[kgr]

My partner and I play that if we confirmed a fit in the minors then 4 in that minor is RKC.
With confirmed ♣-fit, 4♣ is RKC for ♣
With confirmed ♦-fit, 4♦ is RKC for ♦
This has following disadvantages:
1) easier to forget as 4m sounds very natural.
2) not always clear if a fit is confirmed or not.
Eg:
1♦-1♠
2♣-2♦ ..Is fit confirmed or is this false preference.
 
1♣-2♣ ...We play inverted minors, but open 5-5-4-2 and 1♣ can be doubleton.
 
Is there a better RKC for minors, without these disadvantages?

[jdonn]

kgr, on May 28 2009, 02:27 PM, said:

This has following disadvantages:
1) easier to forget as 4m sounds very natural.
2) not always clear if a fit is confirmed or not.

3) 4m is usually a VERY useful natural bid, either to agree the suit, start cuebidding, show a fit without commiting to keycard...

[hrothgar]

I don't think that anything will get you around the requirement that your partnership understands what the trump suit is.

Also, I think that you'd missing the biggest disadvantage with your methods - you can't bid 4m to invite cue bids.

My own preference is to use

4♦ = RKCB for Clubs
4♥ = RKCB for Diamonds

aka Redwood

[kenrexford]

One method that often is easy to remember is to play that four of the cheapest out-of-focus major is RKCB for the agreed minor.

If the auction is something like 1♥-P-2♣-P-3♣-P-4♠, that 4♠ call SCREAMS weird. So, it's probably easy to remember. It costs space, of course.

The best space method won't often be the best memory method.

My "cure" for memory issues is to agree on something and let the chips fall where they may. Eventually, you remember.

[jdonn]

Ignoring is not a cure.

[Cascade]

hrothgar, on May 29 2009, 07:36 AM, said:

I don't think that anything will get you around the requirement that your partnership understands what the trump suit is.

Also, I think that you'd missing the biggest disadvantage with your methods - you can't bid 4m to invite cue bids.

My own preference is to use

4♦ = RKCB for Clubs
4♥ = RKCB for Diamonds

aka Redwood

and more generally you can't bid 4m to invite slam. This could be because you need a specific cue-bid as Richard suggests or because you have a void so have a hand unsuitable for RKCB.

We play kick-back - the suit above for RKCB - which Richard is calling Redwood. I guess that depends on what you use for the other suits. We avoid most ambiguities by trying to explicitly agreeing the suit first before applying kickback in cases of doubt.

[Cascade]

kenrexford, on May 29 2009, 07:57 AM, said:

My "cure" for memory issues is to agree on something and let the chips fall where they may. Eventually, you remember.

Indeed this is clearly a case where a short-term loss can turn into a long term gain.

We have many agreements that serve us well that sometime in the past we have forgotten - sometimes more than once - but that are now automatic and useful.

[kenrexford]

Cascade, on May 28 2009, 05:25 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 29 2009, 07:57 AM, said:

My "cure" for memory issues is to agree on something and let the chips fall where they may.  Eventually, you remember.

Indeed this is clearly a case where a short-term loss can turn into a long term gain.

We have many agreements that serve us well that sometime in the past we have forgotten - sometimes more than once - but that are now automatic and useful.

Yeah, but don't ever play Suit/Lead with M.C. (a friend of mine who shall remain only initials); he NEVER remembers. LOL

[Codo]

Hi Koen,

I play minorwood too.
It works wonderful in non-competitive auctions.
And normally we do not need this bid it to invite cuebids. When we want to cuebid, we can cuebid ourselves, no need to use minorwood then.

It may gets tricky, when you are late in finding a fit.
Something like 1♥ 2♦ 2 ♥ 3♣ is awful, because here 4 ♣ is the first way to show support. But here with still different strains possible, kickback has some serious problems too.

In competitive auctions it is difficult. Here, you sometimes need the 4 of a minor bid to show the fit. Unluckily no possible continuation is without a problem here. When you play the popular way and cuebid afterwards, you may still be off two aces when you play mixed cues and you are maybe too high when you play first round cues. So rightly or wrongly we still play it as minorwood, accepting that this is not optimal at all. And we have some set of rules when minorwood does not apply.
But I guess that at least 99,9% of all experts play minorwood off in competition, so maybe you should do the same.

[CSGibson]

Kickback is probably best (suit above being keycard in an agreed suit auction). I always found it frustrating that expert standard in my area is that, when I agree hearts, 4N-5C-5S asks about 3rd round spade control, and 4N-5C-5N is specific kings. If I need to know about the spade king, there's no recourse. Kickback solves that problem and others, at the cost of one cue-bid (and 4N can substitute for that cue in appropriate auctions).

