[Swammerdam]

I just played a hand and am almost certain that N-S were communicating via side-channel. Look at their bidding:

• North barely has enough to open but jump raises partner.
  
• South has enough to bid game opposite any raise, but passes 3♠ despite partner's jump.

The N-S players were from Sweden and USA; both "Intermediate"; created 2019 and 2020. Nothing much on their Profiles.

---

(My side probably makes 4♥. Should I have bid 4♥?)

[manudude03]

I wouldn't assume cheating. There is a school of thought that North should always jump raise in spades holding 4, bidding 2H if you actually have a good hand. South's decision is a bit weird, but I can see some weak players making the same decision. Cheating allegations should really be going through abuse@bridgebase.com though.

[Huibertus]

No way to know. But I'd assume they are not cheating. Usually "intermediate" is chosen by players who have been playing a significant time but have never ever learned anything about the game.

As a side note, I'd bid 4♥ with your hand first (preferably) or second round anyway.

[mw64ahw]

1♠ is 5+, 3♠ is min. The Law

[barmar]

mw64ahw, on 2025-August-25, 13:55, said:

1♠ is 5+, 3♠ is min. The Law

For most players, a jump raise by opener is invitational, not a minimum.

This is a hand where it would be normal to raise to 2♠ and then compete to 3♠ if necessary, because of the Law.

Cheating is almost impossible to determine from just one example, you need to examine their history to see if they have frequent weird auctions like this that happen to work out. This is how investigation software like EDGAR works.

[mw64ahw]

barmar, on 2025-August-26, 08:51, said:

For most players, a jump raise by opener is invitational, not a minimum.

This is a hand where it would be normal to raise to 2♠ and then compete to 3♠ if necessary, because of the Law.

Cheating is almost impossible to determine from just one example, you need to examine their history to see if they have frequent weird auctions like this that happen to work out. This is how investigation software like EDGAR works.

Without interference yes, but you have cue-bids to show the invitational hand. At least this how is my Acol partner plays it.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2025-August-26, 13:01, said:

Without interference yes, but you have cue-bids to show the invitational hand. At least this how is my Acol partner plays it.

I was going to question barmar's comment but forums were non responsive.
IME, players uss the jump as preemptive and forcing nt as the way to show an invitational 3 card raise.
Kitchen bridge players still jump to show invitational strength.

[manudude03]

jillybean, on 2025-August-26, 14:56, said:

I was going to question barmar's comment but forums were non responsive.
IME, players uss the jump as preemptive and forcing nt as the way to show an invitational 3 card raise.
Kitchen bridge players still jump to show invitational strength.

I can't imagine forcing NT rebids being that popular.

[jillybean]

manudude03, on 2025-August-26, 20:10, said:

I can't imagine forcing NT rebids being that popular.

Good point, I was referring to 1nt by responder, not the posted auction where North has a cue raise available.

[helene_t]

So the allegation is that North wanted to bid a preemptive 3♠ to shut out East, and told South via a side channel that 3♠ was preemptive?

I think this is far fetched. More likely, they just have that partnership understanding. Or they don't but were just lucky that their bad judgments cancelled each other out.

[StevenG]

The opps played four consecutive hands together in casual play. There are no other hands together in the last month. It's clearly not a regular partnership and just a misunderstanding.

[pescetom]

I find the whole discussion bewildering. I would bid this way by agreement in one partnership at this vulnerability (alerting the law-based weak jump). And I would guess that way opposite a pickup partner from Sweden too.

[barmar]

While I generally subscribe to the philosophy "When there's a cue bid available, jumps are weak", I think bids by opener are an exception. Once they've opened, they can't be weak (third-seat openers are an exception to this exception).

A jump raise would be invitational, while a cue bid could be used in an action like this to establish a game force. It will often mean doubt as to strain, since opener could just jump to 4♠ if they agree on spades, or it could be used as a prelude to slam exploration (probably with a freak hand, since they didn't open 2♣). Responder's first obligation would be to bid NT with a stopper in the opponent's suit.