[Fluffy]

♠KQ654
♥AQ
♦94
♣J965


vulnerable versus not, IMPs

1♥-1♠
2♦-3♣-(double)
3♦-??

[rhm]

3♥

Where is the trouble?


Rainer Herrmann

[gszes]

rhm, on 2012-June-14, 01:59, said:

3♥

Where is the trouble?


Rainer Herrmann

yeppers we have already set up a game force and if we had
3 hearts and invitational we would have bid 3h last bid (or the first
round depending on partnership style) If AQ isnt as good as
xxx in partner 5 card suit it must be a really cruddy one. The last
thing we want to do is discourage a p with say Jx Kxxxxx AKQxx void
from considering a slam by bidding something silly like 3n

[lowerline]

rhm, on 2012-June-14, 01:59, said:

3♥

Where is the trouble?


Rainer Herrmann

3♥ shows slam interest with heart support, asking partner for a cue.
I bid 3nt.

Steven

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The " hand wringing "problem is using the 3C bid.
This "troubled" bidding sequence ( 1H - 1S, 2D - ?? ) was solved by Meckwell:
They use 2S! next as an artificial GF and not promising extra ♠-length:

1H - 1S
2D - 2S! ( GF )
??
..this allows Opener to make a 2NT bid with ♣-stop(s) .
Here, though he probably doesn't have any ♣-stop, and bids:

3D - ?? so you are in the same place as before, and like the others have said , 3H is the bid.

[gnasher]

3♥ does look rather obvious. If I wasn't allowed to bid that because it showed a slam try (why?), I'd guess to bid 4♥.

[JLOGIC]

lowerline, on 2012-June-14, 08:08, said:

3♥ shows slam interest with heart support, asking partner for a cue.
I bid 3nt.

Steven

lol

[jallerton]

rhm, on 2012-June-14, 01:59, said:

3♥

Where is the trouble?


Rainer Herrmann

The trouble is that:
(i) 3♥ covers a wide range of strength, which we may not be able to properly clarify later; and
(ii) Partner may be expecting 3-card support, particularly if 3♥ over 2♦ would have been non-forcing.

In my opinion, it's better to bid 2NT on the previous round; then partner will have a good indication as to our hand type and strength. Yes, the ♥AQ are nice, but the rest of the hand is poor, and the opening bid is a devalued currency these days. We probably have no 8-card fit to play on in 3NT.

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-June-14, 08:40, said:

The " hand wringing "problem is using the 3C bid.
This "troubled" bidding sequence ( 1H - 1S, 2D - ?? ) was solved by Meckwell:
They use 2S! next as an artificial GF and not promising extra ♠-length:

1H - 1S
2D - 2S! ( GF )
??
..this allows Opener to make a 2NT bid with ♣-stop(s) .

This saves some space when Responder has a game force, but it's only playable if your system has another way to show weak/intermediate single-suited hands with spades. 1♥-P-2♠ can be used to cover some of these hands, but probably not all.

[Fluffy]

3♥ would no doubt show a GF hand with hearts, I think 4♥>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3♥ because 3♥ commits to hearts anyway but at least doesn't encourage a slam.

[JLOGIC]

3H does not commit to hearts, partner with a club stopper will usually bid three no in which case with both club help, and the KQ of spades opposite a stiff, I would happily pass? Am I missing something? I agree 4H is fine if youre not willing to pass 3N but that seems very strange.

[Fluffy]

what hapened with the old rule of 4SF+ support as slam try?, is it outdated?

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-14, 17:18, said:

what hapened with the old rule of 4SF+ support as slam try?, is it outdated?

FSF was invented as a way of finding out which game to play in. Later people noticed that there were some bids in some sequences that could be used as slam tries. If you're going to use vintage to determine which method applies, 3♥ is clearly a best-game probe.

But anyway, I think you need more logic and fewer rules. One of the common reasons for bidding FSF is to find out whether you have a stop in the unbid suit. If you bid FSF and find out that there is no such stop, you will probably have to play in a suit contract. Since three suits have been bid, it is likely to require some discussion to decide which suit to play in. Hence, in FSF sequences where it emerges that the fourth suit is unstopped, suits that we've already bid are strain suggestions, not slam tries.

[Fluffy]

ok, point taken.

My partner passed 3♦, we got an easy +130, I was really pissed since I had

♠AJ
♥K98xx
♦AKxxx
♣10

That damn ♣10 made 3NT and 4♠ cold, however 4♥ with trumps 5-1 was a lot harder and we picked up 6 IMPs.

[SteveMoe]

3♥ in context, but I would have bid 3N instead of 3♣. I like J9xx.

[mike777]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-14, 01:44, said:

♠KQ654
♥AQ
♦94
♣J965


vulnerable versus not, IMPs

1♥-1♠
2♦-3♣-(double)
3♦-??

prefer 2nt over 2d pard can be really weak so far. ie ten points

2nt=12-13 or so