[kenberg]

---

4♠ may not be a great contract looking at NS only but
a. It makes as the cards lie
b. It's a good deal better than 3NT
c. 5♣ at least can be defeated and, further, this was mps.

I held the South hand with the good four card spade suit. Partner's raise to 2♠, rather than 2♣, at least gave us a shot at finding the winning contract of 4♠.

Two thoughts occur to me:

1. South might say "This four card spade suit is not like your average four card suit, so I will just raise to 4♠ despite my flat hand.
2. North might say "I only have three spades but this hand has more than your average shape and appears to belong in spades".

I have not decided which, if either, is the right way of thinking about this.

[gwnn]

you could use 2n as a shape ask and north should show 6 clubs by bidding 3♣ in which case perhaps south should bid 4♠

coulda woulda shoulda

[hrothgar]

Comment 1:

I don't think that South can make a unilateral decision to play in Spades.
South has a 4=3=3=3 hand, which suggests NT
South has no tenaces to protect on opening lead which means there's no value to bidding NT first.

Comment 2:

South's choice of rebids depends a lot on your methods, and presumably on the set of hands with which North will raise to 2♠.
One quesiton is whether South should ask or show.

From my perspective, South has GF values and a hand that suggests 3N
Absent special agreements, a 3N rebid seems reasonable with this hand type.
However, having some way to sort out stoppers and the like seems prudent.

Comment 3:

An argument can be made that North should suggest an alternative strain after the 3N rebid.
North has a good hand for a Moysian. Maybe North should rebid 4♣ to show extra shape.

Comment 4:

The key issue is that North doesn't have some critical information necessary to make an informed decision. (In this case, the lack of a fitting club honor).

I wonder whether something like the following is workable

2N = Asking bid of some kind.
3C = GF, shows Hxx in clubs (or better)
3D = Game try (Spades and Diamonds)
3H = Game try (Spades and Hearts)
3S = Range ask (max or min)
3N = GF, 4 Spades no club fit

I think that 3D/3H should show shape and let opener evaluate his hand.
3S is probably used as some very simple type of ask, either max/min or trump quality
2N needs to be another ask

This leaves 3C and 3N which probably should show different hand types...

In retrospect, it might be better to do something like the following

3C denies primary club support
3N promises a club honor

[ArtK78]

I have adopted an asking bid over a single raise of a one of a major suit response which a number of better players use. It is very simple and makes the 3NT/4 of a major choice easy on many hands, but not this one.

The method is:

After 1m-1M-2M:

2NT asks:

3♣ - minimum with 3 card support
3♦ - maximum with 3 card support
3♥ - minimum with 4 card support
3♠ - maximum with 4 card support

So, on this hand, the bidding would start 1♣ - 1♠ - 2♠ - 2NT - ?

Opener has a decision to make over 2NT. Often, when responder makes the 2NT inquiry, he has only 4 cards in his major and is trying to determine whether there is an 8 card fit. Opener is going to bid 3♣ (minimum 3 card support) or 3♦ (maximum 3 card support). Whatever he does, responder will rebid 3NT (why not?) and opener will have another decision to make.

Unfortunately, this method is not geared to getting to a good 4-3 major suit game when it is opener who has the flawed hand for 3NT. The method solves some problems, but not this one.

[mfa1010]

3NT is not such a hot bid. South is overlooking the fact that if partner has only three spades he should be expected to be unbalanced. Whether it is short hearts or short diamonds it will be very bad in 3NT. With extremely strong spades south should accept to play a 4-3 if he has only one guess now. North's pass of 3NT is fine, since partner could easily have something like ♠Jxxx and north even has a strong source of tricks on the side for notrumps.
Using 2NT as a forcing inquiry bid is recommendable.

[pooltuna]

You need to set the grinder in your mill to a coarser setting as it is currently set to produce dust.

[awm]

I wouldn't bid 3NT here. The way I play 3NT, partner is supposed to pass when holding only three spades (i.e. it's choice of games). Since partner will normally have a singleton or small doubleton to raise on only three, 3NT should suggest good stoppers in the red suits. Opposite x or xx in either red suit, 3NT will be pretty lousy and 4♠ should play better.

Bidding 4♠ seems better to me. If we want to offer choice of games I would start with 3♣ (if partner has four spades, he will go back to spades.. if he doesn't have four spades then clubs is pretty much guaranteed to be our best fit).

[kenberg]

I have been thinking more about this. It's of course an error to make too much out of one hand but here are some thoughts.

