[kfay]

Had this auction in a friendly Chicago game yesterday:

1♥-2♣
2♦-2NT
3♦-4NT

I took it as quantitative, which I believe it should be in theory, but this is probably stupid in a friendly game where you don't have any agreements.

But my hand was:

x K109xx AK109x Jx

If you think that it's quantitative and that bidding after a quantitative shows suits (I once had a brief discussion with Chuck Burger who thought you should respond aces...?) what do you think 5♣ and 6♣ show after 4NT? 1552 and 0553, respectively? Something else?

[jdonn]

A doubleton since you already didn't bid 3♣ last round. But that doesn't mean you should do it on Jx, with that holding if you are going to accept the invitation you should bid 5NT and see if partner bids 6♣. Of course you don't accept the invitation on the actual hand.

I think 5♣ and 6♣ are the same as far as shape, but 5♣ is not necessarily accepting the invitation. It sounds silly to some but if it doesn't fit partner's hand that well (maybe his clubs are mediocre) I think it allows him to sign off in 5NT.

[helene_t]

Pass.

[gwnn]

I think 5♣ should still be forcing, as well as 6♣. While I'm not sure what the difference is (maybe smallish doubleton vs Ax/Kx?), the thought of stopping in the safety of 5NT is just unbearable to me.

[kfay]

jdonn, on Dec 14 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

A doubleton since you already didn't bid 3♣ last round. But that doesn't mean you should do it on Jx, with that holding if you are going to accept the invitation you should bid 5NT and see if partner bids 6♣. Of course you don't accept the invitation on the actual hand.

I think 5♣ and 6♣ are the same as far as shape, but 5♣ is not necessarily accepting the invitation. It sounds silly to some but if it doesn't fit partner's hand that well (maybe his clubs are mediocre) I think it allows him to sign off in 5NT.

Yeah clearly I passed the actual hand.

So you think with any 0553 that You should bid 3♣ over 2NT rather than 3♦?

[TylerE]

Yea. After you've bid ♥ and ♦, if you then support clubs it's gotta be eiter 5530, 5431, maybe 6430 with a bad 6.

[peachy]

kfay, on Dec 14 2009, 12:57 PM, said:

Had this auction in a friendly Chicago game yesterday:

1♥-2♣
2♦-2NT
3♦-4NT

I took it as quantitative, which I believe it should be in theory, but this is probably stupid in a friendly game where you don't have any agreements.

But my hand was:

x K109xx AK109x Jx

If you think that it's quantitative and that bidding after a quantitative shows suits (I once had a brief discussion with Chuck Burger who thought you should respond aces...?) what do you think 5♣ and 6♣ show after 4NT? 1552 and 0553, respectively? Something else?

Not stupid, it is smart if you expect your partner does not know it is supposed to be quantitative, perhaps a friendly lesson mode afterwards if you think they might appreciate it in the given group

Anyway, I also Pass with your hand.