[neilkaz]

4♦ for me as well.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zelandakh, on 2012-January-24, 08:54, said:

After 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♦, I think it is better to play that 3♥ shows diamonds and 4♣ shows a double-fit than the reverse. Another option is to play 3♥ and 4♣ as cue bids agreeing diamonds and 4♥ to 5♣ as 6KCB responses with a double-fit. If you have space in the system to play second round transfers (easy with hearts but not so simple with spades) then you get a lot more freedom for "cool" stuff here. (Yes, I know this does not have alot to do with the OP any more, sorry).

Thanks for the correction..
....I mis-posted... I did say "cheapest new suit" = agree minor, ♦... which would be 3H!.

Then, the 2nd cheapest ( or 4th suit ), 4C, becomes = double-fit .

( I corrected the post ).

This post has been edited by TWO4BRIDGE: 2012-January-24, 11:52

[CSGibson]

---

This was the auction at our table. Actual result on the hand was making 7. My own thought was that the NT opener should at the very least bid 4♦ planning to drive to slam over any response, and probably just ask for keycards, since every single honor card he has rates to be working (or, to put it another way, since partner is making slam tries without two outside aces, two Q's in key suits, and a K in a key suit).

It did not occur to me that 4♣ could be natural since spades was agreed at the 3 level.

[mikeh]

CSGibson, on 2012-January-24, 14:10, said:

It did not occur to me that 4♣ could be natural since spades was agreed at the 3 level.

What puzzles me is just how any of the 'spades are agreed at the 3-level' players ever get to clubs on say Axxxx void AJxx KQJx opposite Qxx Axx KQx A10xx?

I guess the answer is: we don't.....we always find spades 3-2 with the K onside so we don't worry about this.....or, maybe, we don't but we never lose imps because our opps never know how to bid these hands either

It is common for expert partnerships to have agreements that allow finding a 4-4 side fit after a J2N response to 1M, because the 4-4 fit will often produce an extra trick compared to the 5-4 major suit....surely the same can be said when the major suit is 5-3 as well?

I guess I am definitely out of step here, but find it odd. Were I to agree that 3♠ seals our fate, then I also would cue the wtp 4♦, but I doubt that our choice of red suit cue is relevant.....the key decision, apart from what trump are, is that this is a slam hand.

[JLOGIC]

Finding the 4-4 fit is fine, but using a 3rd or 4th suit after showing 2 already as natural at the 4 level is strange to me in any auction. I mean, in the auction 1S-2H-2S-3D-3M all by us we might still have a 4-4 club fit if opener is 0544 but it's not like 4C is natural. Likewise if it goes 1S-2H-2S-3S we might still have a 4-4 minor suit fit and that might be the best spot to play, but 4m is still a cuebid. 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction.

[Phil]

Secondary transfers are pretty useful here.

1N - 2♥
2♠ - 2N
3♣ - 3♦

Is commonly used to show at least 12 non heart cards.

[quiddity]

JLOGIC, on 2012-January-24, 16:40, said:

4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction.

Agreed as far as finding a side 4-4 fit, but it seems pretty common to want to pattern out and ask opener to evaluate his honor holdings for slam. Is it as useful as starting a cuebidding sequence? Given that responder has already shown an unbalanced hand and that opener has implied scattered honors everywhere, maybe it's even more useful.

[mikeh]

JLOGIC, on 2012-January-24, 16:40, said:

Finding the 4-4 fit is fine, but using a 3rd or 4th suit after showing 2 already as natural at the 4 level is strange to me in any auction. I mean, in the auction 1S-2H-2S-3D-3M all by us we might still have a 4-4 club fit if opener is 0544 but it's not like 4C is natural. Likewise if it goes 1S-2H-2S-3S we might still have a 4-4 minor suit fit and that might be the best spot to play, but 4m is still a cuebid. 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction.

I agree with much of this. However, I don't think it is fair, as a matter of theory, to look to auctions that begin 1♠ 2♥ as analogous to strong 1N auctions. In the former, opener is so ill-defined in terms of strength and shape, compared to a 1N opening bid, that (in the absence of relay) it is simply not possible to have as precise and complete an information exchange as can happen over 1N.

We have to be ready to accept more compromises in the major suit auctions than we may have to in the strong notrump auctions. I am not, by saying that, necessarily arguing that we shouldn't choose, in the OP sequence, to compromise by giving up on natural bidding. I happen to think that we can actually have it both ways here.

