Is this hand an ethical issue? - Updated with minors in correct order! Please disregard thread immediately below.

[Jonathan Ferguson]

I derped and mispresented the hand in the topic immediately below. Here is the hand with the suits in the correct order:

Unfavorable, 2nd seat

54 K732 KQT864 2

P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?

You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.

Over 3S you bid 4H.

What is 4N and what do you bid?





...

Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?

Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

https://ibb.co/c5EEMz

[ais523]

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?
...
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

Updating my previous answer for the corrected hand:

a) If partner has a bid that shows both minors over 2S, then the X
must show hearts, and thus 4N can only realistically be the Blackwood
variant that the partnership plays. I would answer it honestly. There's
basically no judgement in this action, thus no logical alternatives,
thus no ethical constraints.

b) If partner doesn't have a way to show both minors over 2S, this 4NT
might potentially be a both-minors bid. I still think a Blackwood-alike
is a more likely possibility (if partner has both minors, why didn't
the opponents bid more?), so in the absense of UI I'd answer. However,
the tanking makes it more likely still that it's a Blackwood bid
(both-minors wouldn't need much thought, and you're /supposed/ to plan
out the rest of the hand before bidding Blackwood), and thus the Laws
would require me to respond as if it were a both-minors bid, i.e.
respond 5D. (If that happens to be the correct answer to the Blackwood
question too, so much the better!)

I've also been considering the possibility that 4NT is natural but it
seems unlikely; "I care about notrump only if you have hearts" is
effectively showing both minors in this situation, and even if this is
somehow a natural notrump bid, pulling to diamonds is likely the best
option anyway with the minors that unbalanced.

[Elliot]

Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S is the call.

[Dave Flower]

Post by Elliot
Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S is the call.

I think the most likely interpretation of partner's hesitation is that they are uncertain of the meaning of 4NT, and your posting of the problem suggests that you are as well!

It seems to me, therefore, that there is no ethical problem as the reason for the hesitation comes from partnership lack of agreement, which is AI.

Dave Flower

[Co Wiersma]

Post by ais523

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?
...
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

a) If partner has a bid that shows both minors over 2S, then the X
must show hearts, and thus 4N can only realistically be the Blackwood
variant that the partnership plays. I would answer it honestly. There's
basically no judgement in this action, thus no logical alternatives,
thus no ethical constraints.
b) If partner doesn't have a way to show both minors over 2S, this 4NT
might potentially be a both-minors bid. I still think a Blackwood-alike
is a more likely possibility (if partner has both minors, why didn't
the opponents bid more?), so in the absense of UI I'd answer. However,
the tanking makes it more likely still that it's a Blackwood bid
(both-minors wouldn't need much thought, and you're /supposed/ to plan
out the rest of the hand before bidding Blackwood), and thus the Laws
would require me to respond as if it were a both-minors bid, i.e.
respond 5D. (If that happens to be the correct answer to the Blackwood
question too, so much the better!)
I've also been considering the possibility that 4NT is natural but it
seems unlikely; "I care about notrump only if you have hearts" is
effectively showing both minors in this situation, and even if this is
somehow a natural notrump bid, pulling to diamonds is likely the best
option anyway with the minors that unbalanced.

Seems to me that your agreements are poor

A simple and good agreement for takeout double is
it promise all three unbid suits with the emphasis on the unbid major
or a hand to strong for an overcall
And then 4NT can only be ace asking

If partner has a decent hand with both minors, partner should have
overcalled 3D
If partner has a extremely strong hand with both minors, partner should
have overcalled 4NT

Co Wiersma

[Eddie Grove]

Post by Co Wiersma

Post by ais523

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?
...
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

a) If partner has a bid that shows both minors over 2S, then the X
must show hearts, and thus 4N can only realistically be the Blackwood
variant that the partnership plays. I would answer it honestly. There's
basically no judgement in this action, thus no logical alternatives,
thus no ethical constraints.
b) If partner doesn't have a way to show both minors over 2S, this 4NT
might potentially be a both-minors bid. I still think a Blackwood-alike
is a more likely possibility (if partner has both minors, why didn't
the opponents bid more?), so in the absense of UI I'd answer. However,
the tanking makes it more likely still that it's a Blackwood bid
(both-minors wouldn't need much thought, and you're /supposed/ to plan
out the rest of the hand before bidding Blackwood), and thus the Laws
would require me to respond as if it were a both-minors bid, i.e.
respond 5D. (If that happens to be the correct answer to the Blackwood
question too, so much the better!)
I've also been considering the possibility that 4NT is natural but it
seems unlikely; "I care about notrump only if you have hearts" is
effectively showing both minors in this situation, and even if this is
somehow a natural notrump bid, pulling to diamonds is likely the best
option anyway with the minors that unbalanced.

