[P_Marlowe]

nullve, on 2024-December-11, 09:20, said:

Because over 3♦ you don't yet know if you can afford to bypass 3N? (3♦ isn't necessarily slammish, if I've understood the system correctly.)

But it expresses doubt about 3NT? xxx vs shortage is certainly not a indication to
insist on NT.

The seq. is similar to xfer to major and bidding a new suit on the 3 level.
It is either slam interest or showes worries, that NT is best, holding a semibal. hand,
you usually avoid bidding the new suit, unless you have slam interest.
I dont see, why the given seq. should be treated differently.

[mikeh]

Everyone assumes that responder has 4 spades. Why? Go read the OP. Tell me how you think responder would bid a minor two suiter with a good hand? No transfers, no minor stayman. I know….Almost nobody plays methods like that and for good reason. But, if I’ve understood the OP correctly, responder could be something like 5=5 minors!

I’ll look at it both ways….he has 4 spades so very short hearts….which I don’t think is necessarily true but might be, given the description of methods….or he’s 5=5 etc in the minors.

Say he has promised spades. So has some slam interest or perhaps real concern about hearts for notrump.

We hold Kxx AKJ10 Qxx Kxx. Anyone here think a strong 1N is wrong? Anyone think we belong in a 4-3 minor suit game rather than 4N opposite say Axxx x AJxx AQxx. If not, please explain to me how you get to notrump if 4N is keycard in clubs. Anyone who thinks 4N isn’t natural has a very poor grasp of basic bidding theory.

You argue, perhaps, that he ought to be 4=0=5=4. Ok…give him Axxx void Axxxx AQxx. Maybe you want to be in 6D but I don’t….at any form of scoring. If partner bid 4C I’d sure want to bid 4N…..along with every other player who knows how to bid. Note that from his perspective you might hold something like KQx AJxx Kx KJxx so looking for a club slam makes sense. There are many plausible responder/declarer hands on which it makes sense for him, with a strong 4144 or 4054, to look for a club slam while being willing to pass a 4N bid.

What if he has only shown the minors, which is how I read his OP (I read it as ambiguous…could be three suits, could be just minors).

Now we have a real issue….do I need both majors well stopped? How would one bid with AJ10 AKJx Qx Jxx? Please let me bid 4N!!!!

Btw, it should be obvious but if the OP sequence could as easily be a minor two suiter as a spade-minor three suiter, everything devolves into a guessing game. Horrible methods tend to lead to horrible situations. OP needs to learn a better method.

[P_Marlowe]

mikeh, on 2024-December-11, 09:31, said:

Everyone assumes that responder has 4 spades. Why? Go read the OP. Tell me how you think responder would bid a minor two suiter with a good hand? No transfers, no minor stayman. I know….Almost nobody plays methods like that and for good reason. But, if I’ve understood the OP correctly, responder could be something like 5=5 minors!
<snip>

I would have assumed 3D followed by 4C, this is a very basic system, suits on the 3 level are forcing to game,
... but you may well be right, 3C / 3D may be NF in their system, ... although starting with a Stayman inquiry
without a major, ..., but it becomes a guessing game.

[nullve]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-December-11, 09:22, said:

But it expresses doubt about 3NT? xxx vs shortage is certainly not a indication to
insist on NT.

The seq. is similar to xfer to major and bidding a new suit on the 3 level.
It is either slam interest or showes worries, that NT is best, holding a semibal. hand,
you usually avoid bidding the new suit, unless you have slam interest.
I dont see, why the given seq. should be treated differently.

It doesn't have to be treated differently. It's just that there is insufficient bidding space to show everything at a comfortable level, both here and over 1N-[2M-1]; 2M-3♦.

There is a reason many have switched to second round transfers, especially over 1N-[2M-1]; 2M, giving up 2N as a natural invite.

[nullve]

mikeh, on 2024-December-11, 09:31, said:

Everyone assumes that responder has 4 spades.

???