I think that it is possible to cater to both cuebiddng and natural bidding here. We can accept, I hope, that responder is not looking to play 5♣ even if opener has clubs. 4♣ is a slam try, and the only permissible contracts are some number of spades, ranging from 4 to 7, or a club slam/grand slam. It is difficult to construct a hand that would offer 6♣ without possession of a club control. Therefore, the distinction between cue and natural isn't yet important.

Opener's first duty is to show slam suitability by cue-bidding. Both players assume, for the moment, that spades are agreed. However, responder will sometimes be able to bring clubs back into the mix via 5N, and opener via a jump to 6♣. Which would indeed be my choice were partner to sign off in spades over my red suit cue.

Keeping open the possiblity that 4♣ might be natural allows for clubs to be considered as part of the mix later, in some (but not all) auctions.

Maybe I have peered so deeply into this narrow issue so as to lose sight of something basic, but this seems to make sense to me, at least for the moment.

[mike777]

Once you are in a gf in one suit trying to back into another suit is a pretty advanced bidding problem.

Here:
1) we have agreed spades
2) thinking about game or slam in spades
3) now adding another issue, should we bid slam in another suit is an advanced/expert bidding issue.

[jillybean]

Add me to the 4♦, wtp bidders.

[MrAce]

mikeh, on 2012-January-24, 17:22, said:

I agree with much of this. However, I don't think it is fair, as a matter of theory, to look to auctions that begin 1♠ 2♥ as analogous to strong 1N auctions. In the former, opener is so ill-defined in terms of strength and shape, compared to a 1N opening bid, that (in the absence of relay) it is simply not possible to have as precise and complete an information exchange as can happen over 1N.

We have to be ready to accept more compromises in the major suit auctions than we may have to in the strong notrump auctions. I am not, by saying that, necessarily arguing that we shouldn't choose, in the OP sequence, to compromise by giving up on natural bidding. I happen to think that we can actually have it both ways here.

I think that it is possible to cater to both cuebiddng and natural bidding here. We can accept, I hope, that responder is not looking to play 5♣ even if opener has clubs. 4♣ is a slam try, and the only permissible contracts are some number of spades, ranging from 4 to 7, or a club slam/grand slam. It is difficult to construct a hand that would offer 6♣ without possession of a club control. Therefore, the distinction between cue and natural isn't yet important.

Opener's first duty is to show slam suitability by cue-bidding. Both players assume, for the moment, that spades are agreed. However, responder will sometimes be able to bring clubs back into the mix via 5N, and opener via a jump to 6♣. Which would indeed be my choice were partner to sign off in spades over my red suit cue.

Keeping open the possiblity that 4♣ might be natural allows for clubs to be considered as part of the mix later, in some (but not all) auctions.

Maybe I have peered so deeply into this narrow issue so as to lose sight of something basic, but this seems to make sense to me, at least for the moment.

This what you wrote is logical and playable with agreements. However OP says "2-3 times played pdship a decent partner" So i assume some of the further developments of your suggestion (which makes it playable) would not be available with this pd since he wouldnt act as he is supposed to act without agreements.

Would you really give it a try at the table with this pd and without agreements ?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Justin hit the nail on the head: " 4C natural seems to cater to a very unlikely scenario and takes away a common cuebid in this auction. "

[Zelandakh]

mikeh, on 2012-January-24, 15:15, said:

What puzzles me is just how any of the 'spades are agreed at the 3-level' players ever get to clubs on say Axxxx void AJxx KQJx opposite Qxx Axx KQx A10xx?

With a slam-going hand, 5 bad spades and 2 good 4-card minors I would be very tempted to call the hand 4144 and use the systemic splinter route. If we are going to slam then I think it should be easier to get spades back in the picture with KQx opposite than to get the other minor back after starting with 2♥.

[Codo]

Zelandakh, on 2012-January-25, 02:33, said:

With a slam-going hand, 5 bad spades and 2 good 4-card minors I would be very tempted to call the hand 4144 and use the systemic splinter route. If we are going to slam then I think it should be easier to get spades back in the picture with KQx opposite than to get the other minor back after starting with 2♥.

I surely wouldn't.
But with 5044 I surely would rebid 3 Club after 1 NT 2♥ 2 ♠, so I cannot have 5044 anyway.

[FrancesHinden]

mikeh, on 2012-January-24, 15:15, said:

What puzzles me is just how any of the 'spades are agreed at the 3-level' players ever get to clubs on say Axxxx void AJxx KQJx opposite Qxx Axx KQx A10xx?

Responder doesn't bid 3D on these 5044s, he bids 3C after 1NT-2H-2S.
I think you are overcomplicating this auction.