Seems to me that your agreements are poor
A simple and good agreement for takeout double is
it promise all three unbid suits with the emphasis on the unbid major
or a hand to strong for an overcall
And then 4NT can only be ace asking

And how do you bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?

I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.


Eddie

[Co Wiersma]

Post by Eddie Grove

Post by Co Wiersma

Post by ais523

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?
...
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

a) If partner has a bid that shows both minors over 2S, then the X
must show hearts, and thus 4N can only realistically be the Blackwood
variant that the partnership plays. I would answer it honestly. There's
basically no judgement in this action, thus no logical alternatives,
thus no ethical constraints.
b) If partner doesn't have a way to show both minors over 2S, this 4NT
might potentially be a both-minors bid. I still think a Blackwood-alike
is a more likely possibility (if partner has both minors, why didn't
the opponents bid more?), so in the absense of UI I'd answer. However,
the tanking makes it more likely still that it's a Blackwood bid
(both-minors wouldn't need much thought, and you're /supposed/ to plan
out the rest of the hand before bidding Blackwood), and thus the Laws
would require me to respond as if it were a both-minors bid, i.e.
respond 5D. (If that happens to be the correct answer to the Blackwood
question too, so much the better!)
I've also been considering the possibility that 4NT is natural but it
seems unlikely; "I care about notrump only if you have hearts" is
effectively showing both minors in this situation, and even if this is
somehow a natural notrump bid, pulling to diamonds is likely the best
option anyway with the minors that unbalanced.

Seems to me that your agreements are poor
A simple and good agreement for takeout double is
it promise all three unbid suits with the emphasis on the unbid major
or a hand to strong for an overcall
And then 4NT can only be ace asking

And how do you bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?
I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.
Eddie

You right

Co Wiersma

[Steve Willner]

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?

Show one keycard for hearts or zero aces, whatever our Blackwood
agreement is.

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not
change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S
is the call.

That was my reaction too. If I had to guess, I'd think partner was
wondering whether he could afford BW or not. Perhaps he has a void, or
perhaps he can't see 12 tricks even if we have enough keycards or aces.
Whatever it is, it's not my problem.

Post by Elliot
And how [does partner] bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?

6NT? Or Blackwood? If partner has that hand, he's far too strong to
bid a non-forcing 4NT.

Post by Elliot
I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.

Perhaps in some other auction, where the "too strong for NT" hand would
be weaker than here?

[Eddie Grove]

Post by Steve Willner

Post by Eddie Grove

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?

I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.

Perhaps in some other auction, where the "too strong for NT" hand
would be weaker than here?

I don't get your point. A 2N overcall of 2S is not that different from a
1N overcall of 1S. Plenty of people play roughly 15-18 for both. The
"too strong for a simple NT overcall" hands are roughly the same. A jump
to 3N was assumed to be based upon a source of tricks, not hcp. I
suppose if you play 3N differently it would affect the auction in
question.

My [questionable] memory is that the Bridge World stuff was about this
kind of auction. I was really interested about coming up with my own
rules about which 4N is RKC vs BW vs Natural vs Takeout at the time so I
paid extra attention.

Now my vague memories are coming back a little. I now recall that it
was more the editors pushing Natural, with the MSC votes spread among
all the possibilities. Perhaps Natural was not even a plurality but I
let their arguments sway me. It's been too long for me to remember any
particulars.

Eddie

[Steve Willner]

Post by Eddie Grove
I don't get your point. A 2N overcall of 2S is not that different
from a 1N overcall of 1S. Plenty of people play roughly 15-18 for
both. The "too strong for a simple NT overcall" hands are roughly the
same.

That's where we disagree, then. I'd expect "double and bid NT" to be
stronger than an immediate 3NT.