[nullve]

mikeh, on 2024-December-11, 09:31, said:

How would one bid with AJ10 AKJx Qx Jxx? Please let me bid 4N!!!!

12 cards

[mycroft]

I would suggest that 30% of my club has no idea what 1NT-2♣; 2M-3m means (or, at least, would never think to bid it).

I know most of them are new enough that "stayman, then 3m is how you show this range of m" (likely learned 4-suit transfers "immediately" when learning transfers, but at least they can't think of any other way to play it).

I am not. Millions of kitchen bridge players are not. I played Stayman, then minor = "invitational one-suiter" for years with near no damage and many successes (in both "double-barrelled Stayman" and "4-suit transfers" shells. I don't remember playing it in a 2♠ Minor suit Stayman shell, but I would have). I still think you could play it that way effectively (at least as effectively as whatever they are playing now).

Yes, I know that "standard", that everyone will understand, has this auction promise spades. I mean, in the ACBL, if it doesn't, you have to Alert 3m. But that doesn't mean it's not possible, or "unplayably bad". Or, I bet, uncommon (again, at the kitchen table).

[mikeh]

nullve, on 2024-December-11, 09:50, said:

It doesn't have to be treated differently. It's just that there is insufficient bidding space to show everything at a comfortable level, both here and over 1N-[2M-1]; 2M-3♦.

There is a reason many have switched to second round transfers, especially over 1N-[2M-1]; 2M, giving up 2N as a natural invite.

There’s no need to give up on 2N as a natural invite when responder has 5 spades. A normal agreement is:

1N 2H shows 5+ spades and, if exactly five, either gf or weak, signoff.

Invitational hands with 5 spades use 2C. So 1N 2C 2R 2S is 5 spades, invitational. Note tgis is almost invariably played with 1N 2S being either range ask or clubs, so 2C promises a major. That way, 1N 2C 2H 2N promises 4 spades, invitational

In my partnership, we go a step further. 1N 2C 2D 2H is a transfer to spades, invitational. 1N 2C 2R 2S is various hands but excludes 5 spades…2S is commonly a 2N invite but may be a wide range of hands from various slam tries to 4S and a longer minor, weak. 1N 2C 2H 2N is 5S invitational.

[HombreEast]

nullve, on 2024-December-11, 09:20, said:

Because over 3♦ you don't yet know if you can afford to bypass 3N? (3♦ isn't necessarily slammish, if I've understood the system correctly.)

Thank you Nullve - you showed good understanding of my follow-up post where I showed responder's exact distribution. The 3N bid was of course expecting to play 3N. But responder had 5 super diamonds, 4 super clubs, and a small singleton heart. Opener DID understand that 3D followed by 4C said I have 5 nice diamonds, 4 nice clubs and I'd have great interest in slam. (with my small single ht also). The only disagreement was whether 4N would be RKCB or "to play". Responder was hoping for 4N bid by opener asking Keycards, but got 6C because opener felt 4N was passable. So 6C was played when 7C was rock solid AND 6N was easy to make also. 6C making 7 was a very bad Matchpoint score. Hombre

[mikeh]

HombreEast, on 2024-December-11, 15:26, said:

Thank you Nullve - you showed good understanding of my follow-up post where I showed responder's exact distribution. The 3N bid was of course expecting to play 3N. But responder had 5 super diamonds, 4 super clubs, and a small singleton heart. Opener DID understand that 3D followed by 4C said I have 5 nice diamonds, 4 nice clubs and I'd have great interest in slam. (with my small single ht also). The only disagreement was whether 4N would be RKCB or "to play". Responder was hoping for 4N bid by opener asking Keycards, but got 6C because opener felt 4N was passable. So 6C was played when 7C was rock solid AND 6N was easy to make also. 6C making 7 was a very bad Matchpoint score. Hombre

I suspect both players had better bids available at some point. Obviously your methods aren’t very good by modern standards. For example, many experienced pairs use 1N 3M to show a gf hand with 5=4 or 4=5 in the minors and 3=1 or 1=3 majors….I go along with whatever my partners want….in my regular partnership we bid the short major but I’ve played where one bids the 3 card major…there are valid reasons for and against each choice.

