[xbabarx]

Hi, I would like to have experts comments on following auction pls

1D-1H;
2nt-3C;
3S-?

We bid up the line and play NMF..thx

[helene_t]

This shows four spades.

I don't think there is consensus about whether it denies three hearts or not.

[gwnn]

I would have guessed that there was a consensus that it denies four hearts. The other auction is trickier:
1m-1S
2NT-3C
3H

Should opener prefer to bid 3H if they have 34 in the majors? I think they should but I don't know if that's universal (well I guess now I also don't know if the first one is universal).

[billw55]

For me 3♠ denies three hearts and shows four spades.

[Hyperon]

If

1♦-1♥
2NT-3♠

is exactly 4-4 in the majors, then 3C would always have 5+H and your sequence would show a 4 card spades and denies 3 hearts from opener. That way responder could bid 3S over 3H to look for an additional 4-4 fit in spades if interested. There are better versions of checkback, yes.

[xbabarx]

Hi..1D-1H; if holding 4+S..could bid2S..but opener bid 2nt..to me no 4+S...

[billw55]

xbabarx, on 2016-May-26, 12:32, said:

Hi..1D-1H; if holding 4+S..could bid2S..but opener bid 2nt..to me no 4+S...

If opener's 2NT rebid denied holding four spades, then 3♠ cannot sensibly show that. But few players have this agreement. Bidding spades naturally would include a wider range of both shapes (45, 46, 56, etc) and strength. It is considered more valuable for opener to define his hand as 18-19 balanced at once, and deal with a possible spade fit in other ways.

[apollo1201]

Hi xbabarx

As bill pointed out, a 2S rebid implies a 2-suited hand with longer Ds and sets a GF:

AQxx
x
AKJxx
AJx

A balanced hand could even have longer S than the minor if C are opened (eg 4333 hand), rarer with D (unless your partner preferred to open 1D with 4333).

So the options are when you are 18-19 balanced to bid a non-forcing 1S if you decide 2NT denies, or have a system to find back S while stil catering for a 5-3 H fit (the famous checbacks, as several versions are played).

[kenrexford]

An interesting question might be what Opener's 3D would show. It is also below 3H and 3S, which gives Responder room to unwind. Having 3D and 3N as 32/22 majors seems like a waste.

If I were tinkering here, I would probably have Opener one-under his major calls. 3D as hearts, 3H as spades no hearts. Allows Responder to set trumps low enough for cues.

[Zelandakh]

Logically in this system, 3♠ has to show 4 clubs, in other words a 3=2=4=4 hand. Given that we would probably bid 3NT with this shape too, it should also show a good hand for slam should Responder be interested in that. And to Ken's question, surely 3♦ shows 5 of them, what else?

[kenrexford]

Zelandakh, on 2016-May-27, 03:13, said:

Logically in this system, 3♠ has to show 4 clubs, in other words a 3=2=4=4 hand. Given that we would probably bid 3NT with this shape too, it should also show a good hand for slam should Responder be interested in that. And to Ken's question, surely 3♦ shows 5 of them, what else?

Without discussion, 3♦ is not obviously just "5 diamonds." Is it specifically 3253 (denying 3 hearts)? Could it be 3352/2353, where Responder needs to check back? Could it be 4252?

Could, instead, 3♦ be used simply to deny 3♥ or 4♠, where, for example, 3244 is also possible? That would enable one of two neat ideas. First, Responder could use 3♣ as a checkback planning to bid 3♥ after 3♦ if 6H/4(or5)S, with 3♠ after 3♦ instead showing diamond support (checkback, and then if no good support diamonds). Alternatively, after 3♦, maybe the majors are "dead," such that minor-suit flags kick in. E.g., 1♦-1♥, 2NT-3♣, 3♦-3♥ = 5♥/4+♣; ...3♦-3♠ = 5♥/3+♦.

Personally, I like the one-under bids (Opener's 3♦ = 3 hearts; Opener's 3♥ = 2♥/4♠) because it allows Responder to set trumps and enable cuebids. With transfers, 3♠ would logically be 3-2-5-3 or so, 3NT as 3244 or so. The "or so" handles 2254 (treat as whichever seems a better description) and 3262. But, if one-under's is too much, then why not simply go with the old-school Stayman thinking and default 3♦ to enable space for stuff, whatever that stuff might be? A simple stuff might be after 3♦ (2-3 spades, 2 hearts), 3♥ asks for clarification of minors, and you end up with space for the same "or so's" in the one-under situation (losing the gains on the majors).

