[Fluffy]

1♠-2♣
2♦-3NT
4♣-4♥
??

Played this evening at the 4 level with 3 overtricks for a bottom when it should be a top in cold grand nobody cared to bid. I knew partner loves to pass this kind of bids, but couldn't yet decide wich one to use to force.


Very natural approach, 2♣ normally 4+ cards (GF), 2♦ 4+ cards also

[Hanoi5]

I think 4NT could be taken as a sign-off, but 4♠ should be forcing. What's the problem with bidding 6♣ right away?

[JLOGIC]

4S is a cuebid and 4N is keycard. After 4C the only way to play 4S or 4N is for partner to bid it. When he makes a positive move over 4C there is no more playing 4N. Openers 4S being natural would be ridiculous.

[Fluffy]

Hanoi5, on 2011-February-20, 16:04, said:

What's the problem with bidding 6♣ right away?

25% of the match points only

[rhm]

JLOGIC, on 2011-February-20, 16:16, said:

4S is a cuebid and 4N is keycard. After 4C the only way to play 4S or 4N is for partner to bid it. When he makes a positive move over 4C there is no more playing 4N. Openers 4S being natural would be ridiculous.

At match points playing 4NT as non forcing makes a lot of sense to me. Your slam bidding suffers a bit. But it allows you to invite 6♣ without committing yourself irrevocably to slam. Otherwise it is hard to continue over 3NT.
I need 4NT as a landing spot, if only a minor has been agreed. I even play that at IMPs

Rainer Herrmann

[Siegmund]

4S cue 4N natural for me. (And I would not be shocked to hear somebody play 4C is G-ber rather than natural in this auction - our club length is normally limited by failing to raise them on the previous round.)

[phil_20686]

Misread auction, change my vote to both.

[Phil]

rhm, on 2011-February-21, 04:55, said:

At match points playing 4NT as non forcing makes a lot of sense to me. Your slam bidding suffers a bit. But it allows you to invite 6♣ without committing yourself irrevocably to slam. Otherwise it is hard to continue over 3NT.
I need 4NT as a landing spot, if only a minor has been agreed. I even play that at IMPs

Rainer Herrmann

I cannot fathom a hand that wants to pull 3N at matchpoints to 4m, hear partner cuebid (presumably the ♥A) which is great news, and then want to retreat to 4N.

I think a better question would be what the meaning of responder's 4N and 4[sp[ would be. 4N is clearly a signoff (go away, I heard your 4♣) and I think 4[sp] is a COG.

[rhm]

Phil, on 2011-February-21, 13:10, said:

I cannot fathom a hand that wants to pull 3N at matchpoints to 4m, hear partner cuebid (presumably the ♥A) which is great news, and then want to retreat to 4N.

Why is this difficult?

You can have a hand where you want to insist on slam and the question maybe only, which slam to play and whether to play a small one or a grand. This seems to be the case here.

However,much more frequent, you may be weaker and you only want to invite slam in a minor. Partner can not immediately know what your intentions are and what your strength is.
He should cue-bid unless completely unsuitable. That partner does cue-bid is good news but rarely sufficient, if you only have an invitation.
You then continue with a non forcing 4NT if you only wanted to suggest a small slam in a minor and leave the decision to partner and bypass 4NT if you are stronger.
Asking for aces with 4NT when a minor has been agreed is not such a clever idea anyway.

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

Asking for aces is an excellent idea when you need to know how many aces partner has - sometimes you still have room to stop at the five level, and sometimes you're interested in a grand slam.

There are other hands, especially at matchpoints, where it's an equally good idea to make one try and then bid a natural 4NT. If you can't do this, it means that the main decision for the partnership has to be made unilaterally by the player who decides whether to remove 3NT.

I have played both the style described by Justin and the style described by Rainer, and I don't find either of them satisfactory.

[Phil]

rhm, on 2011-February-21, 13:44, said:

Why is this difficult?

You can have a hand where you want to insist on slam and the question maybe only, which slam to play and whether to play a small one or a grand. This seems to be the case here.

However,much more frequent, you may be weaker and you only want to invite slam in a minor. Partner can not immediately know what your intentions are and what your strength is.
He should cue-bid unless completely unsuitable. That partner does cue-bid is good news but rarely sufficient, if you only have an invitation.
You then continue with a non forcing 4NT if you only wanted to suggest a small slam in a minor and leave the decision to partner and bypass 4NT if you are stronger.
Asking for aces with 4NT when a minor has been agreed is not such a clever idea anyway.

Rainer Herrmann

When did I ever say 4N is ace asking?

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-February-21, 14:05, said:

There are other hands, especially at matchpoints, where it's an equally good idea to make one try and then bid a natural 4NT. If you can't do this, it means that the main decision for the partnership has to be made unilaterally by the player who decides whether to remove 3NT.

