[msjennifer]

Since not alerted,4C has to be Gerber.4D shows zero Aces and hence Pass is the correct bid.I know that it’s not compulsory to alert any bid above 3NT but does it apply to such a specific case (convention cards are not always available) ? Personally ,I have not got what your partner meant by “ six pence” as six pence can not buy you anything. If ,indeed, 4C was meant a transfer bid the partner holding 3 or more Aces and a King at least in the 4 Th suit(If holding 3Aces) would have made some noise, as is permissible under the system the pair is playing ,other than bidding just 4D. Hence it is not wrong to pass and make necessary changes in your system afterwards.

[JanisW]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-December-05, 05:03, said:

I think a direct 5♦ requires an exceptional hand to bid 6 and takes 7 out of the equation, better hands will take it a little slower.

that's obviously highly dependent on your methods.
Since we have

• 2NT - 3♠
• 2NT - 4♦, forcing to 5♦
• 3♠ followed by 5♦ (admittedly undiscussed, but I'd trust my Partner to get the message)

available to distinguish between a weak and a strong Hand, then a direct 5♦ can no longer have the same meaning.

As you do not preempt yourself on a hand where Partner opened 2NT, 5♦ is bid to make. How can you hope to make 5♦ looking at 0 key-cards? This bid simply should not exist.
I would take 5♦ as a hand where Partner thinks 5♦ is odds on, and there is no scientific way to find out. Perhaps x,void,QJ 8th,KQxx

What do you use the bids I gave for, if not to distinguish between a strong and a weak minor?
Is 4♦ TexasTransfer to setup ♥ as trump so 4NT is Blackwood as opposed to quantative after 3[do] with 5 card ♥?

regards
JW

[Cyberyeti]

msjennifer, on 2017-December-05, 08:51, said:

Since not alerted,4C has to be Gerber.4D shows zero Aces and hence Pass is the correct bid.I know that it’s not compulsory to alert any bid above 3NT but does it apply to such a specific case (convention cards are not always available) ? Personally ,I have not got what your partner meant by “ six pence” as six pence can not buy you anything. If ,indeed, 4C was meant a transfer bid the partner holding 3 or more Aces and a King at least in the 4 Th suit(If holding 3Aces) would have made some noise, as is permissible under the system the pair is playing ,other than bidding just 4D. Hence it is not wrong to pass and make necessary changes in your system afterwards.

May be jurisdiction dependent but here 4♣ IS alertable if Gerber as it's a non natural suit bid on the first round of bidding and this trumps the "above 3N" restriction.

And as I said before, a lot of people play 4♦ as 0 or 4 if playing Gerber.

[Finanzier]

4 ♣ were a Transfer to ♦. It was rubber, we led 1:1 with 40 to 0.
I was N.
But we do not play for money. If there was a slam, we should be in.
13 tricks in ♦ or NT

---

Who did wrong?
Should I have opened 2 ♦ (SEF)?

[WellSpyder]

Finanzier, on 2017-December-05, 10:08, said:

Who did wrong?

That is a little hard to say when you haven't told us who did what after the first three bids.

I don't play much rubber bridge (perhaps just as well since it would never have occurred to me that 4C could be a transfer in that context), but it does strike me that the north hand is seriously good for the bidding to date. If you choose to open 2N with this, then what about at least breaking the transfer and bidding 5D rather than 4D?

[Tramticket]

WellSpyder, on 2017-December-05, 10:23, said:

That is a little hard to say when you haven't told us who did what after the first three bids.

With 40 below and vulnerable I guess that Finanzier passed (4♦ is game and rubber).

It's difficult to fault either player given the state of the match.

[WellSpyder]

Tramticket, on 2017-December-05, 11:33, said:

With 40 below and vulnerable I guess that Finanzier passed (4♦ is game and rubber).

Yes indeed, we can certainly guess, just as many people did their best by guessing what the agreement about 4C might have been. But I think OP is likely to get a more useful discussion if basic facts are provided up front.

[miamijd]

I don't know what bidding method you use, but in the USA, your partner is much too strong for a 2NT opener. That is 20-21, and he has 22, all in Aces and Kings (which upgrades his 22 by a bunch). If your partner opens 2C and rebids 2NT over your 2D, you are looking at a moose (you have an 7-loser hand opposite probably a 4-5 loser hand; that's 6 and maybe 7).

"Standard US expert" is probably something like:

2C 2D
2NT 3S(1)
3NT(2) 4D(3)
4H(4) 4S(5)
4NT(6) 5C(7)
5H(8) 5S(9)
6c(10) 6NT or 7D(12)

(1) relay to 3NT
(2) forced
(3) one-suited hand in diamonds; slammish
(4) cue
(5) cue
(6) RKCB
(7) 0/3
(8) Qd?
(9) Yes (extra length will do the job), and Ks (could also bid 5NT here, as you've already shown the Ks)
(10) We have all the key cards; can you bid a grand
(11) 8 diamonds; 2 spades; a club and a heart is 12 and only accounts for 19 of opener's 22+ points. Kc or Kh will do the job; a Queen might do it; or a five-card rounded suit might do it. Take your pick of 6NT or 7D (not 7NT, if partner has a five-card H or C suit, you might need to ruff the last one good.

Cheers,
mike

[msjennifer]

JanisW, on 2017-December-05, 08:53, said:

that's obviously highly dependent on your methods.
Since we have

• 2NT - 3♠
• 2NT - 4♦, forcing to 5♦
• 3♠ followed by 5♦ (admittedly undiscussed, but I'd trust my Partner to get the message)

available to distinguish between a weak and a strong Hand, then a direct 5♦ can no longer have the same meaning.

