[Cyberyeti]

Am I the only person who would have cued 4♣ rather than 4♥ ?

[gszes]

johnu, on 2014-July-07, 21:24, said:

I confess I don't know anybody who plays 4♥ as anything but a cue bid so I'll take your word that many play splinters or 2nd suits. That being said, I think I'm on firm ground in saying that standard in most or all parts of the world would be a cue bid and even those who play 4♥ as a splinter or 2nd suit should recognize that the cue bid interpretation is

standard in the rest of the world. So in a casual/first time partnership, you need to assume partner is using the the "standard" meaning of a bid and proceed from there. If you're wrong, apologize and say you thought that was the standard meaning. It's better than being wrong and having to apologize and say you thought he might be a palooka who didn't know what standard was. That philosophy doesn't apply just to this cue bidding example.


The use of 3N as SERIOUS adds a dimension to this sequence that is not readily available to those
that wish to use 3n to play (for whatever reason). While this bid was probably not available to this
partnership (no mention of it was made) the use of serious 3n (slam interest with no short suit as one
interpretation) would allow a partnership to use the 4 level for splinters for ex:) and a cue bidding
sequence could follow the 3n serious call if that was how the partnership wished to proceed. My
explanation was meant to further their possible partnership harmony as well as add future bidding ideas
or concepts that can be learned if not already known. (like mentioning serious 3n)

Playing 2/1 what is the sequence 1s p 4h?? to me it is splinter but not all would agree saying it is
to play (using the theory that if a bid can be natural it should be treated as such -I wonder how those
same players would play 1s 3s 4h natural or cue bid?). The more one knows the more margin for error there
is in a new partnership. Getting by the occasional mishap is important for any partnership and even more
so for a new partnership to have any chance to blossom.

[kenrexford]

The normal default among experts is a help suit slam try. In that interpretation, 4C is the best call.

There's a convention where 4 bids are shortness, in which case 4D would be the best call.

There's a minority who cuebid, in which case 4C is the best call.

4H is never the right call unless you are doing something only forum posters think makes sense.

[Zelandakh]

In the UK Andrew Robson helped to popularise the method where a new suit after a limit raise (inter alia) is a natural slam try so there are indeed alternatives to shortage or cue. I am not sure if Ken's observation of this being the normal default amongst experts is correct though. As others have pointed out, the usage of 3NT is fairly critical in defining the 4 level calls.

[mcphee]

Impossible for the N hand to bid anything over 4H other than 4S. My view is he did not have the 3S call to start with holding only 3 trumps. Even playing sayc should N make a 2/1 in H it is not so cler cut to make any move when partner splinters in your KJx. Fro example a C lead will be going through any values partner holds there and intheory you may still have a D loser.

[phil_20686]

Playing the bid here as shortage is definitely common among experts in the UK. In my group I don't really know anyone who plays this as a Q outside of scratch partnerships. I would expect a long suit try as default.. The guys comment in an expert game that he wasnt sure if it was long suit or shortage seems quite normal to me. I can easily imagine that I would have said that.

Don't think, that many play serious here. 3N is usually showing whichever hands you dont show immediately. So if you play long suit, 3N shows a shortage and 4c asks. If it was 1h p 3H you just move everything down one step.

My default is more or less only to play 3N serious when both hands are still poorly defined. When you have defined your hand closely there is no real need for it.