What do you take this bid as? Sequence after negative double
#1
Posted 2010-November-16, 07:16
1♠ 3♦ X Pass
3NT Pass 4♦
What does 4♦ show?
What would a direct 4♦ show?
Are these bids standard?
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#2
Posted 2010-November-16, 07:40
- A direct 4♦ would show fit and a GF hand (4♠ is preemptive).
- I think this is pretty standard.
#3
Posted 2010-November-16, 07:55
- A direct 4♦ would show fit and a GF hand (4♠ is preemptive).
- I think this is pretty standard." Free
Yup. How else to show freaks in this auction AND get some cooperation.
#4
Posted 2010-November-16, 08:40
only spade support but also a splinter in diamonds. I would use this sequence with shortness in any of the side suits.
#5
Posted 2010-November-16, 16:32
Free, on 2010-November-16, 07:40, said:
Would you mind giving some examples of such hands?
gszeszycki, on 2010-November-16, 08:40, said:
So, you use a negative double with support in partner's Major to be able to show a splinter afterward? Wouldn't a direct cue-bid hint at a control in the suit+fit?
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#6
Posted 2010-November-17, 03:07
Hanoi5, on 2010-November-16, 16:32, said:
Yes
I suppose some 1=4=4=4 or 1=5=2=5 with a poor 5-card ♥ suit, dunno...
#7
Posted 2010-November-17, 07:23
4♦ after the X would be generally forcing to slam without a 5card suit and support, because you will bid 4nt as invitation and without support.
4sp over 3di will be constructive.
I suppose these bids are standard.
#8
Posted 2010-November-18, 08:18
On a side note, the 'similar' auction that I faced with was when I was in 4th seat with this auction:
(P) 1S (P) 2C
(2D) 2N (4D) ... Where 2C=2+C GF, 2N=15-18NT and I had a hand that was prepared to drive to slam with interest in grand, but with limited agreements the auction was bound to be murky in terms of how to set which suit I was interested in as trumps.
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#10
Posted 2010-November-18, 08:40