[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2026-August-03, 08:04, said:

Always the optimist, I gave it one more try. (Another one of my bad habits)

---

Do you want to be in 6 at any vulnerability/scoring?

4H instead of 4S is normal, ..., sry 3S showed SI, opener has a min, but 2KC.
Obv. if you play non serious 3NT you should bid it, but not showing the heart
control is ...

Seeing the Heart control, missing the club control, ..., I still think bidding 4NT,
is ok / normal, if you know p has a min response together with the heart control,
you pass 4NT.
You learn, that you are missing the Queen of trumps, this means the
slam will be at best 50% (p denied the King of clubs), you stay out.

[WasWinM]

I really don't get why everyone is rushing into 6S.I'm just trying to make 4. If the heart finesse and club finesse both lose, I have to hold my spade losers to no more than 1.

[WasWinM]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-August-04, 10:53, said:

4H instead of 4S is normal, ..., sry 3S showed SI, opener has a min, but 2KC.
Obv. if you play non serious 3NT you should bid it, but not showing the heart
control is ...

Seeing the Heart control, missing the club control, ..., I still think bidding 4NT,
is ok / normal, if you know p has a min response together with the heart control,
you pass 4NT.
You learn, that you are missing the Queen of trumps, this means the
slam will be at best 50% (p denied the King of clubs), you stay out.

Normal is a loaded word. Doesn't it come down to understandings? When I was playing a lot, the mild slam try encouraged partner to describe his appropriateness for slam. This 5332, 12 count isn't much so our normal would have been to bid 4S. A following cue by responder would announce a hand still interested in slam opposite the right minimum.

If opener cue bid 4H with this hand you can end up in a slam that isn't very good. As you know, it takes tricks as well as controls to make slam.

[P_Marlowe]

WasWinM, on 2026-August-04, 12:55, said:

Normal is a loaded word. Doesn't it come down to understandings? When I was playing a lot, the mild slam try encouraged partner to describe his appropriateness for slam. This 5332, 12 count isn't much so our normal would have been to bid 4S. A following cue by responder would announce a hand still interested in slam opposite the right minimum.

If opener cue bid 4H with this hand you can end up in a slam that isn't very good. As you know, it takes tricks as well as controls to make slam.

Ok, there is a reason (non) serious 3NT got invented, and if you dont play it, it makes sense to play the cue, in addition to
showing a control, also a hand that is non min.
Obv. it is also a matter, what garbage you regular open, but I think the given hand is an opening bid, I am not ashamed of.

[mike777]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-August-05, 03:02, said:

Ok, there is a reason (non) serious 3NT got invented, and if you dont play it, it makes sense to play the cue, in addition to
showing a control, also a hand that is non min.
Obv. it is also a matter, what garbage you regular open, but I think the given hand is an opening bid, I am not ashamed of.

What reason?

Opener already has told us a minimum opening hand with 2 spades call.

Opener has an 8 adjusted Loser count (add one loser for only an 8 card trump fit) that many intermediate level players use. A lousy minimum hand. The only good feature is two
aces, however counting that still a lousy minimum.


I still don't get the popularity for this convention,

[DavidKok]

This is not at all how the LTC works. I get that there are many variants, adjustments and debates on its merits but the approach above is flawed.

[mike777]

DavidKok, on 2026-August-05, 06:55, said:

This is not at all how the LTC works. I get that there are many variants, adjustments and debates on its merits but the approach above is flawed.

See Klinger book
After known fit
8 card fit add one loser
No adjustment on this hand for honors

Usually opening hand equals only 7 losers

[WasWinM]

mike777, on 2026-August-05, 06:46, said:

What reason?

Opener already has told us a minimum opening hand with 2 spades call.

Opener has an 8 adjusted Loser count (add one loser for only an 8 card trump fit) that many intermediate level players use. A lousy minimum hand. The only good feature is two
aces, however counting that still a lousy minimum.


I still don't get the popularity for this convention,

Q9xxx, AJx, KQxx, xx
AQxxx, Kx, KQxx xx

There are minimums and then there are minimums.

[mike777]

WasWinM, on 2026-August-05, 14:15, said:

Q9xxx, AJx, KQxx, xx
AQxxx, Kx, KQxx xx

There are minimums and then there are minimums.

Once again no, Opener has denied both hands with 2S call. So no, I still don't why this convention is so popular. I Just don't see the frequency or need even if you come up with one hand.

However, I grant the convention is widely popular.

As I told my new partner who loves the convention, just show me the need and frequency of needing the oonvention, I am open to trying it, just don't change the whole system to use it...People love it for some reason, smile.

[WasWinM]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-August-05, 03:02, said:

Ok, there is a reason (non) serious 3NT got invented, and if you dont play it, it makes sense to play the cue, in addition to
showing a control, also a hand that is non min.
Obv. it is also a matter, what garbage you regular open, but I think the given hand is an opening bid, I am not ashamed of.

I'm not ashamed either, but I'm also not wanting to cooperate in a slam try unless partner has a strong hand, hence the reason to separate they types of slam tries.
Of a more interesting note to me, in this auction: 1S-2C-2D-2S, why not use 2NT as either serious or non-serious?

[P_Marlowe]

WasWinM, on 2026-August-05, 14:20, said:

I'm not ashamed either, but I'm also not wanting to cooperate in a slam try unless partner has a strong hand, hence the reason to separate they types of slam tries.
Of a more interesting note to me, in this auction: 1S-2C-2D-2S, why not use 2NT as either serious or non-serious?

Sure, why not.
I do think it sensible, that opener starts to limit his hand, or responder as soon as possible.
In the original seq. 2S did not limit his, I guess it ruled out some shaply hands, but 2S is basically a waiting bid by opener,
3S by responder showed the fit and SI, due to this I think opener should cooperate by showing the control, obv. I prefer
an agreement, that limits openers hand, making it clear, that he only showed the control because he is forced, in case he is
dead.

Obv. you can agree, that instead of bidding 2S, opener should bid 2D to allow responder to show his hand, and after the fit is
found, using 2NT as a way to limit openers strength or asking responder to limit his hand makes a lot of sense.

[P_Marlowe]

mike777, on 2026-August-05, 06:46, said:

What reason?

Opener already has told us a minimum opening hand with 2 spades call.

Opener has an 8 adjusted Loser count (add one loser for only an 8 card trump fit) that many intermediate level players use. A lousy minimum hand. The only good feature is two
aces, however counting that still a lousy minimum.


I still don't get the popularity for this convention,

Sometimes responder may only need controls in a specific suit, 3S in the given auction did not limit responder,
it only showed the fit, and showed SI, or allowed opener to show SI, because at this point, opener could also
have anything.
If opener refuses to show the control, you end up in the scenario that you bid 4NT without the knowledge,
that you have enough to survive the 5 level. (Non) Serious / LTC are methods to enable you to express / deny add.
strength.

The LTC argument does not work, it would assume, that either or both players were forced to bid to the LTC limit,
which neither player was.

[mike777]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-August-05, 14:46, said:

Sometimes responder may only need controls in a specific suit, 3S in the given auction did not limit responder,
it only showed the fit, and showed SI, or allowed opener to show SI, because at this point, opener could also
have anything.
If opener refuses to show the control, you end up in the scenario that you bid 4NT without the knowledge,
that you have enough to survive the 5 level. (Non) Serious / LTC are methods to enable you to express / deny add.
strength.

The LTC argument does not work, it would assume, that either or both players were forced to bid to the LTC limit,
which neither player was.

I don't understand your post so I can't really comment

Do you have a specific deal or type of deals in mind that you can post please?

How frequent or a once in a blue moon problem?