[jillybean]

---

Is 4♥ last train?
I can, and will go back and read the many threads on last train but I know someone will tell me the answer

[mike777]

Look forward to the answer and what it means.
I would just bid 4S.
Looks to me as an adjusted 6 loser hand. Opener will need more than a minimum.
Tough one.

[DavidKok]

Yes, 4♥ would be last train for me here. I think 4♠ is a better bid though.

[paulg]

4♥ would be Last Train for me, but it is not this hand in my methods.

For me, 3♥ shows a limit raise or better so I would bid 4♠ over opener's rebid showing a minimum. I have no interest in slam in this case and I am just helping the opponents with 4♣.

[apollo1201]

If 3H is GF, partner s 3S is at least mildly encouraging, so we can bid 4S, no H control, and let partner take over as we really did convey we were interested (3S from opener does not automatically launch cue bids).

fear HA, H ruf or HAK cashing on the opening lead. Leaving a last chance open is cool but dangerous when we have not ascertained the control of H.

If 3H was inv+, and 3S a reject of the invite, we have made more than enough noise already and it is about time to close the auction.

[thepossum]

First time I heard of last train so I bid 4S
Possibly risk Blackwood and stopping in 5 but not sure

[jillybean]

---

Here's the full hand. At the time I was wondering how would I proceed over 4♦, West has shown length in hearts and with my 4 cards, partner could have a heart cue. Anyway, I don't have last train (yet) so 4♠ it was.

I think 3♠ was an overbid

[pescetom]

Been a busy weekend, late to the thread.

We do not play Last Train (and if we did I don't think I would bid it here).
As North I would probably not control-bid over a minimum, which indicates at least mild slam interest.

But say I did bid 4♣ on a Friday night, now after 4♦ it is automatic to bid 4♠. Note that for us (at least) 4♠ in this control-bid sequence is not signoff or even discouraging (we expressed slam interest and partner has not denied any controls since), it merely denies hearts control. South is expected to bid on with hearts control, although she is allowed to take a view and pass with only ♥K and nothing more to show in the minors. Here she has no hearts control so has an automatic pass anyway.

[smerriman]

jillybean, on 2024-December-01, 10:41, said:

I think 3♠ was an overbid

Does this mean you play 3♥ as GF, rather than 10+ with spade support?

[jillybean]

smerriman, on 2024-December-01, 13:09, said:

Does this mean you play 3♥ as GF, rather than 10+ with spade support?

3♥ is limit + but after a vulnerable 2 level overcall, 3♠ should confirm some interest in slam

[smerriman]

jillybean, on 2024-December-01, 13:52, said:

3♥ is limit + but after a vulnerable 2 level overcall, 3♠ should confirm some interest in slam

If 3♥ is only a limit+ raise, what does opener bid if they have a minimum and don't want to play game opposite a 10-11 count?

[jillybean]

With that hand, we make a very fast 3♠ bid.

In a contested auction, where the opps have made a vulnerable 2 level overcall, the limit + is more + than limit.
Partner here is somewhat conservative, I know I am not sitting opposite an 11 count. It seems to work but I see the problem if the opening bid is not solid.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2024-December-01, 15:56, said:

With that hand, we make a very fast 3♠ bid.

In a contested auction, where the opps have made a vulnerable 2 level overcall, the limit + is more + than limit.
Partner here is somewhat conservative, I know I am not sitting opposite an 11 count. It seems to work but I see the problem if the opening bid is not solid.

The agreement is limit + but you know from partner experience and/or tempo that the bid cannot be limit?
"Directoooor!"

[smerriman]

Well, jokes aside, 3♥ is either GF or it's not, which changes all of the meanings of opener's bids accordingly. For me 3♥ is limit+, so 3♠ is a minimum and can't be an overbid. Perhaps 3♥ as GF is playable, in which case 3♠ shows extras, though I don't know how that system works (does responder bid 2NT with a limit raise?)

Surely your partner isn't so conservative as to bid 2♠ with an 11 count.

[mike777]

 smerriman, on 2024-December-01, 16:12, said:

Well, jokes aside, 3♥ is either GF or it's not, which changes all of the meanings of opener's bids accordingly. For me 3♥ is limit+, so 3♠ is a minimum and can't be an overbid. Perhaps 3♥ as GF is playable, in which case 3♠ shows extras, though I don't know how that system works (does responder bid 2NT with a limit raise?)

Surely your partner isn't so conservative as to bid 2♠ with an 11 count.

Makes a lot of sense to play rebid of 3S as minimum, not accepting game invitation.
Especially if you play conservative invites, aggressive accepting.
Here the opener has enough to accept but not enough to start cue bidding.
Responder is tempted but passes.
Add to that after the 2H overcall, slam is making on lots of distribution,not HCP.

[DavidKok]

 jillybean, on 2024-December-01, 15:56, said:

In a contested auction, where the opps have made a vulnerable 2 level overcall, the limit + is more + than limit.
Partner here is somewhat conservative, I know I am not sitting opposite an 11 count. It seems to work but I see the problem if the opening bid is not solid.

This is backwards. In contested auctions you have less space to explore all your goals, so typically all bids need to stretch.
2♠ needs to have a relatively wide range to avoid being stolen from and avoid getting too high.
Over that you only have two raises to 3♠, barring more gadgets. They are 3♥ and 3♠. Together they need to cover the full range of hands that wish to raise spades but can't commit to game. I think making 3♥ either GF or 'more + than limit' is a bad way to divide them.

[jillybean]

Yet another problem I need to fix. I’m sure there are other tweaks I/we have made with the knowledge that this partner is a very conservative bidder.

Just for clarity, we do not vary tempo or body language to signal hand strength. With the focus on EDGAR lately, this is forefront in my mind. It would be so easy to assign different meanings to bids at the club.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2024-December-02, 09:51, said:

Yet another problem I need to fix. I’m sure there are other tweaks I/we have made with the knowledge that this partner is a very conservative bidder.

Just for clarity, we do not vary tempo or body language to signal hand strength. With the focus on EDGAR lately, this is forefront in my mind. It would be so easy to assign different meanings to bids at the club.

It was already clear you were joking about fast tempo. But that also suggested that the problem was dawning upon you more or less consciously