[aguahombre]

3S instead of 2S is clear, and very old. Sometimes new isn't better when a totally descriptive natural old call can be made.

This might not be true if we don't like bids which describe our exact distribution and strength so partner can take over. If Partner is slamming in a minor, she can bid that minor over 3s. Otherwise, she can take over for spades or notrump.

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2012-January-30, 14:13

[TWO4BRIDGE]

kenrexford, on 2012-January-30, 13:36, said:

If you assume that 2♠ also promises three cards, then, you need some way to set spades as trumps, as 2♥ could presumably be bid with other GF hands without five spades. I like to dedicate 2NT in this sequence for that purpose.

1♦-1♠
2♣-2♥(GF)
2♠(3154 or better)- 2NT! (spades agreed)

The rest of us would ( or at least I would ) have to bid 3♠ to agree spades with 5+ cards .

Any other3-level bid would deny 5 cards ♠, and 3♦ would agree ♦ just as mikeh said of 4♦ over Opener's 3♠-jump .
[ That is why I don't like the 3♠-jump ] .

1D - 1S
2C - 2H!
2S ( 3 1 5 4 or better ) - 3S ( yes, agree ♠, I have 5+ cards; better than fast arrival 4S )
4C ( cue ) - 4NT ( RKC for ♠ )
5C ( 0/3 ) - 5H ( 2nd step = K-ask; 1st step would be trump Q-ask )
6D ( ♦K, no ♥K or ♣K ) - 6S

[the hog]

Codo, on 2012-January-30, 08:07, said:

Opener has an very easy 3 ♠ bid to show his shape and his strength instead of his lame 2 ♠ bid. He cannot use the same bid for this hand and the same hand with a small spade instead of the ace...

So I would bid:
1♦ 1 ♠
2 ♣ 2 ♥
3 ♠ 4 ♦ (non serious slam try)
4 NT 5 ♠ (KCs- south cannot have less for a slam try without a club control opposite a 3154 hand.
6♠

I agree totally with Roland. 3S is obvious and 2S is a very weak bid.

[kenrexford]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-January-30, 18:29, said:

The rest of us would ( or at least I would ) have to bid 3♠ to agree spades with 5+ cards .

Any other3-level bid would deny 5 cards ♠, and 3♦ would agree ♦ just as mikeh said of 4♦ over Opener's 3♠-jump .
[ That is why I don't like the 3♠-jump ] .

1D - 1S
2C - 2H!
2S ( 3 1 5 4 or better ) - 3S ( yes, agree ♠, I have 5+ cards; better than fast arrival 4S )
4C ( cue ) - 4NT ( RKC for ♠ )
5C ( 0/3 ) - 5H ( 2nd step = K-ask; 1st step would be trump Q-ask )
6D ( ♦K, no ♥K or ♣K ) - 6S

i know that is what people play, but this seems like a very common auction, and worthy of more intelligent allocation of space.

[Statto]

I guess, like many things, some aspects here depend on your agreements, styles, and understandings

mikeh, on 2012-January-30, 10:43, said:

FSF can conveniently be taken as responder saying: We're going to game....I'll tell you what denomination I prefer next time.

Assuming it's GF, I think a more common usage is to say: We're going to game... but I'm not sure where.

Quote

So 1♦ 1♠ 2♣ 2♥ 3♠ 4♣/4♦ is natural and sets trump.

If responder wants to say that, and they've already chosen the denomination as one of your minors, they could simply jump to 4♣/4♦ (assuming that's natural, forcing and agreeing suit) instead of 2♥, tho I know this misses out on some information gathering on the way

Quote

... but make S Qxxx Axx AQxx xx ...

With this hand, responder has various options, including 2NT or 3♦ instead of 2♥; or 3NT over 3♠ after 2♥.

ggwhiz, on 2012-January-30, 11:44, said:

I don't understand how any sytem where the 2♥ bid is not a gf is playable.

It works fine, it's invitational+, and helps find the right contract. I play it this way and have not had a single instance where I've thought "if only our FSF had been GF"

The right contract might often be a partscore on a somewhat misfitting hand, so it's a huge advantage on some hands if you can find the right strain of partscore when there is no game. This could be worth 5-6 IMPs.

Hanoi5, on 2012-January-30, 07:45, said:

Who should push a little more?

If FSF is not GF, then 3♠ is forcing to at least game, suggesting a slam try in ♠.

If FSF is GF, then 3♠ is forcing to at least game, suggesting a slam try in ♠.

So I think North should bid 3♠

[Statto]

But I don't like South's 4♠ bid either, unless it was a non-GF auction and slow arrival hadn't kicked in. If it was GF, then South should be able to predict that their values are working, in particular there is unlikely to be wastage in ♥Axx, so they should make some slam attempt.

[gnasher]

mikeh said:

FSF can conveniently be taken as responder saying: We're going to game....I'll tell you what denomination I prefer next time.

If it really meant that, and only that, we'd play 2♥ as a puppet to 2♠, so that responder could issue his decree at a sensible level.

