The BWTA answer was a complete surprise for me.

I would have either bid 3N or 4C. I am being forced to bid so, for me, it comes down to what I judge to be the most important element in my meager holding. Is it the spade stopper? Or, is it the good club support?

The absence of a quick trick argues for 3N, esp at MPs. If the KC were the JC, **maybe** then I would bid 3D. At teams, 5C = 3N and 5C should be safe, so that argues for 4C. I would console myself that if pard bids 4N, my 5C reply would be a safe landing spot. (And I could pass a 5D correction)

Presumably Opener’s JS to 3C could be simply to set up a GF, but with sketchy Clubs (and maybe only three) ??
And presumably Opener could have a big minor-suit two suiter, needing another bid to clarify??
If Responder does bid 3D and Opener raises to 4D (slow shows), what then?

Hi Jim2 & Clarksburg,

At the risk of being thought disloyal, not to mention betraying trust, I agree with both of you that the BWTA demands an imperfect but nevertheless simple 3NT.

The younger high-level bridge world has embraced what was one time Al Roth’s (a late and great bridge analyst and player) innovative suggestion to give a simple artificial preference in order to save space, stay under 3NT, and allow partner to magically make the next move.

My experience is different since next moves are certainly influenced by the whole auction and to prefer diamonds (the above theory even extends at times to prefer partner’s opened major with a high singleton rather than to take up arguably necessary room).

Factors to consider:

1. tendencies of partner including when, where and from whom he got bridge advice.
2. whether (s)he has ever been and survived the cauldrons of high level bridge intensity.
3. as was drilled into me, until one plays for higher stakes than he can afford to lose at rubber bridge and against the best players around, he should be seen and not heard.

Bridge talk is cheap and plentiful and since I am now an old fogey (by anyone’s standards) I still do not trust any partner to go from there after I give a clear and present false preference.

Sure it might work and probably does, more often than I care to admit, but I stand my ground and am glad that you two have given me a chance to be heard.

Before I sign off however, I do remember a hand given to me perhaps 60 years ago by the same Al Roth discussed above:

North South

s. 10xxx s. x
h. Jxxx h. x
d. Kx d. AQJxxx
c. Qxx c. AKJxx

South North
1 diamond 1 heart
2 clubs ?

Unless North bids 2 diamond a virtual laydown
game is missed. Of course, I showed my ignorance and then listened to the gratuitous lecture of taking away partner’s ability to roam.

The good news is that I had forgotten that event until this discussion took place.

Finally, Clarksburg neither Al nor anyone else told me what or how to answer your topical question. Certainly, if I would then retreat to 5 clubs (trying to show my real preference) all partners would (should) treat that like a cue bid toward slam and not length in clubs.

Not merely does this app only apply to US and Canada, the deals’ majority are only in key towns too.