[Winstonm]

3D. Partner's next bid will allow a reasonable evaluation of my hand.

[mike777]

3h forcing, no problems yet.

[Walddk]

3♦. I give preference and let partner get all the room he needs to describe his hand further. We may belong in anything from 3NT, over 4♥ to 5 or 6♦. Even 6♥ is possible.

He can have many types of hands, one of which is a 1-3-6-3 shape too good for a 3♦ rebid now that I responded 1♥. I would rebid 3♥ if my minors had been reversed.

Roland

[hrothgar]

ICK... Anything could be right, but mark me down for 3♠.
I want to pattern out.

I intend to bid 4♥ over 3N and 4♦ over 4♣

[awm]

Several questions here:

(1) What does 3♠ show? Is it some kind of fourth suit forcing (showing a hand with no clear direction) or does it actually show spades?

(2) What does 3♦ show? Three or more diamonds? Two or more? At least as many diamonds as clubs? Just a catch-all with no clear bid?

(3) Is 3♥ forcing, and how many hearts does it show? What would it mean if opener bid 3♠ over 3♥?

The answers to these will certainly have some effect on the choice of bid...

My answers, which are not necessarily standard, would be:

(1) 3♠ is fourth suit forcing, with no clear direction. Usually this denies holding 3♦ or five hearts, so something like 4423 with weak spades or 3424 but too weak to commit to the four level in clubs (especially since opener could have only three clubs on occasion).

(2) 3♦ usually shows three or more diamonds. This is a serious suggestion to play in the diamond suit.

(3) 3♥ is forcing and shows five or more hearts. If opener bids 3♠ it shows a hand with no clear direction (basically a stopper ask).

With those agreements, I'd bid 3♥ and plan to bid 3NT over partner's 3♠. I'm not that excited about playing this hand in a minor suit.

[mikeh]

Tough problem.

Alternatives include:

3♦, 3♥, 3♠ and 3N

3♦ is clearly best if partner is 1=3=5=4 or 0=3=5=5. He will bid 3♥ and we can force with 3♠ and see what happens. But on more frequent shapes, 3♦ endplays opener. He is not about to bid 3N with his ♠ holding, and if he bids 4minor, can he ever take 4♥ by me as an offer to play? I don't think so. Nor do I think that at the table he could bid 3♠ over 3♦ as a stall to get to 3N. It would be a useful treatment, but it is not the sort of bid one invents during the auction.

3♥: cannot be faulted in terms of suit length or strength, and it is both natural and forcing. It is the best way to get to 4♥, but 4♥ may be the wrong spot. Once again, this call rates to endplay partner and to prevent us playing 3N. Also, once again, using 3♠ over 3♥ as a mark time bid would be a great treatment on this hand, but not doable absent prior agreement.

3♠: natural, forcing. Allows for 3N by partner. If he were to bid 3N, one has to respect 3N: to pull to 4♥ should be forcing in my opinion. If one did not want to use this sequence as forcing, why not bid 3♥ now?

3N: descriptive, unless partner has 3 ♥s. Unfortunately, communication issues may make 3N a terrible spot while 4♥ or even 5♦ may be far superior. It is too much to expect partner to pull when right.

What do I choose?

3N. I hate it, and am not the least proud of it. The only thing it has going for it is that it is no worse than and may be better than the other awful choices.

If I had the mark time 3♠ call available to opener, then 3♥ becomes an easy choice.

[cherdano]

I disagree with awm on two of his three questions: The catch-all bid in this situation is 3♦. 3♠ takes up quite some space and thus should be a rather rare bid. I would think it's an advance cue for either minor. Of course 3♥ is forcing, as 3♣ was 100% game forcing.

Still I agree with awm on bidding 3♥. If partner bids 3♠ over 3♦, I have to bid 3N unhappily. If partner bids 3♠ over 3♥, I can bid 3N happily.

[sathyab]

Is it possible that 3c is a temporizing bid over 1h ? What does pd bid with a strong hand with AKx of hearts for instance, x AKx AKQTXX Qxx ? Unless you have specific agreements, with that hand he's planning to rebid 3h your 3d, 4h over 4c or 3h and probbaly pass 3nt.

With that in mind, I'd bid a forcing 3h. If pd has a genuine two-suiter such as xx x AKQxx AKQxx he would now bid 3s and I'd sign off in 3nt. If the partnership had some special bid for the above awkward hand (I don't what that'd be; over 1c-1h, some people play 3d to show that hand), I'd bid 3s and follow it up with 4h over partner's rebid.

Bidding 3d with xx x in minors has little appeal for me. Yes it's true pd gets more room to bid, but what you have shown of your hand ? This is not a hand where all pd needs is room to bid, he needs to know about your hand and there's a lot your hand has to say; the long hearts and great spades, and you convey neither of that by bidding 3d and I don't believe you can do so intelligently over partner's rebids either.

[whereagles]

Well, having seen the kind of hands people in the US make jump-shifts on, I definitely bid 3NT on this one, but contrary to mikeh, I don't feel ashamed of it at all... lol.

[pclayton]

3N. Even with the communication issues, it will be cold on power.

Isn't it nice to have extras sometimes?

[P_Marlowe]

3H.

Ok, this is not a dream suit, but it is a 6 carder.

It would be a lot harder, if the mayors are switched,
because over 3S, partner would not be able to ask for
a heart stopper.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

I'm surprised to see that I disagree with both mike and roland (though luckily for me they disagreed with each other).

I would play 3S as "fourth suit forcing" here not as natural, so mike and I part ways. Actually, I can see the logic for playing it as patterning out on this particular sequence, but in the similar sequence 1H - 1S - 3C it's handy to use 3D as a random I-don't-know-what-to-bid leaving 3H/3S as genuine (well, 3H could well be Hx). I'm not clever enough to play the 4th suit as forcing or natural depending on the relative bids selected, so I shall stick with it as artificial.

