[Vampyr]

Had the auction last night: 1♦-(4♣)-?

Partner thought she could not bid 4NT because it would be RKB for diamonds. This meaning would not have occurred to me. She said that it would be her default with no discussion. I thought this was odd. Has anyone ever heard of this meaning before?

[mikeh]

 Vampyr, on 2020-February-25, 22:09, said:

Had the auction last night: 1♦-(4♣)-?

Partner thought she could not bid 4NT because it would be RKB for diamonds. This meaning would not have occurred to me. She said that it would be her default with no discussion. I thought this was odd. Has anyone ever heard of this meaning before?

My approach is that if rho bids 4M, 4N is two places to play, but over 4m, 4N is keycard if partner had opened 1M. I am currently playing a method in which 1D usually shows 5+ (the only exception is any 4441 with 4 diamonds). I’ll discuss this with my partner during bidding practice tomorrow night, but I haven’t previously discussed this with anyone. With 1D showing a real suit, the utility of keycard seems enhanced.

I suspect keycard is as good as anything, anyway, although it would be nice to be able to make a forcing bid with a big hand, without agreeing diamonds.

What did you think it was? Natural seems a very narrow target.

[pilowsky]

I also thought that 1♦ pass 4NT would be asking for aces. To check, I went into Prime and set up a table. The first hand where the robot opened 1♦, I hovered over 4NT and this is what appeared. So at least in GIB 2/1, it is. Yes, I know that the hand is not suitable for the bid, its just to illustrate the point.... Hope that's Ok. Anyway, that's how the robots taught me.

[Vampyr]

 mikeh, on 2020-February-25, 23:11, said:

My approach is that if rho bids 4M, 4N is two places to play, but over 4m, 4N is keycard if partner had opened 1M. I am currently playing a method in which 1D usually shows 5+ (the only exception is any 4441 with 4 diamonds). I’ll discuss this with my partner during bidding practice tomorrow night, but I haven’t previously discussed this with anyone. With 1D showing a real suit, the utility of keycard seems enhanced.

I suspect keycard is as good as anything, anyway, although it would be nice to be able to make a forcing bid with a big hand, without agreeing diamonds.

What did you think it was? Natural seems a very narrow target.

I would have thought it was natural. 1♦ promised three.

 pilowsky, on 2020-February-25, 23:58, said:

I also thought that 1♦ pass 4NT would be asking for aces. To check, I went into Prime and set up a table. The first hand where the robot opened 1♦, I hovered over 4NT and this is what appeared. So at least in GIB 2/1, it is. Yes, I know that the hand is not suitable for the bid, its just to illustrate the point.... Hope that's Ok. Anyway, that's how the robots taught me.

When the opponents pass it is very different.

[broze]

I agree that without discussion it is RKCB

[Zelandakh]

 Vampyr, on 2020-February-25, 22:09, said:

Had the auction last night: 1♦-(4♣)-?

Partner thought she could not bid 4NT because it would be RKB for diamonds. This meaning would not have occurred to me. She said that it would be her default with no discussion. I thought this was odd. Has anyone ever heard of this meaning before?

It would certainly have been ace-asking for my first bridge partner, who insisted on the rule that 4NT is always Blackwood, at least until the hand where I insisted on playing to our agreement despite him passing me UI that he wanted it to be natural. I imagine there is quite a large pool of players with this way of thinking and that therefore ace-asking would be the most popular meaning in club bridge.

For what it is worth, I think this is an ideal situation to be playing transfers, with 4red showing the appropriate major. That allows Responder effectively both to bid 4M to play as well as making a slam try. It would also mean, for example, that you could get your natural 4NT response and still have 4♠ for RKCB and 5♣ as a slam invite. The alternative to that that springs to mind for me is something akin to a 4♦ end signal from Relay Precision, with that being a marionette to 4♥ with the "to play" hand type and an immediate 4M being a slammy hand. I find it interesting, if a little surprising, that Mike uses natural here with his current partner. I would have expected expert standard to be something beyond that by now despite the rarity of the auction.