Post by Eddie Grove
A jump to 3N was assumed to be based upon a source of tricks, not
hcp.

I can see merit in that overcalling 1S, when 2NT is artificial, and
opener suggests defensive values. I don't see it over 2S. If 3NT is
likely to be the right contract, you have to bid it before the opponents
can compete further. As further evidence: when 4C is used as an inquiry
over 3NT, there are responses for balanced minimum and balanced with extras.

If a particular pair plays as you say, I suppose there could be merit to
playing 4NT as natural and non-forcing. Even then, though, it's an
unusual hand type, and I am not sure allocating a valuable bid to it
would be worthwhile.

Post by Eddie Grove
I now recall that it was more the editors pushing Natural

They probably had valid arguments, but I don't see what they would have
been in this specific context. But 1S-x-... might be different.

[Eddie Grove]

Post by Steve Willner

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?

Show one keycard for hearts or zero aces, whatever our Blackwood
agreement is.

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not
change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S
is the call.

That was my reaction too. If I had to guess, I'd think partner was
wondering whether he could afford BW or not. Perhaps he has a void,
or perhaps he can't see 12 tricks even if we have enough keycards or
aces. Whatever it is, it's not my problem.

Post by Elliot
And how [does partner] bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?

6NT? Or Blackwood? If partner has that hand, he's far too strong to
bid a non-forcing 4NT.

Post by Elliot
I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.

Perhaps in some other auction, where the "too strong for NT" hand
would be weaker than here?

FWIW there is a thread on bridgewinners
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/when-partner-overcalls-3n-in-2nd-seat/
where Frances Hinden wrote

"(1x) - 3nt is always based on a long suit, 99% of the time a minor plus
outside high cards. It is never strong balanced because there is no need
for it to be. If third seat passes I have never seen a hand that would
do anything except pass.

(2x) - 3nt is similar although it may not be a 7-card suit, it could be
assorted off-shape hands but the key is that it is not inviting partner
to pull to say a 6-card major. Doubling first then bidding 3nt is more
flexible (partner might bid higher than 3nt inresponse to the double,
for one thing)"


Eddie

[[e-mail]]

Post by Eddie Grove

Post by Steve Willner

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?

Show one keycard for hearts or zero aces, whatever our Blackwood
agreement is.

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not
change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S
is the call.

That was my reaction too. If I had to guess, I'd think partner was
wondering whether he could afford BW or not. Perhaps he has a void,
or perhaps he can't see 12 tricks even if we have enough keycards or
aces. Whatever it is, it's not my problem.

Post by Elliot
And how [does partner] bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?

6NT? Or Blackwood? If partner has that hand, he's far too strong to
bid a non-forcing 4NT.

Post by Elliot
I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.

Perhaps in some other auction, where the "too strong for NT" hand
would be weaker than here?

FWIW there is a thread on bridgewinners
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/when-partner-overcalls-3n-in-2nd-seat/
"(1x) - 3nt is always based on a long suit, 99% of the time a minor plus
outside high cards. It is never strong balanced because there is no need
for it to be. If third seat passes I have never seen a hand that would
do anything except pass.
(2x) - 3nt is similar although it may not be a 7-card suit, it could beow
assorted off-shape hands but the key is that it is not inviting partner
to pull to say a 6-card major. Doubling first then bidding 3nt is more
flexible (partner might bid higher than 3nt inresponse to the double,
for one thing)"
Eddie

After (1x) - 3NT - (p) - ? how can advancer be sure there is no slam in overcaller's long suit?. Or do you mean you personally have never seen a good hand for advancer?

Carl

[ais523]

Post by ***@verizon.net
After (1x) - 3NT - (p) - ? how can advancer be sure there is no slam
in overcaller's long suit?. Or do you mean you personally have never
seen a good hand for advancer?

It's fairly common to have a system of artificial bids over an opening
3NT in order to allow responder to make a slam try. The 3NT overcall is
slightly wider-ranging, but it wouldn't surprise me if such a system
were still possible to design.

[Eddie Grove]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by Eddie Grove

Post by Steve Willner

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?

Show one keycard for hearts or zero aces, whatever our Blackwood
agreement is.

Post by Elliot

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?

Cannot think of a reasonable meaning except BW. Long delay does not
change this. If X'er has both minors, and he wanted me to choose, 4S
is the call.

