[benlessard]

---

\

4H is undiscussed, what would be the difference between 5S and 5C here ?

[gszes]

Majors NT Minors

We need to treat p hand as minimum for their bidding
until otherwise advised ---this being the case I have to
admit I do not see a reason for the 4h bid vs 4n which
should assure p the black suits are well covered for
NT purposes. P may have a holding similar to
xxx Qxxx Kxxxxx void and is unwilling to settle for 3n
when 5d/6d/7d might be vastly superior contracts.

The problem with the 4h bid it makes it seem you have
a dia fit (which you dont) and it makes it seem you fear
clubs (which you definitely positively don't) and now your
partner proudly shows you a club control (do i hear a void
anyone) and here we are stuck in a quagmire.

P is searching for slam but we have zero clue how
strong they are but we know for sure that our club "stuff"
is not quite as good as it was now that we know p is
short. I would try to sign off in

5d

since there is an outside chance p has 6d or maybe the T
which will help fill in the suit. good luck

[the_clown]

I would have been 4N at my last turn showing no interest, i think 4♥ should agree ♦. Consequently 5♣ is cuebid, denying a ♠control. Maybe something like Qxx Qxxx AKxxx x would be perfectly consistent. Of course partner may have xxx Qxxx AKQxx x.

Anyway I bid 5♦ and hope we are not too high, no way to recover after I misbid previous round.

[helene_t]

IMVHO:

pard is 0454. I would try 6♣ but maybe pass is better.

5♠ would be natural and show that 4♦ was some kind of advanced help suit trial or cue or w/e for 6♠, I think.

[benlessard]

IMO partner 4D can mean 3 things,

4S+5D slammish,
4H+5D could be mildly slammish
4S+ slammish no controls in clubs.


After 4D,

I think you need extras and D fit to bypass 4NT. Just in case partner is slammish without a real D suits. So my suggestion is

4S = minimum (4NT by responder is to play showing D+H)
4H extras no diamond fit.
4Nt+ = extras and D fit

After 3S-4D-4H

4S mild slam try with 4S+D
4NT mildly slammsih not forcing H+D
5C I guess its 6D+H higly slammish (last train for D)
5D to play
5H last train for S
5S asking for C control.


Its sequence like these that make me glad to not use a strong 2nt with my reg partner.

[mikeh]

benlessard, on 2013-June-25, 08:42, said:

IMO partner 4D can mean 3 things,

4S+5D slammish,
4H+5D could be mildly slammish
4S+ slammish no controls in clubs.


After 4D,

I think you need extras and D fit to bypass 4NT. Just in case partner is slammish without a real D suits. So my suggestion is

4S = minimum (4NT by responder is to play showing D+H)
4H extras no diamond fit.
4Nt+ = extras and D fit

After 3S-4D-4H

4S mild slam try with 4S+D
4NT mildly slammsih not forcing H+D
5C I guess its 6D+H higly slammish (last train for D)
5D to play
5H last train for S
5S asking for C control.


Its sequence like these that make me glad to not use a strong 2nt with my reg partner.

All of that may be your opinion (tho one wonders why you posted the problem and then told us what you think the answers should be).

However, it is very common, to the point of being close to standard, that if partner held a spade fit with slam interest, he would bid 4♥ over 3♠. He absolutely wouldn't bid 4♦ as some sort of nebulous bid. 4♦ shows diamonds.

Given you have no specific agreements, it may well be that his first two bids are the only way he knows how to show diamonds, so it isn't even safe to assume hearts...he may or may not have hearts. It is probably safe to assume he has mild slam interest.

Over 4♦, I would expect a panel of expert bidders to be unanimous in endorsing a natural, fit denying 4N.

4♥ would almost as clearly, imo, be seen as showing real diamond support and as a cuebid (in the absence of specific agreements).

As for your disdain for strong two notrumps, I can see why you don't like playing them: you make life far too complicated for yourself by making weird calls in the middle of auctions. Admittedly, 2N auctions can be difficult and it is important to have a very detailed set of agreements, but there are a number of good methods out there.

Had you bid 3♠ then 4N you would be well placed. Were partner to have patterned out via 5♣, I'd bid 5♥, a clear try for grand in clubs.

[benlessard]

Quote

Over 4♦, I would expect a panel of expert bidders to be unanimous in endorsing a natural, fit denying 4N.