On your auction, if opener liked clubs, he can bid 4M over 4C as a cuebid, showing that he liked his hand for clubs….4N says he has both majors well controlled for notrump and lacked a good fit for either major….he might well be 3=4=3=3.

Even over 4N, responder likely had choices….virtually every strong pair uses 5N as forcing opener to pick a slam. Whether any of this gets you to grand depends. Let’s see the hand (bearing in mind that quite a few posters here bid incredibly well once they see both hands, lol)

[akwoo]

4N means whatever the partnership has agreed it to mean.

If the partnership has not agreed, then the question 'One partner thinks X and the other partner thinks Y; which is it?" has no correct answer. It's like asking someone out of the blue "What does the word 'gfrng.nkra;kj' mean?"

You can of course ask the question "Are we going to get better results agreeing to X or to Y?" You can ask "Do most partnerships agree to play it as X or Y?" (but you'd better qualify what you mean by 'most partnerships' because most players are probably in Poland or China and of course you care what the partnerships around you usually agree to, not what partnerships you will never meet agree to.) You cannot ask "What does this bid mean?" because it means whatever you and your partner have agreed, and if you have no agreement, it is gibberish.

For the OP - neither of the partners is right or wrong. They should now make an agreement for the next time this comes up, and hopefully make the agreement general enough to apply to similar situations (so as to reduce the number of future instances where they have no agreement).
 
Language (and bridge bidding) is not something decreed from the heavens; it is something that humans make and agree to, even if sometimes the agreements are so fixed in a web of ancient prior agreements and conventions are so embedded in our way of life that it seems like it is from the heavens.

[HombreEast]

Once again, we do not open 1N with a 5-card major. Opener showed exactly 4 hts when he bid 2H. Responder with 3D said my interest is diamonds as trumps. Opener said 3N intending to play it there because his distrib. was 3-4-2-4. Responder said "I'm still interested in slam in a minor so I'm going past 3N with my 5 good diamonds and 4 good clubs, and single small heart. Opener with bid 6C, concerned that 4N might be RKCB. 6C making 7 was very bad MP score because both 6N and 7C made handily.
Responder hoped and expected opener to bid 4N RKCB. The question was would 4N have been RKCB or "to play"? We hope these details of our understandings leading up thru 4C helps get a solid answer

[mikeh]

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Once again, we do not open 1N with a 5-card major. Opener showed exactly 4 hts when he bid 2H. Responder with 3D said my interest is diamonds as trumps. Opener said 3N intending to play it there because his distrib. was 3-4-2-4. Responder said "I'm still interested in slam in a minor so I'm going past 3N with my 5 good diamonds and 4 good clubs, and single small heart. Opener with bid 6C, concerned that 4N might be RKCB. 6C making 7 was very bad MP score because both 6N and 7C made handily.
Responder hoped and expected opener to bid 4N RKCB. The question was would 4N have been RKCB or "to play"? We hope these details of our understandings leading up thru 4C helps get a solid answer

You’ve had the benefit of several opinions, but for some reason you reopen the thread, posting as if nobody has answered you

The posters here represent a wide range of styles and just as a wide range of expertise. That can make it difficult, if not impossible, for a non-expert to recognize those whose experience and skill/knowledge would suggest you pay most attention to their ideas.

However, and recognizing I’m repeating myself from many, many posts where posters want 4N to be keycard…..it is an essential element of using keycard that asker can place the contract with relative certainty once he gets ANY plausible response….that ALL he needs, to count winners, is to know how many keycards partner has.

That’s very….very….rarely going to happen when it’s the strong notrump bidder asking. Look at your auction. What does opener know about responder’s shape?

He knows responder has at least 5 diamonds and 4 clubs. But can’t responder be 5=5? Can’t he be 6=5? Believe it or not, he might be 6=6…. I held a 6=6 hand playing in Las Vegas two weeks ago.

