[pescetom]

Assuming you play a fairly natural 5-card major system and agree the sequence 1♥-1♠; 2♣-2♦ to be an artificial Fourth Suit Forcing, forcing to game and requesting opener primarily to raise ♠ with a 3-card fit or to bid NT with some degree of stop in ♦, what would you prefer or expect the sequence 1♥-1♠; 2♣-3♦ to mean ?

[Tramticket]

pescetom, on 2018-October-18, 05:22, said:

what would you prefer or expect the sequence 1♥-1♠; 2♣-3♦ to mean ?

The unhelpful answer is "whatever you and your partner have agreed"! I don't think that there is unanimous agreement on this, but for us it is a splinter, with club support. Some play the bid as 5-5 in spades and diamonds.

There are some sequences where opener might have four cards in the fourth suit (1♦, 1♥; 1♠ ... opener might have a 4441 hand with a singleton heart). In this case some play that the jump shows four cards in the 4th suit, other would simply bid the 4th suit and expect opener to raise with this 4441 shape.

[pescetom]

Tramticket, on 2018-October-18, 06:27, said:

The unhelpful answer is "whatever you and your partner have agreed"! I don't think that there is unanimous agreement on this, but for us it is a splinter, with club support. Some play the bid as 5-5 in spades and diamonds.

The problem of course is that we hadn't agreed. I'm pretty sure there is no unanimous agreement, otherwise I wouldn't have thought of two possible explanations - the ones you mention - which turned out to be different from the one partner had in mind
I discarded the first hypothesis because we don't usually splinter over Opener's minors, so decided for 5-card ♠ and 5+card ♦. Partner intended it to be a plain request to bid 3NT with ♣ stopped, without FSF implications.

Let's see if others prefer yet another agreement.

[pescetom]

Tramticket, on 2018-October-18, 06:27, said:

There are some sequences where opener might have four cards in the fourth suit (1♦, 1♥; 1♠ ... opener might have a 4441 hand with a singleton heart). In this case some play that the jump shows four cards in the 4th suit, other would simply bid the 4th suit and expect opener to raise with this 4441 shape.

Does it have implications about responder's first suit as well? Otherwise it seems odd, as you say opener can always "raise" the FSF suit anyway. If it said "I have 4-card ♣ but the ♥ are not stopped" or "I have ♣ stopped but also 5-card ♥" it would seem more useful to me.

[Cyberyeti]

We play it as a splinter. We have unusual arrangements for 4441s, in that we don't raise the 4th suit if minimum, we bid NT, now rebidding the 4th suit is natural.

Where opener can't have 4 cards in 4th suit, raising the 4th suit is "5th suit forcing" showing extras and no clear bid.

[dsLawsd]

Perhaps solid clubs, no diamond stopper- so partner do something intelligent.
I suppose an alternative would be 6 clubs- 4 diamonds with good suits.

[GrahamJson]

This sequence is a good example of a bid that you shouldn’t make unless you have a clear agreement as to what it means (this might be a general rule such as “a jump when a non-jump would be forcing is a splinter”). To make this bid without some sort of agreement would be inviting disaster, especially if one partner thinks it shows a five card suit whilst the other thinks it shows a singleton. Winning the postmortem is of little satisfaction if you’ve just lost 12 imps.

[nekthen]

I cannot see the value in it being a cue bid. I would go with the natural solution of a 5 5 hand, the interesting question is whether it is weak or GF. As you could rebid the 4th suit to show the GF version I vote for a weak hand at least 55 how else can you bid this

---

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2018-October-19, 03:44, said:

I cannot see the value in it being a cue bid. I would go with the natural solution of a 5 5 hand, the interesting question is whether it is weak or GF. As you could rebid the 4th suit to show the GF version I vote for a weak hand at least 55 how else can you bid this

---

I don't want to be at the 3 level on a 2 suited misfit opposite an 11 count, 1100 beckons.

I'd much rather bid 1♥-1♠-2♣-3♦ on say AKxxx, xx, x, Kxxxx

[nekthen]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-October-19, 04:30, said:

I don't want to be at the 3 level on a 2 suited misfit opposite an 11 count, 1100 beckons.

