[pescetom]

MP

---

Your partner's 1♦ opening is at least 4 cards and does not deny 4 clubs.
Your 2♦ raise is natural and competitive with 4 cards (maybe 5 given the vulnerability).
What do you make of 3♣ and what is your call?

[mike777]

4C,

Take 3C as game try, natural
Will pass 4D
Will take 4H as RKC, Diamonds are trump
Will pass 5C or 5D over my 4C call.

Why?

I don't think partner has a balanced hand if that matters..

[mikeh]

3C sounds like clubs. The relative lack of competition suggests he has at least 2 spades, which means my heart cards are of dubious value, other than preventing a tap…but we rate to have sufficient trump anyway. Swap my heart honours with two of my club spots, and I’d be delighted. But, as it is, I don’t much like my hand. Ax x AJxxx AQxxx is the sort of hand I’m thinking he has and, on the likely spade lead, we need a huge amount of luck not to lose 3 tricks. Make it Ax x AJxxx AKxxx and now it’s a game you want to be in at imps, even though it’s a (very) slight underdog. Edit: didn’t notice it was mps.

Edit: if it were imps, and given that I do have great trump I think I’m worth the mildest invite I can make: 4D. Denies any cuebid….I’m not telling him about my heart king because even if he has 2 hearts, I think that makes him something like 2=2=5=4 and now I dislike my hand even more. Meanwhile, 4D should reassure him about my diamond holding.

At mps, there are other factors at play. Partner knows it’s mps as well, so he should have a slightly higher ‘minimum’ range for the game try. So while the mp factor makes me more cautious, I think it’s offset by the assumption that partner will have a real hand more than he might at imps.

[mike777]

I think MikeH last sentence is very important and agree.

[mw64ahw]

3♣ feels like a bit of shape and the better suit that wants to be competitive over 2♠. 3♦ given 2♦ already described my hand. Partner can make more noise if they want

[jschafer]

We are maximum for our diamond raise and the 3♣ both increases our ♦ fit to 9+ and reveals a secondary ♣ fit, so hand feels a little better than previous round. I think I would try 3H.

[pescetom]

Thanks to those who replied so far and my apologies for not following up earlier, but I have been having persistent problems of access to the forum in last two days (is it only me?).

I bid 4C reasoning that I have a maximum and partner has a right to know about the double fit even if my clubs are poor, but on reflection I think mikeh is right that a straight 4D is the better choice.
I was concerned about what was going on because it's a new partnership and a rather unusual situation at a delicate point in the tournament (sure enough, it cost us first place).The opponents are a solid pair, so partner is unlikely to be thinking about 3NT as I see it and it takes quite a hand to make 11 tricks opposite my dummy.
It turned out my fear was justified, partner passed 4C and went down 2 for a bottom: 3D or even 4D-1 would have been fine. He clearly shouldn't have bid 3C just to compete with 2S on a 13 point balanced hand, but that is not the point of the post, I was just a bit uncertain about my own choice of 4C and wondering how others saw the situation.

I polled this on that other site and a Bulgarian majority chose 3H: not sure what to make of that, for me 3H was barely an LA.

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2026-August-10, 11:18, said:

Thanks to those who replied so far and my apologies for not following up earlier, but I have been having persistent problems of access to the forum in last two days (is it only me?).

I bid 4C reasoning that I have a maximum and partner has a right to know about the double fit even if my clubs are poor, but on reflection I think mikeh is right that a straight 4D is the better choice.
I was concerned about what was going on because it's a new partnership and a rather unusual situation at a delicate point in the tournament (sure enough, it cost us first place).The opponents are a solid pair, so partner is unlikely to be thinking about 3NT as I see it and it takes quite a hand to make 11 tricks opposite my dummy.
It turned out my fear was justified, partner passed 4C and went down 2 for a bottom: 3D or even 4D-1 would have been fine. He clearly shouldn't have bid 3C just to compete with 2S on a 13 point balanced hand, but that is not the point of the post, I was just a bit uncertain about my own choice of 4C and wondering how others saw the situation.

I polled this on that other site and a Bulgarian majority chose 3H: not sure what to make of that, for me 3H was barely an LA.

Where do you want to be opposite AQ, Qx, Axxxx, KJxx ? 3N seems reasonable, maybe you opened 1N on that, but that's why 3♥

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-August-10, 11:18, said:

(is it only me?).

no, I am having the same issues.

[mike777]

pescetom, on 2026-August-10, 11:18, said:

Thanks to those who replied so far and my apologies for not following up earlier, but I have been having persistent problems of access to the forum in last two days (is it only me?).

I bid 4C reasoning that I have a maximum and partner has a right to know about the double fit even if my clubs are poor, but on reflection I think mikeh is right that a straight 4D is the better choice.
I was concerned about what was going on because it's a new partnership and a rather unusual situation at a delicate point in the tournament (sure enough, it cost us first place).The opponents are a solid pair, so partner is unlikely to be thinking about 3NT as I see it and it takes quite a hand to make 11 tricks opposite my dummy.
It turned out my fear was justified, partner passed 4C and went down 2 for a bottom: 3D or even 4D-1 would have been fine. He clearly shouldn't have bid 3C just to compete with 2S on a 13 point balanced hand, but that is not the point of the post, I was just a bit uncertain about my own choice of 4C and wondering how others saw the situation.

I polled this on that other site and a Bulgarian majority chose 3H: not sure what to make of that, for me 3H was barely an LA.

Yes, terrible getting on site.

You did fine, perhaps 4D is better but 4C was not the issue. well done, congrats.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-August-10, 12:22, said:

Where do you want to be opposite AQ, Qx, Axxxx, KJxx ? 3N seems reasonable, maybe you opened 1N on that, but that's why 3♥

As you pointed out, partner can't have that hand...

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2026-August-10, 13:23, said:

As you pointed out, partner can't have that hand...

OK, AQ, Q, Axxxxx QJ10x or Ax, A, Axxxxx, QJ10x

There are plenty of hands where 3N by partner is the right spot and he wants to hear 3♥

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-August-10, 13:39, said:

OK, AQ, Q, Axxxxx QJ10x or Ax, A, Axxxxx, QJ10x

There are plenty of hands where 3N by partner is the right spot and he wants to hear 3♥

Not that many I think...on second example 5 of minor good chances...

[pescetom]

Luckily this was near the end of the tournament (otherwise we would have dropped from 68% to who knows where) but it caused a major hit in partnership confidence on both sides... partner is bright but has only being playing 5 years and somehow thought it made sense to shape out rather than merely compete, I wasn't sure myself if 4C was right in the circumstances.
Discussion over a beer at the end helped defuse things, but the better pairs available had no clear consensus about what to do over 3♣, beyond that it was forcing (at least to 3♦) and had to be at least a game try, which is what I assumed.
I am interested in the frequency of hands where 3N is the right spot.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2026-August-10, 13:44, said:

Not that many I think...on second example 5 of minor good chances...

It has very little chance on correct defence (3 rounds of clubs v 5♦, diamond lead v 5♣)