That was my reaction too. If I had to guess, I'd think partner was
wondering whether he could afford BW or not. Perhaps he has a void,
or perhaps he can't see 12 tricks even if we have enough keycards or
aces. Whatever it is, it's not my problem.

Post by Elliot
And how [does partner] bid a hand too strong for a natural NT overcall?

6NT? Or Blackwood? If partner has that hand, he's far too strong to
bid a non-forcing 4NT.

Post by Elliot
I remember plenty of remarks in The Bridge World in the 90s about this
sort of 4N being natural.

Perhaps in some other auction, where the "too strong for NT" hand
would be weaker than here?

FWIW there is a thread on bridgewinners
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/when-partner-overcalls-3n-in-2nd-seat/
"(1x) - 3nt is always based on a long suit, 99% of the time a minor plus
outside high cards. It is never strong balanced because there is no need
for it to be. If third seat passes I have never seen a hand that would
do anything except pass.
(2x) - 3nt is similar although it may not be a 7-card suit, it could beow
assorted off-shape hands but the key is that it is not inviting partner
to pull to say a 6-card major. Doubling first then bidding 3nt is more
flexible (partner might bid higher than 3nt inresponse to the double,
for one thing)"

After (1x) - 3NT - (p) - ? how can advancer be sure there is no slam in overcaller's long suit?. Or do you mean you personally have never seen a good hand for advancer?

I'm not good enough to have a meaningful comment on anything Hinden
says. I'm sure he has methods for advancing over 3N.

The point of my post is that on an auction such as 2S-X-3S-4H opener may
have a generic balanced 20 hcp, possibly with a doubleton heart, and
need to find a bid. Previously in this thread it was suggested that with
such a hand one bids 3N directly over 2S. Hinden at least would not.

Eddie

[f***@googlemail.com]

Post by Eddie Grove

Post by ***@verizon.net
After (1x) - 3NT - (p) - ? how can advancer be sure there is no slam in overcaller's long suit?. Or do you mean you personally have never seen a good hand for advancer?

I'm not good enough to have a meaningful comment on anything Hinden
says. I'm sure he has methods for advancing over 3N.
The point of my post is that on an auction such as 2S-X-3S-4H opener may
have a generic balanced 20 hcp, possibly with a doubleton heart, and
need to find a bid. Previously in this thread it was suggested that with
such a hand one bids 3N directly over 2S. Hinden at least would not.
Eddie

Hinden is a SHE

I meant that after 1x (3NT) I've never actually seen a hand as advancer that is interested in slam. It's not impossible, but not very high on my list of things to worry about.

A 4243 20-count might bid 3NT over 2S, because they don't want partner to jump to 4H with 5 of them. But a 4342 wouldn't. But I would still think 4NT is blackwood on the auction 2S x 3S 4H P 4NT.

[ais523]

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.

In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.

In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.

You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.

[Co Wiersma]

Post by ais523

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.
In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.
In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.
You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.

Ehhh, I thought 2S was opened
not 3

And I think a takeout double is much better than a "double guarantees
hearts"
I seriously think that you confuse the double over an opening bid with
the negative double over an overcall

Co Wiersma

[[e-mail]]

Post by ais523

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.
In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.
In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.
You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.
--
ais523

I suspect that after an auction so pre-empted, a 4-4 fit at the 4-level has worse prospects than after a non-competitive. Maybe much worse. Anyone with documented experience?

Carl

[Fred.]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by ais523

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.
In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.
In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.
You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.
--
ais523

I suspect that after an auction so pre-empted, a 4-4 fit at the 4-level has worse prospects than after a non-competitive. Maybe much worse. Anyone with documented experience?
Carl

I assume that from the length of time your question has been
hanging out that no one both has and wishes to present the
documented experience.

My own undocumented experience is that partner, in doubling
2S, is asking me to show a 4-card heart suit if I have one.
I don't think that responder's raise to 3S suggests much
new about hearts. Responder could be playing a deep game with
3 spades and a strong 4-card heart holding, but a responder
wishing to give us a chance to bid hearts may well pass 2S.

What the 3S raise does suggest, since responder did not raise
to 4S, is that partner is likely to have a couple of spade
losers. Given this, the 10-trick game looks more attractive.

