[blackshoe]

---

You have not discussed what 4♥ may mean in this auction. What's your call? Why?

[Fluffy]

Fold, because partner is captain and he probably though that slam was suitable only opposite 4 card hearts. On my land there is no splinter with 4♥ since 4♥ is always to play. On a land where 1♠-4♥ is splinter I would think about splinter as well. If this is an UI situation pass is obvious

[Cyberyeti]

To me it means whatever 1N-2♣-2♠-4♥ would mean in your system, which for us is a non specific spade slam try but I don't expect it to be that for anybody else, more likely a splinter. Is 3♥ forcing ? I would expect it to be and partner can bid 3♥ then 4♥ if that's where he wants to play.

[MrAce]

I agree with Cyber. It should mean whatever it would be without the transfer and I would bid accordingly. 4♠

[CSGibson]

It depends on the rest of your structure. Was partner able to show a heart single-suiter over 1N, for example? What would other calls have meant as follow-ups to 2♥? Without knowing what other options were available, its impossible to determine what 4♥ should be.

If I were in this situation, I would logic out what other hand types are available, how partner might have bid with those hand types, and assign a different meaning to 4 hearts if possible.

[wank]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-April-10, 17:06, said:

To me it means whatever 1N-2♣-2♠-4♥ would mean in your system, which for us is a non specific spade slam try but I don't expect it to be that for anybody else, more likely a splinter. Is 3♥ forcing ? I would expect it to be and partner can bid 3♥ then 4♥ if that's where he wants to play.

no you're comparing apples and oranges. if you assume it's a raise, rather than fluffy's interpretation, it should be a shortage of some variety. as they're playing precision , 3s is a non-descript gf raise.

[PhilKing]

I have no idea what is going on, so I bid 4♠ - I don't think partner is splintering and I don't think he has hearts.

And I am pretty certain I disagree with his bidding.

[MrAce]

 CSGibson, on 2014-April-10, 17:33, said:

It depends on the rest of your structure. Was partner able to show a heart single-suiter over 1N, for example? What would other calls have meant as follow-ups to 2♥? Without knowing what other options were available, its impossible to determine what 4♥ should be.

If I were in this situation, I would logic out what other hand types are available, how partner might have bid with those hand types, and assign a different meaning to 4 hearts if possible.

I played precision long time. In fact that is what I started bridge with. Although you are right that the structure is important and there are as many precision versions as the pairs who plays it, if opener had long hearts he would have bid them over 1 NT imo unless they play some sort of relays (but this seems unlikely, given that he did not continue relays) We can also conclude from the word in OP (alert of 2♣, staymanic-whatever that means but I assume it is stayman until later which may show clubs-or something else) that opener should have at least one 4 card major.

[Lord Molyb]

My system has a 2♥ bid available over 1NT to show the single-suiter, so I would take this as a slam try. I have nothing to say (although I have a bit extra), so I call 4♠.

[PhilKing]

Oh, I forgot the "why": since Blackshoe is asking, I assume I am in trouble, so I make the cheapest action other than pass ...

[mfa1010]

"Guess my system" is a tough quiz, but I would take any undiscussed leap to 4M as natural if at all feasible. It is feasible here.

[blackshoe]

I think East would have a way to show a heart single suiter, but I'm not certain. 3♥ by East after 2♥ would be forcing, yes.

[mfa1010]

I like that you call partner's bidding "staymanic". That is probably accurate.

[CSGibson]

 MrAce, on 2014-April-10, 17:50, said:

I played precision long time. In fact that is what I started bridge with. Although you are right that the structure is important and there are as many precision versions as the pairs who plays it, if opener had long hearts he would have bid them over 1 NT imo unless they play some sort of relays (but this seems unlikely, given that he did not continue relays) We can also conclude from the word in OP (alert of 2♣, staymanic-whatever that means but I assume it is stayman until later which may show clubs-or something else) that opener should have at least one 4 card major.

I don't want to give them a sensible precision agreement because they have already wrong-sided the NT, so I assume that they don't have them. I don't think the 4H as splinter interpretation makes sense if 2S would be forcing with 4 spades, and I don't think that the 4H to play interpretation makes sense unless they didn't have a way of showing a single-suiter over 1N - what the hell are they doing staymaning, they can just bid their heart suit and get a NT reply, a raise, or a "superaccept" cue-bid response.

I also don't think this is a reasonable question without additional information.

[mfa1010]

 CSGibson, on 2014-April-10, 18:36, said:

I don't want to give them a sensible precision agreement because they have already wrong-sided the NT, so I assume that they don't have them.