I'd much rather bid 1♥-1♠-2♣-3♦ on say AKxxx, xx, x, Kxxxx

Would you rather be in 2♥? or 2♣? I'd rather take my chances on finding a 5-3 fit

But the main thing is that partner understands me!

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2018-October-19, 05:22, said:

Would you rather be in 2♥? or 2♣? I'd rather take my chances on finding a 5-3 fit

But the main thing is that partner understands me!

Yes I would,you are only good where partner is 1534 and you're a level higher if he isn't.

[miamijd]

As others have noted, there are two logical alternatives here:

1. GF, club support, splinter in diamonds
2. GF, 5/5+ in spades / diamonds

I like option 1 better, because the second hand can be shown (though not as perfectly) via 2D (4SF) followed by 3D.

There are probably other good ways to play this bid, but none that are super-common.

Using 3D as a stopper ask is silly. 2D (4SF) does that just fine.

Cheers,
Mike

[kanchi]

That bid shows a good opening hand with 4 or5 card d forcing to game

[pescetom]

miamijd, on 2018-October-19, 12:23, said:

As others have noted, there are two logical alternatives here:

1. GF, club support, splinter in diamonds
2. GF, 5/5+ in spades / diamonds

I like option 1 better, because the second hand can be shown (though not as perfectly) via 2D (4SF) followed by 3D.

There are probably other good ways to play this bid, but none that are super-common.

Using 3D as a stopper ask is silly. 2D (4SF) does that just fine.

This seems to be pretty much the consensus view.

In defence of using 3♦ as a stopper ask, when 4th suit needs stopping it could be effective to have a second string besides 4SF in order to differentiate the degree of stopper required (4SF=full 3♦=half, or similar). But I agree it's barely worth complicating the system for.
Option 1 is fine, but it doesn't fit well into our system and again it's no great loss.
So I guess we will go with Option 2, thanks to all who replied.

[dokoko]

I don't think there is enough need for artificial forcing bids to completely rule out a contract in the fourth suit. So a jump in the 4th suit is natural if lower than responder's first suit.

How strong should this be? Playing 4th suit FG we can at least hope to rebid the 4th suit naturally (showing a 55 game force) - in fact to jump in response to FSF opener should have very good reason. As others pointed out there is no case for jumping with a weak hand; just choose from partner's suits or rebid your first suit. So the logical thing is to play the 4th suit jump as a natural invite.

[dokoko]

nekthen, on 2018-October-19, 03:44, said:

I cannot see the value in it being a cue bid. I would go with the natural solution of a 5 5 hand, the interesting question is whether it is weak or GF. As you could rebid the 4th suit to show the GF version I vote for a weak hand at least 55 how else can you bid this

---

I pass 2♣ - and next time bid diamonds if I get the chance. 2♣-4 beats 3♠X-2

[Caitlynne]

I prefer to play it as a Splinter showing 4+ card length in opener's second suit and - importantly - shortness in opener's first bid suit.

For example, in the sequence given (1H-1S, 2C-3D), one might expect responder's hand to be something like this:
AQxxx
x
QJx
KJxx

The reason that shortness in opener's first bid suit is important is that a simple 4th suit forcing bid would be best with support, e.g.,
AQxxx
Qx
xx
KJxx
Now responder rebids 2D. This gives opener a chance to describe his hand, perhaps showing 3 card spade support, emphasizing hearts, bidding NT with diamond values, or raising diamonds with 4 cards in diamonds (i.e., a 0544 pattern). No matter what opener does next, responder is usually well placed to lead the remainder of the auction.

[helene_t]

5-5 invitational

[msjennifer]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-October-18, 09:52, said:

We play it as a splinter. We have unusual arrangements for 4441s, in that we don't raise the 4th suit if minimum, we bid NT, now rebidding the 4th suit is natural.

Where opener can't have 4 cards in 4th suit, raising the 4th suit is "5th suit forcing" showing extras and no clear bid.

Sir,I personally think that what you say is indeed logical and fair enough.However,there is a question whether the 2C bid is natural or a sort of Gazzilli when the 2D by responder is a forced bid,and which one is preferable.

[phntmshark]

We play it as long diamonds with 4 spades and on the weakish side.