing so, they give us back the slam try they took away with 4♣, plus they give us a 2-way shot.

[ArtK78]

mikeh, on Oct 3 2008, 12:05 PM, said:

Having said that, there is no doubt but the call worked well for the opps, by depriving us of a cue-bid... we had an easy 4♣ call... so maybe my ideas are wrong

So, in the absence of a 4♣ call by RHO, you would have bid 4♣ on these cards?

Over 4♣, what does 4♦ mean?

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Oct 3 2008, 09:05 AM, said:

I agree with 4♥, but disagree with Phil's comment about the hands on which partner would have bid 4♥. We responded 1N, and partner needs a GOOD hand to bid 4♥ opposite a limited and possibly weak/misfitting hand. I don't mean a big hand in terms of hcp, but certainly he'd have to be 5-5 with chunky suits... AKQxx KQJx Jx xx wouldn't be enough, and slam isn't bad opposite this.

When our RHO preempts clubs, and we have 5-5 in the majors, our chances of catching a fit are enhanced. Take a hand like AKxxx KQJxx x xx. I would not dream of charging this into 4♥ opposite a simple F1N response, but when RHO the number of hands that pard can have is diminished. The only 'death hand' is single suited diamonds.

Opposite AKxxx KQJxx x xx I would not expect pard to raise 3♥ on say ♥Axx and another card.

I also want to be free to bid 3♥ on minimum 'purish' a hand like AKxxx KJxxx x xx.

[dake50]

I think I have an extra trick for just a 4H bid. Ie. Over 1H, this is GF. Clue partner with 5C, (or 4NT=Romex H-raise slam try). He knows how solid his suits are and I suggested slam. Win MP if 6H on; hope tie 11 tricks if 5H.

[ArtK78]

I will try again - it seems that no one is interested in answering this question.

1♠ - (P) - 1NT - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - ?

We have one poster who said he wanted to cue 4♣ but RHO took that away.

We have another poster who says the hand is worth a 5♣ bid over 4♣.

What is 4♦ in this position? Is it natural and to play? Is it a slam try in support of hearts (or spades)?

[kenrexford]

3♥ could be relatively light. (This precise auction was discussed a few years ago in Gatlinburg by a lot of top players.) Not ridiculously so, but relatively light.

4♣ without interference would not be a cue -- it would be choice.

With interference, I think that 4♦ should be choice in this auction.

If I want to move with this hand, the best course seems to be 4♦ and then moving forward after Opener tells me his major shape.

[mike777]

ArtK78, on Oct 3 2008, 10:04 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♠ - (P) - 1NT* - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - ?

* Forcing

---

You are South, and you were intending to make a limit spade raise but the auction took an unexpected twist.

What is your call over 4♣?

4h may miss slam at mp
If we open lite partner knows I can have this and much much more for 1nt.

OTOH if partner opens sound prefer to start with 2d not 1nt.

[P_Marlowe]

4H, prefering to play the 4-4 fit,
but I may catch a 5-4.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[fachiru]

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2008, 10:33 AM, said:

I will try again - it seems that no one is interested in answering this question.

1♠ - (P) - 1NT - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - ?

We have one poster who said he wanted to cue 4♣ but RHO took that away.

We have another poster who says the hand is worth a 5♣ bid over 4♣.

What is 4♦ in this position?  Is it natural and to play?  Is it a slam try in support of hearts (or spades)?

I would interpret 4 ♦ in that sequence as a cue with ♥ agreed as trump.
It can't really be natural with long ♦ at the 4-level after opener's 2-suited hand description.

4 ♦ would be my choice at the table.

[rogerclee]

4h, this hand is not as good as it looks. xxx of spades = badddddddddddd.

[FrancesHinden]

ArtK78, on Oct 4 2008, 04:33 PM, said:

I will try again - it seems that no one is interested in answering this question.

1♠ - (P) - 1NT - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - ?

We have one poster who said he wanted to cue 4♣ but RHO took that away.

We have another poster who says the hand is worth a 5♣ bid over 4♣.

What is 4♦ in this position? Is it natural and to play? Is it a slam try in support of hearts (or spades)?

It's a good question what 4D should be.

In an uncontested auction, it's nice if it could be natural

(I gained 13 imps in a match a few months ago when we bid

1S - 1NT
3D* - 4D
5D - P

*game forcing with hearts

and I had x xx AKJ109xx xxx

but then the advantage of the transfer jump shift is that responder can bid 3H with heart support; without that he has no way of showing a good 4H bid
)

Clearly if you had some way of showing diamonds on the first round, 4D here is not natural (whether that was via an Acol-type 2/1 or an intermediate jump shift).

Failing that I see arguments both ways (cue or natural), but I wouldn't expect it to be choice of games. If I want to play in a major, I'll bid it. I think I'll go for a good 4H bid, if you have a hand like the one above you could always bid 5D over 4C and expect to see the dummy.

[ArtK78]

Scoring: MP

1♠ - (P) - 1NT - (3♣)
3♥ - (4♣) - 4♦ - All Pass

---

I found this hand to be mildly amusing.

I bid 4♦ intending it to be a strong heart raise. Obviously partner interpreted it to be a hand with long diamonds and not good enough to bid 2♦ over 1♠. Since we play that a 2/1 response followed by a rebid is nonforcing, I find this interpretation to be silly when I am not forced to bid over 4♣.

I suspect that most would not have bid 3♥ on his cards, but judging from some of the comments above, maybe some would.

The funny thing about this hand is that RHO has all of the outstanding spades, and you can't make anything. But the opps are cold for 5♣ if they guess the heart suit or if we play it for them (the ♦K is on your left, LHO is 0-2-4-7 with the JT of hearts). We were playing a practice game scored at matchpoints, and I went down 150 in 4♦ for a below average score. Hearts may do a trick better, but spades will get doubled and go for 500.

[kenrexford]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 7 2008, 11:38 AM, said:

Failing that I see arguments both ways (cue or natural), but I wouldn't expect it to be choice of games. If I want to play in a major, I'll bid it. I think I'll go for a good 4H bid, if you have a hand like the one above you could always bid 5D over 4C and expect to see the dummy.

And with 2♠/3♥, do you bid...

4♠ to play in the 5-2 rather than the 5-3 and catch the 5-1 stack behind, or
4♥ to play in the 4-3 instead of the 5-3 and catch the 5-1 stack behind?

I find it of great personal amusement to write this, but sometimes game before slam makes sense. This is one of those sequences. 4♦ as a cue in support of hearts is, IMO, poor.