[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2011-December-05, 21:37, said:

We treat 4C as Minorwood for clubs. The jokes about Gerber aside...

My partner and I have not discussed this auction, but since we play that 4♣ is often RKCB as well, this is a situation where we might play it. I am not sure why everyone is so negative about this treatment -- if you with to use 4♣ as forcing, then using it as RKCB is not ridiculous.

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-06, 05:22, said:

Stayman should be unnecessary, as with clubs and a major it's pretty normal to pass over 2♦ then bid clubs second time after opener reveals his suit to show clubs and the other major.

This is one reason that weak-only Multi is gaining in popularity.

[whereagles]

jdeegan, on 2011-December-04, 17:32, said:

Gerber - all 4♣ bids are Gerber

ye infidel!! to the gallows!!!

[gnasher]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-06, 05:22, said:

Stayman should be unnecessary, as with clubs and a major it's pretty normal to pass over 2♦ then bid clubs second time after opener reveals his suit to show clubs and the other major.

It may have been normal 25 years ago in England, but I don't think the rest of the world took much notice of this idea, and I don't think it's stood the test of time anywhere.

How do you show clubs and spades after
  2♦ pass 2♠ pass
  4♥

[fromageGB]

Vampyr, on 2011-December-06, 06:17, said:

My partner and I have not discussed this auction, but since we play that 4♣ is often RKCB as well, this is a situation where we might play it. I am not sure why everyone is so negative about this treatment -- if you with to use 4♣ as forcing, then using it as RKCB is not ridiculous.

I'm pretty negative about it, because normally with partner making a very strong bid like this he is the one with a long suit, and you are just a willing helper with some controls. It won't do you any good to ask for aces because you will not be in a position to know how many tricks are there for the taking. Are you going to guess whether partner has 6 clubs? Or 8? Only he knows, so he is the one who should be ace asking. But you need to tell him to ask.

[JLOGIC]

phil_20686, on 2011-December-05, 08:07, said:

trying to stop in 4m is an absurd use of a bid IMO.

Not trying to pick on you or anything, this is a common argument, but I hate it and find it terribly flawed. The point of inviting, whether its 2N or 4m, is to try to get to game if it is good, and otherwise stop in a partial. Of course nobody ever wants to play 2N or 4m, but if the other option is to miss games when they're good, or play games that are bad, I'll choose to play it.

I would not describe an invitational 4m bid as "trying to stop in 4m" I would describe it as "trying to find game when it is good, and play partscore when game is bad, with partner evaluating somewhat intelligently"

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2011-December-06, 06:43, said:

It may have been normal 25 years ago in England, but I don't think the rest of the world took much notice of this idea, and I don't think it's stood the test of time anywhere.

How do you show clubs and spades after
  2♦ pass 2♠ pass
  4♥

What do you think X shows here ?

[Zelandakh]

My default for a raise to 4m where there were bids available to look for 3NT is for it to be forcing and a slam try or better. I think that should apply here too but with a pick up partner I would assume invitational.

[helene_t]

Undiscussed I would say forcing because undiscussed we would surely have no other way to show a forcing club raise. OK, we could start with 3♦ and then bid 4♣ but if 3♦ is natural then partner may raise it, and he would more often do so when we don't have diamonds.

While stopping in 4m in constructive sequences should not be on the very top of our priorities, I think "absurd" is an overbid. But if we do play 3♦ as artificial and we want a way to show a non-forcing club raise, then I would like that to go via 3♦ and let the direct 4♣ be forcing. I think most hands that would invite for 5♣ would also invite for 3NT. Besides, if we want to invite for 5♣ we might want to look for a feature rather than just making an omnibus invite.

As for the idea of using 4♦ as the forcing club raise I think it is not bad. But I am not sure if I don't want to use 4♦ for something else. We could use 4♦ as multi or texas, allowing us to show more different hands with one long major or a major+minor. Or 4♦ could be natural, maybe.

[gnasher]

gnasher, on 2011-December-06, 06:43, said:

How do you show clubs and spades after
  2♦ pass 2♠ pass
  4♥

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-06, 08:40, said:

What do you think X shows here ?

I think it's for takeout (unless I'm playing methods where that hand would already have acted).

Are you saying that you play it as showing clubs and spades?

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-December-06, 12:08

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2011-December-06, 12:07, said:

I think it's for takeout (unless I'm playing methods where that hand would already have acted).

Are you saying that you play it as showing clubs and spades?

Depends on the partnership, I play different methods with different people, but in one yes.

[gnasher]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-06, 12:37, said:

Depends on the partnership, I play different methods with different people, but in one yes.