So….without knowing responder’s length, how on earth can opener know what level to bid to if there are no missing keycards? He can’t

Also, what if responder has a void?

Finally, there will be hands on which responder quite properly wants to suggest a minor suit contract, by pulling 3N, but where opener’s hand is very much unsuitable for 5m or higher….he’s loaded in the majors.

AQ10 KQJ9 Kx xxxx What would you have him bid over 4C? Anything but 4N is a serious error….and exactly how can learning how many keycards responder holds help? Lol. Maybe responder has Kx void AQxxxx KQJxx. Missing two keycards yet slam is excellent….or Kx x AQJxx KQJxx. Same response yet slam is down off the top. Or xx x AQJxx AQJxx. Passing 3N might have caught opener with AKx Qxxx Kx Kxxx when 6C is excellent so 4C makes sense but you’d clearly want to pass 4N opposite AQ10 KQJx Kx xxxx

Responder can still bid over 4N….having been warned that opener is loaded in the majors, his hand (unlimited so far) may be strong enough to keep bidding.

I think the problem may be that your partnership plays very inadequate methods. I’ve played a wide variety of notrump structures…my current one in my main partnership is many pages in length….and I’ve played against, literally, the best pairs in the world….so I’ve seen notrump structures used at the highest level. You’d do well to learn a better method.

Find the strongest pair in your area….and ask for their strong notrump notes. That assumes you have access to the type of player who has notes, lol, but in my experience serious pairs do and almost all are happy to share. After seeing what Grue-Moss play in one situation (at the recent world championships) I sent a message to Grue on Bridgewinners and he couldn’t have been more courteous and helpful…I’ve had similar responses from other WC players. Heck, while I’m not at that level, I’d send you my notrump notes if you asked. But I think you’d struggle with them….we play a LOT of ‘stuff’.

Your poor methods led you to a situation in which both of you ‘wanted’ 4N to be keycard…contrary to virtually every principle of keycard auctions. It’s a common failing…and, unfortunately, so too is a stubborn refusal to accept advice.

[nullve]

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Once again, we do not open 1N with a 5-card major. Opener showed exactly 4 hts when he bid 2H.

I've reread your posts, and this seems like new information.

With this agreement (2♥ = 4 hearts, not 2♥ = 4-5 hearts), Opener might have bid 3♥ over 3♦ as a wake-up call (since he can't be showing a 5th heart) with no club stopper, e.g. on the hand I gave above, which was

KTx
AQxx
AKx
xxx

.

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Responder with 3D said my interest is diamonds as trumps. Opener said 3N intending to play it there because his distrib. was 3-4-2-4.

I'm not sure how to interpret this. Certainly, it's neither the case that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦ = "My interest is diamonds as trumps"

nor that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N = "I intend to play 3NT"

nor that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N = "I intend to play 3NT because my shape is 3424"

?

The meaning of a call (including 4N when used as RKC!) is essentially just a set of hands and it's often possible to describe that set without using mentalistic terms like 'said', 'interest', 'intending' and so on. For example,

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦ = 5+D3-H and either a) game values and a small singleton or void [mentalistically, Responder is "uncertain" about 3NT even if there's no 4-4 spade fit], or b) slam values

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; ?:

3♥ = 2-3 spades and either good hearts or no club stopper
3♠ = 4 spades
3N = 2-3 spades and clubs stopped

(I'm not claiming that the above is exactly what you play, though.)

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Responder said "I'm still interested in slam in a minor so I'm going past 3N with my 5 good diamonds and 4 good clubs, and single small heart.

You know your own system best, but is it really true in your system that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N-4♣ = slammish with 5 good diamonds [not, more generally, 5+ diamonds], 4 good clubs [not, more generally, 4+ clubs] and a small singleton heart [not, more generally, 3 or fewer hearts]

?

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Opener with bid 6C, concerned that 4N might be RKCB. 6C making 7 was very bad MP score because both 6N and 7C made handily.

Might NOT be RKCB and get passed, you mean? And was his hand also unsuitable for 4♥ and 4♠ (cuebids with clubs as trumps, don't you agree?)?

