[joshs]

You Hold:
AKxxx QJTx KQ KQ

White vs Red at BAM

Partner opens 1S (we open most 5332 11's at these colors)
You bid 2N (Jacoby)
He bids 3C (Any Min)
You bid 3D (Asking Shortage)
He bids 3H (None)

Now what? Plan the auction....


If it means anything your rkc is 0314 with spiral scan followups. Qbidding below game is not manditory. You can Qbid 1'st or second round controls as you see fit, although you generally Qbid up the line unless strong enough to force to the 5 level.

[hrothgar]

Lets assume that I start with Serious 3NT (assuming its available)

Will that impact the scan order?

[cherdano]

I will assume that 3S is natural, showing good trumps. So I will bid that. If partner bids 4S over that, I pass; with AA + K AND lots of space below our game AND having shown a minimum, partner should cooperate once. If partner cues 4m, it seems I have to choose between finding out about the heart control (to avoid disaster opposite Qxxxx xx AJx AJx) and finding out about keycards (to avoid disaster opposite QJxxx Kx AJx Jxx). The heart control disaster seems less likely so I will keycard.
I will then play 5S or 6N.

[TheoKole]

4 ♣ cue bid.

I assume that you and your partner are on the same wave-length when it comes to cuebidding sequences, as to what a denial of a possible cue-bid would mean.

Since a 5, 3, 3, 2 11 count is a possability the only hand that I am worried about is Jxxxx, xx, AJx, AJx in partners hand.

There is no play for more than 5 spades and there is a possibility of going down, AK of ♥ and overruff with the Q ♠.

I want a heart cue bid from partner, either first or second round. 4 NT would not help me because 2 Aces with / without the Q reponse can be made on the above hand and on

Jxxxx Kx Axx, Axx or xxxxx, AKx, Ax xx or even Qxxxx, xxx, Ax, Axx

On the last hand AK ♥ and ruff is even more of a possibility.

If you are on the same wavelength, you bid 4 ♣ and if partner cuebids 4 ♦, then rebid 4 ♠ if you are feeling caucious (sp?) or 5 ♠ as a small Josephine bid. Partner should then go on with a control in ♥.

A question of partnership trust comes into play now, will he "know" that you would not start a cue-bidding sequence without top trump control? Only you and your partner can answer that question, and it would probably be a good thing to discuss if you haven't already.

Cheers,

Theo

[kenrexford]

You need partner to have two Aces. You also need partner to have the Ace or King of hearts. If partner has the Ace of hearts and another Ace, it looks to be on a finesse. How to bid this next depends upon how comfortable you are playing a slam on a finesse.

The conservative person wants three Aces or AAK, which is a huge hand contextually. Bid 3♠. If partner bids 3NT, and if that is serious, he should be control-rich, which is this hand. You probably should still cue 4♣, and then 4♥ Last Train if partner cues 4♦, if partner would show serious (contextual) interest with AA and the trump Queen.

The aggressive person will be satisfied by a minor Ace and the heart Ace. With that hand, partner will cue either 4♣, after which you cue 4♦ and wait for a 4♥ cue, or 4♦, against which you Last Train. You are comfortable enough at the five-level opposite a minor Ace and the heart King.

[mikeh]

I bid 3♠

I don't care if I am playing serious, frivolous or any other variant of 3N (I personally like it to be about looking for a club cue rather than about how strong a slam try I hold, but I know this isn't mainstream).

Whatever, I am going to want to hear partner cue... if he doesn't, or if his cue is 4♥, then we have no slam.

There are a lot of permutations after any of 3N, 4♣ or 4♦, and obviously how we deal with these depends on what 3N says (and thus what non-3N says) about the hand.

Ignoring this, the reality is that I will always make one cue over 3N or 4♣, since the 1st step cue is 'free'. Whether I push on or sign off depends on what happens next, but partner is allowed to move with a good hand in context because we have made a slam try after finding out that he has a flat or semi-flat minimum.

If he bids 4♦, we may be off 2 aces, may be on a heart hook, or may be laydown, and while I can find out if the 1st applies, I can't find out whether he has AK or A♥s... we lack the room to cue twice and no keycard structure helps, if the object is to avoid a slam on at best a hook. I say 'at best' because Jxxxx Axx AJx Jx is less than 50% due to the chance of a 3-0 trump break.

