[1eyedjack]

jh51, on 2011-June-22, 13:35, said:

Who ever said that those were the only available calls with 4 spades? I think the quoted statement simply meant that if responder chooses to show her spade suit, a double shows 4 and 1♠ shows 5. I would not think that any other bid says anything about spades. BTW, I did not previously mention it because I did not see the relevance in this case, but we were playnig 2/1, not SAYC.

OK, understood now.

jh51, on 2011-June-22, 13:35, said:

For those who object to my partner's negative double, how would you do after

---

Are you still thinking slam?

I think on the original hand as posted opener would bid 2S rather than 3D, assuming 2H does not deny a major. But that said, on the auction that you now state I think yes, personally I am still thinking slam. I was thinking slam when I bid 2H. What has changed since then is that partner has made the weakest rebid, which is bad news but the opponents have kindly informed me that partner is unlikely to have much in the way of wasted Heart values which is good news. I have a lot in reserve for 2H, and all I need from P is a smattering of top controls, which is well within the realms of his 3D rebid. Not worth a slam force, for sure, but I personally think worth something a bit more encouraging than a 5D raise.

[SimonFa]

1eyedjack, on 2011-June-22, 13:04, said:

Are you saying that pass and double the only available calls when you hold precisely 4 Spades? I am no SAYC expert but I would find that surprising. Most basic and natural systems allow for a considerable degree of flexibility.

What if responder had held (say) a long Club suit and 4 Spades? The way that I was taught, and my experience of others playing SAYC is that their methods are mostly similar, is that with a hand strong enough to bid both suits in a forcing context you would bid the suits naturally and in descending order of length. To start with a double and then bid Clubs (once a Spade fit has failed to come to light) would be a non-forcing bid showing values short of bidding Clubs then Spades. On the same theme, I would expect (say) a 2H "unassuming cue" to show a sound raise in Diamonds and, when followed up by a bid of Spades, to show a hand that is too strong to double (to show Spades) and then support Diamonds (NF). The reverse treatment (which I think goes by the description "negative free bids") start with double on forcing auctions, and I know that there are a few who play this, but I would expect that to be a minority and non-standard.

Of course the 2H UCB is superfluous if playing inverted raises in competition as outlined by Hog. I am rather ambivalent about the manner by which the diamond support is shown, but I strongly feel that it should be shown first.

Of course there are other bids available, but you need to consider that with SAYC the aim is to find a major fit first. Partner may be bidding with 3 of a minor and 4/4 in the majors so the idea is for responder to show their 4-card majors to see if you have an 8-card trump suit.

The sequence described is a very good way of working out if you have 5-3 in spades as well.

While on the subject the sequence::

1♣- (1♦)- X -

Shows at 4/4 in the majors so that again you can quickly locate an 8-card trump fit before worrying about minors.

[Free]

While I agree that there's a large difference in the suits, I think looking for a double fit has merit. Also, Dbl allows opener to play ♠s, chances are bigger for East to have a ♦ void than West (vacant spaces). So in MP I would also Dbl, while in imps I might conceil the ♠ suit (I only need to know keycards for ♦).

After the 1♠ rebid by North, I think South should definitely do more than just signoff in game. He has a monster.

I know some people play inverted minors after competition (but most I know don't), I've tried it myself, but I didn't like it. I was always under the impression that the standard treatment was that inverted minors were off after intervention, but apparently there's no international standard for this either...