[badderzboy]

During play with my partner I have on a couple of occasions asked my partner for keycards in a suit that I don't want to play in but the info regarding that suit has been key in determining whether I can make slam or not.

The examples have been where I have a solid 7 card suit but missing honours in one suit but have say Qxx in hearts and A's elsewhere.
Bidding goes 2C-2D-2S-3H-4NT(KC ask in H's)-5x-6S

Following the response I have bid the appropriate slam in my view...

I'm aware that when I improve that 6x bids in a different suit can be played as control asks but we don't play that yet so my partner has passed the slam bid.

As my partner is now aware that the keycard ask does NOT specify the slam suit in extreme situations do we need to disclose that to opps? or is the fact that RKCB is a keycard ask in the suit sufficient?

Cheers

Steve

[inquiry]

My initial feeling is that announcing it as RKCB in the suit you intend to ask is good enough with a subsequent alert when you bid slam in something else that this cancels the first suit as trumps. Having said that, however, I can imagine ways your opponents might be hurt. For instance, if they have a potential lead directing double of your partner's reply to RKCB but don't double since they think they are surely going to be on the lead. Or if they didn't want that suit lead and didn't double but then when you land in your suit, their partner can't draw the right influence about the meaning of this bid. So this has become a grey area if you have formulized your agreement. I would guess as long as it is asking for aces and the king of a specific suit, announcing it as RKCB is ok... but maybe you should alert it as RKBC=but other strains possible.

Ben

[Free]

As far as I know, in many regions no bid above 3NT may be alerted. I don't know if it's a WBF rule or not...

[luis]

No need to alert but if you want to say that you frequently ask for KCs in a side suit you can do it. I'm sure it is not needed by regulations.

[inquiry]

Free.. I think this is due to the "self-alerting" nature of a high level bid. But then you have a filled out convention card. But let me give an example....

(1S)-2C-(2H)-P
(4H)-Ps=(4N)-P
(5C)-X <====

Assume you play this double as "lead my suit" no alert no problem, but what if your agreement is "don't lead my suit". I think this "bid" above 3NT should be alerted. Matter of fact, this double should not only mean that, but should have a serious reason for using it... since it gives your opponents several extra bidding options (of course they are not going to play 5Cx).

And online, regardless of what the regulations are, since there is not complete disclosure in the form of convention cards and notes, alerting when in doubt is the best approach, especially since partner can not see or hear your alerts so no UI is possible.


Ben

[Trpltrbl]

If you bid 4 NT in your second round of bidding or thereafter it doesn't not have to be alerted. Any bid after 3 NT in secound round of bidding should not be alerted.
And after the bidding when you tell opps you had a RKC auction and for what suit, but that is all you have to tell them. You don't have to play the slam in the suit you are RKC-ing for. If you already have AKQ in trumpsuit yourself, why do you need to know from pd if he has the King and Queen in the trumpsuit
As long as opps know what suit you were RKC-ing for you have no problem.

Mike

[EricK]

You have to tell your opps what your bid means, you don't have to tell them why you are bidding it.

If 4NT asks for partner to tell you how many keycards he has including the HK, then that is what you should tell opps.

I don't really see any difference between this, and the fairly common occurence of asking for keycards in a suit before bidding a slam in NT.

Eric

[lenze]

Is there a difference in asking in one suit and ending in another or asking in a suit and ending in 6NT?

[luis]

lenze, on Jan 12 2004, 06:43 PM, said:

Is there a difference in asking in one suit and ending in another or asking in a suit and ending in 6NT?

Yes, there is a difference.
If you ask in a suit and bid 6N your strongest suit is usually the suit where you asked for keycards, now you bid 6N to protect the lead or other reasons.

[lenze]

The opponents are entiltled to your PARTNERSHIP understandings. When you bid RKCB in a suit, they are entitled to know what that means. When partner gives his response, they are entitled to the meaning of his response. If you then choose to place the contact in another strain, whether a suit or NT, you are exercising BRIDGE JUDGEMENT. The opponents are NOT entitled to your bridge judgement or the thought process behind it. That is something that must be learned through experience and study. Why do we think we have to baby our opponents?

