[mikeh]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 11 2006, 10:42 AM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 11 2006, 04:27 PM, said:

Could be a very strong ♠ one suiter with red stops.... so 3♣ asks for a ♣ stopper: AKQ10xxx Ax KJx x... not willing to commit to a ten trick game but sure interested in a 9 trick contract

Wouldn't you bid 3S on that hand?

Quote

If I read the comments from Roland correctly, the player who held the 3♣ hand merely thought about bidding it and did not actually do it: which I think is the perfect way to deal with these thoughts... no partner deserves to have to figure out 3♣ at the table

Absolutely.

I really don't know

The whole point is that I am not sure that I can come up with a hand for the 3♣ call that was a clear pass earlier... maybe 3♠ on the previous round would have been the long one-suiter without side values... or maybe 3♠ on the previous round would be, say, xx Ax AKQJxxx Ax? We are, almost by definition, discussing unusual hands, thus the argument that xx Ax AKQJxxx Ax is too unusual to worry about falls away.

I suppose one point that comes through loud and clear on this thread is that it would help if we knew the partnership agreements/tendencies-from-analogous-sequences for all the possible immediate actions that the 3♣ bidder did not take. The only one we know of is that an immediate 2♠ would be natural and non-forcing... and that is not much help

[Walddk]

mikeh, on Sep 11 2006, 06:41 PM, said:

The only one we know of is that an immediate 2♠ would be natural and non-forcing... and that is not much help

As I said in my initial post, I doubt that many (if any) partnerships have an agreement as to what 3♣ shows on this auction. So how can I tell you more than 2♠ would be natural and non-forcing?

Roland

[mike777]

Walddk, on Sep 11 2006, 11:37 AM, said:

Walddk, on Sep 11 2006, 01:37 PM, said:

1Club pass 1Spade pass
2Clubs pass pass .. 3♣?

"How would you interpret 3♣", David Greenwood asked me. He got this back:

"Very strong hand with spades, and possibly a red suit on the side. A hand too good to bid a natural 2♠ first time around, and not suitable for a leap to 4♠. 6-5, 6-4, 5-5, 5-4, and then I will correct 3♦ to 3♥ if I have the majors and 3♥ to 3♠ if I have spades and diamonds".

After a while I got this back from David:

"Right Roland. Thought I had invented a bid but any expert should deduce the obvious. I was given the hand

♠ AK1098x
♥ AKQxx
♦ void
♣ xx

from the CBAI Camrose Trials by BJ O'Brien. He actually doubled 1♠ and then got into a mess of course. Over 3♣ partner will bid 3♦ and you clarify with 3♥. 4♠ makes if you guess the spades which are QJxx onside. Only one dummy entry".

Roland

OK...I would have just bid 2s natural planning on rebidding hearts natural.

[arrows]

Why couldn't it be a running suit, asking for club stopper?