[kenrexford]

I have been studying cuebidding theory recently and am having some trouble. I have found some interesting write-ups by Gitelman and by Belladonna, which helped. But, I seek more depth than either explores.

I have been assuming base rules:

Last Train
Serious 3NT
2NT, if a cue, denies good trumps
Jumps are Pictures; Splinters are Pictures
Cue of own shows 2 of top 3 honors
Cue of partner's shows A or K or Q
Side cue shows first or second round control

Where it gets muddled is in certain strange situations. What, for example, is a delayed (second cuebidding round) jump cue (own suit or side)? E.g., 1S-P-2C-P-2D-P-2S-P-3C-P-3D-P-4H???

What rules apply inferentially? For example, assuming 1S-P-2C-P-2D-P-2S. If Opener now bids 3D, he denies a club honor but shows 2/3 diamond honors and good trumps (did not bid 2NT). As 4D would show the same thing, but deny controls in clubs or hearts. 4C would seem to be a picture splinter (same as 4D, but a stiff/void in clubs), as would 4H. Thus, 3D seems to guarantee a heart control, in the form of Ace or King (not shortness), with a stiff club possible. If Responder next bids 3NT (denial of a second heart control, but serious), then Opener might bid 4C (stiff or void in clubs), 4D (solid diamonds, doubleton or three clubs), or 4H (broken diamonds, xx(x) in clubs, and something about hearts). Does this 4H operate to clarify the heart control as first-round? Double control (AK, AQ, stiff Ace, or void)? Something else???

I have tons of questions like this, and yet I cannot find any write-up or book which explores cuebidding theory to this depth. Any suggestions???

[Beto]

Cuebidding theory depends on partnership agreements.

for ex:
I prefer to show distribution at the 3-level (so i never use 2NT with bad trumps) and cuebids starting on 3NT

this way, in the bidding:

1S - 2C - 2D - 2S

2NT would show values in hearts with xx clubs.
3C shows H in clubs (Hxx/Hx in most cases)
3D shows 5-5 distribution with values in S and D, may have Hx in clubs
3H shows singleton club with HHx probably
4H directly would show a singleton H with xxx in clubs probably

so 1S 2C 2D 2S 3C 3D 4H i guess it shows 5143 with values in all suits,
maybe something like KQJxx x AQJx Kxx

[kenrexford]

Thanks for the info. I realize that, for example, if one compares "Gitelman" cuebidding with "Belladonna" cuebidding, similar but different conclusions arise. However, in neither instance do these gentlemen expand into as deep a theory as I am seeking. I am still trying to find general "answers" to certain theory questions.

To explain my interest, beyond simple thirst for knowledge, I have seen quite respectable players mess up cuebidding sequences because of an apparent lack of taoistic knowledge of cuebidding theory. In the Vanderbilts this year, two men from Turkey playing with Palowan and Pavlicek missed a grand slam in an auction where 5S was explained as "I am not sure what is going on and hoped he'd sign off at 5NT." In the IMP Pairs, Zia and his partner missed a grand in another cuebidding situation. Both were easily 57%+ grand slams. The miss was due not to judgment but to informational exchange problems.

So, I am trying to understand, perhaps, that which the gods punished man for trying to learn. But, has anyone done this sort of depth of analysis? Any secret websites? Any double secret newsletters? Anything out there???

[kenrexford]

Actually, these were both nearly 100% grand slams. But, thanks for the advice, writing to Fred. I hope this helps...

[000002]

2 weeks ago, we discussed those "Shape first".

Why forget now?

IMO accurate cue-bid is theoretical only.

good regards

[Chamaco]

Just a quick tip:

the reason why it is important to describe as best as possible the SHAPE befor starting the cues, is the fact that it's important to know:

- if your pard is cuebidding shortness or honors;
- if your pard has a long suit to develop, in which you might hold a key honor that will make the suit solid.

For this reasons, many good players try to use sequences that allow to find a fit, but also to describe whether they have specific shortness or specific good suits.
This way, when they reach the cuebidding stage, they have a much better idea about whether the small/grand slam is a good proposition, or whether the 2 hands are not fitting well despite extra values.


