[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

in a 20 board team match against strong players this was the 5th hand.
We lost 30IMPs combined in the 5th, 6th and 7th board, which basically decided the match, we ended up loosing with 20IMPs.
The following hand is interesting to discuss in a serious partnership, what certain bids mean, if you play a natural system.

As dealer you hold, all being red

♠K3
♥KJ973
♦QJ
♣Q764


The opponents stay silent.

The bidding

1♥ - Pass - 1♠ - Pass
2♣ - Pass - 2♦ (1) - Pass
2♥ (2) - Pass - 3♣ (3) - Pass
??? (4)


(1) FSF, invitational+, i.e. not forcing to game
(2) Default response, no 3 spades, no diamond stopper, min
55 and 64 is still possible
(3) Club fit, forcing to game

(4) Your bid?

What is the meaning of the various bids 3♦, 3♥, 3♠, 3NT, 4♣, 4♦?

I did not choose the best bid, which was the starting point for loosing our first 10IMPs.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If you play FSF as GF feel free to assume so, I am not sure it makes a big difference.
The difference being the default bid would exclude the 55 and 64 shape at the cost of not being
able to convey the message "min".
Related is also the question, what you do with 5332 hands, with a 5 card major,
if you always open 1NT, when in range, you can say, this is one big plus for this treatment,
otherwise you need to discuss, what to do, and what are the implications in the given seq.

[mikeh]

I have (very) long played 4SF as gf, but I don’t see how that much impacts our decision here (as with a non gf 2/1 method, I think the downside of forcing opener to jump on hands with only modest ‘extras’ is very bad for slam bidding in particular, while the downside of the problems arising from having to rebid as responder with merely invitational hands isn’t that big a deal….but I play an imp style where we’d rather overbid and reach thin games than stop on a dime in a partscore).

As it is, this is an ugly hand, especially since, imo, it’s unplayable to have 2H deny a diamond stopper….I agree 100% that 2H is a default bid, but I can’t see bidding 2N with a minimum 1=6=2=4 or 0=6=3=4 hand! So 2H should, imo, only deny a stopper if opener has 5 hearts. This complicates our rebid here, since 3N is exactly the right bid with, say, K KQxxxx Kx Qxxx.

Whenever I’m stuck with an awkward bid, I try to use a process of elimination. I’m hoping to find the least bad call.

So my choices seem to be:

3D…..can’t be natural. With 0=5=4=4, I’d rebid 2D rather than 2C. With 1=5=3=4 and a diamond stop,I’d have bid 2N earlier.

With 1=6=2=4 and a stopper, I’d bid 3N now, as I would with 0=6=3=4

So I think 3D has to be denying a stopper, while also denying 3 spades…see below. It will often….usually in fact…be 1=5=3=4 with no stopper. In some circles, this bid is described as ‘fifth suit forcing’.

3H…clearly wrong. Absolutely has to be a six card suit.

3S…tempting. But how would I bid 3=6=0=4 with three weak spades and a good six card heart suit? More to the point, it’s very hard to construct a hand on which we belong in spades once responder didn’t rebid spades over 2H or, and I think this is key…where we can’t reach spades opposite common hands such as 5=2=2=4, where he bids 3H and I 3S, or 5=1=3=4 where he may bid 3S…or (I admit) 3N.

3N…also tempting, but this is how I’d bid with 6 hearts and a real stopper.

4C….ugh. Driving past 3N with this collection is horrible…I have no aces and a terrible club suit plus my pointed suit cards rate to be far more valuable in 3N than in 5C. Partner will often be 5=1=3=4 on this auction. If he’s truly club oriented, he can and should be the one committing us to the suit.

My experience with this process usually leads me to a clear, if ugly, conclusion. Unfortunately it doesn’t this time: I think any of 3D, 3S or 3N could work out better than one or both alternatives.

However, I opt for 3D on the grounds that is the least committal. Most importantly, if he has something like AQxxx xx xx AKJx he can bid 3H and we’d bid 3S, leading to the best, even if poor, game in 4S). Admittedly we’d end up in 3N opposite some 5=1=3=4 hand when 4S is better. As I say, I don’t see any clearly best action.

[Cyberyeti]

3♦ - I have a part stop is possible, but the danger is that partner bids 3N with Kx and you're missing a lot of aces so may not have 9 to run. 3♠ is also possible with Kx being a pretty normal holding for this.

[DavidKok]

I like 3♦ but can live with 3♠. The other options seem significantly worse to me. I've always played 4SGF but I think it doesn't impact the meaning of bids here - with most 1534 hands we would have a 2NT bid over 2♦, while with 3514 we would bid 2♠. It might not be crazy to jump on the third round with 3604, though I prefer bidding slowly on GF auctions (and I would bid 2♠, not 2♥). With this inference I think the meaning of the next round bids should be:

• 3♦ - A punt, unsuitable for any other call. Typically 1534 with half a diamond stopper.
  
• 3♥ - A sixth heart (or a really strong 5-card suit prepared to play in a Moysian).
  
• 3♠ - Soft diamonds and a doubleton spade in support. Depending on partnership agreement you may require Hx or better, which most of the time you will have (where else did all your points go).
  
• 3NT - Probably 0634, concealing the diamond stopper last round to emphasise the hearts.
  
• 4♣ - 5 clubs, setting trumps, confirming we are not playing in 3NT due to the diamond weakness. Partner's 3♣ (rather than 2NT or 3NT, this round or the last one) permitted us to bypass 3NT with weak diamonds.

