[cnszsun]

One bidding sequence i kibitzed at a table:
1♣-(1♥)-dbl*-(1♠)
3♣-(ps)-3♥-(ps)
3♠-(ps)-4♣-(ps)
?
double is conventional, showing less than 4♠s
you bid 3♠ to ask for stop

How do you interpret this sequence?
Is your partner 4♣ non-forcing (fail to find 3nt), or slam try (your partner has to bid 5♣ if he want to stop)?

[jdonn]

First one (non forcing). If partner had a slam try he could bid 4♣ directly over 3♣ without introducing confusion. That bid would have been 100% forcing.

I like to play bids like this 3♥ are forcing to game, with the exception that I can stop in 4 of a minor when 3NT was aimed at and missed. I admit I have never added further definition to when this occurs, but I can't recall not knowing and this one seems obvious to me.

[skjaeran]

Normally, when opps have bid two suits, a cuebid shows a stopper and asks partner to bid 3NT with the other suit stopped. Some play it the other way around - a cuebid asks for a stopper and promises a stopper in the other suit.

Partner then either bids 3NT with the required stopper or returns to 4♣'s, which might be passed. If the 3♥ bidder goes on past 4♣, 3♥ was an advance cuebid, exploring slam.

Here opener neither bid 3NT - thus denying the required stopper - nor bid 4♣, non-forcing. Instead he made a 3♠ cuebid. That should be gameforcing. Thus 4♣ is forcing - he set up the force himself. Partner probably temporizes, maybe he wants to hear a 4♦ cuebid.

[000002]

if i can bid 3nt,i would not play 5minor contract.
apparently,3♥/♠ probe into this puzzle but it's game seeking only.

if i want cuebid i should cue 4♦/♥/♠ instead of 4♣.






regards 000002

[inquiry]

Not forcing.

[jtfanclub]

Sorry, I know, wrong forum for non-experts like me.

You said "you bid 3♠ to ask for stop".

Therefore, 4♣ is nonforcing.

If 3♠ showed a stop, and didn't ask for a stop, then I wouldn't know the answer. But in this case, the answer is obvious.

4♣ just means 'I don't have a spade stop'.

[SoTired]

If responder wanted to play 3N and had both stoppers, responder could bid 3N. But responder bid 3H, showing a heart stopper and denying a spade stopper. Opener is supposed to bid 3N with a spade stopper. Opener, strangely, then bids 3S denying a spade stopper. Responder bids 4C confirming the club suit and again denying a spade stopper. The bidding is now confused.

So what was 3S? "Please look again partner. Maybe the ♠K is hidden among your clubs." No... Opener does not want to bid 4C and get passed out there, so opener bids 3S first (probably shortness). Or maybe, opener's club suit is not that great and opener has tolerance for diam.

Was 3H = "I have a heart q-bid and club fit, but don't want to waste bidding space with an immediate 4C, so I am bidding 3H first." No... too obtuse. You can bid 4C first and q-bid 4H below 5C.

Conclusion: Stopping on the 4C dime seems difficult in normal auctions. In this confusing one, I would not risk it. 5C is a reasonable contract and opener should not pass

[P_Marlowe]

forcing.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Mar 10 2007, 12:23 AM, said:

First one (non forcing). If partner had a slam try he could bid 4♣ directly over 3♣ without introducing confusion. That bid would have been 100% forcing.

I like to play bids like this 3♥ are forcing to game, with the exception that I can stop in 4 of a minor when 3NT was aimed at and missed. I admit I have never added further definition to when this occurs, but I can't recall not knowing and this one seems obvious to me.

ditto

[pclayton]

The sequence is NF.

Echo what Josh said, although I'd add that 3♠ in this context tends to show a partial stop.

[Halo]

Stopping on a quark.

I would never pass.

[Echognome]

I hate to contradict BBITW, but for me 3♥ set up a game force, so 4♣ is forcing.

[mike777]

Partner made a jump rebid.
I cuebid meaning something
Partner cuebid meaning whatever
Stopping in 4clubs too tough and the least of my worries.

[cnszsun]

I don't think the answers are that obvious.
For example, you play it as non forcing. 3♥, 3♠ are both probing for 3nt, then we've failed to reach it, so we are glad to stop at 4♣.
Next time, you have a hand with slam interest and want to start cue-bidding, you have to bid 4♣ first rather than bidding 3♥ before showing ♣ fit. But i have found many people mentioning advance-cubbid all the time.
Are there any people playing 4♣ as Minorwood here? If yes, how do you set ♣ as trump and start cue-bid later?