Now, without entering the details of which conventions or schemes to use to allow for a better shape description, it is easy enough to start with the general principle outlined e.g. by Beto (and by Fred in his 2/1 article) that, *when a major fit is found and the 2 level, the bidding up to 3M describes shape, not controls*, and higher bids will instead be geared towards showing controls .

[kenrexford]

I have heard this "finish shape" theory, but I find it amazingly unnecessary. Inferential shape develops itself the lower the cuebidding starts.

A simple example. 1H-P-2C-P-2D-P-2H. Assuming the "rules" I assume, 2NT would deny good trumps. 3C would show a club A/K/Q. 3H, therefore, would show good trumps, but no A/K/Q of clubs, and 2 of top 3 diamond honors, and NOT a spade control.

This same holding is covered by picture jumps and picture splinters. Thus, there seems to be a fine distinction. With a stiff club, one would typically jump to 3C under these other parameters. Hence, 3D, instead, denies a stiff club.

With a stiff spade, one could either curbid 2S OR picture-Splinter, the option here. Hence, 3D denies a stiff spade. Sounds like 5422. Same pattern as the picture jump, and same parameters. However, the precise club message is not the same, as the picture jump denies a club "control" and the failure to bid 3C denies the club A/K/Q, a denial inferior to the picture bid inference. Hence, it appears that a 3D call shows 5422 with no club or spade control and not Qx of clubs; inferentially, then, 4D, to be distinguished, must imply possessing the Qx of clubs.

This depth of inference is lost is one goes with "pattern first" theory, which I contend to be relatively unnecessary.

[Chamaco]

kenrexford, on Sep 22 2005, 01:44 PM, said:

A simple example.  1H-P-2C-P-2D-P-2H.  Assuming the "rules" I assume, 2NT would deny good trumps.

The use of 2NT or 3NT to discriminate trumps quality is a good tool, but redundant if you play 4NT RKCB.

As a matter of fact, this 2NT/3NT/4NT bid was widely used by the Blue Team, introduced by Chiaradia in the neapolitan Club and described in the later Belladonna writeups.

However, they did use 4NT as Keycard ask only if it was a jump.
If 4NT was bid up the line, it was the so called "declarative-Interrogative" bid, which was multi-meaning, with concepts very similar to the "Turbo 3NT" and "Turbo 4NT" used nowdays by many italian players (shows an odd or even no. of keycards during a cuebidding scan), or to the "serious 3NT"/LTTC meaning used by others.

This 4NT bid up the line makes it hard to check for the trump queen without bypassing 5M, hence, they needed a tool to guarantee/deny the trump quality before getting there.

----

Bottomline: the scheme is sound, but it needs adjustment to avoid redundancy (e.g.
1. RKCB 4NT is often useless and best substituted with "Turbo" 4NT, and
2. we need tools to guarantee/deny good trumps early on in the bidding).

[kenrexford]

How about a "patience principle?" Case in point.

1S-P-2D-P-2H-P-2S. If Opener bids 3H, he shows good trumps and good hearts, without a club control or a diamond card. Responder, if still interested, can bid 3S if Responder has the missing trump honor (I do not buy into the "do not cuebid trumps" theory). This would also infer a club control, right? Any other call would also infer a club control (other than 4S).

Thus, if Opener was interested in a club control, he would opt for this route rather than the "picture bid" of 4H, to avoid unnecessary disclosure to the opponents and to advoid redundancy. Thus, the "patience principle" should re-define the picture bid to actually show club control. As 4C would be available to show shortness-based club control, the inferred club control from the picture jump should be honor-based. Hence, the "patience principle" should suggest that 4H by Opener be based upon a hand like AKxxx-AQJx-xx-Kx.

The "patience principle" would only arise on rare occasions, with lots of room.

Now, I must admit that other principles could be employed. For instance, the picture bid might, perhaps, infer no honor control in clubs and thus infer a club shortness control. This would make 4C as a picture splinter redundant unless the picture splinter under these circumstances suggested a void.