[Cascade]

In the following situation what is the best method for investigating whether or not you have a slam.

Assume you are at 4minor and have the agreement that trumps are set and you have slam interest.

What is the best use of cue-bids:

1. Show a control in case partner needs a control in a specific suit to bid slam

2. Show a control and by inference extra or good values so that partner can bid the slam 'quantitatively' knowing you have extras

3. Some other scheme - maybe asking bids, automatically showing key-cards etc

[luke warm]

i like playing that in any gf auction where a minor is agreed, 4 of that minor is always rkc..

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I dont know if it is best, but 1).

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mr1303]

What I like to do is the following:

If I jump to 4 of a minor (when 3 of a minor would have been forcing) then it is RKCB for the minor. E.g. playing 2/1, 1S 2C 4C

If I pull 3NT to 4 of a minor, it is forcing, setting trumps and asking for a cue-bid. (direct 4NT after this 4 of a minor is to play)

[Echognome]

Jimmy, I used to play with my p that 4 of the agreed minor was always blackwood, but then I found it to be a very inflexible plan. There are certain hands where you want to make a slam try, but you don't want to take control. So we now play that one above the agreed trump suit is keycard. It has the slight trade-off that you lose that cue-bid, but I think having the choice whether to take control or to "pass the buck" is winning bridge.

To answer Wayne's question, we've discussed this a lot as a partnership and once one of us has made a slam try with 4m, then the options are to bid one step up as keycard, 4NT as no interest (most of the time as a place to play), and other bid or two as "pass the buck again". They basically say "I hear you've got slam interest partner and I'm still interested but not enough to take control."

[inquiry]

The best method (assuming 4m was not blackwoodish) would seem to depend upon rather the 4m bidder is markedly stronger, markedly weaker, or roughly equal in stregth to the other partner.

Assume for a minute one hand is monster strong. Say....

2C - 2D
3C - 4C

where 2D was waiting, 3C was 100% game force. Here to have opener "cue-bid" is probably inferior to some asking bid structure. Maybe with 4♦ being kickback and other bids being asking.

On the other hand, assume the 4m bidder is the stronger hand. Consider perhaps,

2C - 3C
4C

Now clearly responder should cue-bid something (no time for opener to ask).

If both hands are roughly equal in value, cue-bidding makes sense. Of course, the easiest thing to do is to play cue-bidding in all cases. I use the simple cue-bidding option, but keep cheapest unbid suit for kickback.

Ben

[cherdano]

I have to admit I am not playing this with anyone. but I would believe it is best to have some last train bid available, e.g. 4NT after clubs have been agreed and at least one cuebid has been made.

This way, you get the best of both worlds, you can start with mandatory cuebids, and clarify strength later with last train. You lose RKCB, but with clubs agreed, it doesn't seems so useful anyway, only when it is about playing a grand.

This is BWS btw.

Arend

[FrancesHinden]

I play the other way round: 4NT is discouraging and 5C is encouraging. Very useful, comes up a lot.

This came up once when I was commentating on vugraph, and I was suprised to find that it seemed that only the pair using it at the table and I had heard of the idea!

[Flame]

Its depend on the exact situation, but in general i play that a limited partner must cue bid even without extra, while a non limitted partner will show extra by cue bidding, in doubt cue will show some extra.

[cherdano]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 26 2005, 03:28 PM, said:

I play the other way round: 4NT is discouraging and 5C is encouraging. Very useful, comes up a lot.

This came up once when I was commentating on vugraph, and I was suprised to find that it seemed that only the pair using it at the table and I had heard of the idea!

So the advantage is that you can pass 4NT? Sounds very useful, especially at MPs! (Even more so for confused minds like me who might misremember whether 4NT is last train or to play ).

Arend

[Fluffy]

2 if our range is still wide, if we are in 12-14 or 15-17 range already I would switch to 1.

[Chamaco]

Cascade, on Oct 26 2005, 09:47 AM, said:

In the following situation what is the best method for investigating whether or not you have a slam.

Assume you are at 4minor and have the agreement that trumps are set and you have slam interest.

What is the best use of cue-bids:

1. Show a control in case partner needs a control in a specific suit to bid slam

2. Show a control and by inference extra or good values so that partner can bid the slam 'quantitatively' knowing you have extras

3. Some other scheme - maybe asking bids, automatically showing key-cards etc

I like 2 schemes , with pros/cons:

1) Kickbac: 1st step above the agreed minor is kickback RKCB, higher steps are cue. The direct 4NT can be used as cuebid in the kickback suit; alternatively, at MP a case might be done for 4NT = to play;

2) "Turbo": just cuebid up-the line; bidding 4NT shows an even number of keycards, bypassing 4NT shows an odd number of keycards;
One could play "Inverted Turbo", using the FIRST step to show an even number of keycards.

Both approaches suffer of the same drawback: only one of the players can ask or show the keycards, and according to the sequences, it is not always the right player of the pair.

[Echognome]

This is what I don't understand. In most situations both players can ask if you play one step above 4 of an agreed suit is keycard. So supposing it goes:

1♣ - 1♥
1♠ - 3♣
3NT - ?

Then I can bid 4♣ as a general slam try and leave it up to partner to take control, pass the buck back to me by cue-bidding in hearts or spades or he can sign off in 4NT with no further interest.

OR... I can bid 4♦ to take control myself.

[Chamaco]

Echognome, on Oct 26 2005, 02:52 PM, said:

This is what I don't understand. In most situations both players can ask if you play one step above 4 of an agreed suit is keycard. So supposing it goes:....

Ok, sorry, my bad, I thought the suit had been agreed at the 4 level.

[kenrexford]

Context is critical, as bids leading up to the 4-level call dictate the meanings of the balance. However, the scheme I use is this:

Four of the out-of-focus major is RKCB for the agreed minor. On default, this is 4H. The only exception is that 4D is RKCB for clubs if 4C was bid in response to a failed notrump probe and either major contract is plausible.

If 4H is RKCB, and clubs agreed, 4D is Last Train. If 4S is RKCB, 4H is Last Train, and 4D ( if clubs agreed) is a regular cue.

Bypassing the RKCB spot is normally a cue, but it might contextually be either Exclusion RKCB, or possibly even a modified RKCB where the secondary "key cards" are the King and Queen of this side suit (rare).

These general rules are different if the context suggests something else. That gets too complicated for a forum post, though.