[jdonn]

cnszsun, on Mar 10 2007, 08:14 PM, said:

I don't think the answers are that obvious.
For example, you play it as non forcing. 3♥, 3♠ are both probing for 3nt, then we've failed to reach it, so we are glad to stop at 4♣.
Next time, you have a hand with slam interest and want to start cue-bidding, you have to bid 4♣ first rather than bidding 3♥ before showing ♣ fit. But i have found many people mentioning advance-cubbid all the time.
Are there any people playing 4♣ as Minorwood here? If yes, how do you set ♣ as trump and start cue-bid later?

3♥ could definitely be an advance cuebid at the time it is bid, but then to clarify that's what it is the next bid should be another cuebid or perhaps blackwood (or 4♣ if partner DOES bid 3NT, since then it can't be misinterpreted.)

Personally I rarely bid this way as I think it can lead to confusion, and I am happy to simply bid 4♣ when I have slam interest and see what develops. But that is what I would take it as if partner made those bids, and it's possible I would as well though unlikely.

Playing 4♣ minorwood is a terrible agreement there. I would rather not play any ace asking bid at all than play that. So much more important in slam auctions to gather both players' opinions than for one to just ask a question which may not even solve his problems.

[cnszsun]

jdonn, on Mar 11 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

cnszsun, on Mar 10 2007, 08:14 PM, said:

I don't think the answers are that obvious.
For example, you play it as non forcing. 3♥, 3♠ are both probing for 3nt, then we've failed to reach it, so we are glad to stop at 4♣.
Next time, you have a hand with slam interest and want to start cue-bidding, you have to bid 4♣ first rather than bidding 3♥ before showing ♣ fit. But i have found many people mentioning advance-cubbid all the time.
Are there any people playing 4♣ as Minorwood here? If yes, how do you set ♣ as trump and start cue-bid later?

3♥ could definitely be an advance cuebid at the time it is bid, but then to clarify that's what it is the next bid should be another cuebid or perhaps blackwood (or 4♣ if partner DOES bid 3NT, since then it can't be misinterpreted.)

Personally I rarely bid this way as I think it can lead to confusion, and I am happy to simply bid 4♣ when I have slam interest and see what develops. But that is what I would take it as if partner made those bids, and it's possible I would as well though unlikely.

Playing 4♣ minorwood is a terrible agreement there. I would rather not play any ace asking bid at all than play that. So much more important in slam auctions to gather both players' opinions than for one to just ask a question which may not even solve his problems.

Thanks, josh. I agree with you 100%.

[mike777]

cnszsun, on Mar 10 2007, 08:14 PM, said:

I don't think the answers are that obvious.
For example, you play it as non forcing. 3♥, 3♠ are both probing for 3nt, then we've failed to reach it, so we are glad to stop at 4♣.
Next time, you have a hand with slam interest and want to start cue-bidding, you have to bid 4♣ first rather than bidding 3♥ before showing ♣ fit. But i have found many people mentioning advance-cubbid all the time.
Are there any people playing 4♣ as Minorwood here? If yes, how do you set ♣ as trump and start cue-bid later?

Playing kickback.....4d over 3s is clearly rkc...not natural or cuebid or other.

[Rebound]

If I may interject:
If 3♥ shows a stop in one major and lack of a stop in the other, doesn't that make using 3♠ to ask for a stop a redundancy, regardless of which suit is stopped by the 3♥ bidder? Wouldn't that make it a cuebid in support of ♣ or a slam probe of some sort? I don't believe this makes asking about the 4♣ response being forcing a useful question. I would ask instead, what is 3♠ forcing to?

[000002]

Rebound, on Mar 12 2007, 01:40 AM, said:

If I may interject:
If 3♥ shows a stop in one major and lack of a stop in the other, doesn't that make using 3♠ to ask for a stop a redundancy, regardless of which suit is stopped by the 3♥ bidder? Wouldn't that make it a cuebid in support of ♣ or a slam probe of some sort? I don't believe this makes asking about the 4♣ response being forcing a useful question. I would ask instead, what is 3♠ forcing to?

i love this challenge!

3answer,combine it with ur dear pard.

shortness in ♠ ;
alone ♥A stopper;
lack of key card on key suit--♣A or K.




regards 000002

[helene_t]

To me, 4♣ is always forcing unless it can't be. I know this isn't optimal, but I'd rather miss the golden 4♣ contract once on a blue monday than having to torture myself with questions about the forcing character of all kinds of non-discussed 4♣ bids.