helene_t, on 2016-September-15, 06:10, said:
For better or worse, we play that 4♦ by responder (after 3♦ or after 3NT) would be minorwood while 4♦ by opener (after 3♥) would be optional minorwood, i.e. responder can sign off in 4nt or 5♦ rather than ansswering if she has an unsuitable hand.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but wouldn't the response to Opener's 4
♦ minorwood holding 2 key cards be 4NT? Could be tough if 4NT is also what Responder bids when trying to sign off!
helene_t, on 2016-September-15, 06:10, said:
Matchpoints, intermediate-advanced field
Control bidding is first round but because of minorwood there is probably no way to initiate a control bidding sequence here. (Or maybe some would say it is possible?)
We don't usually make fake jump shifts on 3-card suits (in case we found the West hand a tad strong for 3
♦).
Who, if anyone, should have done more? Should opener use the optional minorwood? I suppose you could say that if this hand doesn't qualify then we might as well scrap that convention? Or should responder have moved over 3NT?
Opener should have done more. This is a proper Acol 2 in diamonds. It would be reasonable for Responder to pass the jump rebid holding xxxxx xxx A QJxx and +170 would be a bit embarrassing. Yes, I've constructed a perfect fit hand, but plenty of other weak hands opposite will make game.
You say that you don't like fake jump shifts, but this isn't particularly fake (10 cards in the minors partner); if partner raises to 4
♣ you have the option to jump to 5
♦.
On the actual Responding hand, she should bid 3
♦ over 3
♣ (see previous thread). Would 1
♦-1
♠-3
♣-3
♦-4
♦ be optional Minorwood?