Fred.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Fred.

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by ais523

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.
In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.
In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.
You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.
--
ais523

I suspect that after an auction so pre-empted, a 4-4 fit at the 4-level has worse prospects than after a non-competitive. Maybe much worse. Anyone with documented experience?
Carl

I assume that from the length of time your question has been
hanging out that no one both has and wishes to present the
documented experience.
My own undocumented experience is that partner, in doubling
2S, is asking me to show a 4-card heart suit if I have one.
I don't think that responder's raise to 3S suggests much
new about hearts. Responder could be playing a deep game with
3 spades and a strong 4-card heart holding, but a responder
wishing to give us a chance to bid hearts may well pass 2S.
What the 3S raise does suggest, since responder did not raise
to 4S, is that partner is likely to have a couple of spade
losers. Given this, the 10-trick game looks more attractive.
Fred.

Evidently, you haven't encountered the ploy of raising partner's pre-empt with singleton king support.

As to doubler's intent: It is one thing to invite a 4-4 fit at 3. Quite another at 4.

Carl

[Fred.]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by Fred.

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by ais523

Post by Co Wiersma
Seems to me that your agreements are poor

Well, I'm trying to give multiple possibilities depending on what the
OP's agreements are.
In Acol, a common arrangement would be X over 3S guarantees hearts, 3NT
over 3S is natural, 4NT directly over 3S is strong with both minors
(weaker hands with both minors would have to guess a suit). I'm finding
it hard to envisage a balanced hand that would be "too strong to bid
3NT", although such hands would likely start with 4S and then hope
their partner bid no-trumps in response.
In this situation, there would be no doubt that X, followed by 4NT after
a heart reply, would be a slam try in hearts.
You tend to get a lot of variation in the replies to 3S, though; unlike
in many other situations, where there's easily enough bidding space to
fit everything in and the only problem is arranging it, over 3S there
genuinely isn't enough bidding space to show every type of hand you'd
like.
--
ais523

I suspect that after an auction so pre-empted, a 4-4 fit at the 4-level has worse prospects than after a non-competitive. Maybe much worse. Anyone with documented experience?
Carl

I assume that from the length of time your question has been
hanging out that no one both has and wishes to present the
documented experience.
My own undocumented experience is that partner, in doubling
2S, is asking me to show a 4-card heart suit if I have one.
I don't think that responder's raise to 3S suggests much
new about hearts. Responder could be playing a deep game with
3 spades and a strong 4-card heart holding, but a responder
wishing to give us a chance to bid hearts may well pass 2S.
What the 3S raise does suggest, since responder did not raise
to 4S, is that partner is likely to have a couple of spade
losers. Given this, the 10-trick game looks more attractive.
Fred.

Evidently, you haven't encountered the ploy of raising partner's pre-empt with singleton king support.
As to doubler's intent: It is one thing to invite a 4-4 fit at 3. Quite another at 4.
Carl

If responder is raising on a singleton king then partner made a takeout
double holding 4 spades. Not likely. Even responder's raise on Kx is low probability based on partner's bidding.

Looking at my hand following the double my main question is "how high will
responder raise?". So, I have a hard time seeing how the actuality of a
spade raise makes a bad heart break more likely.

If I saw 4D as a sure thing, I might look at things differently,
particularly if playing match points. I agree that 4H is more
risky than 4D, but I also see that there are ways in which 4D
can succumb to a bad heart break.

Fred.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -?
You passed in 2nd seat, either because of the vulnerability or the side 4 card major or because you had no weak 2D available.
Over 3S you bid 4H.
What is 4N and what do you bid?
...
Okay, now partner tanks for ~ 2 minutes and bids 4N, what do you bid?
Is this hand a problem from an ethical perspective?
https://ibb.co/c5EEMz

It was a very deep position to bid H instead of C the round before.

What did you have in mind?

Regardless, it cannot be too late to show your real suit.

If you end up playing a 4-3 heart at 5 or 6, you'll have to apologize.

Carl

[ais523]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Unfavorable, 2nd seat
54 K732 KQT864 2
P-P-2S-X
3S-4H-P-4N
P -

Regardless, it cannot be too late to show your real suit.
If you end up playing a 4-3 heart at 5 or 6, you'll have to apologize.

What are you interpreting 4N as here?