I don't really agree. Partner can still sign off in 4N over 4C if he has a bad hand. I think the subset of hands where opener pulls 3N, and partner cooperates, and it's still right to play 4N is very small.

Quote

Asking for aces with 4NT when a minor has been agreed is not such a clever idea anyway.

I agree that asking for aces with 4N is suboptimal, and in my regular partnerships I would play that 4S is asking for aces and 4N is last train which is fine (what are the odds opener cannot force to slam opposite 2 keycards here?). This also would have given partner the option of bidding keycard over 4C with 4D. That said, the ability to ask for aces is still an important thing to have, and playing no fancy agreements I'd much rather have that than a natural 4N.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-February-21, 14:05, said:

There are other hands, especially at matchpoints, where it's an equally good idea to make one try and then bid a natural 4NT. If you can't do this, it means that the main decision for the partnership has to be made unilaterally by the player who decides whether to remove 3NT.

I don't really agree. Partner can still sign off in 4N over 4C if he has a bad hand. I think the subset of hands where opener pulls 3N, and partner cooperates, and it's still right to play 4N is very small.

Quote

Asking for aces with 4NT when a minor has been agreed is not such a clever idea anyway.

I agree that asking for aces with 4N is suboptimal, and in my regular partnerships I would play that 4S is asking for aces and 4N is last train which is fine (what are the odds opener cannot force to slam opposite 2 keycards here?). This also would have given partner the option of bidding keycard over 4C with 4D. That said, the ability to ask for aces is still an important thing to have, and playing no fancy agreements I'd much rather have that than a natural 4N.

For instance, if you play 1430 then it is impossible that partner has 0 and has bid 4H. So you still are effectively forcing to slam via keycard opposite as many as 2 without the queen. As has been said, it is very unlikely opener doesn't have enough keycards to do that, if he needs more than that he should just cuebid 4S anyways. Keycard will help you stop in the times you are off 2, and it will help you get to 7.

[gnasher]

JLOGIC, on 2011-February-21, 15:35, said:

I don't really agree. Partner can still sign off in 4N over 4C if he has a bad hand. I think the subset of hands where opener pulls 3N, and partner cooperates, and it's still right to play 4N is very small.

That's because your partner can only cooperate with hands which are of relatively high suitability. Rainer's partner can cooperate with hands that are less suitable, knowing that he can still pass 4NT (or bid 4NT himself after a further cue-bid). So Rainer gains by having more gradations of strength, and you gain by being able to ask for aces.

With your other suggestion, of playing 4♠ as keycard and 4NT as last train, is 4NT passable? If so, that sounds a good compromise - all you lose is a cue-bid.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-February-21, 16:39, said:

That's because your partner can only cooperate with hands which are of relatively high suitability. Rainer's partner can cooperate with hands that are less suitable, knowing that he can still pass 4NT (or bid 4NT himself after a further cue-bid). So Rainer gains by having more gradations of strength, and you gain by being able to ask for aces.

We don't need that many gradations. We are almost in slam already, opener is very strong, responder has made a 2/1 and cuebid. At some point having so many gradations of strength is not that useful.

Likewise, if we want to sign off we can just bid 5C over 4H. Why is playing 4N when partner doesn't have a lot wasted in hearts, and I have a stiff heart, so awesome? Even at matchpoints I don't know why we're so sure 4N will make if we've decided 6C will not make. That seems like we're drawing a really fine line. Probably much of our hands value was based on shape.

Everyone in theory has these excellent cuebidding auctions stopping in 4N making 630 when 5C would only make 600 when both sides have cooperated, and there is seemingly not a ton wasted in our known stiff. They also don't ever need key card. In practice I have never seen people bid this way consistently and successfully.

Even with something like AQx of hearts, if we are not bidding slam it sure sounds like we might be off 2 tricks somewhere, and the opponents are going to get hearts going before we knock out those 2 tricks. Maybe we have 10 tricks before we knock out those 2 things, or maybe we don't, I'm never really going to gamble on that. And it is just unlikely partner will bid 4H with 3 heart stoppers, but I guess Rainer can!

At some point imo when we have both shown such significant values, and a fit, and probably not a ton wasted in the third suit, I don't believe it is practical to be able to play in 4N.

Quote

With your other suggestion, of playing 4♠ as keycard and 4NT as last train, is 4NT passable? If so, that sounds a good compromise - all you lose is a cue-bid.

Lol, I guess I answered this question with this post, but no I cannot conceive of a hand where I would pass 4N and not have bid 4N on the round before. I suppose it is theoretically possible though. Maybe I play way too much imps but I am not trying to get to 4N rather than 5C.