Statto said:

Assuming it's GF, I think a more common usage is to say: We're going to game... but I'm not sure where.

That's close to what FSF was orginally invented for, but the usage has broadened somewhat. FSF has to cover both types of hand: the ones where responder has a good idea of the right strain but not of the right level, and the ones where he wants to discuss strain as well. We're going to be dealt both 5233 shapes and 4243 shapes, so we have to cater for both.

Quote

With [Qxxx Axx AQxx xx], responder has various options, including 2NT or 3♦ instead of 2♥; or 3NT over 3♠ after 2♥.

Saying that Mike's example isn't worth game doesn't address his point, which is that a 4342 shape with game values will often want to bid 4♦. As for bidding 2♥-3♠;3NT, you might find it worthwhile to write down some 3154 15-counts and see where you want to play. Here's one to get you started: KJx x KJxxx AKxx. (OK, I admit that this wasn't randomly selected.)

[TWO4BRIDGE]

kenrexford, on 2012-January-30, 13:36, said:

1♦-1♠
2♣-2♥(GF)
2♠(3154 or better)-2NT! (spades agreed)

The more I think about it, the more I can't find fault with it .

Because... if Responder didn't have 5 cards ♠ and his real intent was to show GF+ support in one of Opener's 2 suits, then he had an easy 3♣ or 3♦ over 2♠-- thus cancelling interest in ♠.

And, as you said, 2NT! certainly is a " more intelligent allocation of space" than having to bid 3♠ over 2♠ to set trump.

[phil_20686]

I think aswell on this auction its rare to have three spades, as most people will raise immediately with 12-14 and 3154 shape. So it follows that 3S is always 15-17 with 3154 shape. Since it describes out hand so precisely partner should have a very good idea what do do next.

Having a two spade bid show three spades when partner cannot have a minimum hand with 3 spades seems wasteful to me.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

phil_20686, on 2012-January-31, 08:22, said:

I think aswell on this auction its rare to have three spades, as most people will raise immediately with 12-14 and 3154 shape. So it follows that 3S is always 15-17 with 3154 shape. Since it describes out hand so precisely partner should have a very good idea what do do next.

Having a two spade bid show three spades when partner cannot have a minimum hand with 3 spades seems wasteful to me.

But what if Responder doesn't have 5 cards ♠ and really wanted to make a GF, slammish raise in either of opener's 2 suits ( ♣ or ♦ )?
How do you handle that after the 3S-jump ?
Most here say 4♣ or 4♦ next by Responder are cuebids agreeing ♠. But Mikeh pointed out that they should be natural, support bids -- in essence cancelling out interest in ♠.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

kenrexford, on 2012-January-30, 13:36, said:

1♦-1♠
2♣-2♥!(GF)

2♠(3154 or better)- ?? 2NT! (spades agreed)

Of the SEVEN 4th suit Forcing sequences, there are only TWO where
-- Opener has limited and
-- Responder has not reversed.

The one above is one of them.
The other is:
1♥ - 1♠
2♣ - 2♦!

It also involves a 1♠ Response.

Ken, I presume you would also use 2NT! over 2♠ by Opener to "agree Spades" .

[mikeh]

gnasher, on 2012-January-31, 03:19, said:

If it really meant that, and only that, we'd play 2♥ as a puppet to 2♠, so that responder could issue his decree at a sensible level.

I didn't say, and didn't mean, that responder's intention to tell opener of his desired strain was already formed before opener bid over the FSF. But if you think about what responder's bid over that response emans, I suspect you'll agree with my view. That isn't to say that responder's call 'freezes' the denomination...the partnership is still allowed to bid co-operatively

[gnasher]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-January-31, 08:43, said:

But what if Responder doesn't have 5 cards ♠ and really wanted to make a GF, slammish raise in either of opener's 2 suits ( ♣ or ♦ )?
How do you handle that after the 3S-jump ?
Most here say 4♣ or 4♦ next by Responder are cuebids agreeing ♠. But Mikeh pointed out that they should be natural, support bids -- in essence cancelling out interest in ♠.

"Most" is an overstatement. So far as I can see there have been one auction where 4♦ is described as a cue bid, two people who agreed with that auction, and one other who argued for playing 4m as a cue-bid.

Anyway, however many of them there are, I think they're plainly wrong. 4m is natural for the reasons that Mike gave, and 3NT is natural for the reasons I gave. Thus the only way to make a slam try with spades agreed is to bid 4♥. As in other such situations, it's sensible to play that this 4♥ says nothing about control.

[phil_20686]

gnasher, on 2012-January-31, 09:49, said:

"Most" is an overstatement. So far as I can see there have been one auction where 4♦ is described as a cue bid, two people who agreed with that auction, and one other who argued for playing 4m as a cue-bid.

Anyway, however many of them there are, I think they're plainly wrong. 4m is natural for the reasons that Mike gave, and 3NT is natural for the reasons I gave. Thus the only way to make a slam try with spades agreed is to bid 4♥. As in other such situations, it's sensible to play that this 4♥ says nothing about control.