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

Responder hoped and expected opener to bid 4N RKCB.

Despite what mikeh says, I still think it makes sense for 4NT to be RKC agreeing clubs by failure to show diamond preference. (Since 2♥ showed precisely 4 hearts and 3N presumably denied 4 spades, Opener's only possible shape is now 3424 (or, f you allow it with a singleton top honour, 3415.)) But even then, how could Responder expect partner to bid 4N unless he already knew about the club fit? Maybe 3N already showed 3424 shape, the way you play, because Opener would bypass 3N with diamond support?

HombreEast, on 2024-December-17, 17:54, said:

The question was would 4N have been RKCB or "to play"?

I’d like to see an example of 4N being used as a (very self-preemptive!) minor suit analogue to Non-Serious 3NT in a top level event like the Bermuda Bowl or the Open European Teams Championship!

[thepossum]

HombreEast, on 2024-December-09, 13:07, said:

Hi, the bidding went 1N-p-2C (Stayman)-p; 2H-p-3D-p; 3N-p-4C-p; 4N. What does 4N mean or ask in this sequence?
Note: we do NOT bid minor-suit Stayman nor do we bid transfers after 1N opening.

I think I have no idea what it means
Let's go quant

Blackwood in clubs perhaps?

But first line says I have no idea

[mikeh]

nullve, on 2024-December-18, 01:57, said:

I've reread your posts, and this seems like new information.

With this agreement (2♥ = 4 hearts, not 2♥ = 4-5 hearts), Opener might have bid 3♥ over 3♦ as a wake-up call (since he can't be showing a 5th heart) with no club stopper, e.g. on the hand I gave above, which was

KTx
AQxx
AKx
xxx

.

I'm not sure how to interpret this. Certainly, it's neither the case that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦ = "My interest is diamonds as trumps"

nor that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N = "I intend to play 3NT"

nor that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N = "I intend to play 3NT because my shape is 3424"

?

The meaning of a call (including 4N when used as RKC!) is essentially just a set of hands and it's often possible to describe that set without using mentalistic terms like 'said', 'interest', 'intending' and so on. For example,

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦ = 5+D3-H and either a) game values and a small singleton or void [mentalistically, Responder is "uncertain" about 3NT even if there's no 4-4 spade fit], or b) slam values

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; ?:

3♥ = 2-3 spades and either good hearts or no club stopper
3♠ = 4 spades
3N = 2-3 spades and clubs stopped

(I'm not claiming that the above is exactly what you play, though.)


You know your own system best, but is it really true in your system that

1N-2♣; 2♥-3♦; 3N-4♣ = slammish with 5 good diamonds [not, more generally, 5+ diamonds], 4 good clubs [not, more generally, 4+ clubs] and a small singleton heart [not, more generally, 3 or fewer hearts]

?

Might NOT be RKCB and get passed, you mean? And was his hand also unsuitable for 4♥ and 4♠ (cuebids with clubs as trumps, don't you agree?)?


Despite what mikeh says, I still think it makes sense for 4NT to be RKC agreeing clubs by failure to show diamond preference. (Since 2♥ showed precisely 4 hearts and 3N presumably denied 4 spades, Opener's only possible shape is now 3424 (or, f you allow it with a singleton top honour, 3415.)) But even then, how could Responder expect partner to bid 4N unless he already knew about the club fit? Maybe 3N already showed 3424 shape, the way you play, because Opener would bypass 3N with diamond support?


I’d like to see an example of 4N being used as a (very self-preemptive!) minor suit analogue to Non-Serious 3NT in a top level event like the Bermuda Bowl or the Open European Teams Championship!

Lol


If I posted that the sun rose in the east in the northern hemisphere, you’d claim that it rose in the west.


Also, if you think I’m wrong, tell us how you’d bid as opener with that AQ10 KQJ9 Kx xxxx example I set out. Iow, try thinking rather than simply disagreeing. Try articulating your reasoning.