[nildesp]

The bidding goes

1♥ 1♠;
2♠ 3♥
?

Can opener pass?

[barmar]

I think it's forcing. It's not even necessarily natural, it could be a control bid, since spades have been bid and raised. But either way, if responder only had an invitational hand, he should make a game try in some other suit or bid 3♠.

[aguahombre]

I vote for NF game try; limit raise in hearts intended from the beginning, and would prefer to play the eight or 9-card heart contract rather than a possible moysean spade contract. Opener can still choose to bid 3 or 4 spades, but can opt for hearts as well.

[P_Marlowe]

you have found a fit, maybe even a double fit, but the sure
fit is not hearts, hence pass is out.

Keep it simple.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Hanoi5]

It should be forcing. Delayed heart support, 15+ looking for a slam.

[barmar]

Question for OP: Are you playing forcing 1NT? With a 3-card limit raise of hearts, could responder have bypassed his spades to bid the forcing NT?

[nildesp]

The only agreement is SAYC, so no forcing NT. Only 2 responded 1♠. P had an aceless 4=3=2=4 13 count. If he wanted to force he could bid 3♣ with KQJx. If 3♥ and 3♣ are both forcing, how does he invite?

Many bid 2♣ or 4♥ with his hand.

[barmar]

I think responder should bid 4♥ on the second round. Partner will then know they have a double fit, and responder has minimum game forcing values.

[aguahombre]

 barmar, on 2012-December-26, 13:31, said:

I think responder should bid 4♥ on the second round. Partner will then know they have a double fit, and responder has minimum game forcing values.

Yep. OP believes 3H should be invitational in SAYC. So, do I. Barmar shows what to do with the given hand.

That is "keep it simple". To me, there is nothing simple about making 3H a forcing bid which might not even show a heart fit, after agreeing to play standard or SAYC.

[P_Marlowe]

 aguahombre, on 2012-December-26, 15:58, said:

Yep. OP believes 3H should be invitational in SAYC. So, do I. Barmar shows what to do with the given hand.

That is "keep it simple". To me, there is nothing simple about making 3H a forcing bid which might not even show a heart fit, after agreeing to play standard or SAYC.

Playing simple, I would never make an undiscussed 3H bid, so in the end,
we are talking about a situation, which no longer is simple.

Playing 3H as NF, maybe simpler, but only if we restrict it to the bid, not
to the context.

[akwoo]

I believe that opener's raise to 2♠ must have 4 card support in this situation; any unbalanced hand with 3 card support must either have 6 hearts, in which case 2♥ is rebid, or 4 of some minor, in which case 2 of the minor is rebid. A balanced hand rebids notrump (or should have opened notrump).

On the general principle that 4-4 (or 5-4) fits are better than 5-3 fits, spades are now the agreed trump suit.

Therefore, 3♥ is a game try with spades as trump. It is forcing; if opener does not want to accept the invitation, opener must bid 3♠. Responder can abuse this bid as a slam try with a heart control; this is indicated by bidding on over 3♠.

[gordontd]

 akwoo, on 2012-December-27, 03:07, said:

I believe that opener's raise to 2♠ must have 4 card support in this situation; any unbalanced hand with 3 card support must either have 6 hearts, in which case 2♥ is rebid, or 4 of some minor, in which case 2 of the minor is rebid. A balanced hand rebids notrump (or should have opened notrump).

I'd certainly rather rebid 2♠ than 1NT with

♠AKx
♥AQxxx
♦xx
♣xxx

[gnasher]

 akwoo, on 2012-December-27, 03:07, said:

I believe that opener's raise to 2♠ must have 4 card support in this situation; any unbalanced hand with 3 card support must either have 6 hearts, in which case 2♥ is rebid, or 4 of some minor, in which case 2 of the minor is rebid. A balanced hand rebids notrump (or should have opened notrump).

The original poster says that he was playing SAYC. In SAYC, opener's simple raise "may have good three-card support".

This seems to vary according to where you play bridge. In my world, it's normal to raise 1♠ to 2♠ on any 35(14) minimum. In France, I understand that it would be a hanging (or guillotining) offence.

[lipeng2076]

YES,it is focing of course，and foncing to 3s at least，preferably to pay ♠ for a reasonably 44 fit.

[lycier]

It is a forcing bid with game values.

[LH2650]

Following gnasher's link and reading down a little, one finds "responder should make a limit raise directly over the opening with 10–11 points and at least three-card support", so I presume that any other path to 3 of opener's major does not show that hand.

[aguahombre]

 LH2650, on 2012-December-27, 20:05, said:

Following gnasher's link and reading down a little, one finds "responder should make a limit raise directly over the opening with 10–11 points and at least three-card support", so I presume that any other path to 3 of opener's major does not show that hand.

There is another part which says that after responder has made a 1/1 response, his subsequent bid at the 3-level ---even in opener's previously shown suit---is invitational strength.

[Fluffy]

if 2♠ can be 3 cards this is NF for the reasons aguahombre said, if it must be 4 cards it is a game try and forcing to 3♠ since it makes no sense to play in heart partscore once 4-4 spade fit has been found. It is a game try regardless (could be advanced slam try when it is forcing)

[Siegmund]

Absent special agreements that SAYC doesn't have ... spades are trumps. 3H is exactly the same as 3C here (forcing to 3S.)

[aguahombre]

 Siegmund, on 2012-December-28, 16:02, said:

Absent special agreements that SAYC doesn't have ... spades are trumps. 3H is exactly the same as 3C here (forcing to 3S.)

He has spoken, so it must be right. Those of us who read the SAYC treatise a bit differently must be wrong.