[smerriman]

Maybe playable, but standard would be 4 card. I assumed the question was what we thought of West's choice of bid, not West's choice of system, which is always assumed to be something standard unless stated otherwise..

[jdiana]

smerriman, on 2025-February-04, 18:04, said:

Maybe playable, but standard would be 4 card. I assumed the question was what we thought of West's choice of bid, not West's choice of system, which is always assumed to be something standard unless stated otherwise..

I agree that standard is that we don't bypass a 4-card spade suit to bid a forcing (or semi-forcing) 1NT. I had made a note to myself to consider changing that rule if I ever start playing again but I couldn't remember where the impetus for that change came from. I finally found it - https://bridgewinner...at-begin-1h-1s/

Just sticking with standard might still be best.

[jillybean]

I was going over this hand with my partner today, he would be unsure about (1♠) 2♠ or (1♠) 3♠, "hard not to take it as a cue bid"

As I said earlier, I got lucky. An 80% board.

edit: my other partner just responded. "if 4th seat makes those bids thet are natural, to play"
So much of this game is resolved only after trial and error.

[jdiana]

jillybean, on 2025-February-04, 21:17, said:

I was going over this hand with my partner today, he would be unsure about (1♠) 2♠ or (1♠) 3♠, "hard not to take it as a cue bid"

As I said earlier, I got lucky. An 80% board.

edit: my other partner just responded. "if 4th seat makes those bids thet are natural, to play"

Yes - big difference between direct seat and "sandwich seat" - https://kwbridge.com/sandwich.htm

[jillybean]

cue under, natural over