[the_clown]

---

Team game, no specific agreement about the 3♦ bid, except that it is natural and game force.

Your bid?

[mike777]

3nt


option two is 3h cue agree d but this looks like a very average flat hand with dispersed pts so 3nt.

[mikeh]

While the club suit is a plus factor, the plethora of quacks made this a minimum opening to start with and it hasn't improved one iota since then.

We aren't told if this is the only way for responder to show a minor or whether this sequence guarantees a major as well as a 5+ diamond suit. If the latter, then the likelihood of short clubs opposite has gone up, further reducing our liking for our hand. But even if the former, we still have no reason to upgrade.

We owe it to partner to apply the brakes and, fortunately, we have both majors stopped. Hence this seems to me to be a wtp 3N.

Should partner hold 4=2=5=2 or 4=1=5=3, with no working heart card, we may need some luck in 3N, but we can't misbid our hand (by making a more encouraging or less descriptive call) at this stage out of fear that they can run hearts (or spades for that matter) after knocking out our only stopper.

[Phil]

Agree that 3N is kind of obvious. Chances are that partner has the red suits. 3♠ will only cast doubt on the club suit, which we have well under control.

Be practical.

[nigel_k]

3♠.

After I respond 2♦ to Stayman and don't insist on playing diamonds later, partner can assume clubs are taken care of. So he will bid 3NT over 3♠ when his major is hearts unless he has extra shape. If partner's major is spades, 3NT could have a serious problem on a heart lead.

For example, 5♦ is best opposite Kxxx xx AKxxx Kx and 3NT is best opposite xx Kxxx AKxxx Kx.

[pooltuna]

as you dont know what partner has except a 4 card major and 5plus ♦ cooperate by qbidding the ♥A as a ♦ support call

[whereagles]

3NT is not kind of obvious. It's totally obvious.

[Fluffy]

3♠ is obvious to me, Give 4 spades to partner and you have aces opposite shortness and QJ in his suits. And even if slam is not in play, 4♠ might be extremelly superior game

[gnasher]

If this is partner's only way to bid a 4-card major and five diamonds, 3♠ looks normal.

Partner shouldn't worry about the club suit - I've said I have weak hearts, and he won't play me for two weak suits.

[MickyB]

3♠ wtp. Why are people talking about the probabilities of partner holding 4♠ when they could just describe their hand? Especially as partner has kinda gone out of his way to consider contracts other than 3NT.

For the 3♥ bidders - 3M here should show values in the suit, it's not usually played as a cuebid for diamonds. The only time cuebids apply below 3NT is 3S when hearts are agreed. You wouldn't usually show values in the suit with Ax(x)(x) because this is a holding that suggests playing a suit contract when partner holds a singleton. Contrast with KJx which may be useless in a suit contract if there is a singleton opposite.

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2011-December-14, 12:15, said:

Should partner hold 4=2=5=2 or 4=1=5=3, with no working heart card, we may need some luck in 3N, but we can't misbid our hand (by making a more encouraging or less descriptive call) at this stage out of fear that they can run hearts (or spades for that matter) after knocking out our only stopper.

Should I make one of those "I don´t recall ever disagreeing as much on a bid with you" blablabla statements?

Whatever, those shapes are just some examples, ♥xxx, ♥Jxx, and even ♥Qxx some of the time will make 3NT extrelly poor with 4♠&5♦ cold. The only question is if we will be able to find them after 3♠.

[Free]

- 3♠ describes our hand. This can be positive or negative. We can end up in a likely 3NT, but we can also find a better 4♠ or ♦ slam.
- 3NT is fast arrival and a small gamble. Partner will probably have 4♥, but if he doesn't 3NT may be in danger. Opps won't know which suit to lead though.

So it depends on what you prefer...

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2011-December-16, 06:30, said:

Should I make one of those "I don´t recall ever disagreeing as much on a bid with you" blablabla statements?

Whatever, those shapes are just some examples, ♥xxx, ♥Jxx, and even ♥Qxx some of the time will make 3NT extrelly poor with 4♠&5♦ cold. The only question is if we will be able to find them after 3♠.

There are, it seems to me, 3 ways to play 3M here.

1. A cuebid...this is the approach of the 3♥ bidders. I don't like it.

2. shows a useful holding, and expresses doubt about 3N, but neither promises nor denies a stopper in the other major...this is the approach of the 3♠ bidders

3. shows a useful holding and denies a stopper in the other major...or is a maximum in support of diamonds, and we will retroactively convert it into a cuebid when/if we pull. This is my view and (perhaps without the second part) I assume it to be the view of the other 3N bidders.

I don't pretend to know whether, across all sets of hands that match the auction, approach 2 is better, worse or the same as approach 3, in terms of overall efficiency. My style has always been 3, so of course I am biased in favour of it.

I think we can all appreciate that it may be important for responder to know whether opener has only one major stopped. On other hands, the possession of a single stopper in responder's short major may be inadequate, as you have shown with your examples.

My take is that you and partner decide which school you prefer and stick to it (imagine one player using school 1 and the other school 2...this could be embarassing!). As I say, I don't like 1, but I wouldn't argue strongly with a partner who tried to convert me to 2.

[Fluffy]

yes, I play the same as you, the onl differenmce is my understanding of ♥Ax as a stopper, on the context of 1NT opener I don;t think it is.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2011-December-16, 15:06, said:

yes, I play the same as you, the onl differenmce is my understanding of ♥Ax as a stopper, on the context of 1NT opener I don;t think it is.

Hmmmm.....I think I will avoid any cheap shot about whether an A is a stopper in notrump......damn....this is tempting

[JLOGIC]

I think 3S is really obvious also

[AlexJonson]

How are we seeing the auction developing form the obvious bids?

[gnasher]

AlexJonson, on 2011-December-16, 16:39, said:

How are we seeing the auction developing form the obvious bids?

If partner bids 3NT, 4♠ or 5♦, we pass.

If he bids 4♦, we cue-bid ♥A.

If he bids 4♥, that's presumably a cue-bid for diamonds, so we bid 5♣.

If he bids 4♣, we need to know if that is shape-showing and looking for the best game, or a cue-bid for diamonds.

[gnasher]

Duplicate post, sorry.

[Zelandakh]

mikeh, on 2011-December-16, 11:20, said:

There are, it seems to me, 3 ways to play 3M here.

Also a 4th way, showing the absence of a good stopper in the major (and in the case of 3S shows a useful holding in the other major) or as a denial cue bid in support of diamonds (will bid again over 3NT). This is the inverse method to 3 and is nice for pairs that prefer to ask for stoppers rather than show them.