Change my J of hearts to the ace of hearts and I still want to be in 4♠. In fact, even more so. In the original hand, in 4♠ on a diamond lead, I think I had better play for clubs to be 2-2, establish them before drawing trumps, and plan on taking 4+0+1+5 tricks. If I have the ace of hearts instead of the Jack then I can tolerate a club ruff and come in with 4+2+1+4=11 tricks. 3NT would still be down (most likely anyway) on a diamond lead.

The essential feature, I think, is that my spades are good enough that I can expect them to be a control asset instead of having trump establishment being something to fret over in a moysian. The partner here was not someone I have a lot of agreements with, but just on general principles he is apt to find raising spades on three small to be less appealing than when he has Kxx and shortness in one of the red suits. So he does not promise an honor on a three card raise, but it's not crazy to think he might well more often than not have it. And, if not, the hand may still come in. Certainly possible on the variant hand where the heart Jack is an Ace.

Generals shouldn't fight the last war and bridge players should not bid on the basis of the last hand. But thinking it over, I think next time I will bid 4♠. Maybe 3♣ is another option but I think I will wait for Qxx for that call.

[nigel_k]

I don't know your style but I wouldn't normally make a three card raise on a balanced hand. So partner has either four spades or a red singleton or is maybe 3226. At best he is balanced and has chosen to raise because of his honour structure, e.g. Kxx Axx xx KQJxx. Then he will have a small doubleton somwhere. Shape asks are nice but even without them you can work out there is a problem in one of the red suits and 4♠ will be better except in the case where partner is precisely 4333.

[hrothgar]

nigel_k, on 2011-January-03, 14:44, said:

I don't know your style but I wouldn't normally make a three card raise on a balanced hand. So partner has either four spades or a red singleton. At best he has a small doubleton and has chosen to raise because of his honour structure, e.g. Kxx Axx xx KQJxx. Shape asks are nice but even without them you can work out there is a problem in one of the red suits and 4♠ will be better except in the case where partner is precisely 4333.

Here's the rub...

I'd happily raise 1♠ to two holding

Kxx
Axx
xx
Axxx

The Aces and K scream suit contract and the doubleton is enough shape for me.
I don't think that my style is all that uncommon...

[kenberg]

hrothgar, on 2011-January-03, 14:50, said:

Here's the rub...

I'd happily raise 1♠ to two holding

Kxx
Axx
xx
Axxx

The Aces and K scream suit contract and the doubleton is enough shape for me.
I don't think that my style is all that uncommon...

I would also raise to 2♠ on something like that. Except I would demand another card.

Incidentally, opposite the hand that I had, both 4♠ and 3NT would be a struggle (at best). It occurred to me that with my hand I could reason that while I will try 4♠ if partner has four, I might well want to get out below game when he doesn't. But I am an optimist.

[barmar]

You need to downgrade the hand for the 4333 shape, so it's really only enough for an invitation. Bid 2NT, and if partner corrects back to 3♠, you can then think about going to 4.

[gwnn]

12 cards hrothgar (But I will assume below that you meant Axxxx in clubs)

I think I like raising to 2♠ with that hand too but if I played 2N as a shape ask then this would not be quite possible (as you can't bid a fragment or rebid clubs).

[kenberg]

nigel_k, on 2011-January-03, 14:44, said:

I don't know your style but I wouldn't normally make a three card raise on a balanced hand. So partner has either four spades or a red singleton or is maybe 3226. At best he is balanced and has chosen to raise because of his honour structure, e.g. Kxx Axx xx KQJxx. Then he will have a small doubleton somwhere. Shape asks are nice but even without them you can work out there is a problem in one of the red suits and 4♠ will be better except in the case where partner is precisely 4333.

Yes. I dunno partner's style exactly (or even that approximately) so I just figure to avoid artificial bids and to choose my natural bids as if I were playing with my clone. I would rarely or never raise on 3 when 4 triple 3 so, with my clone, I assume that maybe 3=4=2=4 is possible but not 3=3=3=4. With 3=2=4=4 my clone would open a diamond and I believe that my partner of the moment would have also.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2011-January-03, 15:11, said:

You need to downgrade the hand for the 4333 shape, so it's really only enough for an invitation. Bid 2NT, and if partner corrects back to 3♠, you can then think about going to 4.

Yes, maybe so. I think I want to be in 4♠ if pard has four but with 3 maybe not. 4♠ makes as the cards lie, but it's a bit lucky.

I suppose over 2NT partner would bid 3♣ unless he is really in a gambling mood. This would give me a clear picture, and I could do something. Really 3♠ has a lot going for it as a contract and in fact +170 would have scored well. Any plus would have.

[JLOGIC]

Madness. Complete madness.

3N is just awful. If partner raises on 3, it's because he thinks spades will likely play better than NT. This usually means a stiff red suit, or a hand like hrothgar gave (2 small somewhere and Kxx of spades etc).

