[jillybean]

Hi,
The auction, playing checkback stayman....

1♦:1♠
1nt:2♣ (checkback)
2♠: ??

Is 3♣ here generaly a cue bid in ♠ or something else?

ty
jb

[1eyedjack]

I don't know what is standard.
I don't even know if there IS a standard.
It certainly warrants express agreement.

Personally, I would normally expect the bid to be natural and forcing (where a jump to 3C immediately over 1N would be natural and non-forcing but invitational). You might want to reverse those meanings, and I doubt that it matters much.

[mike777]

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 10:02 AM, said:

Hi,
The auction, playing checkback stayman....

1♦:1♠
1nt:2♣ (checkback)
2♠: ??

Is 3♣ here generaly a cue bid in ♠ or something else?

ty
jb

Are you playing 2 way checkback where 2clubs is an invite not game force bid. Are you playing where partner bids 3s with 3 spades and a maximum and 2s with 3spades and a minimum?

[pclayton]

Assuming a jump to the prior round would have shown some sort of 5-5 invite, 3♣ should be a 5-5 GF. I can see an argument that its some sort of game try too.

Unless you play some sort of majors first, this has to promise 5 spades.

[jillybean]

mike777, on Nov 1 2006, 08:52 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 10:02 AM, said:

Hi,
The auction, playing checkback stayman....

1♦:1♠
1nt:2♣ (checkback)
2♠: ??

Is 3♣ here generaly a cue bid in ♠ or something else?

ty
jb

Are you playing 2 way checkback where 2clubs is an invite not game force bid. Are you playing where partner bids 3s with 3 spades and a maximum and 2s with 3spades and a minimum?

2♣ checkback, not 2way here.
2♠ shows min, 3card support
3♠ max, 3card support.

I want to start cue bidding starting with ♣A but it seems like that is a non standard treatment here.

If I was playing 2way checkback maybe I could do it.
1♦:1♠
1nt:2♦
2♠:3♣

[1eyedjack]

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 05:16 PM, said:

I want to start cue bidding starting with ♣A but it seems like that is a non standard treatment here.

You are not forced to play a standard treatment, especially in a situation where what is "standard" is perhaps contentious. That said, my personal opinion is that it normally pays dividends to clarify a bit more about your distribution before committing to control-showing cue bids, especially where (as here) you have plenty of bidding space to do it.

[helene_t]

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 06:16 PM, said:

2♣ checkback, not 2way here.
2♠ shows min, 3card support
3♠ max, 3card support.

I want to start cue bidding starting with ♣A but it seems like that is a non standard treatment here.

I think 3♥ should be your forcing spades raise here. You can start cuebidding afterwards. This probably can't be called "standard" but it's the only forcing spades raise I've heard of (except for those who play two-way checkback, of course).

[pclayton]

The other issue is how you bid a weak black 6-4.

Suffice it to say I'm glad I play xyz

[kenberg]

Assuming that spades are trump after the 2S bid, I can see two reasonable meanings:

Big hand with some sort of clubs, making a slam try in spades

Game try in spades, interpreting "game try" however you usually do.

Presumably after the 2S bid it is possible for responder to be uncertain whether to bid 4. The usual action is to bid 3S asking partner to choose, but I can see where a side suit bid with a specific meaning could be useful. That's if the meaning is known to both partners.

Undiscussed, I would expect a big hand with at least five spades and some values in clubs.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3C is certainly a cue bid, agreeing
spades.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: The only sensible other option would be
weak 6-4, but I would simply suggest to pass
2S to make life simpler.

[FrancesHinden]

3C here is normally considered natural and forcing, not a cue bid.

Why? How else are you going to show a forcing club hand (assuming that you would respond 1S with 4-4 in the blacks).

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 11:16 AM, said:

mike777, on Nov 1 2006, 08:52 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Nov 1 2006, 10:02 AM, said:

Hi,
The auction, playing checkback stayman....

1♦:1♠
1nt:2♣ (checkback)
2♠: ??

Is 3♣ here generaly a cue bid in ♠ or something else?

ty
jb

Are you playing 2 way checkback where 2clubs is an invite not game force bid. Are you playing where partner bids 3s with 3 spades and a maximum and 2s with 3spades and a minimum?

2♣ checkback, not 2way here.
2♠ shows min, 3card support
3♠ max, 3card support.

I want to start cue bidding starting with ♣A but it seems like that is a non standard treatment here.

If I was playing 2way checkback maybe I could do it.
1♦:1♠
1nt:2♦
2♠:3♣

Hi,

your other option would be to bid 3S instead of 3C,
requesting an cue bid from opener.
3S is forcing and is looking for a possible slam.

Since opener has already defined his hand very
precise, missing is only the location of his honors,
responder does not need to tell the oppoents where
his honors are located.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[keylime]

Beaner,

Check out my blog. I am starting to discuss checkback and NMF in earnest, and the Lowell Adjunct might be the winning ticket for you.

Thankfully you are using CBS, which is far better than the farce of NMF.