+1

Also, I dont see how you are better placed if you have to bid 3d on a 2254 shape with no heart stop. Then you still have to go to the 4m to agree a minor, but you have two major suit shapes to worry about rather than just one 1354 or 2254. If you can bid 2s on a a doubleton then when you go to 3d you always have a singleton spade, which is valuable information.

[Statto]

gnasher, on 2012-January-31, 03:19, said:

Saying that Mike's example isn't worth game doesn't address his point, which is that a 4342 shape with game values will often want to bid 4♦. As for bidding 2♥-3♠;3NT, you might find it worthwhile to write down some 3154 15-counts and see where you want to play. Here's one to get you started: KJx x KJxxx AKxx. (OK, I admit that this wasn't randomly selected.)

Ok, I'm sold. After 1♦-1♠;2♣-2♥;3♠, 4♣/4♦ cannot be a cue - it's saying that in light of further information, this is the denomination we should be playing in, having now rejected 3NT; now decide if you want to try for slam (by control-cueing something), or just play in game there. Many thanks to both of you for posting

[kenrexford]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-January-31, 08:51, said:

Of the SEVEN 4th suit Forcing sequences, there are only TWO where
-- Opener has limited and
-- Responder has not reversed.

The one above is one of them.
The other is:
1♥ - 1♠
2♣ - 2♦!

It also involves a 1♠ Response.

Ken, I presume you would also use 2NT! over 2♠ by Opener to "agree Spades" .

After any (1) 4SGF or (2) 2♦GF Checkback, I play that Responder's 2NT agrees whatever major Opener just bid. So, 2NT could also agree hearts in some sequences. This occurs in all seven non-reverse sequences and in all 1minor-1MAJOR-1NT-2♦ sequences.

This structure seems so much better. As others have pointed out, whenever the bid of a major by Opener after a 4SGF (or a 2♦ GF Checkback) does not esdtablish for Responder a fit, Responder almost always has support for one of the suits that Opener bid himself. When that is not the case, and perhaps Responder was hoping to just make a quantitative notrump invite (which cannot really exist in the OP problem), then THAT call could be three of the major by Responder. (Meanning, Responder bids 2NT to establish the fit but three of the major that is shown via 2NT as quantitative notrump, a much rarer situation.)

Avoiding the jump by Opener, which is enabled by allowing space through this 2NT call, keeps open the below-3NT minor GF agreements that are MUCH better than the ideas to set this up at the four-level, which bypasses 3NT (and is really bad for that reason alone) and which deprives the partnership of cues (equally bad, IMO).

The fact that this mega-agreement seems to me easy and easily translatable across multiple sequences seals the deal for me. The nonsense discussion of what you do after the jump convinces me that I am right, as well.

As an aside, this same exact reasoning is why I want 2♠ in this sequence to promise three. I could blast 3♠ as Opener to show the very rare 2254 if I really want to. But, for those who insist that 2♠ with that 2254 hand makes sense, then 2NT still works better. Opener bids 2♠ with either; 2NT suggests spades; Opener bids 3NT after 2NT to show 2254. Still better than jamming the auction. (Or, if you want to save space even more, have Opener bid 3♣ with the 2254, and then unwind from there, alll else re-confirming spades.)

[wank]

using 3♦ as a catchall is clearly inferior to using 2♠, otherwise you lose the ability to show a 6th diamond.

gnasher is obviously right about 3M-4m. bit surprised that mikeh considers this an issue tbh: yes some people get confused. equally, some people get confused over stayman and jump reply, if you search hard enough around the bottom tables of a swiss.

[Poky]

Very easy board.

When you have 3154 and 11-13 you raise 1♠ to 2♠.

When you have a doubleton spade, you bid it on the 4th suit forcing.

Therefore, the sequence:
1♦ 1♠
2♣ 2♥
3♠
shows exactly 3154 and 14-16.

Responder can now bid 6♠ even directly.

[Codo]

wank, on 2012-January-31, 20:17, said:

using 3♦ as a catchall is clearly inferior to using 2♠, otherwise you lose the ability to show a 6th diamond.

gnasher is obviously right about 3M-4m. bit surprised that mikeh considers this an issue tbh: yes some people get confused. equally, some people get confused over stayman and jump reply, if you search hard enough around the bottom tables of a swiss.

But if you use 2 ♠ as a catch all, you cannot use it to show spades, you need a lot af work to do later on to show your support at the right level. Seems to be a bigger drawback for me, I have quite often some kind of spade support which I need to show somehow- much more often then 6/4 in the minors....
I guess both styles are playable and I hope that I can convince my partner to play Kens suggestion from now on.

[MrAce]

Statto, on 2012-January-31, 17:03, said:

Ok, I'm sold. After 1♦-1♠;2♣-2♥;3♠, 4♣/4♦ cannot be a cue - it's saying that in light of further information, this is the denomination we should be playing in, having now rejected 3NT; now decide if you want to try for slam (by control-cueing something), or just play in game there. Many thanks to both of you for posting

It also has a lot to do with what this means for pdship;

1♦-1♠
2♣-4m