So if responder make a mild slam and the hand look like a misfit try there is no way to stop in 4S ?

I jsut find it weird that a bid that bypass your most probable game is weaker than a bid below your most probable game.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

4D should show 4 cards ♥ and at least 6 cards ♦ ( ie NO fit for ♠ ) .

I agree that 4NT now would be a sign-off .

[mikeh]

benlessard, on 2013-June-25, 09:52, said:

So if responder make a mild slam and the hand look like a misfit try there is no way to stop in 4S ?

I jsut find it weird that a bid that bypass your most probable game is weaker than a bid below your most probable game.

Why not go back and read my post?

4♦ DOES NOT SHOW SPADES in any standard approach. Indeed, as I posted, the common approach amongst good players, absent specialized agreements, is that if responder has spades and slam interest he bids an artificial 4♥. If he has spades and no slam interest then he (surprise!) bids 4♠ or passes.

If he doesn't have spades, then I very much doubt that 4♠ is 'our most probable game'. And, at the risk of belaboring the point, I would never, ever expect a reasonably competent partner to have spades when he bid 4♦...

Edit: you posted this in the expert forum and then gave an auction that I doubt would even occur to an expert to bid. I could see merit in posting this in the I/A forum, but I simply don't understand why you think that experts might think responder could have spades here.

[aguahombre]

benlessard, on 2013-June-25, 09:52, said:

So if responder make a mild slam and the hand look like a misfit try there is no way to stop in 4S ?

I jsut find it weird that a bid that bypass your most probable game is weaker than a bid below your most probable game.

Spades should be out of the picture as trump in the eyes of Opener when Responder bids 4D. Even if you don't have 4H available to show slammish with a spade fit, Opener proceeds as if Responder is showing 4-5+ in the red suits and bids 4NT. If partner accidentally does have a Spade fit, stopping at 4 will not be a concern anyway. You will be committed to 6S at least, and not be sorry if pard has anything resembling a slam try.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Ben... I'm ready to see the North hand .

[benlessard]

Quote

4♦ DOES NOT SHOW SPADES in any standard approach.

I find it hard to believe that you can have 4S and diamonds and be forced to bid 4H instead of 4D, if 4H is your only call showing 4S slammish, I have to tell you that its one of poorest method ive heard lately, and I simply find it hard to believe its standard.

I must admit here (Montreal) that we dont have a definite standard methods over 2Nt, for example what is fairly popular here is

2NT-3C
3D no M or 5S
3H=4
3S=4
3NT=5H

Wich is not really Romex, Ive enconter this method vs 3 pairs vs 1 for regular puppet in the last tournament. Also fairly popular here is transfer after a 2nt rebid wich is pretty rare elsewhere I think.

Anyway If you find some link or writing on the continuations of US or UK standard I would like to get it thanks.

[mikeh]

benlessard, on 2013-June-25, 12:34, said:

I find it hard to believe that you can have 4S and diamonds and be forced to bid 4H instead of 4D, if 4H is your only call showing 4S slammish, I have to tell you that its one of poorest method ive heard lately, and I simply find it hard to believe its standard.

I must admit here (Montreal) that we dont have a definite standard methods over 2Nt, for example what is fairly popular here is

2NT-3C
3D no M or 5S
3H=4
3S=4
3NT=5H

Wich is not really Romex, Ive enconter this method vs 3 pairs vs 1 for regular puppet in the last tournament. Also fairly popular here is transfer after a 2nt rebid wich is pretty rare elsewhere I think.

Anyway If you find some link or writing on the continuations of US or UK standard I would like to get it thanks.

I often play the 2N response structure you outlined, because I played for a few years in a regular partnership with Doug Fraser (and still on occasion) and he taught me this after he moved out West from Montreal.

As for 4♥ being a general slam try after a 3♠ response to normal stayman, I can't give you a specific reference. I can say that I have played that method for at least 20 years, and I vaguely recall first seeing it in a BW CTC or MSC, but that was a long time ago and I may be wrong about that.

I'd be interested in the views of other experts about this treatment, especially NA experts, since I have learned that many of the treatments we in NA think are 'standard' are nothing like standard in areas with a different tradition.

It really isn't wasteful at all.