[jamesh1]

Hello, I find this bid v interesting, to me opener accept H as trump with 3 cards, showing S first round control and have interest in slam.thx

[nige1]

xbabarx, on 2016-May-26, 06:53, said:

Hi, I would like to have experts comments on following auction pls
1D-1H;
2nt-3C;
3S-?
We bid up the line and play NMF..thx

IMO opener shows 2♥s and 4 ♠s. Partner judged that his 2N rebid described his hand better than alternatives. Perhaps his ♠ are poor -- or he might worry that you could pass 1♠ --- and 2♠ would be G/F and show more shape.

[alok c]

Fit in ♣ & spade control with 18/19 pts.

[apollo1201]

The most complex but comprehensive checkback I found was:

3D = 3H and 4S, respondent set trumps with 3om to show slam interest or signs off in game (he can always bid 3NT as a transfer to 4S so that the strong hand can declare)

3H/S = H w/o S / S w/o H, then responder places the contract in 3NT or 4M, or starts cue-bidding to show slam interest

3NT = 32 majors (a few nasty 31 or 22 will probably be mixed inside!)

It dosent fare well in finding minor slams but when responder uses this, he usually shows no interest for minors. Slam iinterest in opener's suit are expressed by 3D (skips a level when it is C, some Checkbacks use 3om but can't show unequivocally opener's majors...) denying 5Hs or not primarily interested in receiving delayed support, or 4m (55 shape or more). And if responder has SI in the other minor eg with a 55 hand he jumps to 4 in his minor (with 5m4M he would have started with the minor).

[Zelandakh]

apollo1201, on 2016-May-30, 12:13, said:

The most complex but comprehensive checkback I found was:

If you are going to go into things this far, is it not better to move over to a full transfer scheme?

[rmnka447]

3 ♠ in this auction can be a number of things depending on what your priority is in responding to the NMF. You can either "show support first" or "show other major first". My sense is that most people (in the US at least) play "show support first". But one expert I play with insists we play "show other major first". In any case, when you play NMF with someone, you need to make sure which responding scheme you're using.

If you use "support first" then 3 ♠ should show 4 ♠ but not 3 ♥. If responder started out with 4 ♠, responder can now bid 4 ♠. If responder just has 5 ♥, normally responder bids 3 NT over 3 ♠. If opener had held 3 ♥, opener would have bid 3 ♥. Over a 3 ♥ rebid, responder with 4-4 in the majors bids 3 NT. Opener knows responder doesn't have 5 ♥ so must be 4-4 and carries on to 4 ♠ when holding 4 ♠.

If you use "show other major first" then 3 ♠ shows 4 spades but does not deny 3 ♥. With 4 ♠ responder can again bid 4 ♠.
With 5 ♥ and less than 4 ♠, responder bids 3 NT. Over this 3 NT continuation when opener has 3 ♥, opener bids 4 ♥ knowing responder was bidding to find 3 card ♥ support.

Whatever your response priority is, typically 3 ♦ denies either 3 cards in the first bid (♥ here) or 4 cards in the unbid major (♠ here).

[rmnka447]

I'm adding an additional post because I wanted to limit the previous one to cover the basic bidding mechanisms.

One bid that was left undefined was a direct 3 NT bid by opener over the NMF bid. I don't know that there is any agreement about what this should mean. However, one possible use might be to use it for any 4-3-3-3 hand. Especially at matchpoints, responder knowing that opener has a flat hand without short trump ruffing possibilities might swing responder to play 3 NT with certain hands.

[Zelandakh]

rmnka447, on 2016-June-02, 16:06, said:

If you use "support first" then 3 ♠ should show 4 ♠ but not 3 ♥.

If you use "show other major first" then 3 ♠ shows 4 spades but does not deny 3 ♥.

You did read the part of the thread discussing how Opener cannot hold 4 spades in the OP's system, right? This is the whole point of the discussion. Up-the-line in this context means that preference is given to bidding 4 card suits rather than showing shape.