[Mbodell]

Playing normalish 2/1 with weak nt the following occurs:

Scoring: MP

1♦-2♣-2♥-P
2♠-P-???

What's your call?

---

[P_Marlowe]

3C, planning to support diamonds later.

The only problem maybe that 4D after 3NT may not really sound like a strong bid,
so a direct 4D has a lot going for it.

Since I did bid 3C, I most likely need to bid 4C over 3NT, if I am unsure, that 4D
over 3NT is move toward slam.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kgr]

P_Marlowe, on Dec 31 2009, 12:47 PM, said:

3C, planning to support diamonds later.
The only problem maybe that 4D after 3NT may not really sound like a strong bid, so a direct 4D has a lot going for it.

I would think that 3♣...3NT...4♦ is stronger then 4♦?

[P_Marlowe]

kgr, on Dec 31 2009, 06:41 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Dec 31 2009, 12:47 PM, said:

3C, planning to support diamonds later.
The only problem maybe that 4D after 3NT may not really sound like a strong bid, so a direct 4D has a lot going for it.

I would think that 3♣...3NT...4♦ is stronger then 4♦?

Well, for me a direct 4D bid would be forcing, since I dont play 4D, unless
I made a serious effort to investigate the possibility of a 3NT contract, since I
bypass 3NT, i did not seriously investigate 3NT, hence 4D is forcing to game,
and if we have to play 5D, than I will always investigate, if 6D is possible, after
all we just need to make one overtrick in 5D to make 6D.

So in short: No I think a direct 4D is stronger than a delayed one.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ONEferBRID]

Marlowe: " 3C , planning to support diamonds later."

agree.... and Diam support later should be forcing, slammish.

[TylerE]

I'm going to pull a rexford and suggest that 4♣ here should be a splinter for ♦. (Not ♠ since we would start with a neg X on hands with both majors). Failing that agreement, I would start with 3♣.

[pooltuna]

TylerE, on Dec 31 2009, 09:17 AM, said:

I'm going to pull a rexford and suggest that 4♣ here should be a splinter for ♦. (Not ♠ since we would start with a neg X on hands with both majors). Failing that agreement, I would start with 3♣.

you got my vote

[mike777]

4d


I was at first thinking 3c but why mess around with this hand....lets just set trumps. btw 4h over 4d would be rkc for d with me.


4d sends the message I got h and d and your 2s does not slow me down and do not care about 3nt and i got some slam interest

[barryallen]

I would like to know a bit more about partners hand before committing, on that basis I would bid 3♣. This is one of those hands where I can easily see a ♦ slam given the right conditions. I don't see great value in splintering 4♣, because this is one hand where it's far more important me getting information, than giving. Very easy for me to count the tricks up, not so easy for partner.

[jdonn]

4♣ is for spades, come on. You don't negative double on a GF 4-5 automatically. What about 4-6?

3♣ here, then diamonds. But I would have made a fit jump a round earlier, planning to follow with a 4♠ bid.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Dec 31 2009, 11:20 AM, said:

4♣ is for spades, come on. You don't negative double on a GF 4-5 automatically. What about 4-6?

3♣ here, then diamonds. But I would have made a fit jump a round earlier, planning to follow with a 4♠ bid.

I'm glad you said that: I almost spewed my coffee when I read two posters asserting that one would negative double with 4=5 or better gf hands!

I bid 3♣ here, to ensure that partner knows we are game bound, and to conserve space. I intend to support diamonds next, of course. We are not playing 3N.

I was going to post that the fit-jump would leave us with issues if he rebid 3N, but then I saw we were playing weak notrumps...if he rebid 3N, we'd be in the slam zone (in diamonds). So I like the fit jump.

[neilkaz]

Cue bidding the opp's suit and then pulling 3NT certainly suggests slam. 3♣ then 4♦ for me.

[aguahombre]

Not convinced that playing weak NT makes 3NT over a fit jump strong, unless 1NT is opened with a stiff heart x often.

Content with 4D (much hated Minorwood), and will struggle in the grand opposite, say, KXXX X AKXXX AXX and settle for six if the spade king is missing, even though it might make 7.

[ONEferBRID]

TylerE, on Dec 31 2009, 09:17 AM, said:

I'm going to pull a rexford and suggest that 4♣ here should be a splinter for ♦. (Not ♠ since we would start with a neg X on hands with both majors). Failing that agreement, I would start with 3♣.

Krexford ain't going to buy into that.

4C! would be a splinter for partner's last bid suit ( ♠ ) .

[Mbodell]

jdonn, on Dec 31 2009, 08:20 AM, said:

3♣ here, then diamonds. But I would have made a fit jump a round earlier, planning to follow with a 4♠ bid.

Interestingly we are playing fit jumps here and agreed that the fit jump was what we should have bid the first time, and then given we didn't we discussed 4♦ versus 3♣ and preferred 3♣. The table action was 3♦ which floated for +150 opposite KQxx - Jxxxx AQxx.

[jdonn]

Mbodell, on Dec 31 2009, 03:58 PM, said:

jdonn, on Dec 31 2009, 08:20 AM, said:

3♣ here, then diamonds. But I would have made a fit jump a round earlier, planning to follow with a 4♠ bid.

Interestingly we are playing fit jumps here and agreed that the fit jump was what we should have bid the first time, and then given we didn't we discussed 4♦ versus 3♣ and preferred 3♣. The table action was 3♦ which floated for +150 opposite KQxx - Jxxxx AQxx.

You bid 3♦ over 2♣? Isn't that preemptive?

[Jlall]

3C then 4D, I think 4D direct here shows good trumps.

[jdonn]

Jlall, on Dec 31 2009, 04:13 PM, said:

3C then 4D, I think 4D direct here shows good trumps.

1♦ (2♣) 4♦? Isn't that preemptive too? I either have the auction wrong or I'm on another planet today...

[P_Marlowe]

jdonn, on Dec 31 2009, 04:16 PM, said:

Jlall, on Dec 31 2009, 04:13 PM, said:

3C then 4D, I think 4D direct here shows good trumps.

1♦ (2♣) 4♦? Isn't that preemptive too? I either have the auction wrong or I'm on another planet today...

Yes, you have the auction wrong, you have already made a strong bid, you did bid
a forcing 2H after they made an overcall of 2C.
The auction continued, opener / your partner did bid bid 2S, and now you will certainly
agree, that 4D now is a strong bid, whatever it may add. mean.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I wont dispute the fact, that both of us live on different planets, but that should come
as no surprise, I usually live in a different galaxy, than the rest of the peoble I met,
even in real live, so no wonder, that we both dont live on the same planet.

[jdonn]

LOL my bad on both auctions, although yeah 3♦ is NF.