[jdonn]

Interesting, I guess it's important to know how your partner thinks. Absent discussion I know the only meanings I would consider intuitive would be something where there is a counteracting meaning for the other minor suit bid. In other words it's funny to me you say you didn't give much thought to the meaning of 3♣, since if my partner made such a bid my first thought would be to reject anything unless that is symmetrical with some other logical meaning I can think of for 3♣.

But there is no doubt that having some bid to show spades there would be very useful, and perhaps the most useful of any available meaning.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, it seems to me that a logical extension of this concept would create a sort of parallel. If there is one "artificial" call, that shows interest in the "other major."

Thus, for instance, had the interference been 3♣, then 3♦ would operate equally.

An interestiong question suggesting itself, then, is whether the red card ever should have that meaning. For instance,

1♥-P-2♥-P-
P-3♦-X

Now, in that sequence, the double seems best used as for penalty. However, there might be a similar auction (I haven't thought of one yet) where the double would be more effective as a strain reconsideration suggestion. By the nature of the general principles of the game, the situation would seem to develop when the agreed strain is lower-ranking than an alternative strain, and typically in an auction where a practical raise makes sense.

A situation I sometimes see is the raise of a minor burying a major. Maybe 1♦-(2♣)-2♦ when Responder buries a four-card heart suit, for example? Then, after a 3♣ call, perhaps doubling as re-introducing hearts? You would need the opther major introduced in a way where a penalty double is unappealing. Not sure when that would occur, but worth remembering in case it's seen at the table.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3D should show 4 card support, a max. for 2H, what consist of a max,
depends on f you happen to play constructive raises or not,
and also depending on your general style, 3D either showes diamond
values or diamond shortage, most likely diamond shortage makes more
sense, which would be in sync with the a style, where you can only make
a splinter in their suit.

So I come to 4 hearts, 1diamonds, 4-5 spades, 3-4 (small) clubs, 8HCP-10HCP,
if 8HCP - they should be kings and Aces.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gnasher]

P_Marlowe, on Dec 17 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

So I come to 4 hearts, 1diamonds, 4-5 spades, 3-4 (small) clubs, 8HCP-10HCP,
if 8HCP - they should be kings and Aces.

Wouldn't that hand have raised 1♥ to game on the first round?

[PeterGill]

Maggieb also won this Forum's tipping competition for Sao Paulo results in September - well done maggieb - like the Nickell team (World Championship and Reisinger), you have two wins.

[Ant590]

PeterGill, on Dec 17 2009, 02:13 PM, said:

Maggieb also won this Forum's tipping competition for Sao Paulo results in September

Fancy picking some lottery numbers for me Maggieb?

[Fluffy]

dumb no wI see that my answer entered late lol, well done maggie.

[hanp]

Well done Sherlock B!

Perhaps you could also post the winning call with 9xxx Axx xxx AKx?

[peachy]

Not even attempting to read Fred's mind!. here is what I think though. I think you had 3-card heart support, spades stopped (maybe a suit) and now you wanted to investigate game or alternate strain and showed diamond stopper for 3NT. Sometimes the balancer's actions allow us to reach game. If you don't lusua;;y go with this strategy, then I think you had a diamond singleton:)

[peachy]

Oops. I didn't read the thread before I answered... It was already solved.

[axu2008]

I would like to guess: the 3D invite to 3N if opener has stop in D (could be C depends on the style). the S is not the problem since the 2nt bid. Opener either bid 3H without stop or 3N with stop in D ©.

[P_Marlowe]

gnasher, on Dec 17 2009, 06:33 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Dec 17 2009, 09:50 AM, said:

So I come to 4 hearts, 1diamonds, 4-5 spades, 3-4 (small) clubs, 8HCP-10HCP,
if 8HCP - they should be kings and Aces.

Wouldn't that hand have raised 1♥ to game on the first round?

Not necessarily, but you have a point: the hands I outlined may already
qualify as a limit raise, so the HCP count is to high, make it max. 8HCP. (*)

I was assuming 2H to be a constructive raise.

(*) I know the original hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe