[ghow]

Scoring: IMP

Auction begins 1♦(p)1♥(p)1♠
(p)2♣(x)[2DI](p)

1[Di}=11-15 can be2
2{CL]=4sf but not GF
unless we make a bid at 3 level
2♦ denied 3 ♥ & denied ♣ stop.
1. what's N best bid now?
2.If N bids 2M now would 2n by south show a partial stop?
3.How do you envision the auction finishing?

---

[mtvesuvius]

I tend to bid directly unless I see a reason not to. I bid 3NT as N. This better be the final contract.

[Phil]

1♦ - (pass) - 1♥ - (1♠);
Pass - (2♣) - pass - (pass);
2♦ - (pass) - ?

Any reason why South didn't rebid 1N? Is not AT9x a sufficient stopper?

North should place opener with a 3=2=5=3 or a 4=1=5=3 or the actual. There's no reason to look for anything but 3N. It may make and it may not.

[awm]

3♦ (if forcing) seems like a nice call.

It's not hard to imagine 5♦ being a better game than 3nt; in fact on the actual hands it looks to me like 5♦ is better (4♠ might also be better than 3nt). And opener's sequence is consistent with a 4-6 hand as well, opposite which 6♦ could well be excellent (imagine AQxx x KQxxxx Qx).

If 3♦ is not forcing then things are more awkward; perhaps 3♣ would be an artificial game force? It is not really clear to me how to force in these "forcing one round" auctions.

[mtvesuvius]

Adam, how is 5♦ better than 3NT? If the ♦ finesse is on 3NT makes. If there is KT doubleton of Hearts, 3NT makes. In 5♦ you have 1♣ loser, and if the ♦ finesse is on it should make barring a bad ♥ split, but why play on the 5 level, when you can play just as good of a contract on the 3 level?

[jdonn]

1. I think north's bid over 2♦ should be 3♦.
2. I guess, but north shouldn't bid a major on this hand. His choice is raise diamonds or bid notrump.
3. South would bid 3♥ and north would bid 3NT. Yet another bad contract reached, what else is new?

Phil it looks like you got the auction wrong. It was
1♦ - (pass) - 1♥- (pass);
1♠ - (pass) - 2♣ - (dbl);
2♦ - (pass) - ?

[mtvesuvius]

jdonn, on Jan 19 2009, 01:44 PM, said:

1. I think north's bid over 2♦ should be 3♦.

Isn't 3♦ NF?

[TimG]

mtvesuvius, on Jan 19 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 19 2009, 01:44 PM, said:

1. I think north's bid over 2♦ should be 3♦.

Isn't 3♦ NF?

I think the general idea in a 4SF, but not to game, situation such as this where responder's first bid was at the one-level, is it is responder that can pass when opener shows a minimum with 2M or 2N, but responder's 3rd bids are still GF.

In this specific case, responder presumably had a 3♦ invitation available instead of going through 4th suit, so the delayed 3♦ is GF.

Responder did not have available an invitational 2M rebid, which is why 4SF is needed in auctions like this. It's more like a checkback than a 4SF.

[awm]

mtvesuvius, on Jan 19 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

Adam, how is 5♦ better than 3NT? If the ♦ finesse is on 3NT makes. If there is KT doubleton of Hearts, 3NT makes. In 5♦ you have 1♣ loser, and if the ♦ finesse is on it should make barring a bad ♥ split, but why play on the 5 level, when you can play just as good of a contract on the 3 level?

Um... against 3nt, you get a club lead. You win it, and now presumably you take the diamond finesse which is your best chance for nine tricks (two spades, one heart, five diamonds, one club). If this finesse loses, you go down immediately on the run of the clubs. So basically, you need diamonds coming in for no losers to make 3nt (okay, you can also make if diamonds are 4-1 with the queen on and hearts are KT-tight onside, but that's very odds-against).

In 5♦, you're also more or less cold if diamonds play for five tricks. But you have some chances if diamonds play for one loser as well. In particular suppose hearts are 3-3 with the king on; you can then set up the suit for two spade discards and make 5♦ even with a diamond loser.

[mtvesuvius]

awm, on Jan 19 2009, 03:08 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Jan 19 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

Adam, how is 5♦ better than 3NT? If the ♦ finesse is on 3NT makes. If there is KT doubleton of Hearts, 3NT makes. In 5♦ you have 1♣ loser, and if the ♦ finesse is on it should make barring a bad ♥ split, but why play on the 5 level, when you can play just as good of a contract on the 3 level?

Um... against 3nt, you get a club lead. You win it, and now presumably you take the diamond finesse which is your best chance for nine tricks (two spades, one heart, five diamonds, one club). If this finesse loses, you go down immediately on the run of the clubs. So basically, you need diamonds coming in for no losers to make 3nt (okay, you can also make if diamonds are 4-1 with the queen on and hearts are KT-tight onside, but that's very odds-against).

In 5♦, you're also more or less cold if diamonds play for five tricks. But you have some chances if diamonds play for one loser as well. In particular suppose hearts are 3-3 with the king on; you can then set up the suit for two spade discards and make 5♦ even with a diamond loser.

That's true... You're right.

[jdonn]

mtvesuvius, on Jan 19 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 19 2009, 01:44 PM, said:

1. I think north's bid over 2♦ should be 3♦.

Isn't 3♦ NF?

I have to admit it's always forcing for me. My understanding of 'fourth suit forcing just one round but not to game' is that responder can pass a minimum rebid by opener, but responder bidding again is forcing. I could be wrong. Sure I'd bid 3NT if I thought nothing lower that is reasonable would be forcing, but that would just show why I think it's a bad method.