[jillybean]

1♠ (p) 3♠ (p)

---

Hi,
Playing/learning SAYC, my partners 3♠ bid = limit raise 3or4 ♠ 10-12hcp

We could have 6 but I risk getting too high before I find out, should I just sign off in 4♠?

thanks,
jillybean

[jtfanclub]

I'd bid 4♥, but then I'm well known to be weird.

Seriously, 4♥ should say "I have the heart ace and I'm interested in slam, but I don't have a minor suit ace or I'd have bid that one instead. What do you think?". The nice thing about the bid is that if your partner doesn't like the idea of slam, he'll sign off in 4♠ and you won't have lost anything.

[luke warm]

i wouldn't sign off opposite a limit raise... perfect hand for serious 3nt, but i know you don't play that yet, so i'd bid 4D... if pard bids 4H, showing the K, i bid 4S showing that i'm worried about clubs... if pard bids 4S, i think i'm gonna bid 4nt

if we're too high, we're too high... happens

[Rado]

Hi Jilly and all

1. The KISS (keep it simple and smile) way
is just to use 4NT and if 1 Key card bid 6. Yes there is a risk 2 quick ♣ losers, or to have ♣ control but dead 2 losers. Anyway statistically for the limit raise partner will have suitable cards most of the cases
2. The "Science" way (but not too complex)
is to bid 4♦ showing ♦ control (A or K, or singleton or void) and denying ♣ control. Now it's partner's turn to bid asf:
-----if no ♣ control in his hand = 4♠ pure sign-off
-----if ♣ control available, but ♥ control not then he bids 4♥ so called anti-cue, whick conveys following message to the opener: "Dear partner I have ♣ control (the questionable suit for the moment since opener had already denied control there) but I do not have ♥ control, so please take the decision!!!!!!!!!"
-----if ♣ and ♥ controls then simply 4NT RKCB

The main idea of "mixed" cue-bids is to check whether all suits outside trump guarded by some kind of 1st/2nd round controls before asking 4NT for KC and when founding quick 2 losers in 1 suit to retreat peacfully at 4 Major level not risking 5 where may go down due to some surpisingly bad breaks

Regards
Rado

[Free]

This hand is just perfect for serious 3NT imo.

[EricK]

Free, on Aug 8 2004, 04:17 PM, said:

This hand is just perfect for serious 3NT imo.

Is serious 3NT really that useful when partner has already limited their hand so much?

I can think of better uses for 3NT in this sequence (slam interest but no Club control would top the list, I think), but none of them are really suitable for a B/I forum.

Eric

[luke warm]

i think it is, eric, because it allows responder to show a club control immediately rather than resorting to a last train auction like rado (correctly) pointed out

but you're right, neither s3nt nor lttc should be included... which is why i just cue the diamonds and awaited developments

[EricK]

luke warm, on Aug 8 2004, 05:21 PM, said:

i think it is, eric, because it allows responder to show a club control immediately rather than resorting to a last train auction like rado (correctly) pointed out

but you're right, neither s3nt nor lttc should be included... which is why i just cue the diamonds and awaited developments

But you are not really using 3NT as serious as opposed to non-serious - All slam tries are serious opposite a limit-bid!

Beginners please turn away now.

The benefit of using 3NT as specifically denying a club control, comes when you don't bid it. eg A cue bid of 4♦ will show a ♣ control and a ♦ control, but deny a ♥ control.

Beginners, you may look again.

Eric

[luke warm]

right, that makes sense... s3nt does work best when one doesn't *know* when a cue is serious... vs. a limit raise, you're right... all cues are serious...