[gwnn]

in Hungary they play

4m=ORKC

and then

4m+1=good hand
4m+2=bad hand with 0/3
4m+3=bad hand with 1/4

etc

I never really liked it to be honest, but it's a bit better than just 4m=RKC and you need to think less. (well you should probably make 4m+1=bad hand and the rest being good hands in case you aren't interested in slam opposite a bad hand)

[Codo]

gwnn, on May 29 2009, 07:07 PM, said:

in Hungary they play

4m=ORKC

and then

4m+1=good hand
4m+2=bad hand with 0/3
4m+3=bad hand with 1/4

etc

I never really liked it to be honest, but it's a bit better than just 4m=RKC and you need to think less. (well you should probably make 4m+1=bad hand and the rest being good hands in case you aren't interested in slam opposite a bad hand)

I play that 4m+1 shows a bad hand and I love it

[gnasher]

CSGibson, on May 29 2009, 09:09 AM, said:

Kickback is probably best (suit above being keycard in an agreed suit auction). I always found it frustrating that expert standard in my area is that, when I agree hearts, 4N-5C-5S asks about 3rd round spade control, and 4N-5C-5N is specific kings. If I need to know about the spade king, there's no recourse. Kickback solves that problem and others, at the cost of one cue-bid (and 4N can substitute for that cue in appropriate auctions).

That's not the only cost of Kickback (or other similar low-level keycard asks). A bigger cost is that you can't do things in the natural order, which is to investigate holdings in specific suits first, and then confirm that you're not missing two keycards.

For example, suppose that diamonds are agreed, the bidding is currently at 4♦, and I don't have a spade control. Playing 4NT as RKCB, I can bid 4♥, see if partner cuebids 4♠, and then bid RKCB if he does. Playing Kickback, I have to either ask for keycards immediately, risking reaching slam with no spade control, or bid 4NT to show my heart control, forgoing the chance to check for keycards.

[OleBerg]

gnasher, on May 29 2009, 12:41 PM, said:

CSGibson, on May 29 2009, 09:09 AM, said:

Kickback is probably best (suit above being keycard in an agreed suit auction).  I always found it frustrating that expert standard in my area is that, when I agree hearts, 4N-5C-5S asks about 3rd round spade control, and 4N-5C-5N is specific kings.  If I need to know about the spade king, there's no recourse.  Kickback solves that problem and others, at the cost of one cue-bid (and 4N can substitute for that cue in appropriate auctions).

That's not the only cost of Kickback (or other similar low-level keycard asks). A bigger cost is that you can't do things in the natural order, which is to investigate holdings in specific suits first, and then confirm that you're not missing two keycards.

For example, suppose that diamonds are agreed, the bidding is currently at 4♦, and I don't have a spade control. Playing 4NT as RKCB, I can bid 4♥, see if partner cuebids 4♠, and then bid RKCB if he does. Playing Kickback, I have to either ask for keycards immediately, risking reaching slam with no spade control, or bid 4NT to show my heart control, forgoing the chance to check for keycards.

One way around many of these problems, is not to ask for aces, but to show them. A method that has some following among Scandinavian experts.

Normally 4 NT is used to show at least three aces out of five. (The convention is actually labeled "Culbertsons 4NT-5NT".)

Any cuebid below 4NT promises one ace, and cuebids above 4NT promises two aces.

The number of aces promised are adjusted for a player known to hold a limited hand, and for both players if, if one hand is known to be very strong.

5NT is used for grand exploration. If the partner of a 4NT bidder bids it, he promises the rest of the aces, while if the 4NT bidder himself bid it, he promises an extra ace.

One advantage is, that when the last cuebid is the one beneath 5 of the agreed suit, which is often the case, the other player has the option of signing of (which is naturally not unconditional) in 5 of the suit.



There are still problems, especially with the minor suits. (4NT then takes the place of the cuebid that is gone.)

A way to solve a lot of these, is to use the kick-back-bid to show three aces:

An example where the agreement shine:

1♥ - 2♣
3♠ = Splinter

Now responder has these options, if slammy:

4♣ = Slammy, denies three aces. (Hoping partner can bid 4♦.)
4♦ = At least three aces.
4♥ = Heart cue, exactly two aces.
4♠ = Spade cue, no heart cue, exactly two aces.
4NT = Diamond cue, no heart or spade cue, exactly two aces.

The bids will have the same meaning for responder. Note that in all sequences where all controls are present, one player will have the chance to sign off in 5♣. This could be quite useful, as both hands are rather unlimited.

This, imo, more precise bidding, also builds a better base for grand investigation. But thats for another post.