A difficult hand

At the club the other evening I held this hand ♠64 ♥J983 ♦A82 ♣JT94 and heard the following auction, starting on my right (we were silent throughout): 1♥ - 2♣ - 2NT - 3♠ - 4♣ - 4NT - 5♥ - 6♣.  I was in the passout seat and considered briefly whether to double.  Clearly this contract was going down unless somehow declarer had a void in diamonds or could quickly pitch a losing diamond.  The Roman keycard blackwood sequence suggested no voids, however.  So it seemed prudent to pass and await developments.  There was another very good reason not to double and that was because double would ask for an unusual lead.  Since I could have doubled 5♥ for a heart lead, it wouldn't be clear what an unusual lead would get.  A heart lead could easily be disastrous if partner had say the ♥K (he did).  Finally, there was the fact that I knew that they were in a bad contract and so I was happy.  Why tip them off?  Stay with happiness.

Somewhat surprisingly, partner led the ♦K and we took the first two tricks.  I subsequently got my club trick and so we were +200.  Obviously we were getting a top.

But wait!  The hand proved to be difficult for our "team-mates" too and, believe it or not, +200 was a common result for our direction.  There was a 500, three 300s, and four other 200s.  So our score was only 15/21.  No other pair was in 6♣ (two were in 5♣ down 1) and the majority of the blood was shed in spade contracts.  Our side doubled only once: a 4♥ contract (that accounts for the 500).

So let's see how this should have been bid.  Let's put ourselves in the dealer's seat with: ♠K93 ♥AQT62 ♦973 ♣K5.  After the initial 1♥ call and the game-forcing 2♣ response, what should the rebid be?  In my opinion, 2♥ is automatic.  2NT would be fine if we had some sort of honor in diamonds, but we have nothing.  Of course, we hate to bid 2♥ with only five pieces, but partner knows it's a possibility so should take that into account.

Partner will now bid 2♠, completing the picture of his hand as being at least 5-4 in the black suits.  Now what?  Again, I think the correct bid is automatic: 3♦.  This, the fourth suit, is artificial and says I have no obvious bid -- I can't support either of your suits and I can't bid notrump because I don't have anything in diamonds.  Partner will bid 3NT with a diamond stopper and all will hopefully be well.  If he happens to have 4045 shape, he can "raise" diamonds.

In this case, partner doesn't have a diamond stopper and will now bid 4♣, hopefully showing a sixth club.

At this point, I think pass stands out but I wouldn't call it automatic.  5♣ might be right.  Most partnerships don't consider a 2/1 game force to be forcing to a minor-suit game when there's no fit and we can't play notrump.  We do have quite a nice club holding, but there again, we have a bare minimum hand.  In this case, 4♣ is the last making contract.  My LHO's hand, by the way, was ♠AQ72 ♥5 ♦T4 ♣AQ8732.

The key to bidding this hand, I believe, is our old friend the fourth suit.  It's amazing how often people fail to use it when it's the right bid.  I've even heard it said that since we're already in a game force, how can it be artificial?  That is nonsense of course.  Like "double", the fourth suit is an under-utilized bid that should be our friend.

Fourth suit forcing

As mentioned in Forcing Raises, I've recently been re-reading Barry Rigal's Test Your Bridge Judgement.  I never knew that fourth-suit-forcing was such a versatile bid until I first read his various scenarios.  Actually, he recommends that if used at the two-level it is forcing for one round only, while if at the 3-level, it's forcing to game.  That makes reasonable sense, although I'm not quite ready to understand the nuances of that treatment.  Forcing to game is certainly the simplest and the easiest on the old ticker!

But what about this sequence, with silent opponents, and playing (or aspiring to play) "expert standard"?

Pass 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ 2♣
In my opinion, 2♣ was clearly the fourth suit and therefore forcing (and not necessarily promising four clubs).  Obviously, it couldn't be forcing to game by a passed hand.  But opener was still completely unlimited and I thought would be keen to know that I had 11 hcp with five hearts (and no enthusiasm to bid 2NT from my side of the table).

Incidentally, with some of my other partners, I play XYZ in this sequence where 2♣ is unambiguously forcing and artificial.  But what of 2♦ by a passed hand (in that context)?  Perhaps that should be natural and, obviously, non-forcing.

In fact, I could make 3NT on 23 hcp and the actual defense (I didn't – shame!).  But my partner clearly thought that 2♣ was natural and raised me to 3♣.

What do you think?