[steve2005]

fromageGB, on 2015-February-21, 09:10, said:

With no forcing spade raise and "keep it simple" I think 4♠ is to play.
Of course not ideal, but better methods involve complexity/agreement/artificiality/understandings.

♠AQ42
♥QT93
♦Q2
♣842
I would imagine many people with no agreements would be reluctant to bid 2♣, and perhaps 2♥ is the least lie.

This is a limit raise, no need to temporize and muddle your sure ♠ fit

[steve2005]

MrAce, on 2015-February-21, 09:31, said:

Yes, I thought about this. But then again, if 3♠ is preemptive, they are either playing bergen raises and/or artificial 2/1 responses, both of which tells us "with no agreements" condition should not be the case.

Their not playing anything fancy like Bergen so 3♠ is limit. I cant believe they have no forcing ♠ raise. In Acol some sort of 4♣/4♦ Swiss raise is common and is not very useful as natural bid. in North America most play 2N and splinters as a raise. Many also use 3N as some sort of raise.

[all loomis]

is 1 club out of the question?

[Cyberyeti]

all loomis, on 2015-February-22, 02:03, said:

is 1 club out of the question?

Old style Acol opens 1♠, we would open 1♣ and start 1♣-1♥-1N(15-bad 19)-2♣(art ask)-2♥(15-16, 3♥, may still have 4♠) now 2♠ would be nat F and we'd find out whether 4♠ was natural at the 2 level.

[VixTD]

Thanks for the replies. My partner held ♠A986 ♥QJ432 ♦Q7 ♣J8, which looks like a limit raise to 3♠ to me. I understand the difficulties he might have had with no way to make a forcing spade raise, but I didn't dare leave him in 4♠ in case he was cue-bidding. He kept insisting that he would never make a cue-bid in my first-bid suit, but that was far from obvious to me. I couldn't see why he shouldn't have the hand mikeh suggests.

I bid 5♣, which I'm pleased to see has a commanding lead in the poll. I went two off in 5♥, but luckily no game was making.

[fromageGB]

I think you have a system problem here. There is no reason why opener could not be a 55xx shape and if that is the case, with 45xx in responder's hand you want to play in hearts. If he replies 3♠ it is difficult to end in a heart contract.

Probably 2♥ is therefore the better response, and you need agreement on how to handle a return to spades. Possibly you can agree that a GF opener does not jump, but 3♥ is forcing, and now 3♠ from responder shows 4 cards. If you find it difficult to think that a minimum opener with 3 card heart support is committed to game after a start of 1♠ 2♥, perhaps you should increase the strength requirement for responder's 2/1 bid.

[helene_t]

Nah, it is quite simple:

- if you fake a suit in order to support partner later, always fake clubs (diamonds if his suit is clubs or if diamonds are a feature while clubs are not).
- if you by mistake fake a major and partner raises then suck it up and accept that the fake suit is trump. You are probably in a reasonable fit anyway. In the OP case there was really no reason to correct 4♥ to 4♠. 4♥ is an OK contract.
- if you want to make any system agreements at all, beyond "acol, weak twos, system off in competition" then agree that you play inverted minors, and 2NT is a GF raise of partner's major.