[cnszsun]

2/1 system:
1H-2C
2H-2S
2N-3H
3N-4N

[aguahombre]

Have to know more about your agreements about 2/1 auctions. In mine (such as it is) hearts are trump; opener showed six, responder bid around diamond shortness with better than a splinter, and 3NT was "serious". So, 4NT is just keycard for hearts.

Cetainly others will disagree with every part of what I just said, because they have better methods. And, they will surely explain them.

[jdonn]

Quantitative. Regardless of how many hearts you think either player has shown (5 and 2 in what I consider standard bidding) it would be very easy for responder to bid 4♦ over 3NT to agree hearts if he wanted to bid blackwood.

[cnszsun]

jdonn, on Jan 3 2010, 11:29 AM, said:

Quantitative. Regardless of how many hearts you think either player has shown (5 and 2 in what I consider standard bidding) it would be very easy for responder to bid 4♦ over 3NT to agree hearts if he wanted to bid blackwood.

Exactly what i thought. My hand is Axxx Ax Ax KQJxx

[Old York]

cnszsun, on Jan 3 2010, 04:11 AM, said:

2/1 system:
1H-2C
2H-2S
2N-3H
3N-4N

Opener has shown a maximum hand already by bidding 2NT?
The bidding up to 2♠ seems fairly clear, but all of the following bids are ambiguous

I suppose it depends on agreed methods, but a weaker hand might have rebid 3NT, because this sequence is already GF (fast arrival)
I would not be happy to assume responder has failed to splinter, he may hold a stiff Ace or King

Tony

[1eyedjack]

Old York, on Jan 3 2010, 05:06 AM, said:

I suppose it depends on agreed methods, but a weaker hand might have rebid 3NT, because this sequence is already GF (fast arrival)

You may well be right in guessing the agreed methods, and I am sure that a lot of players bid this way, but personally I find the principle of fast arrival a flawed concept when bidding it opposite an unlimited hand. It is fine if you know that there is no slam on the cards, but just to leap a level of auction to limit your hand as general-purpose minimum when there may still be slam on does not sit well with me.

[helene_t]

Fast arrival shouldn't apply here.

With an unknown p I would assume
2♥ = catch all, basically any minimum without four diamonds, or a good hand with long but modest hearts, or maybe 6♥4♣, maybe 15+ balanced with a leach in a pointed suit.
2♠ = four spades, at least "in principle".
2NT = natural, maybe either 12-14 or 18-19, possibly a 6322-type.
3♥ = 4306 or 4315, possibly ♥Hx
3NT = (non) serious may apply here if 3♥ promised 3-card support but I would assume 3NT to be natural, as responder can assume 12-14.
4NT = quanti, unless we have agreed that 3♥ promised 3, in which case it is probably RKC.

Those are not my preferred methods as I like 2♦ rather than 2♥ to be catch-all. In that case, 2♥ shows 6 and 4NT is RKC.

[Fluffy]

agree with josh

[Old York]

I dont get it

Opener has been forced to make 3 rebids, and yet we seem to have no real clue as to his strength or distribution

Had we forseen this, then we might as well bid
1♥-2♣
2♥-2♠
2NT-4NT
as the best chance of avoiding a mishap
.... or just "follow the flock" and bid 6NT?

Tony

Edit:
IM(very)HO the 3♥ bid was to blame. Opener has shown a diamond stopper, so the question of ruffing value in the heart slam seems irrelevant
(3♥ may be 3 card support, so 3NT may be "serious" and not natural?)

[mich-b]

4NT is quantitative, because :
1. 4NT directly over a natural 3NT should be played as invitational, any exceptions will cause misunderstandings.
2. Not only that a fit was not found in any suit, it was actually established that there is no fit anywhere (surely not in ♥s, which are 5-2). In positions where a fit was not found , 4NT should be quantitative.

[pooltuna]

mich-b, on Jan 3 2010, 11:09 AM, said:

4NT is quantitative, because :
1. 4NT directly over a natural 3NT should be played as invitational, any exceptions will cause misunderstandings.
2. Not only that a fit was not found in any suit, it was actually established that there is no fit anywhere (surely not in ♥s, which are 5-2). In positions where a fit was not found , 4NT should be quantitative.

I think you and JDonn have nailed this pretty well.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

What was 3NT?

Ok, assuming no frills:

3H showed only secondary 2 card support, 3NT was to play,
that means opener will have only 5 card heart suit, otherwise
...

That means 4NT is quantitative.

Since opener, showed a min opener with 2NT, the quantitative
ask is based on enough HCP to make 6NT playable oppossite
a max of 12-15, which means responder is showing something
like 17/18.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Old York, on Jan 3 2010, 10:54 AM, said:

I dont get it 

Opener has been forced to make 3 rebids, and yet we seem to have no real clue as to his strength or distribution

Had we forseen this, then we might as well bid
1♥-2♣
2♥-2♠
2NT-4NT
as the best chance of avoiding a mishap
.... or just "follow the flock" and bid 6NT?

Tony

Edit:
IM(very)HO the 3♥ bid was to blame. Opener has shown a diamond stopper, so the question of ruffing value in the heart slam seems irrelevant
(3♥ may be 3 card support, so 3NT may be "serious" and not natural?)

2NT limits openers hand.

And the 2NT bid also tells something about openers shape, 2NT is either 5422 or
6322, ... 5422 is not possible anymore, since with a 4 card suit in clubs or spades,
opener would have bid either 3C or 3S, i.e. opener is showing 6322.

Because of this, it could be argued, that 3H does set trumps, and 3NT is something
like serious 3NT, but this would be a fairly fine tuned system.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: The above logic assumes, that openers rebid is NT with 5332 shape.

[gwnn]

quantitative. is there any alternative?

[peachy]

Raise of 3NT to 4NT cannot be anything but a quantitative invite.

[whereagles]

If 3♥ 100% promises fit, then 4NT should be RKCB. Otherwise quantitative.

[Codo]

rubbish deleted.

[gwnn]

Codo:

cnszsun, on Jan 3 2010, 03:11 AM, said:

2/1 system:

[Codo]

gwnn, on Jan 4 2010, 09:20 PM, said:

Codo:

cnszsun, on Jan 3 2010, 03:11 AM, said:

2/1 system:

HNY but which message did you try to send me?

[gwnn]

well if 2♣ set a GF, 3♥ is GF with hearts isn't it? how else can you show a good raise? are you trying to say that

1♥-2♣
2♥-2♠
2NT-3♥

could possibly ever imply better support than

1♥-2♣
2♥-3♥

?

who has these agreements?