As you do not preempt yourself on a hand where Partner opened 2NT, 5♦ is bid to make. How can you hope to make 5♦ looking at 0 key-cards? This bid simply should not exist.
I would take 5♦ as a hand where Partner thinks 5♦ is odds on, and there is no scientific way to find out. Perhaps x,void,QJ 8th,KQxx

What do you use the bids I gave for, if not to distinguish between a strong and a weak minor?
Is 4♦ TexasTransfer to setup ♥ as trump so 4NT is Blackwood as opposed to quantative after 3[do] with 5 card ♥?

regards
JW

We play 2NT**3S As GF with
5Sand 4H
2NT -3NT As tr to 4C and2NT -4C As tr to 4D.
Obviously to play in only 3NT we have to go via BARON (we do not play Stayman over 2NT.)

[msjennifer]

JanisW, on 2017-December-05, 08:53, said:

that's obviously highly dependent on your methods.
Since we have

• 2NT - 3♠
• 2NT - 4♦, forcing to 5♦
• 3♠ followed by 5♦ (admittedly undiscussed, but I'd trust my Partner to get the message)

available to distinguish between a weak and a strong Hand, then a direct 5♦ can no longer have the same meaning.

As you do not preempt yourself on a hand where Partner opened 2NT, 5♦ is bid to make. How can you hope to make 5♦ looking at 0 key-cards? This bid simply should not exist.
I would take 5♦ as a hand where Partner thinks 5♦ is odds on, and there is no scientific way to find out. Perhaps x,void,QJ 8th,KQxx

What do you use the bids I gave for, if not to distinguish between a strong and a weak minor?
Is 4♦ TexasTransfer to setup ♥ as trump so 4NT is Blackwood as opposed to quantative after 3[do] with 5 card ♥?

regards
JW

We play 2NT**3S As GF with
5Sand 4H
2NT -3NT As tr to 4C and2NT -4C As tr to 4D.
Obviously to play in only 3NT we have to go via BARON (we do not play Stayman over 2NT.)

[Cyberyeti]

Finanzier, on 2017-December-05, 10:08, said:

4 ♣ were a Transfer to ♦. It was rubber, we led 1:1 with 40 to 0.
I was N.
But we do not play for money. If there was a slam, we should be in.
13 tricks in ♦ or NT

---

Who did wrong?
Should I have opened 2 ♦ (SEF)?

I would bid this however you bid a balanced 23, 4 aces and 2 kings is too good to be treated as 20/21-22, 5 to the Q in either red suit is cold for 3N for example.

Given the state of the rubber I can entirely sympathise with what happened

[gszes]

Let's assume that the 2n was the right opening bid for your system. The next step is what would be the minimum requirements for a 4c (transfer to diamonds) bid. Is it possible that responder could have as little as xx xx xxxxxx xxx? IMHO that hand would
vastly prefer 2n to 4d. That means the worst case scenario is that responder will have at least seven diamonds for a 4c bid. Opening bidder can count 11 top tricks opposite a complete bust so they should bid 5d as a minimum (at rubber bridge and plus 40 it may seem unnecessary but how else to get responder to reevaluate their hand to bid 7d (extra diamond and spade K))? As long as the 5d bid shows all 5 keys and can count 11 tricks the rest is easy.

[GrahamJson]

msjennifer, on 2017-December-05, 08:51, said:

Since not alerted,4C has to be Gerber.4D shows zero Aces and hence Pass is the correct bid.I know that it’s not compulsory to alert any bid above 3NT but does it apply to such a specific case (convention cards are not always available) ? Personally ,I have not got what your partner meant by “ six pence” as six pence can not buy you anything. If ,indeed, 4C was meant a transfer bid the partner holding 3 or more Aces and a King at least in the 4 Th suit(If holding 3Aces) would have made some noise, as is permissible under the system the pair is playing ,other than bidding just 4D. Hence it is not wrong to pass and make necessary changes in your system afterwards.

If it was intended to be Gerber it is a pretty pointless bid as all responses other than 4D commit you to slam, even with two or three aces missing. Similarly a sequence involving 4NT, RKKB, is fine if partner has sufficient key cards, but not so good if he responds 5H or 5S and you find yourself in 6D off two aces.

My suggestion is that you have a sequence such as 2NT-3S-3NT-4D (or a direct 4D if you prefer) as Minorwood, showing a single suiter and with step responses showing key cards. Of course you could still end up in 5D missing three key cards, but that seems unlikely. And I think that you are always going to commit to game on this hand.

[Vampyr]

GrahamJson, on 2017-December-06, 04:14, said:

If it was intended to be Gerber it is a pretty pointless bid as all responses other than 4D commit you to slam, even with two or three aces missing. Similarly a sequence involving 4NT, RKKB, is fine if partner has sufficient key cards, but not so good if he responds 5H or 5S and you find yourself in 6D off two aces.

My suggestion is that you have a sequence such as 2NT-3S-3NT-4D (or a direct 4D if you prefer) as Minorwood, showing a single suiter and with step responses showing key cards. Of course you could still end up in 5D missing three key cards, but that seems unlikely. And I think that you are always going to commit to game on this hand.

Yes, I was also going to suggest that there are worse uses for 2NT-4m than RKBC. I would use that instead of the sequences with the 3♠ relay.

[Finanzier]

Thank you for your opinion.
I was a bit surprised, because so many prefer the rubber over a possible Schlemm.
And many see it as me that these special 22 points are too much for 2NT.
The south hand is an excellent proof of that.