On this auction I would expect 3S often to be too strong to bid 3NT, but too flexible or too strong to want to bid 4NT (natural, NF); a slam-invitational or better hand would only want to give preference to diamonds with something good in the suit or partner can't evaluate.

I bid 3H. I have SIX of them. If we'd been dealt AJxx KJ109xx xx x I bet everyone would bid 3H but you are put off by the bad pips. Well, we are likely to have a bad hand on this auction so I'm not so concerned by that. I also don't see that it gives partner problems: with a 3154 or 2254 he can bid 3S (4th suit) and we have an easy 3NT bid.

[Walddk]

Experience has taught me to pay attention to the location of my high cards on an auction like this. This 9 count isn't great with zero in partner's suits. It could only have been slightly worse (x xx in the minors).

For me there is a big difference between J109xxx and Frances' KJ10xxx. I would certainly have rebid 3♥ with the latter, but I am reluctantly to put too much emphasis on the moth-eaten suit we are presented with here.

I am not saying that 3♦ is ideal, but I think it's the most flexible under the circumstances. It's merely a preference between the minors and does not promise support in my book.

3♠ would be 4th suit to me as well and I don't see any reason to bid it with the actual holding. That would never lead to 3NT if it's there we belong. Something like

♠ Jxxx
♥ KJxx
♦ x
♣ QJxx

and there is a case for 4th suit 3♠. I am reluctant to support clubs when 3NT is still a real possibility, and I don't think we will miss a slam if partner can't bid anything but 3NT now. Then I know that my ♥K and J are wasted for a club slam.

Roland

[Apollo81]

I don't see anything wrong with 3♥. This doesn't deny spade values and gives partner a convenience bid (3♠) if he needs it.

With AKJx J109xx xx xx or AKJx J109xx x xxx I would bid 3NT.
With AKJx J109xx xxx x I would bid 3♦.

[FrancesHinden]

Walddk, on Dec 1 2006, 02:31 PM, said:

3♠ would be 4th suit to me as well and I don't see any reason to bid it with the actual holding.

We agree on this one. This often seems to be a North American/European difference of opinion on this type of auction.

FWIW, give me AKxx 1098xxx Qx x and I'd bid 3D. Justin has carefully constructed the hand where we part ways.

[fred]

This is a very hard problem.

The main advantage of 3D is that you might hear voluntary heart support. This will tell you that you should move toward a heart slam, as long as you know that 3H would always be based on 3-card support. I know some very good players who would bid routinely 3H after this start with something like xx Ax in the majors (and I suspect that this is the right way to play).

Rebidding 3H will not really help in this regard since some players would raise to 4H with the same sort of hand with xx Ax in the majors (and I would agree with them). Of course 4H may well be the contract of choice facing a hand like that, but 3NT will usually be fine too.

The main disadvantage of both of these bids is that partner might bid 4C with 5-5 in the minors and you really don't want to hear him do that (since you probably belong in 3NT opposite such a hand hand and it is hard to get to 3NT when partner bids 4C).

3S not only suffers from the same disadantage (and in a more serious way), the comments from the other posters suggest that the meaning of this bid is ambiguous. The ambiguity of 3S is, in itself, is a good enough reason to reject this call. For me 3S is at least semi-natural and forward going. The first message of 3S is "I want you to bid 4C with 5-5 in the minors, but otherwse I do not want to go above 3NT since we might belong there" - something like AJxx Axxx xx Jxx would be typical. In my partnerships there is no need for 4th suit forcing in this auction since we can always bid 3D as a waiting move on a hand for which no natural descriptive bid is appropriate.

3NT has a lot going for it mostly because there is a good chance that 3NT, if not the best contract, will at least be a contract that usually makes. But don't kid yourself about getting to other better contracts after you bid 3NT - partner is almost certain to Pass. And, if partner's hand is sufficiently unusual to even consider bidding over 3NT, most likely he will not evaluate well since he will not picture a hand like yours (he will expect more of your high cards to be in hearts and less distribution than 4-6 in the majors).

One of the reasons this is a hard hand is because you cannot cater to both 6D (which could easily be laydown opposite, say, 3064) and 3NT (which is probably best if partner has something like 3154 or 2155).

I hate 3S, but I have no strong feeling about the relative merits of the other 3 possible calls (3D, 3H, and 3NT). My Canadian upbringing makes 3D look more attractive to me than it probably should be. I suspect this is the call I would make with some of the people I play with on a regular basis, but I would be more likely to bid 3H or 3NT if I was playing with a stranger. I would almost certainly bid 3NT if I was playing with a sponsor/student type.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[bid_em_up]

Right or wrong, I would bid 3N over 3C. It lets partner know we have spade stops (that he is lacking) and no REAL fit for either minor.

A close 2nd choice is 3H.

[Walddk]

Nice problem, Justin. Of course we don't want to hear 4♣, but we are not in dire straits just yet. For me, 4NT is now to play. I have agreements here in my long-time experienced partnership:

4♦ = Natural.
4♥ = cue bid for clubs.
4♠ = cue bid for clubs, no heart cue bid.
4N = Natural, not 3 diamonds.

I think it makes sense and it's not too difficult to remember. And then we can open another thread for the 4th or 5th time: when is 4NT ace asking, and when is it not. It's not on this auction as far as I'm concerned.

1♦ - 1♥
3♣ - 3♦
4♣ - 4NT

4NT by responder (the weaker hand) must have been preceded by a cue bid for it to be RKCB.

This would have been an excellent hand for the BPO. However, this seems dead and buried. Nothing has happened since the last post my mikeh on October 17.

Roland