[msjennifer]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-11, 17:40, said:

Which is more common? And do you really want to go back to your teammates and explain why you allowed your opponents to play the hand when you had the spades? Or are you planning on bidding 4S after the auction (1C) 1D (1H) P (2H) P (4H) ?

98 posts in less than One and half months! WOW!

[Caitlynne]

It means whatever your partnership defines it to mean!!

I am not trying to be cute here, but rather to emphasize the point that there is no universal meaning. That said, here are among the most commonly used meanings:

1. Preemptive. (This is the meaning Goren probably would have given you.)

2. Fit showing with spade length.

3. Fit showing with shortness in a specific suit (which, usually is played as being in spades - i.e., a Splinter bid).

I actually think a Splinter with shortness in spades is a misguided agreement. Three suits have been bid, so you are very unlikely to have shortness in the 4th suit!

[barmar]

 Caitlynne, on 2016-September-12, 11:29, said:

It means whatever your partnership defines it to mean!!

That's a cop-out answer, it's true for any "What does this mean?" question.

When someone asks a question like this, I think you should assume the context is that you're playing with an unfamiliar partner (a pick-up, an indy, etc.) and you haven't discussed it, but they made the bid. So you need to guess how to interpret it -- what is the most "standard" agreement?

[Kaitlyn S]

 barmar, on 2016-September-12, 12:58, said:

That's a cop-out answer, it's true for any "What does this mean?" question.

When someone asks a question like this, I think you should assume the context is that you're playing with an unfamiliar partner (a pick-up, an indy, etc.) and you haven't discussed it, but they made the bid. So you need to guess how to interpret it -- what is the most "standard" agreement?

Actually, I think that "It means what you want" is totally legitimate; there are some calls where expert (and also non-expert) opinion is divided and if your random new partner makes it, you have to guess and are quite likely to guess wrong. Common examples are:

1C 1H P 1S: Show 4 or 5? Forcing or not? If you think you're gonna get this one right with a random partner more than half the time, good luck!

1NT P 3C (or similarly 1NT P 2C P 2S P 3C)

1S P 1NT 2D P P Dbl

1H P 2C P 3D (when partner has splinters on his profile)

1C P 2S

1S P 1NT P 3D P 4C (This infamous example is from the Bridge World Master Solvers Club where they gave the same problem from both sides of the table a year apart and many panelists didn't agree with themselves!)

1C P 1H 2H

Yes, each of them are partnership agreement (it means what you want it to mean.) If you encounter any of these auctions with a random pickup partner, you are reasonably likely to get it wrong because I'm not sure there is any universally agreed upon standard for any of these, and if you boldly say there is a standard, somebody will surely post that they believe your standard treatment is not standard. In many of these, double digit IMPs might depend on whether you guess right or not, although sometimes your hand will tell you what partner thinks the sequence means. You would think - a friend told me of a time he held a void in spades and the auction went 1S P 1NT P 2S Double. He thought partner had a spade stack for the double because he was void but it turns out the 1NT response was soft-pedaling with seven spades and partner was prebalancing.

And no, I am not a sock puppet for Caitlynne.

[zillahandp]

Am with you kaitlyn, not yeti's somewhat artifical construction.

[muronghan]

My thoughts of the bidding by North is as following, if the above auctions are natural and psyc. bidding is not allowed:

- Dbl= Just 4 cards of ♠ and may w/o ♦ support. A double after (1♣)-1♥-(1♠)-? can shows 5+♦ and certain ♥support which is normal. But after a minor suit overbid, finding ♠4-4 fit(or better) will be the first priority of heading for a game try or a partial contract. Therefore you may have to compromise not to disclose the length of ♦ precisely and immediately given the design of scoring system - Major is the King!

- 1♠= 5+♠s and I would like to treat it F1. Still can w/o ♦ support.

- 1NT= Natural; or very good ♣suit as alternative. I will choose it natural because staying at 1NT is usually cool e.g. in MP system even -50 will be scored nicely.

- 2♣= Good raise for ♦ and no interests in majors mostly, or a first step for a GF hand which is not shown in this list.

- 2♦= Just a raise for ♦ even with just ♠xx ♥xxxx ♦Kxx ♣xxxx. Of cause no interests in majors.

- 2♥= I like it as a natural bid, a strong 6 cards of ♥ and constructive but NF. Otherwise 5+♠s plus 3 cards of ♦ can be an alternative.

- 2♠= Fit Jump... BTW, I am always very happy when I can do so. Just one bid to show everything.

- 2NT= Good raise with 4 cards of ♦ can be an alternative but I would rather take is as natural and NF (in this case obviously the support of ♦ is still good). Simple reason: Trying 3NT first rather before 5♦.

- 3♣= Mixed raise, no interests in majors.

- 3♦= Preemptive raise, no interests in majors.

- 3♥= Splinter I will, implying some strength in ♣, so South can decide if shooting for 3NT. No interests in majors.

- 3♠= frankly speaking I can accept it as preemptive but for some reasons I prefer not as: 1. everybody has bid so the preemptive auction becomes dangerous and you never know if the opp has a game or not; 2. Perhaps always got a chance to interference given 7 cards of ♠; 3. opp has not found a suit fit yet and there is no evidence they will... therefore I would rather treat it as constructive, either Fit Jump or Splinter, or even can be Splinter for ♣ as 4♣ has bypassed 3NT.

- 3NT= To play.

All in all, a very interesting topic and I believe such auction process shall be discussed between the partners in a frequent way.