Really I'm just repeating what mikeh said, though I think we would have bid 3604 hands differently last round.

[TMorris]

3 ♠ for me. I would raise spades at once with many weak hands and three card support so Hx is a very likely holding for 3 ♠.

[giorgis_di]

P_Marlowe, on 2023-October-17, 23:48, said:

Hi,

in a 20 board team match against strong players this was the 5th hand.
We lost 30IMPs combined in the 5th, 6th and 7th board, which basically decided the match, we ended up loosing with 20IMPs.
The following hand is interesting to discuss in a serious partnership, what certain bids mean, if you play a natural system.

As dealer you hold, all being red

♠K3
♥KJ973
♦QJ
♣Q764


The opponents stay silent.

The bidding

1♥ - Pass - 1♠ - Pass
2♣ - Pass - 2♦ (1) - Pass
2♥ (2) - Pass - 3♣ (3) - Pass
??? (4)


(1) FSF, invitational+, i.e. not forcing to game
(2) Default response, no 3 spades, no diamond stopper, min
55 and 64 is still possible
(3) Club fit, forcing to game

(4) Your bid?

What is the meaning of the various bids 3♦, 3♥, 3♠, 3NT, 4♣, 4♦?

I did not choose the best bid, which was the starting point for loosing our first 10IMPs.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If you play FSF as GF feel free to assume so, I am not sure it makes a big difference.
The difference being the default bid would exclude the 55 and 64 shape at the cost of not being
able to convey the message "min".
Related is also the question, what you do with 5332 hands, with a 5 card major,
if you always open 1NT, when in range, you can say, this is one big plus for this treatment,
otherwise you need to discuss, what to do, and what are the implications in the given seq.

To begin with, I wouldn't rebid 2♣, because my hand is semi-balanced. I believe that rebidding 1NT is more descriptive than 2♣ (I would bid the same with 3c in ♣)

Further, 3♣ is gave invitational that shows no control in an unspecified suit. Thus, you might respond by showing your first stopper at the minimum possible level, i.e. by bidding 3♥. . Alternatively, 3NT is also a good bid, because you indicate that you are not interested in something more than the game.

For your next question, I would say that that 3♦ shows a partial stopper, 3♠ = a stopper in spades that denies a stopper in hearts, 4♣ is slem try

[P_Marlowe]

giorgis_di, on 2023-October-18, 03:35, said:

To begin with, I wouldn't rebid 2♣, because my hand is semi-balanced. I believe that rebidding 1NT is more descriptive than 2♣ (I would bid the same with 3c in ♣)

Further, 3♣ is gave invitational that shows no control in an unspecified suit. Thus, you might respond by showing your first stopper at the minimum possible level, i.e. by bidding 3♥. . Alternatively, 3NT is also a good bid, because you indicate that you are not interested in something more than the game.

For your next question, I would say that that 3♦ shows a partial stopper, 3♠ = a stopper in spades that denies a stopper in hearts, 4♣ is slem try

The system in play was 5 card major with weak NT, so rebidding 1NT is not an option, but certainly a valid one, in a strong NT system.

[Gilithin]

mikeh, on 2023-October-18, 01:34, said:

3N…also tempting, but this is how I’d bid with 6 hearts and a real stopper.

In the most common German style, 2♥ specifically denies a stopper so 3NT would be what you bid with a half stopper and no slam interest.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Thanks for the comments.

I choose 3♦, alerting it, as asking / showing a half stopper, but this was wrong.
I think 3NT is more in line, the way we do it.

As always it is more important to have an agreement at all, or to be on the same page, than to have
the best agreement.
Partner took the 3♦ bid as control, it got doubled, he jumped to 6♣, they cashed AK.

We have discussed it, and decided to assign the following meaning to the bids

3♠ - doubleton spade
3NT - half stopper
4♦ - splinter
5♣ - spade single, xx or xxx in ♦

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

P_Marlowe, on 2023-October-19, 00:15, said:

Hi,

Thanks for the comments.

I choose 3♦, alerting it, as asking / showing a half stopper, but this was wrong.
I think 3NT is more in line, the way we do it.

As always it is more important to have an agreement at all, or to be on the same page, than to have
the best agreement.
Partner took the 3♦ bid as control, it got doubled, he jumped to 6♣, they cashed AK.

We have discussed it, and decided to assign the following meaning to the bids

3♠ - doubleton spade
3NT - half stopper
4♦ - splinter
5♣ - spade single, xx or xxx in ♦

With kind regards
Marlowe

A very good mantra in auctions in which strain is not yet clearly agreed is ‘game before slam’. Ambiguous bids below 3N,unless a major suit is clearly trump, should always be tries for 3N. You can have it both ways….say you bid 3D, as you did, and partner bid 3N. If you now pull 3N,you retroactively change 3D into a control bid.

While this is a good general principle, imo it becomes even more so on your auction, in which opener showed a minimum.

[P_Marlowe]

mikeh, on 2023-October-19, 01:52, said:

<snip>
Ambiguous bids below 3N,unless a major suit is clearly trump, should always be tries for 3N.
<snip>

I agree, but p sees it different, ..., and the seq. is rare, lets see how it plays out.
We need to ramp up the freq. we play in tougher comp., ..., but we are both full time professionals,
so time is limited, and we need our agreements to be as simple (in the sense consistent without too
much wrinkles) as possible, so style and being on the same wavelength is most important.

I got children, ..., this let to some friction (no hard feelings / words), the results got worse,
and a breakup was in the cards, we are rebuilding at the moment the partnership understanding chemistry.