[Trpltrbl]

lenze, on Jan 12 2004, 04:22 PM, said:

The opponents are entiltled to your PARTNERSHIP understandings. When you bid RKCB in a suit, they are entitled to know what that means. When partner gives his response, they are entitled to the meaning of his response. If you then choose to place the contact in another strain, whether a suit or NT, you are exercising BRIDGE JUDGEMENT. The opponents are NOT entitled to your bridge judgement or the thought process behind it. That is something that must be learned through experience and study. Why do we think we have to baby our opponents?

Partnership understanding you have to disclose, Bridgejudgement you don't. Simple as that.

Mike

[Trpltrbl]

LAW 40 - PARTNERSHIP UNDERSTANDINGS

A. Right to Choose Call or Play
A player may make any call or play (including an intentionally misleading call - such as a psychic bid - or a call or play that departs from commonly accepted, or previously announced, use of a convention), without prior announcement, provided that such call or play is not based on a partnership understanding.

B. Concealed Partnership Understandings Prohibited
A player may not make a call or play based on a special partnership understanding unless an opposing pair may reasonably be expected to understand its meaning, or unless his side discloses the use of such call or play in accordance with the regulations of the sponsoring organisation.

C. Director's Option
If the Director decides that a side has been damaged through its opponents' failure to explain the full meaning of a call or play, he may award an adjusted score.

D. Regulation of Conventions
The sponsoring organisation may regulate the use of bidding or play conventions. Zonal organisations may, in addition, regulate partnership understandings (even if not conventional) that permit the partnership's initial actions at the one level to be made with a hand of a king or more below average strength. Zonal organisations may delegate this responsibility.

This is what "The Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge" has to say about it.
Which is approved by WBF, EBL and the ACBL

Mike

[paulg]

For reference the WBF Alerting rules are available at http://www.worldbrid...tems/alerts.asp

Although many National Organisations (ACBL, most of Europe except the UK currently) have regulations prohibiting or delaying alerts for conventional bids above 3NT, I feel that online bridge should probably adopt the WBF rules as the default standard ... until such time (if ever) that BBO wishes to implement their own standard.

I would also suggest that online bridge is most similar to playing with screens, in the sense that I can alert my own bids without alerting partner. The WBF rules for screens mean that all conventional bids, including those above 3NT, should be alerted.

So I fully support Ben's suggestion that it is best to alert everything that is conventional even, perhaps especially, at a high level.

I feel that the specific case raised is also easily addressed by this policy. Clearly the 4NT bid and response are alertable and should be explained. A subsequent natural bid, suggesting the final contract, is non-alertable. I only see a problem if the opposition were expecting the bid to be king-ask (or other convention) and assumed that you had failed to alert. If you are diligent in your alerting style then this should not occur.

As I tend to over-alert/over-explain during online bridge, I may tell the opps that my final bid was a strong suggestion for the final contract, especially if it was unclear from the auction that it is a potential resting spot.

This isn't a potential partnership understanding that I'd be worried about you having, assuming that the alerts were there.

Cheers

Paul

[Trpltrbl]

cardsharp, on Jan 14 2004, 12:40 PM, said:

For reference the WBF Alerting rules are available at http://www.worldbrid...tems/alerts.asp

Although many National Organisations (ACBL, most of Europe except the UK currently) have regulations prohibiting or delaying alerts for conventional bids above 3NT, I feel that online bridge should probably adopt the WBF rules as the default standard ... until such time (if ever) that BBO wishes to implement their own standard.

I would also suggest that online bridge is most similar to playing with screens, in the sense that I can alert my own bids without alerting partner. The WBF rules for screens mean that all conventional bids, including those above 3NT, should be alerted.

I fully agree with that.

Mike