[hrothgar]

System = KS
Scoring = MP

You hold

♠ A
♥ K985
♦ AKQxxx
♣ A3

The auction starts

1♦ - 1♠
2♥ - 3♥
3♠ - 3N
???

Any thoughts where to go from here?

4♦ ???
4N ???
5♥ ???
6N ???

[han]

I assume that 3H was natural and showed GF values. I will also assume that, since you would have mentioned it if 3NT was artificial, 3NT is natural and a suggestion to play there. It shows decent club cards. Finally, I imagine that even though partner has suggested notrump, 4NT will still be keycards for hearts, and that is what I am bidding.

If partner shows 1 without the queen then I'm bidding 6NT.

If partner shows 1 with the queen then I'm bidding 7H, I don't need a black king for that (though I'd be surprised if partner does not have a black king)

[TimG]

In KS, opener hasn't promised length in hearts, the reverse could be manufactured on a three- (or even two-) card suit when opener has a 2 1/2 spade raise with three trumps, or a 2 1/2 m rebid (1m-1M-3m is forcing in KS). 3S, I believe, reveals the 2 1/2 spade raise.

So, I think 4N here would be keycard for spades. I think 4N on the previous round, when it would have been keycard for hearts, is better.

[hrothgar]

TimG, on Oct 10 2008, 04:32 PM, said:

In KS, opener hasn't promised length in hearts, the reverse could be manufactured on a three- (or even two-) card suit when opener has a 2 1/2 spade raise with three trumps, or a 2 1/2 m rebid (1m-1M-3m is forcing in KS). 3S, I believe, reveals the 2 1/2 spade raise.

So, I think 4N here would be keycard for spades. I think 4N on the previous round, when it would have been keycard for hearts, is better.

I agree that 3♠ was a poor choice of bids.

At the same time, I think that it worked out decently in that it allowed Tim to bid 3NT. 3N was a natural bid. To me, at least, it suggested weak trumps.

[TimG]

3♠ wasn't the first poor choice, responder (me) had already botched the auction by that time.

I agree that 3N should suggest poor trumps (spades) and values in clubs while suggesting 3N instead of 4S (on the presumed 53).

[gnasher]

han, on Oct 10 2008, 02:15 PM, said:

If partner shows 1 without the queen then I'm bidding 6NT.

If partner is, as his bidding suggests, 5=4=1=3, and diamonds are 4-2, you'll need partner to provide three black-suit tricks. Isn't that a bit optimistic?

[han]

If 3S denied hearts then 3NT wouldn't show weak hearts, right?

[han]

gnasher, on Oct 10 2008, 09:21 AM, said:

han, on Oct 10 2008, 02:15 PM, said:

If partner shows 1 without the queen then I'm bidding 6NT.

If partner is, as his bidding suggests, 5=4=1=3, and diamonds are 4-2, you'll need partner to provide three black-suit tricks. Isn't that a bit optimistic?

Good point, although sometimes diamonds do split and sometimes partner has the heart jack when they don't.

To be truthful, I just didn't think about it carefully enough.

[pclayton]

Are we playing any Ingberman / Lebesnohl bids here? Agreements on 3♥?

Agree that 3♠ creates problems. 3N confuses me. Pard should have four hearts for the raise, but if pard reads 3♠ as 3 card support, then pard would be rejecting with 4 spades but looking for a major with 5 (probably). So it appears to me that pard is 5♠ 4♥ with weak suits. That may or may not be good news.

Anyway, I will continue to lead us down the road of confusion with 4♣. Hell, how often to we get to bid all four suits in an auction by ourselves?

[P_Marlowe]

4D.

Should show real slam interest, and a good suit.

I assume, you would have mentioned,
if 3NT was agreed as serious.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TimG]

pclayton, on Oct 10 2008, 10:24 AM, said:

Are we playing any Ingberman / Lebesnohl bids here? Agreements on 3♥?

Over 2H, responder's only signoff is 3D, 2S would show 5+ and ambiguous strength, all other bids establish a GF. 3H is characterized as "a strong rebid" and shows 5 spades along with 4+ hearts.

I agree with others that the 3N bid looks a bit strange. Maybe something like Txxxx Axxx J KQx?

[jdonn]

Yeah 3♠ was a misbid, it happens. I can't think of any reason not to bid blackwood now, or even earlier. Especially now since we have misrepresented our shape, we want to take control.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Oct 10 2008, 07:55 AM, said:

Yeah 3♠ was a misbid, it happens. I can't think of any reason not to bid blackwood now, or even earlier. Especially now since we have misrepresented our shape, we want to take control.

4N is blackwood?

[mikeh]

I join those who criticize 3♠... the October 2008 BW MSC had, if I am not getting issues confused, a hand with AQx KQx AQ109xx x opening 1♦, having LHO double and partner bid 1♠. A fake reverse of 2♥ was the popular bid, with supporters pointing out that they could handle a raise of hearts, because that would promise 5 spades.

So you cannot bid 2♥ and then bid 3♠... the fact that partner didn't raise or cue bid in support of spades is pure luck.

The problem is that nothing you do now can possibly alter the erroneous description you have given. I don't think even a 4♥ call is safe... AKx AKx KJxxxx x?

As for 4N: a simple and effective rule is that any 4N raise of a natural, to play, 3N is quantitative. IMO, this rule has virtually no downside... it is in my experience always possible to make a forcing call at the 4 level and then use 4N as keycard

[awm]

mikeh, on Oct 10 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

As for 4N: a simple and effective rule is that any 4N raise of a natural, to play, 3N is quantitative. IMO, this rule has virtually no downside... it is in my experience always possible to make a forcing call at the 4 level and then use 4N as keycard

This rule is fine, but it doesn't resolve all situations where 4NT might be ambiguous. I would extend the rule to say that:

(1) If we have bid and raised a suit, then 4NT is keycard in that suit. That includes auctions like this one starting 1♦-1♠-2♥-3♥ even though it is marginally possible that we do not have a real heart fit.

(2) If there exists a forcing raise of partner's last-named suit below the level of 4NT, and we have never previously supported partner's suit, then bidding 4NT is quantitative. For example (2♦)-2♠-(3♦)-4NT is quantitative; we have never before supported spades and 4♦ is available as a forcing spade raise.