[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

1♦ - 1♥;
2♥ - 2♠*;
2NT - 3NT;
?

---

*Natural, F1

Have we landed?

[gnasher]

No - we're on a ledge half way up a cliff.

You have a 4-4 major suit fit and a ruffing value. The doubleton is opposite a four-card suit, so it is likely to be worth at least one extra trick and maybe two. Why would you want to play in 3NT?

Presumably you'd have bid this way with xx K109 AQxxx KJx or Q K109 AQxxx Kxxx. If so, partner's 3NT caters for your having only three trumps; it doesn't ask you to pass with four.

[Phil]

No, we have not landed. I expect a 44(23) and soft values, but there was a reason pard bid 2♠ instead of 2N (asking I presume) or 3N (choice of games). My 4th trump and doubleton spade tells me 4♥.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Apr 20 2009, 04:21 PM, said:

Presumably you'd have bid this way with xx K109 AQxxx KJx or Q K109 AQxxx Kxxx.  If so, partner's 3NT caters for your having only three trumps; it doesn't ask you to pass with four.

I'd bid 3♣ on the second hand, not 2NT. In any case I don't think partner's 3NT bid can have such a specifically defined request as pass with 3, pull with 4. That leaves him no options when 3NT can be right opposite hands with 4, such as this one.

Phil, on Apr 20 2009, 04:23 PM, said:

I expect a 44(23) and soft values, but there was a reason pard bid 2♠ instead of 2N (asking I presume) or 3N (choice of games).

Seems to me that reason was probably he needed club help. We told him we have it and he chose 3NT. Why overrule him?

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Apr 20 2009, 01:34 PM, said:

Phil, on Apr 20 2009, 04:23 PM, said:

I expect a 44(23) and soft values, but there was a reason pard bid 2♠ instead of 2N (asking I presume) or 3N (choice of games).

Seems to me that reason was probably he needed club help. We told him we have it and he chose 3NT. Why overrule him?

This seems like an aside, but it may depend on what you respond with a minimum 4=3=5=1. Partner would rather play the 4-4 fit than the 4-3 fit.

[jdonn]

He may bid 2♠ for that reason but I don't see what it has to do with this problem.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Apr 20 2009, 02:15 PM, said:

He may bid 2♠ for that reason but I don't see what it has to do with this problem.

Only in that I don't think it's clear he is worried about clubs.

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Apr 20 2009, 11:15 PM, said:

He may bid 2♠ for that reason but I don't see what it has to do with this problem.

If opener might be 4315, responder (not playing anything artificial), has to bid 2♠ with 4-4 in the majors. In turn, opener, catering for this possibility, has to bid notrumps when he has raised to 2♥ without four cards in either major. Playing that style, 3NT would be to play, and 2NT would have been a misbid.

If that is our system, it's obviously vital to know it. I'd assumed that it wasn't, because if it was we would have been told.

[JLOL]

4H

[kenrexford]

Answers to questions like this depend a lot on partnership style.

In my best partnership, for example, a few principles would apply:

1. Opener has guaranteed four hearts. We only raise with three when holding a hand pattern that would be right for a reverse except for the weakness of the hand.

2. 2♠ as a game try eliminates 3NT as a possibly viable contract to be suggested by Responder. Responder must bid 2NT whenever 3NT might be proposed by Responder.

3. 2NT by Opener accepts the game try but denies two of the top three honors in trumps.

4. 3NT by Responder, by virtue of the 2♠ call, is serious. Responder has no club control, no diamond honor, not solid spades, but serious interest. Maybe something like ♠AKxxx ♥AQxxx ♦x ♣xx.

Thus, there would be too much work to do to make slam, it seems. However, a courtesy cue makes sense. I like 4♦. I clearly must have a club control, so bypassing 4♣ clues partner in on the control being second-round. If he cannot handle that one loser, he will sign off.

I doubt others would have this same understanding. But, there may well be differences along the way as to the meanings of various bids already made that impact the analysis.

[Apollo81]

4♥