But I'm not going to play him for those specific Jacks. So over 4♦, I'll try 5♣ to tease out a 5♥ call. You'd be surprised how many people will double 5♥ when they hold the King... even tho they are not on lead

So against average players, I'd bid the slam with confidence if 5♥ were not doubled... partner is not cuing the K, when I deny the Ace by bidding 5♣ rather than 4♥...Question: if Zia doubled 5♥ would that make you think slam was on or off?

[whereagles]

Agree with mikeh, and thank him for spelling it out.. lol

[Apollo81]

Since "cuebidding below game is not mandatory" I will bid RKC.

[mikeh]

Apollo81, on Dec 6 2007, 10:32 AM, said:

Since "cuebidding below game is not mandatory" I will bid RKC.

This, with all respect (and I don't mean that sarcastically... I enjoy your posts... well, not this one) is a clear error.

Consider: partner bids 5♠... 2 keycards and the spade Queen. What do you bid now?

Does he have QJxxx xx Axx Axx... or Qxxxx AKx Axx xx? As two obviously consistent holdings. Since slam has NO play on the 1st and is cold on any lie other than a 6-0 heart break (with the long suit on lead) on the 2nd, you might suspect that your auction was not flawless

If there is one rule that every player should memorize it is that one does NOT use keycard when a possible answer leaves you with no guidance as to the final contract. I have never run across a situation in which keycard is flawed in this way and there is no other plausible way to move the auction forward. There is always another, better way to bid when this situation looms.

Also, note that the statement that cuebidding is not mandatory is very helpful.. not an obstacle. It means that partner will cue bid only if he has a good hand in context... and the context is a balanced minimum. So he will be cue-bidding with almost all hands that make slam a viable proposition, having already limited his values. Maybe he won't cue with QJxxx xx Axx Axx, but I am sure that he would cue with Qxxxx AKx Axx xx

[cherdano]

Apollo81, on Dec 6 2007, 09:32 AM, said:

Since "cuebidding below game is not mandatory" I will bid RKC.

I agree with Mike on this, this seems wrong. If partner bids 4♠ over 3♠, how can we have a slam?

[pclayton]

If pard has already shown a minimum, why wouldn't he cooperate if I make a slam try? Do we really need to differentiate between a lousy 13 and a lousy 11?

I'll start with 3♠. If I can coax a 4♥ call at some point, I'll know we are safe at the 5 level.

Since this is BAM, I really want to find a way to the right number of NT.

I have a feeling Josh's idea is to try 4♦ to *force* a 4♥ cue.

[han]

mikeh, on Dec 6 2007, 11:23 AM, said:

Apollo81, on Dec 6 2007, 10:32 AM, said:

Since "cuebidding below game is not mandatory" I will bid RKC.

This, with all respect (and I don't mean that sarcastically... I enjoy your posts... well, not this one) is a clear error.

Agree. Cuebidding not being mandatory is great here, since you know that partner will cuebid if you have a slam, and sign of if you don't.

[pclayton]

Will pard cue bid with crappy trumps and 3 outside cards?

I'm skeptical.

[kenrexford]

On the question of whether partner will cuebid:

I'll assume a 15-17 1NT opening. Assuming that, then the minimum seems to be roughly 11-14. I'll also assume, for sake of an easier analysis, that a 5422 with 15+ is not a "minimum."

We need partner to have something like ♠xxxxx ♥AKx ♦Ax ♣xxx. That's a mere 11-count. Does partner know that controls defines a "good minimum" from a "bad minimum?" Contrast ♠QJxxx ♥Kxx ♦AJx ♣Jx, a 12-count, where slam is hopeless because the control count is two fewer.

The maximum possible seems to be something like ♠Qxxxx ♥Axx ♦Axx ♣Ax, which might be a 1NT opener in your methods (I would). Assuming that this is OK, then it seems that the control-count range runs from about three with the Queen to about six with the Queen. For me, and for aggressive upgraders, the range seems to be three with the Queen to five with the Queen.

Surely partner will cue with five or with five plus the Queen. Using Serious 3NT, five with the Queen or better (no upgrades) or five without the Queen (upgraders) would be contextually serious.

Whatever the methods, then, this hand should not be a problem.