[AL78]

In the absence of discussion, I would take it as RCKB, just because if I am playing with a pick-up partner at my local club, almost everyone would play it that way. With a regular partner, it is either RCKB, or two places to play, and I would discuss it with them.

[mikeh]

 Zelandakh, on 2020-February-26, 09:13, said:

It would certainly have been ace-asking for my first bridge partner, who insisted on the rule that 4NT is always Blackwood, at least until the hand where I insisted on playing to our agreement despite him passing me UI that he wanted it to be natural. I imagine there is quite a large pool of players with this way of thinking and that therefore ace-asking would be the most popular meaning in club bridge.

For what it is worth, I think this is an ideal situation to be playing transfers, with 4red showing the appropriate major. That allows Responder effectively both to bid 4M to play as well as making a slam try. It would also mean, for example, that you could get your natural 4NT response and still have 4♠ for RKCB and 5♣ as a slam invite. The alternative to that that springs to mind for me is something akin to a 4♦ end signal from Relay Precision, with that being a marionette to 4♥ with the "to play" hand type and an immediate 4M being a slammy hand. I find it interesting, if a little surprising, that Mike uses natural here with his current partner. I would have expected expert standard to be something beyond that by now despite the rarity of the auction.

Since I think I am the only mike who has posted so far, think you misread my post😊

[pescetom]

For us 4NT is RKCB here, two places to play over 4M.

We should probably discuss what double would mean here, though.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I am not sure, that in the given seq. 2-places makes a lot of sense, you have neg.X,
to look for a Major suit fit.
The main Question is, is 4D forcing?

If 4D is NF, 4NT could indicate a good raise (SI) interest compared to a bad raise to 5D.

But I also dont believe natural is sensible.

I think it Comes down to Meta Agreements that may be in place, and Maybe the concrete meaning
is not really sensible, but as Long as you know what it is, this will work ok.

With Kind regards
Marlowe

PS: My guess is, it is good-bad in the given seq. for us, but I may be wrong.

[Vampyr]

 P_Marlowe, on 2020-February-28, 15:31, said:

Hi,

I am not sure, that in the given seq. 2-places makes a lot of sense, you have neg.X,
to look for a Major suit fit.
The main Question is, is 4D forcing?

If 4D is NF, 4NT could indicate a good raise (SI) interest compared to a bad raise to 5D.

But I also dont believe natural is sensible.

I think it Comes down to Meta Agreements that may be in place, and Maybe the concrete meaning
is not really sensible, but as Long as you know what it is, this will work ok.

With Kind regards
Marlowe

PS: My guess is, it is good-bad in the given seq. for us, but I may be wrong.

Well, it was a first-time partnership, so there were no “Meta Agreements” but I do think that natural is very sensible indeed. How else will you get to play in notrumps?

[smerriman]

 Vampyr, on 2020-February-28, 16:24, said:

Well, it was a first-time partnership, so there were no “Meta Agreements” but I do think that natural is very sensible indeed. How else will you get to play in notrumps?

If you had good enough clubs to play in 4NT wouldn't it be better to pass and play 4Cx?

[cherdano]

 smerriman, on 2020-February-28, 16:47, said:

If you had good enough clubs to play in 4NT wouldn't it be better to pass and play 4Cx?

You won't get to play 4CX if partner has a weak NT. I think the hand-type for a natural 4NT is something like 6 running diamonds, a club stopper (not the ace) and some cards in the majors meaning you can reasonably hope for three top tricks there.

[broze]

 Vampyr, on 2020-February-28, 16:24, said:

Well, it was a first-time partnership, so there were no “Meta Agreements” but I do think that natural is very sensible indeed. How else will you get to play in notrumps?

You might as well say, "how else will you get to keycard in diamonds"