Whichever that is, we agree strongly with partner that spades will play better than NT! We have very weak red suits, and very strong spades. x/xx heart? x/xx diamond? We don't want to play NT.

It seems that this south simply thought "Oh no we might have only a 7 card fit, we better not play in it!" rather than using his brain, which is funny since they play a style where one can raise on 3 and play a 4-3 fit often anyways.

Of course, whether south is worth an invite or a GF somewhat depends on opening bid style but I think inviting is pretty clear in almost all styles (or maybe pass in some precision systems). But that is a much lesser issue than realizing that you're not supposed to play NT after a raise, unless you're one of the forum nuts who raises often with 3 and a balanced hand and Qx haha.

[kenberg]

OK, I'm convinced.
My thinking has evolved from
1. I thought it right when I did it.
2. I had second thoughts when I posted, maybe it's not right.
3. By now, I am convinced that it was wrong.
Thanks all.

[whereagles]

3NT is a technical error. There are conventions here that can help responder sorting out what type of raise opener has. If it turns out he has an unbalanced 3 card raise, then it's very likely he has a singleton too, making the hand more playable in spades.

[kenberg]

whereagles, on 2011-January-04, 11:03, said:

3NT is a technical error. There are conventions here that can help responder sorting out what type of raise opener has. If it turns out he has an unbalanced 3 card raise, then it's very likely he has a singleton too, making the hand more playable in spades.

"Technical error" is kindly put. If partner has four spades I want to be in spades, and as you say if it's a three card raise his hand is most likely such that I want to be in spades. Whatever gadgets one could play, we weren't.

My current view is that we want to be in spades, pretty much regardless, and pretty much for the reasons that a number of folks have mentioned. However, I also think that on a three card raise with minimum values, I want to be in 3S not 4S. For example, if one of partner's small clubs is a small diamond, this hand will not be playing so well. Not in spades, not in NT. Maybe 2NT.

My partner was neither a stranger nor a regular partner, our discussions were at the level of "Can we skip Bergen?[I am not a fan], "OK but let's do Stolen", "If we must". As far as I know, if I bid 2NT over 2S he would be allowed to pass with the 3=3=2=5 hand if minimal. Maybe I will stumble in to 8 tricks. With his actual hand he would no doubt have bid a natural 3C and I could get out in 3S. If he had four spades he would show them and then, even if he bids only 3S, I would raise to 4S. Wrong perhaps, but I would.

Perhaps a forcing and shape asking 2NT over 2S would be better, but we were not doing that. What I really needed was a bid that asks if the opponent's clubs are 2-2.

[JLOGIC]

Let's discuss some more madness. Why must we be discussing the options of playing in 4S or 3N or 3S? There is another suit on this board that we might have been able to play, you know, partner's solid-missing-the-ace 6 card suit which we have 3 card support of. That seems like a pretty nice spot. Why can't we get there? Because partner read some book about raising with 3, and has lost his sense of common sense so much that he cannot even rebid KQJT8x in an aceless terrible hand.

When we raise to 2S we are thinking one or both of these:

A ) It will make it easier to get to a spade game
B ) 2S will often be a superior partial to whatever we would have rebid (typically 1N, or 2C on 3415, etc).

I mean really, if we belong in a spade game, don't you think we will get there after rebidding 2C? We will have much more room to show what we have (especially considering we don't seem to have any methods after 1C-1S-2S!).

And if partner passes 2C, are we thinking, omg I wish we were in 2S? Gonna suck having to play my KING-QUEEN-JACK-TEN-EIGHT-THREE suit.

Raising to 3 so often makes your range ridiculously wide, and makes it tough on partner. It is not some great thing, it is something that sometimes you have to do which you wish you didn't. In general you want to avoid it with minimums, or with good options. Despite what some on this forum will tell you, it will make your auctions harder. It must, because it is far more space consuming than 2C or 1N. If you combine this with awful judgement on when to do it, and partner having poor judgement and not even insisting on spades with AQJT, etc etc, it is just a nightmare. If you are not sure about whether or not to raise with a 3 card support, just stick to doing it always on 3(41)5 or 3154/3451 and never on any of the other hands and you will likely be doing much better than you are now. Sorry if that is harsh, but that is really applicable to 95 %+ of people who raise with 3 all the time that are not experts. Just remember the basics of bidding (trying to find 8 card fits, trying to avoid 7 card fits, keeping the auction low while describing your hand the best you can, etc etc).

BTW Meckwell do not raise with 3 except 3451 (in a precision style) and many/(most?) top europeans do not do it either.