Sorry, I didn't mean to ask what you play this as.

Earlier in this thread, you said that it was "pretty normal" to play a delayed 3♣ as showing clubs and the unbid major. Playing "pretty normal" methods, how does one show clubs and spades (or diamonds and spades) in the sequence
  2♦ pass 2♠ pass
  4♥

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2011-December-07, 03:41, said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to ask what you play this as.

Earlier in this thread, you said that it was "pretty normal" to play a delayed 3♣ as showing clubs and the unbid major. Playing "pretty normal" methods, how does one show clubs and spades (or diamonds and spades) in the sequence
  2♦ pass 2♠ pass
  4♥

It depends which pretty normal method you use.

If a Dixon-ish method, you would already have acted with a 3 suited takeout, so it's reasonable for this to be 5+m/4♠.

If your 2♠ overcall is natural, then you might not have.

[gnasher]

Dixon* is another method that was popular in England 25 years ago but failed to retain its market share.

* Over 2♦, 2M shows a takeout double of the other major.

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-06, 07:19, said:

Not trying to pick on you or anything, this is a common argument, but I hate it and find it terribly flawed. The point of inviting, whether its 2N or 4m, is to try to get to game if it is good, and otherwise stop in a partial. Of course nobody ever wants to play 2N or 4m, but if the other option is to miss games when they're good, or play games that are bad, I'll choose to play it.

I would not describe an invitational 4m bid as "trying to stop in 4m" I would describe it as "trying to find game when it is good, and play partscore when game is bad, with partner evaluating somewhat intelligently"

Yes, but 4m is different from these others, as it rules out 3N as a possible spot. I think the class of hands that have more play in 5c than 3N is pretty limited. Normally you only go past 3N when you foresee a decent chance of minor suit slam. How often to we see the auction 1c-1x-3c and decide to play in 3N even with a 9 or ten card fit?

Not only that, but the higher you go the greater chance that the contracts basically depend on the same finesse or have the case that 4c is far from col anyway, in which case the % of making game becomes less than our usual % in the relative decision. Suppose 5c is 25% and 4c is 50% then the 4c vs 5c decision is 25% to gain 13 25% to lose 6 and 50% to lose 3, so still ev positive.

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2011-December-07, 07:47, said:

Dixon* is another method that was popular in England 25 years ago but failed to retain its market share.

* Over 2♦, 2M shows a takeout double of the other major.

It's still played frequently (but not that popular even among people who play it, just regarded as least of evils), maybe not at top level, but certainly at just below that.

And 2M is a LIMITED ToX of the other major.

[FrancesHinden]

aguahombre, on 2011-December-05, 21:37, said:

Forget multi for a minute. Whatever the raise means is the same meaning as if there was a 3C overcall of a weak two. 3C is a very good overcall in our world.

No, it's not. After a 3C overcall of a weak two, you have a cue bid available. You don't have a cue bid after a multi,

I'm certain I play 2M (nat, weak) - 3C - Pass - 4C as natural invitational both with and without discussion.

[FrancesHinden]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-06, 05:22, said:

Stayman should be unnecessary, as with clubs and a major it's pretty normal to pass over 2♦ then bid clubs second time after opener reveals his suit to show clubs and the other major.

You have to bid at once with a good hand with short diamonds. You can't afford to pass.

We play a delayed 4m as diamonds and the linked major (5-5/6-5) and an immediate 4m bid as clubs and the linked major, but with 6-4 with clubs and a major, you just bid your club suit at once.

[Cyberyeti]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-December-07, 15:13, said:

You have to bid at once with a good hand with short diamonds. You can't afford to pass.

We play a delayed 4m as diamonds and the linked major (5-5/6-5) and an immediate 4m bid as clubs and the linked major, but with 6-4 with clubs and a major, you just bid your club suit at once.

A really good hand yes, a minimum opening bid not necessarily. We play the P then 3♣ 12-15 ish.

[the hog]

Invitational of course, particularly in an semi casual partnership.

[mycroft]

Gerber I hate. Minorwood - for someone who refuses to have a Kickback disaster^* - is a whole different beast. The difference is that 4♣ Minorwood agrees (for now, at least) *CLUBS* - and, of course the ♣K comes into play. Note that this says nothing about the auction given and whether it should apply here.

* I 100% agree that Kickback is theoretically better. I also know that I have to get it right 3-4 times *when it matters* for every time I get it wrong for it to be worth it (with all the "we're getting to the same spot either way" ones thrown out as a wash), and it's not better enough for there to be enough "matters" cases that *I* won't screw it up too much.