[MinorKid]

1♦ - 1♥ - 2♦ - 3♦ (invitational) - 3NT - 4♦
1♦ - 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♦ (invitational) - 3NT - 4♦

[Zelandakh]

Could you construct a hand for us where Responder would want to look for slam here?

[fromageGB]

Do you play 3♦ as invitational, but no stronger? I guess so, if it may be passed, and therefore I would read 4♦ as still game invitational in diamonds, but hates NT. Void in a side suit.

[Quantumcat]

If 3♦ was non-forcing, he can't possibly have slam values.

[barmar]

In the second sequence, was 2♣ game forcing?

[Quantumcat]

barmar, on 2012-September-14, 10:16, said:

In the second sequence, was 2♣ game forcing?

The rebid is marked invitational. If he meant invitational to slam, he wouldn't be asking the question of whether 4♦ was forcing :-)

[ggwhiz]

In my experience, nobody pulls a game to a partscore without serious intent except for the ones that can't stand notrump but forgot to bid 4♦ instead of 3 AND forgot to just bid 5.

Since 3♦ was passable I take it as a mild slam try, almost help suit in responders first bid in case we can run both suits and IF I'm game for that we need to cuebid and find the perfect fit control wise.

ie. ♠xx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣KQ10xxx on #2 only needs the black Aces plus Kxxxxx of diamonds and a 3nt bid has more than that but where is it?

ps. I think that 4nt by opener should be to play.

[FrancesHinden]

ggwhiz, on 2012-September-14, 15:17, said:

In my experience, nobody pulls a game to a partscore without serious intent except for the ones that can't stand notrump but forgot to bid 4♦ instead of 3.

Since 3♦ was passable I take it as a mild slam try, almost help suit in responders first bid in case we can run both suits and IF I'm game for that we need to cuebid and find the perfect fit control wise.

ie. ♠xx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣KQJxxx on #2 only needs the black Aces plus Kxxxxx of diamonds and a 3nt bid has more than that but where?

ps. I think that 4nt by opener should be to play.

I don't understand the logic of "since 3D was passable I take it as a mild slam try". If 3D was passable you can't have a slam try.

Your example hand looks like a game force to me, but if I bid like that I would pass 3NT; by not game forcing I was gambling partner had soft stuff in the majors, and I haven't learnt anything new.

[ggwhiz]

FrancesHinden, on 2012-September-14, 15:31, said:

I don't understand the logic of "since 3D was passable I take it as a mild slam try". If 3D was passable you can't have a slam try.

Your example hand looks like a game force to me, but if I bid like that I would pass 3NT; by not game forcing I was gambling partner had soft stuff in the majors, and I haven't learnt anything new.

Fair ball but I don't think opener even promises a 6th diamond or extra values for a 2♦ call if their shape is 4-3-5-1 until they bid 3nt.

The logic I don't understand is pulling a game contract to a partscore to play after inviting game with a non 4♦ bid.

[lowerline]

MinorKid, on 2012-September-14, 01:20, said:

1♦ - 1♥ - 2♦ - 3♦ (invitational) - 3NT - 4♦
1♦ - 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♦ (invitational) - 3NT - 4♦

You have answered the question yourself. If 3♦ was invitational, 4♦ can not be slam going.

That said, I think it doesn't make sense to play 3♦ invitational in the 2nd sequence...

Steven