------------------------------

As to the suggestion to bid 4♦ to induce a 4♥ call. That gives me the willies. Partner would surely not cuebid hearts if he held ♠QJxxxx ♥AKx ♦Ax ♣Jx, because of the inability to cover clubs. Further, 4♥ would be his call with ♠QJxxxx ♥xxx ♦Ax ♣Ax, because he can cover clubs (the one cue you could not make) but cannot cover hearts. Thus, a 4♦ cue would not only be dead wrong -- it would be horribly wrong, based upon a wild misunderstanding of cuebidding principles.

[kenrexford]

pclayton, on Dec 6 2007, 01:04 PM, said:

Will pard cue bid with crappy trumps and 3 outside cards?

I'm skeptical.

This is why I play that 3♠ by Responder (at this point) would be a trump cue, promising two of the top three spades; 3NT would show serious interest with lesser trumps. This solves a lot of problems that others solve by "judgment," which really means guessing, or through RKCB, which is often too expensive a tool.

However, even if not playing that, a high-control Opener should still cue.

[Apollo81]

Let me clarify.

I don't know what "any min" means. Does that mean I can't have a 5332 14-count? Does that mean I can't have a 5422 13 count? Those are certainly minimums for the overall range of my 1♠ opening, but clearly hold extra values. If I can still have those hands, then I am not going to cuebid with QJxxx Axx Axx xx over anything partner bids, I'm going to sign off in 4♠. If partner continues by cuebidding 5♣, THEN I will cuebid one of my aces, but how does partner know I have two aces? Am I to continue to slam now if partner signs off?

In my experience, cuebidding is often the "right" decision in hindsight, but at the table partners often have different views of whether one should cuebid with a given hand in a given situation. Now maybe this is just because I have not always had expert level partners, but I suspect bad results from cuebidding are both under-reported and under-remembered by people who experience them.

Let's say my structure over this 2NT was something like:
3♣: would not accept a 3-card limit raise
3♦: some extras, but still min
3♥... various better hands

Now I would feel obliged to cuebid after bidding either 3♣ or 3♦.

I'm not saying bidding RKC is so great an action in this situation either, and I can hardly argue that it is better than cuebidding in theory. Merely trying to give an alternative point of view to these sorts of auctions.

[Apollo81]

I'll also cede that bidding RKC over 3♥ in the given auction is strictly worse than bidding 3♠ since partner could bid 4♥ and you have a clear signoff over that.

But I would not pass if partner raised my 3♠ to 4♠.

[kenrexford]

Apollo81, on Dec 6 2007, 01:54 PM, said:

I don't know what "any min" means. Does that mean I can't have a 5332 14-count? Does that mean I can't have a 5422 13 count? Those are certainly minimums for the overall range of my 1♠ opening, but clearly hold extra values. If I can still have those hands, then I am not going to cuebid with QJxxx Axx Axx xx over anything partner bids, I'm going to sign off in 4♠.

That's four controls and a Queen. I suppose that's why you might need serious 3NT for this sequence. If, after 3♠, you decline serious 3NT, then you must not have at least five controls. The best, then, would be two with the Queen. With that, you cuebid as a courtesy cue 4♦, and then accept 4♥ LTTC.

One good rule that I learned from a friend -- never zoom to sign off if your answer would be "two with the Queen." Cuebidding does not promise "two with the Queen" or better, but a zoom, fast-arrival signoff denies that good.

(BTW -- I'm wondering whether the 3♣ response to 2NT promised something better than dead-bang minimum, with maybe an immediate 4♠ being reserved for the "two without a Queen or worse" hands. That might have some impact on decision-making here.)

[Echognome]

Noble - What if over 3♠ you had serious (or as I play frivolous) 3NT available? Then cuebidding could be obliged. This is also useful on hands where opener has poor trumps. Once he has stated he is a minimum hand with no shortness, his range is often fairly narrow anyway.

There is another alternative which is to play that 3♠ is a further relay with responses:

3NT 5332 any
4♣/♦/♥ 4-card side suit in a 5422 hand
4♠ 6322 any

But I'm not sure if that's any better than serious/frivolous.

[keylime]

I would play 3♠ here as waiting. It's not clear as of yet that pard is single suited or 5332 and may have another side suit (like a broken five bagger) he may want to introduce. Additionally, in a 2/1 context, any minimum can be up to a 15-16 count that is flat and tenace-oriented (for this hand, obviously not, but in general). I also want to solicit more information from partner in terms of what my next bid is.

I'm not a RKC or Serious 3NT user on this hand - I'm interesting in hearing what type of minimum pard owns. I'm privately hoping for a flat/balanced distribution.