[cwiggins]

Assume you are playing Fourth Suit Forcing to game and you hold:
S-AQxx
H-xx
D-xxx
C-AKxx

You are dealer and the auction starts:
1C 1H
1S 2D*

You don't have any of the standard rebids: you don't have three hearts, you don't have a diamond stop, you don't have a fifth club.

Question 1: What do you bid? I.e. what do you consider the smallest lie?

Question 2: Paul Thurston recommends that the raise of the fourth suit means "I can't bid anything else" rather than showing 4-cards in the fourth suit. That would solve the problem here. Do you agree with that treatment?

Question 3: Klinger recommends rebidding 1NT with a balanced hand rather than bidding 1S. Do you agree with this treatment?

Thanks for your help.

[Fluffy]

I bid 2♠ with shows more or less this, one of the advantages of 1♣ opening denying 5♠.

Even not playing this style I bet many players ahve the agreement that 2♠ means nothing and 3♠ is the 5-6.

[jillybean]

2♠ is the smallest lie, I dont want to bid at the 3 level.

I would rebid 1nt with this hand, if you play checkback you wont miss a 44♠ fit.

[mich-b]

Answer 1 : without special agreements, I would probably select 2NT, reluctantly.
My Suggestion : In this sequence (4SF after opener rebid 1♠) play 2♠ by opener as showing exactly this hand (no conveniet rebid) , and if you happen to have a 6-5 , jump to 3♠.

Answer 2 : That is a possible agreement , but I think showing 4 cards in the 4th suit is more important. I only use the "raise" as neutral , if I denied holding the suit previously, like : 1C- 1D; 1S - 2H; 3H

Answer 3 : This style has been gaining popularity, but personally I dont like it, mainly because I would hate to miss the ♠ fit when responder is weakish with 4423, 4522 or similar.

[TylerE]

Specifically in answer to #3, this is the style I have adopted in my main partnership. That said, for us 1♦-1♥-1NT is 13-15 (1♣ is Precision).

[helene_t]

Robson/Segal bid 2♥ which doesn't suggest three as they frequently raise directly with 3-card support.

Most would bid 2♠, though.

I like to rebid 1NT with balanced hands but this one with all the honors in the two four-cards can better rebid 1♠ if the system allows it, IMHO.

[jdonn]

I have always had the idea artificial rebids would work well here, although I never played such a thing (actually I did in a precision partnership after a 1♦ opening, which I thought was needed because so many shapes were possible). I like to have a bid to show 5-6, but admittedly 2♠ really is cheaper than needed for that bid since it would be very descriptive and not at all common.

Given my normal agreements I would bid 2♥ showing a doubleton often. I prefer honor doubleton but what can I do? I play every bid here as natural.

Maybe 2♥ as doubleton heart, 2♠ as three hearts, and 3♥ as five spades six clubs would work ok.

[mikeh]

I rebid 1N here, which has its own problems... but this hand type is a perfect reason (tho by no means the only reason) for the style. If partner insists on up the line bidding, then I bid 2♥ as by far the cheapest 'lie'. One reason I won't bid 2♠ is that partner may be about to bid 2♠ himself, if I give him room. I'd rather find our fit at the 2-level than the 3-level...of course, maybe he'll think our fit is hearts

BTW, I have played artificial responses to 4SF: a relay method. It works very well, altho it is memory intensive.. but it only worked because we exclude this hand pattern... we rebid 1N. Including 4432s or 4333 in the relay would make it too space consuming.... too many steps would be needed to show all patterns, making the control and denial relays operate too high to be effective.

[skjaeran]

I'm used to raising to 3♦, showing 2-3 small.

[whereagles]

I used to rebid 1♠ on these hands, but now I prefer 1NT.

Anyway, having bid 1♠, I now bid 2NT.

[Echognome]

I think this is a good question, especially given the diversity of answers. I play in two main partnerships and in one of them I would have rebid 1NT as Mikeh and whereagles. In the other, I rebid 1♠ and have this problem. I like Harald's solution of 3♦, but I think we reserve that for good 4=1=3=5 hands, rather than as a "punt", so I would rebid 2NT. It is definitely a choice of which of the evils you want to choose.

[Mbodell]

I like NT. I'd bid 1NT instead of 1♠, playing 2-way NMF. And if I did bid 1♠ I'd now bid 2NT as I'd be afraid of showing 55 in the blacks and 3 small+claiming a stop is sort of a stop.

[Ant590]

I play in a partnership where we have agreed to return to the minor with nothing more to say (our 4th suit is game forcing). So for us we would return to 3♣ which shows no extra shape. I can see how this hand isn't described well by this at all, but we prefer to have a blanket meta-rule in these situations and we'll take the rough with the smooth.

Regarding #3, we rebid 1NT on this hand. This is due to another meta-rule that 1x-1y-1z shows 5-4 or a singleton somewhere. This means we also rebid 1NT on a 4=2=4=3 after 1♦ - 1♥ which I was informed yesterday was seriously unsound, so I wouldn't go by our methods!

[mike777]

cwiggins, on Jan 14 2009, 09:56 AM, said:

Assume you are playing Fourth Suit Forcing to game and you hold:
S-AQxx
H-xx
D-xxx
C-AKxx

You are dealer and the auction starts:
1C 1H
1S 2D*

You don't have any of the standard rebids: you don't have three hearts, you don't have a diamond stop, you don't have a fifth club.

Question 1: What do you bid?  I.e. what do you consider the smallest lie?

Question 2: Paul Thurston recommends that the raise of the fourth suit means "I can't bid anything else" rather than showing 4-cards in the fourth suit.  That would solve the problem here.  Do you agree with that treatment?

Question 3: Klinger recommends rebidding 1NT with a balanced hand rather than bidding 1S.  Do you agree with this treatment?

Thanks for your help.

2nt

Partner may assume I got 2h, 4c and 4s and 3d and 11-13 but I live with it.
Heck nv I could be as bad as:

AQxx...xx...xxx....Axxx