[gwnn]

stop. We have a nice system with partner, some artificial sequences, some not so artificial but well established ones, and in general I was happy with our convention card and that our system file is at least 5 times longer than it.

but

3♦-p-p-3NT
p-?

oops we have never discussed this. Well I mean how bad can it be?

AJTxx
J98xx
-
Qxx

This sequence has never been discussed, partner is intelligent. What is your call?

[ONEferBRID]

4D! = pick-a-major

[akhare]

4♦ if you must bid -- frankly, I don't see much wrong with just passing...

[gwnn]

point taken, OP edited

[mikeh]

pass

seriously, do you have a method over a direct 3N? If so, then I suggest you use the same system, bearing in mind that the 3N bidder's minimum will/may be lower than in direct. This may be suboptimum, in that your hand is limited whereas opposite a direct overcall, your hand may be unlimited (if you were in 4th seat), but it is easier to remember one method rather than two, and if it works over direct, it should be ok over balancing.

Absent clear agreement, and the entire point of the post is that none exists, I'd pass, happily (well...happyish).

There is some reason to expect partner to hold 4 diamonds here (no raise, altho that isn't conclusive), and no real reason to expect a major suit fit...and even less reason to expect that we'd find the one that exists..if we bid 4♦ and he bids 4♥, with or without announcing what he took 4♦ as, would we be happy (well...if he said stayman we'd be happy)? And if we bid 4♣ and he bid 4♦, what now? Would we be comfortable that 4♥ was pick a major, and anyway, why should he hold even one 3 card major?

[gwnn]

no, actually we have absolutely never discussed (3x)-3NT or (3x)-p-p-3NT. it's quite LOL I know but..

[minimonkey]

I got laughed at by some friends for not having a system in this situation. They said I had to play:

4C= Inquiry
4D= Signoff Somewhere
4H+= Slam try but Non Forcing

Over 4C (Forcing to 4NT)

4D=15/16 HCP
4H= 17/18HCP
4S=19/20 HCP
4NT= 21+ HCP
5C/D= Stopper and this running minor

Admittedly this dosent help a bit on this hand but thought I would share anyway.

[helene_t]

I like minimonkey's structure.

Or you can play 4♣=hearts, 4♦=spades. Jack Zhao calls it a two-under transfer and probably Ken Rexford calls it flag bids

With this hand and without discussion I would pass. 4♦ may work but I am afraid p takes it as a transfer and has only 2 (or less) hearts.

[paulg]

It is a little surprising that gwnn has not already adopted and posted Frances' methods which are in another thread somewhere (exercise for the reader).

Her structure is the same as minimonkey's save the responses to 4♣ were different, differentiating between 3NT bids based on a long suit and just providing a min/max option for balanced hands.

Paul

[gwnn]

better to have a mixed state of maybe screwed by system+maybe can improvise and get out of it than be sure you have a system that screws you on this hand

(kidding)

partner's hand and his thoughts on how he takes an undiscussed 4x here to be revealed after this short commercial break.

[whereagles]

without agreements, it's a canonical 4♦

Pard will bid his best major 99% of the time and 5♣ the other 1%. We're fine with both bids, so it's really a wtp to me.

I do happen to have some agreements here, though (4♣ = majors, 4♦/♥ = transfer, 4♠ = 3-suiter short ♦, etc).

[Ant590]

I can't find the thread where Frances wrote, but http://forums.bridge...showtopic=32153 is a different one.

[655321]

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=14166

[Ant590]

I wish someone would make an index of this stuff somewhere!

[kgr]

Playing Rubensohl: Do you have an agreement/understanding about this one?
1NT-(2♣ Nat)-3♥!-(Pass)
3NT-(pass)-4♥?
 
3♥=Rubensohl; Transfer ♠, limit+
3NT=No 3c♠, stop in ♣ and not minimal.
What is 4♥: retransfer ♠ or ♥?

[655321]

Ant590, on Apr 21 2010, 06:00 AM, said:

I wish someone would make an index of this stuff somewhere!

Been suggested before, for example:

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=5438

You could try keeping the resulting thread up to date, but it seems more trouble than it is worth. Most threads/topics can be found by searching easily enough just using a couple of key words.

[helene_t]

It is unfortunate that the forums are not indexed by google. Google finds almost nothing (looks as if google did index it in the first few months of the forums existence but then stopped), yahoo, bing, lycos, hotbot and altavista find exactly nothing. Is that a deliberate choice? If not, is there something to do about it?

[Rossoneri]

My vote for 4♦ too without any specific agreements. When's the commercial break ending?

[mgoetze]

helene_t, on Apr 21 2010, 11:47 AM, said:

It is unfortunate that the forums are not indexed by google. Google finds almost nothing (looks as if google did index it in the first few months of the forums existence but then stopped), yahoo, bing, lycos, hotbot and altavista find exactly nothing. Is that a deliberate choice? If not, is there something to do about it?

Apparently it is, see
http://forums.bridge....com/robots.txt

[gwnn]

Oh right, I forgot to turn off the commercials.

xx
AKQx
AQJxxx
J

I think. 4H is a good contract, 3NT which we played, not so good. Well I would never really bid 3NT with his hand but what do I know..