[stansllee]

AS East You open 1♦ with:

---

the bidding went:

East West
1♦ 1♥
2♣ 2♠
2NT 3♦
3NT 4NT

What's the 4NT here?

And are you happy with 3NT bid last round?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

stansllee, on 2012-April-08, 17:02, said:

AS East You open 1♦ with:

---

the bidding went:

East West
1♦ 1♥
2♣ 2♠
2NT 3♦
3NT 4NT

What's the 4NT here?

And are you happy with 3NT bid last round?

FYP

[Hanoi5]

I hate it. I mean, I hate it. I really, really hate opening 1♦.

[stansllee]

Hanoi5, on 2012-April-08, 17:29, said:

I hate it. I mean, I hate it. I really, really hate opening 1♦.

Hate is a strong word But I really, really, really hope you can compromise 1♦ opening is to consider the rebid, not too far off the mark！

[aguahombre]

Great start, huh? One Fixes the post without changing anything, and another complains about the conditions.

You think someone will answer your question? I don't know what partner is doing, either, but RKC for diamonds would never occur to me. Am bidding 5C.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

aguahombre, on 2012-April-08, 19:48, said:

Great start, huh? One Fixes the post without changing anything,

He then fixed HIS post AFTER my post.....

I'm passing 4NT

[ArtK78]

Put me into the camp that really hates the 1♦ opening bid.

Having said that, how is responder supposed to bid RKCB in diamonds after first bidding his long heart suit? First, he bids 4th suit forcing, then he raises diamonds. He can't help it that opener bids 3NT. 4NT must be RKCB unless the partnership has a different method of bidding RKCB.

If responder wanted to make a quantitative invite to 6NT, he could have done that over 2NT.

By the way, in answer to your other question, am I happy with 3NT on the previous round? Happy may not be the right word. I am endplayed into bidding 3NT. That's what happens when you open xxxx instead of AKQTx. I am not making a slam-cooperative move like a 3♠ bid with a "trump" suit of xxxx.

[aguahombre]

I guess I should have added that, after dragging my feet for 2 rounds after the 4SF bid (failing to bid 3S after partner showed slammish for diamonds was a felony), there is no way I can pass 4NT. I have sounded like 11 when I really have a solid 15 ---all 15 working together. This is a mountain, compared to what I have shown thus far.

[stansllee]

aguahombre, on 2012-April-08, 19:48, said:

Great start, huh? One Fixes the post without changing anything, and another complains about the conditions.

You think someone will answer your question? I don't know what partner is doing, either, but RKC for diamonds would never occur to me. Am bidding 5C.

was surprised to find misplant E / W, so hurriedly corrected, very sorry.

[stansllee]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-April-08, 19:54, said:

He then fixed HIS post AFTER my post.....

I'm passing 4NT

was surprised to find misplant E / W, so hurriedly corrected, very sorry.

[rmnka447]

I don't think this hand should ever be opened 1 ♦. The hand has a perfectly rebiddable ♣ suit, so there's no need to start with those trashy ♦s. The only time it's right to open a 4 card ♦ suit instead of a 5 card ♣ suit with a minimum hand is where the ♣ are not rebiddable -- something like ♠ AQx ♥ x ♦ AKQx ♣ 10xxxx.

Anyhow, 4 NT directly after a NT bid should be quantitative.

[menggq]

It's supposed to be PRECISION sys on 1♦ openning bid.4N sd be RKCB cause 3♦ confirmed ♦ trump.By the way i'd like to say i dont like 1♦ openning bid but when u play PRECISION sys how do you handle this one?

[stansllee]

ArtK78, on 2012-April-08, 20:08, said:

Put me into the camp that really hates the 1♦ opening bid.

Having said that, how is responder supposed to bid RKCB in diamonds after first bidding his long heart suit? First, he bids 4th suit forcing, then he raises diamonds. He can't help it that opener bids 3NT. 4NT must be RKCB unless the partnership has a different method of bidding RKCB.

If responder wanted to make a quantitative invite to 6NT, he could have done that over 2NT.

By the way, in answer to your other question, am I happy with 3NT on the previous round? Happy may not be the right word. I am endplayed into bidding 3NT. That's what happens when you open xxxx instead of AKQTx. I am not making a slam-cooperative move like a 3♠ bid with a "trump" suit of xxxx.

Your analysis is very convincing, in particular, is identified after 4SF and trumps consent of 4NT is RKC.

The following are two hands:

---

Over 4NT, partner bid 6NT (obviously play 4NT as quantitative!)

North holding ♥AQJ

By the way, over 3♦ if you want to make a slam-cooperative move, will u bid 3♥ or 3♠ with those holding?

[ArtK78]

stansllee, on 2012-April-08, 21:05, said:

Your analysis is very convincing, in particular, is identified after 4SF and trumps consent of 4NT is RKC.

The following are two hands:

---

Over 4NT, partner bid 6NT (obviously play 4NT as quantitative!)

North holding ♥AQJ

By the way, over 3♦ if you want to make a slam-cooperative move, will u bid 3♥ or 3♠ with those holding?

3♠. My first cue bid is not a singleton in partner's suit.

[stansllee]

ArtK78, on 2012-April-08, 22:06, said:

3♠. My first cue bid is not a singleton in partner's suit.

As a result, I may have parked in the 5♦, because I have to worry about hearts may have 2 losers. The fact that partner bypass the hearts to cue-bid spades, and wrong side declare!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Since suit agreement was at the 3-level, then 4D! becomes RKC ( not 4H ).
So, 4NT was Quantitative.

[Bbradley62]

aguahombre, on 2012-April-08, 20:11, said:

I have sounded like 11 when I really have a solid 15 ---all 15 working together. This is a mountain, compared to what I have shown thus far.

Didn't 2N show extras, rather than a fast-arrival 3N?

[phil_20686]

This feels like quantative. 3D nominally agreed diamonds, but opener could still have poor diamonds. If North bid a black suit over 3N for me that would be a cue agreeing diamonds. Since he didn't do that or bid 4d, and he can hardly have a slam try with no black suit controls, it follows that 4N should be quantative.

[ArtK78]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-April-09, 06:49, said:

Since suit agreement was at the 3-level, then 4D! becomes RKC ( not 4H ).
So, 4NT was Quantitative.

That depends upon the partnership agreement.

stansllee, on 2012-April-09, 02:34, said:

As a result, I may have parked in the 5♦, because I have to worry about hearts may have 2 losers. The fact that partner bypass the hearts to cue-bid spades, and wrong side declare!

No. The diamond declarer was fixed with the opening bid. Choosing whether to cue bid hearts or spades first has no effect on the declarership. In diamonds, it doesn't matter which hand declares. Why would you ever want to play slam in notrump on this hand?

[aguahombre]

Bbradley62, on 2012-April-09, 07:00, said:

Didn't 2N show extras, rather than a fast-arrival 3N?

No. Fast arrival jumps in NT are not a good idea, even if you like fast-arrival jumps in a suit. 2NT was mere pattern, staying out of responder's way so he could describe nature of his 4SF bid.