[WasWinM]

---

As far as I know, a 2/1 doesn't guarantee 3 Aces or that a 5-level contract is safe.

[akwoo]

If you're playing serious in this situation, it should promise at least something like 4 control points, counting Q of trump as 1, and counting voids and singletons if you've got enough trump. It's clear that AKSV are what count here, and therefore that's what serious/non-serious should be based on.

[mike777]

 WasWinM, on 2026-September-08, 12:08, said:

---

As far as I know, a 2/1 doesn't guarantee 3 Aces or that a 5-level contract is safe.

Fortunately not a gf hand

As I mentioned a very rare auction, so not going to spend more time on it.
--------------

Again don't get all these serious/non posts on this convention. Another example where not needed

t🕵️

[WasWinM]

mike777, on 2026-September-08, 13:05, said:

Fortunately not a gf hand

As I mentioned a very rare auction, so not going to spend more time on it.
--------------

Again don't get all these serious/non posts on this convention. Another example where not needed

t🕵️

Your concept of GF is rather conservative, or your opening hands are really light.

[jillybean]

WasWinM, on 2026-September-08, 11:41, said:

I'm late to this thread but I really do not like 1S-3S. I'm in the 1-4 group. Over 2D, I don't bid 3S then, either, as that to me is solid suit. I simply bid 1234 spades unless partner gives me an earlier reason to get more excited.

KQJ987542, sure I am missing the Ace but I still call this a solid suit

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-September-08, 14:02, said:

KQJ987542, sure I am missing the Ace but I still call this a solid suit

Then you don’t know what the term means.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2026-September-08, 14:02, said:

KQJ987542, sure I am missing the Ace but I still call this a solid suit

I prefer the term self-sustaining which I define as a suit quality of at least ten with max 1 loser.

[jillybean]

Whatever the "correct" term is, I consider this suit sufficient to force trump after a 2♦ response.

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2026-September-08, 11:46, said:

Three spades is not a request for control bidding, it is a demand. Granted this is a very rare auction.

It is a rare auction, but the same semantic (and not only) issue arises in the frequent auction 1S-2m/H;something-3S (at least for those of us who do not play Jacoby 2NT) and others like 1H-1S;1N-3H (at least playing XYZ) or 2C-2D; 3S.
These auctions (for me at least) are GF, impose trumps and request control-bidding.
To what extent they oblige control-bidding rather than 3NT or fast arrival and what 3NT means (natural, non-serious, waiting, disallowed) is a question of partnership agreements for each case.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-September-08, 09:43, said:

---

Assuming you agreed 4NT as RKCB 1403 here, then 5♦ = 0/3

[jillybean]

---

5♦ 30

[mike777]

 pescetom, on 2026-September-08, 16:16, said:

It is a rare auction, but the same semantic (and not only) issue arises in the frequent auction 1S-2m/H;something-3S (at least for those of us who do not play Jacoby 2NT) and others like 1H-1S;1N-3H (at least playing XYZ) or 2C-2D; 3S.
These auctions (for me at least) are GF, impose trumps and request control-bidding.
To what extent they oblige control-bidding rather than 3NT or fast arrival and what 3NT means (natural, non-serious, waiting, disallowed) is a question of partnership agreements for each case.

A specific example would help.
If I understand your post they all seem to demand control showing and set trump.

Granted, if I understand your post, all three examples are rare.

[WasWinM]

jillybean, on 2026-September-08, 16:05, said:

Whatever the "correct" term is, I consider this suit sufficient to force trump after a 2♦ response.

It kind of makes a difference between a 1-loser suit and a no-loser suit, as the trump ace is rarely not cashed against a Grand Slam.