[mycroft]

Long time Flight A partnership, you play Suction/NT, including separated bids for the non-touching 2-suiters (so 2NT shows ♣+♥, and 3♣ shows ♦+♠). At IMPs, teams in contention, round 4 of 7:

---

• What is 3♦?
  
• What is your call?

And what is your reasoning for your decisions?

Spoiler

Bonus question: why am I asking?

[fuzzyquack]

I'd have an inv in ♥ by general principles of two-suiter bidding. I cue just in case I hit something like Jxxxx, QTx, Axx, xx

[apollo1201]

I guess part is very happy of one of your suits and has some D values that if not facing your sg might be useful for a high level contract in that suit.

Presumably H, I guess.

[apollo1201]

Had not seen the spolier question

There were for sure mistakes around which 2-suiter was held

[helene_t]

Agree that 3♦ is a game try, which we obviously accept. My first thought was just to bid 4♥.

Spoiler

But if p explained 2NT wrongly, and a 3♠ is a logical alternative, it is awkward

[Winstonm]

Genuine diamonds is pretty senseless. 3D sounds like tolerance for both suits but no clear choice but enough hand to invite game. I would bid 4H.

[mikeh]

Partner has at least 4 spades…opener may have 5 but responder didn’t transfer so should have at most 4. It’s barely possible that advancer has something like 4=2=6=1 and is hoping we can pass 3D, but if he has that, then we have an 8 card major fit and a ruffing value in his hand….they can’t negate that without helping us in trump.

More often partner has 5+ spades and in my partnership, if we played suction…we don’t…we’d be bidding at favourable with almost any 5=6 pointed suits, But some are more cautious so he might be 5=2=6=0. What he won’t have is equal length in my suits. With that he bids 3C, intending to run to 3D if doubled (assuming 3D was intended as natural).

Ok, I bid 4H.

It’s only one disaster if I’m wrong, and it’s at favourable….and our opposite numbers don’t rate to do much better.

Edit: there seems only one other logical explanation, but it’s too esoteric even for me. What would/should advancer bid with say xxxxx Axxx AQx x?


Grand is very good and while it’s still biddable after a jump to 4H by advancer, he might not see it that way. However,t he problem with inventing a ‘slam try cue bid’ 3D is ttatvsomehow partners are rarely on the same wavelength and disaster may ensue

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3D has to be a super accept, it still leaves the door open to play 3H, so
it may ask for min / max.
Your hand is max, and I would bid 4H.

I would say that 3H has to be default, so may or may not be my better suit.
4C would imply, that heart is the better suit.

3S instead of 3D would also be super accept, asking for the better suit.

My reason is simple: Partner showes 2-suits, we play in one of his suits,
I dont introduce a suit of my own, and it does not even matter, that I had already
a chance to speak.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[fuzzyquack]

[quote name='P_Marlowe' timestamp='1707916458' post='1061831']
You should explore for a slam if 3D was encouraging in H and you are at least near to an expert. The post is an apparent UI case investigation of a forget of 2N meaning with South bidding 4H to wake up his partner.

[P_Marlowe]

fuzzyquack, on 2024-February-14, 12:46, said:

You should explore for a slam if 3D was encouraging in H and you are at least near to an expert. The post is an apparent UI case investigation of a forget of 2N meaning with South bidding 4H to wake up his partner.

I was saying 3D was a super accept, but unclear which suit.

The thing is, I have no idea how weak a intervention over a strong NT could be, given the colors.
But than we are reopening, and we dont want to go for numbers, when they were content to play a part score,
i.e. it cant be too wild, it already showes something.

I also give up on slam, when they open a strong NT, ..., I usually dont even try for game.

Finnally, even if I wanted to make a slam move, I have no idea how, without bypassing 4H.
A 4S bid would certainly show a spade void, ..., hopefully partner will be understanding, when we
end up 5H-1.

[johnu]

My guess is that partner had a diamond preference and thought 2NT showed the minors.

[mycroft]

Very interesting. I didn't get that at all from the people I polled.

Yes, of course it's a ruling question :-)

I'm surprised I got nobody to tell me what 2NT was explained as - because it was the obvious forget "minors" and I would have expected at least one to offer that as the explanation for 3♦. [Edit: johnu beat me right under the bell!]

Frankly, all the arguments that this is a strong hand (that wasn't able to come in) make a lot more sense to me, as would the 4♥ call, than the "is it unauthorized panic?" 3♥ on the "I'm 6-5, not 5-5".

I don't think I'll go into the ruling or the result - I'm not sure it matters?

[pescetom]

mycroft, on 2024-February-14, 20:01, said:

I don't think I'll go into the ruling or the result - I'm not sure it matters?

Please do if you have time.
Maybe in a new thread under Laws and Rulings so that people interested in such things will find it and maybe ask some pertinent questions.