[inquiry]

Quote

The trouble with FSF followed by 4NT, or NMF followed by 4NT is that partner may show delayed support for your suit. Then he is bound to take 4NT as some flavour of Blackwood. Which is why I would play the immediate 4NT as quantitative on the first and last of these sequences.

Playing 2/1, you are right that you don't need an immediate quantitative 4NT in the second example. But playing slightly weaker 2/1s, I suggest that quantitative is again the best meaning for this jump to 4NT.

Eric

Hi Eric,

This really is a matter or partnership agreement, and I have no problem with immediate jumps to 4NT as quantatitive. But you don’t necessary need 4NT as quantitative if partner shows delayed support for your suit. Let’s look at two auctions.

1C 1S 1C 1S
2C 2D 2C 2D
2S 3S

Here your partner has separated his “good” 2C rebids from his “weaker” 2C rebids with a jump to 3S or a simple 2S rebid. This sort of takes the need for quantitative 4NT on these auctions away. You can bid a simple 3NT on the first auction, and 6NT on the second. The question that might become worth thinking about is what would 5NT be on the second auction (invite 7NT or ask for quality of spade support for 7S, or pick a slam between 6C and 6S), but we can leave that for another thread.

The same kind of good/bad responses are frequently part of the responses to fourth suit forcing. But, and this is important, after fsf or nmf you have time to temporize before bidding 4NT as blackwood, so you can use immediate 4NT after fsf or nmf as quantitative even if partner supports your suit if you want... that is, you can just define the nmf-any-4NT as quantitative, or fsf-any-4NT as the same. This is how I play it, again, by partnership agreement.

1C 1S
2C 2D
2S 4NT = quantitative,

1C 1S
2C 2D
2S 3H (or 3C or 3D but not 3S)
any 4NT = rkcb… for spades or if 3C bid, two suit rkcb

The secret is to have an agreement, or to at least be on teh same bridge logic as your partner. Generally, I use quantative after a NT bid/rebid, or immediately after a nmf or 4sf.

Ben

[EricK]

Quote

This really is a matter or partnership agreement

Ben

This is true. And if you have lots of constructive bidding agreements, you can often get away without needing a quantitative 4NT bid. I am not so sure the same applies to simpler systems.

One of the things which annoys me about online bridge is that the default assumption for undiscussed 4NT bids seems to be Blackwood.

How did this happen?

I thought the general rule for undiscussed bids was "If it could be natural, then it is". This seems to apply to everything except 4NT.

Eric

[bglover]

I have a simple rule I follow about 4nt.... Over any NT bid its quantitative and over a suit its RKC. I think that treatment is pretty common in undiscussed partnerships and would venture that's why you sometimes get the response you aren't expecting from your partners.

[inquiry]

I agree with Steve's "general rule" for 4NT with an "unknown partner" on line. Over a NT opening bid, I treat it as natural, over others it is blackwood or roman keycard blackwood.

[EricK]

Quote

I agree with Steve's "general rule" for 4NT with an "unknown partner" on line. Over NT bid, I treat it as natural, over others it is blackwood or roman keycard blackwood.

It's what I (have been forced to) do too.

My question remains "How did this situation arise?"

A more sensible rule would be "If a suit has been explicitly supported then 4NT is Blackwood, else it is natural". I would even prefer to restrict it to major suits, if not playing some sort of Minorwood.

Eric

[Trpltrbl]

Quote

I have a simple rule I follow about 4nt.... Over any NT bid its quantitative and over a suit its RKC. I think that treatment is pretty common in undiscussed partnerships and would venture that's why you sometimes get the response you aren't expecting from your partners.

Probably the best way in new or short pdships, but if y play a little longer with someone I will tell them the way I like to play it.

Mike ;D