[mikeh]

Winstonm, on 2021-March-19, 09:01, said:

Duh! Of course Mikeh is right in that once a game-forcing auction is underway there is no such thing as 4th suit forcing.

My approach to actual 4th suit forcing has always been that it is used in two situations: 1) needing to create a force with a fit and no forcing non-jump raise is available, or 2) creating a force when no other bid is satisfactory.

Now that I realize 2H cannot be 4th suit, a 2H bid would basically deny more than 2-card support for spades in my thinking but I can see how it could be used as an advance cue bid - which I think your suggested auction would show but I have always found advance cues to be quite tricky to use and high risk of creating misunderstandings - in me.



The way I've always played 2/1 is that it first determines general strength - the 2/1 establishes game strength - then fits are found at the lowest level possible, and only after fit would the partnership start investigating slam.

I am quite opposed the the "captaincy" idea of bidding - although I know there are times it is necessary - so subsequent bidding after the fit is found is not so much strength showing but interest showing or maybe call in suitability showing. Only if one partner has signed off as showing no interest and the other continues to cue does a forced cue bid situation arise.

I hope that last paragraph is not too convoluted.

Advance cuebids are an awful idea. They were developed at a time when players had few tools to create forces. With the advent of devices such as 2/1 gf, 4SF and so on, they have deservedly fallen out of favour.

[fromageGB]

As 2♠ is GF I would have thought a 3♠ bid from opener is all that is needed, or the 2NT that here serves the same purpose. However, I prefer 3♠ as I would rather emphasis the quality of that suit than suggest numerous scattered values. Responder has room to suggest signing off, room to cue beneath game, room to make a slam invitation. On the given hand I think it comes in the in-between category, too good to suggest signing off, not quite enough to unilaterally go ace asking.

So it depends on your agreement of the purposes of the cue. If this is a suggestion, then cue. If (as I prefer) cues are used as a prelude to an ace ask, simply to check that no suit is wide open, where the ace ask (or show) is obligatory if that is the case, then I don't rate this responder hand as quite being there. It needs your third option, and my choice is a 4M-1 slam try. Which partner accepts by ace asking or telling, and refuses by bidding game.

Whether opener has enough to accept is another matter. I wouldn't.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2021-March-19, 08:06, said:

I understand the logic behind having south’s 3C bid over 2N as suppressing good clubs, but I’m not going to play that.

Is suppressing a typo?

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-March-20, 07:54, said:

Is suppressing a typo?

Yes. Weird.