That system criticism is open for debate. 1N as a response to 1C has to mean something (or would you forbid responder to bid NTs?), and even though a balanced hand is frequent, being balanced means that the wrongsiding is much-much less bad on average than if 1N was some unbalanced type with some shortage(s). The actual hand is fine as declarer for instance, with honours in every suit to get the lead around to.

[SteveMoe]

I'd expect partner has 4=1=4=4 or the rough equivalent. 4N is Keycard for ♠ so that's my bid.
If partner duly alerted my 2♥ bid then the other likely explanation no longer applies (partner forgot we play exclusion Stayman).

Like Chris I don't like 1NT with 8-10. I prefer the nebulous 1♥ response with 8-11, or 2♣ (with 1 or 2 4-card Majors) or 2♦(bal & no 4-card major or ♦s).

[MrAce]

I agree with MFA. Adding that there are a lot of pairs who uses 1♦ respond just like 2♣-2♦ waiting bid, or willing to start relays after opener makes his 2nd bid, with hands that he for some reason do not want his hand to be the puppet but the master. Thus with less suitable hands for 1 NT respond, some pairs have the ability to not bid it.

Chris, for example all the positive responses were limited to 8-12 in the version i played so it made it easier when relays started to define the exact shape and values.(8-10 and 11-12 were the ranges with A=2 K=1 controls method) With 0-7 or 13+ responder started with 1♦ and became the master hand in the auction.Also when needed, we had the ability to get out of relays and bid the game we are likely to play to prevent info leak.

[steve2005]

4♥ makes no sense in a Precision context. if its show 1-suited ♥ bids 2♥ previous round. With a ♥ 2-suiter and a minor still 2♥.

Even with a splinter I would probably bid 2♠ to rightside the contract and get to use the asking bids that we actually have discussed rather than an undiscussed 4♥

So I have to ask the question no one wants to ask. How familiar is he with the system and could he have forgotten?

but I would bid 4♠

[gszes]

 Fluffy, on 2014-April-10, 17:02, said:

Fold, because partner is captain and he probably though that slam was suitable only opposite 4 card hearts. On my land there is no splinter with 4♥ since 4♥ is always to play. On a land where 1♠-4♥ is splinter I would think about splinter as well. If this is an UI situation pass is obvious

I have heard this argument many times and the window for when a hand is suitable for slam
ONLY when p has 4 hearts and not 3 seems so tiny as to be invisible. Surely there have to
be better uses for 4h here.

Since 2h would have shown a heart suit and gf 4h here as hearts seems just not right. Having
failed to bid 2h this jump to 4h would almost have to be a splinter since little else makes sense
here. As for the responder they have 8 decent hcp outside of hearts I personally would bid 5s
as a quatitative jump to show this but others like to cue bid while I save my cue bids for hands
that have the (heart) ace and nothing else wasted (in case p splintered with a void which they
can do with even less power and the ace carries less value under those conditions).

[blackshoe]

 mfa1010, on 2014-April-10, 18:28, said:

"Guess my system" is a tough quiz, but I would take any undiscussed leap to 4M as natural if at all feasible. It is feasible here.

"Guess my system" is pretty much what EW were doing.

At the table, West bid 4♠, everyone passed, and when East put down the dummy, North called for the director. A loud and vociferous argument ensued, mostly between North and East, which the director had difficulty stifling. During all this, West was asked what 4♥ meant, and he said it was "undiscussed". North commented that it ought to be a splinter and East said "yeah, that's right, it's a splinter". Things got more heated. Here's the full hand:

---

North maintained that West had UI from East's failure to alert 2♥ and that there was a logical alternative (pass) to 4♠. The director called ACBL HQ for advice and was told that the UI (and MI) "didn't matter", that West is allowed to attempt to "rescue" the contract. The director later called the club owner, explained the situation, and left the ruling to him. I don't know what he finally decided.

I noted after the session that there's another infraction here: West should have called the director himself before the opening lead was faced and explained that East had failed to alert 2♥. He didn't. The director did not address this infraction at all.

The EW pair did have at least one system card, but apparently it didn't cover this auction. Of course, there's not a lot of room on the ACBL card to do that.

Maybe I should have put this in "Laws and Rulings" to start with, but I wanted to get a sense of what folks thought about the auction before talking about a UI (or MI) ruling. I didn't want to split it into two threads (one here, one there) and unfortunately I can't move the thread from here. Anyway, what do folks think about the ruling?