[mikeh]

jdonn, on Jul 31 2008, 02:30 PM, said:

cherdano, on Jul 31 2008, 02:28 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 31 2008, 01:26 PM, said:

I'm shocked Mike, I thought you were the most stringent of any of us with this 3NT rebid. Not a solid suit AND no diamond stopper?

Partner has shown diamonds...
Nevertheless, the hand doesn't look no-trumpy to me, and I don't think 3N is very descriptive, e.g. the hand is way to suitable for 6m.

I thought 1♠ showed either balanced with no four card major, or diamonds. Granted the first hand type will have diamonds stopped a lot more often than not.

I'd bet heavily that a simulation would show that partner had 3+ diamonds and or a stopper well over 90% of the time.

As for 3N, yes, I like it to be a solid suit, but, as is often the case, we have no clear descriptive call over 1♠. Whatever we do will convey to partner an inaccurate picture of our hand so we strive to make the smallest distortion.

We also strive to make the cheapest of roughly equal distortions, and so 2♥ should get the nod so long as we see it as roughly equivalent, in terms of misdescription, as the alternatives.

I don't.

3♣ is woefully inadequate, 4♣ (whatever that means) has to be wrong on several grounds, not the least of which is missing 3N.

2♥ shows 4+ hearts and 5+ clubs... we don't hold anything like this.

3N shows slightly better clubs but is otherwise descriptive.. it doesn't (to me) promise 2+ support for the unbids... it promises side stoppers and a long usually solid minor. So it is the least distortion, to my mind, even tho it is also the most space consuming distortion (other than the non-starter of 4♣).

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Jul 31 2008, 11:26 AM, said:

Phil I don't like 4♦ instead of 3♦ since you could just so easily belong in 3NT. Another possibility is 5♦ instead of 4♦ in my given auction, but that puts a lot of pressure on opener and it's not clear how he should continue investigating.

The attractiveness of 4♦ is a function of whether or not we can put on the brakes in 4N. If we can't, then 3♦ is OK.

[han]

Alright I'll bite. You can stop in 4NT after the 4D call Phil? With which partner, I'm going to check it.

[Echognome]

han, on Jul 31 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

Alright I'll bite. You can stop in 4NT after the 4D call Phil? With which partner, I'm going to check it.

Phil and I play keycard only ever with kickback. So if 4♦ is unambiguously diamonds, then 4NT is to play.

[jdonn]

Not to mention, say partner has the completely normal Qxx AKQx x AKxxx. I'd rather stop in 3!

[han]

Echognome, on Jul 31 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

han, on Jul 31 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

Alright I'll bite. You can stop in 4NT after the 4D call Phil? With which partner, I'm going to check it.

Phil and I play keycard only ever with kickback. So if 4♦ is unambiguously diamonds, then 4NT is to play.

How do you cue hearts?

[Echognome]

han, on Jul 31 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 31 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

han, on Jul 31 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

Alright I'll bite. You can stop in 4NT after the 4D call Phil? With which partner, I'm going to check it.

Phil and I play keycard only ever with kickback. So if 4♦ is unambiguously diamonds, then 4NT is to play.

How do you cue hearts?

Something's gotta give right? Suppose hearts are agreed and you are playing 1430 RKCB and partner shows you 0 or 3 with 5♦. How do you ask for the trump Q? It was just a choice we made.

[jdonn]

Echognome, on Jul 31 2008, 03:46 PM, said:

han, on Jul 31 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 31 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

han, on Jul 31 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

Alright I'll bite. You can stop in 4NT after the 4D call Phil? With which partner, I'm going to check it.

Phil and I play keycard only ever with kickback. So if 4♦ is unambiguously diamonds, then 4NT is to play.

How do you cue hearts?

Something's gotta give right? Suppose hearts are agreed and you are playing 1430 RKCB and partner shows you 0 or 3 with 5♦. How do you ask for the trump Q? It was just a choice we made.

I think han's point is that if you play 4♥ as keycard then it would be normal to play 4NT as a cuebid in hearts, rather than natural.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Jul 31 2008, 01:09 PM, said:

I think han's point is that if you play 4♥ as keycard then it would be normal to play 4NT as a cuebid in hearts, rather than natural.

To me that is just a question of taste. Do we want 4♦ to unequivocably set diamonds as trumps or to have a bail out in 4NT available?

[kgr]

We have following additional agreements:
- We play T-Walsh. 1♠ denies a 4-card Major, except if GF.
- 1♣-1♠! (transfer ♦)
   3NT = 18-19HCP and 4 card support (sorry for that).
- 1♣-1♠!
   2♦! = reverse with 4-card ♦
- 4m is almost always forcing.
- 1♣-1♠! (transfer ♦)
   2♥-3♦
   4♦ ...
4NT would now be RKC for ♦. I don't think we can ever stop in 4NT after we confirmed a fit.

[han]

I don't think that 2H is too much of a flaw when partner has almost denied a 4-card heart suit.

I like to play that a jump rebid in a suit sets trump if the non-jump is game-forcing. Examples:

1S - 2D
3S

sets trump.

1S - 2D
2S - 4D

sets trump.

1C - 1S*
2H - 4D

sets trump.

If you don't want to set trump, don't take up so much room from a partner who has reversed.

[mikeh]

han, on Jul 31 2008, 05:40 PM, said:

I like to play that a jump rebid in a suit sets trump if the non-jump is game-forcing. Examples:


1C - 1S*
2H - 4D

sets trump.

If you don't want to set trump, don't take up so much room from a partner who has reversed.

Han, I think most would agree that a gratuitous jump rebid in an already gf auction shows a solid suit. I am not so sure that it makes sense to use it here, but I can understand that if responder were, for example, Axx xx AKQJxxx x.

Are you suggesting that responder bid 4♦, over 2♥, on the posted hand?

If so, how do you deal with the non-trivial risk that partner may be:

1. 5=6 in the round suits: xx AQJxx void AKQxxx... how do you like setting diamonds as trump, especially when 4♥ by him is either a cue bid or keycard? And he could be a LOT weaker than that if 5=6... take away the club Q and we'd all bid 1♣ 2♥, I think.

2. 3=4=1=5 18 count, with, say, Kxx AQxx x AKQxx. You can play in 5♦ and maybe you won't get the spade Queen lead... if I bid that way, opening leader would hold QJx in spades and 10xxx in diamonds and my only consolation for being in 5 or 6♦ is that I'd have gone down in 4! My opps' consolation is the imps they win for the routine (wtp?) 3N in the other room.

[cherdano]

Han was suggesting that a jump to 4♦ sets trumps, and thus implying it should not be used on the actual hand.