mycroft, on 2011-July-05, 12:40, said:
Information:
- two-way Stayman and no transfers after 1NT. 4♦ explicitly doesn't exist.
- Jacoby/Texas transfers after (20-21) 2NT
- Partner forgot/didn't realize was on card Texas after 2NT-4♦ last week.
- No Gerber Ever, but splinters after 1M.
Without screens, so 1NT was announced, 12-14.
I hope I gave some of this information when asked about 4
♦ (more than "doesn't exist").
mycroft, on 2011-July-05, 12:40, said:
4
♥ looks OK
mycroft, on 2011-July-05, 12:40, said:
If you do bid 4♥, what happens when the TD is called?
At the end of the hand, the TD asks partner what was 4
♦ and what partner thought the partnership agreement (if any) was. If partner thought 4
♦ was Texas then the TD might find that your agreement/understanding was Texas and rule that opener's uncertainty was misinformation but opponents are unlikely to be damaged.
mycroft, on 2011-July-05, 12:40, said:
What would count as UI from 4♦ bidder that would convince you that opener is under any constraints?
Obviously all the usual suspects would count as UI (tempo, remarks, gestures) but it is difficult to know what would be suggest by unspecific UI to someone who thinks the bid does not exist.
Obviously remarks such as "we agreed 4
♦ Texas partner" would suggest 4
♥ and would put opener under some constraint.