4♥ says that responder has at least slam interest in spades. He may have better. Opener rejects via 4♠.

It is possible to play that opener shows keycards with bids beyond 4♠. It is possible to use 4N as accepting but not showing keycards, and bids of 5♣ and beyond being keycards, or it is possible to cuebid.....one needs agreements and in the absence of agreements, I'd assume cuebidding.....but then I come from a school that believes that keycard asking is a grossly over-used and often unnecessary approach to slam bidding.

It is reasonable for opener to infer that partner has only 4 spades, since responder didn't transfer (this is an inference, not a guarantee for several reasons including that responder might be about to smolen over a 3♦ response, if smolen or similar gadgets are available).

So opener simply evaluates based on controls, shape, quality of trump...all the usual factors.

This is closely analogous to a jacoby transfer followed by responder jumping to game, as a mild slam try for those of us who play some form of texas. Opener passes or makes a move, dependent on his assessment of slam suitability, and I have rarely had a problem with that sequence, nor with the suggested usage of 4♥. The main difference is that here responder may be moving forward over a signoff.

Btw, when responder bids 3♥ in response to stayman, the corollary is that 3♠ is now the slam try. That doesn't work when playing the Montreal type of modified puppet that you describe, and that I have played off and on for some 13 years now, but I do believe it to be a widely accepted expert approach (as always: in the absence of special agreements, and most experienced pairs have very specialized agreements over 2N openings).

[han]

With a pick-up partner I'd assume that 2NT - 3C - 3S - 4H is a slam try in spades. With a regular partner I'd prefer 4C to be the slam try. Then 4D would show clubs and 4H would show diamonds.

In the Netherlands it has become more popular to play that 2NT - 3H - 3S - 4S denies slam interest and 2NT - 4D shows slam interest. Over 4D we play that 4S shows a good hand for slam and 4H shows a bad hand.

[Zelandakh]

In Germany, it is popular to play a transfer followed by a new suit as two-way, either a real suit or a cue bid. I do not think they do this over Stayman too but I could understand it if they did. I personally think the method is completely bonkers. Using 4♥ as a slam try after spades is agreed is quite a good trick in 2NT auctions. One possible structure (using Puppet) gets to repeat this theme 3 times:

2NT - 3♣; 3♠ - 4♥ = 3+ spades, SI
2NT - 3♣; 3♦ - 3♥; 3♠ - 4♥ = 4 spades, SI (assumes the version of Puppet where 3♥ does not show 4 spades)
2NT - 3♥; 3♠ - 4♥ = one-suited slam try

Of course it is also play Hans' switch in all of these auctions if desired.

[cherdano]

benlessard, on 2013-June-25, 12:34, said:

I find it hard to believe that you can have 4S and diamonds and be forced to bid 4H instead of 4D, if 4H is your only call showing 4S slammish, I have to tell you that its one of poorest method ive heard lately, and I simply find it hard to believe its standard.

Well, in that case you probably haven't heard of the following method:
Over 3♠, 4♦ shows diamonds, and is ambiguous as to whether responder has spade support, or diamonds+hearts.

[aguahombre]

han, on 2013-June-26, 01:48, said:

With a regular partner I'd prefer 4C to be the slam try. Then 4D would show clubs and 4H would show diamonds.

We contemplated doing that, but ran into some problems. It seems excellent for the times when there is a spade fit, but awkward with one of the minor-suit variations. If 4D shows Clubs, 4H can be random acceptance of Clubs from which we can proceed. But when 4H shows Diamonds, we want to be able to bid 4S with a 5th Spade and don't have a last train available at the 4-level.

[han]

I would suggest that you play that 3S shows 5 spades. There are many good structures around.

[aguahombre]

han, on 2013-June-26, 10:56, said:

I would suggest that you play that 3S shows 5 spades. There are many good structures around.

That, of course, would change the whole OP issue into something else. The major 4-4 fit, if it existed would have been established or negated in a different way before or while the 4-level bid occurred.

Anyway, it is obviously not what OP is playing and irrelevant here.

[benlessard]

On BW forum most said that 4H as any S try is standard but they dont like it and some play like Han (4c is art show fit) North hand was

Axxx
x
AKQxxx
xx

where 7D/7nt are cold while even 6S could go down. Luckyly for us the other table also stopped in 6D.