[twcho]

Playing 2/1 with uncontested auction:
1♦ - 1♥
4♠??

What is this 4♠?

[inquiry]

Jlall, on Mar 19 2008, 05:31 AM, said:

exclusion keycard

yep, only possibility

[FrancesHinden]

I've agreed with my regular partners that we don't play exclusion keycard, and I still can't think of any alternative meaning.

[Codo]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 19 2008, 10:03 PM, said:

I've agreed with my regular partners that we don't play exclusion keycard, and I still can't think of any alternative meaning.

You may think about it as a void splinter?
I think Harlad f.e use to differ between single and void splinters, but I don`t know if he does so in this sequence.

But anyway if it was not explicit forbidden, this is Exclusion KCB.

[whereagles]

If agreed: exclusion
If not agreed and random pard: some strong 65

[rogerclee]

Some people play this as RKC. I personally think this is kind of silly and use it for Exclusion.

If for some reason I knew that neither of these things was possible (either by agreement that we specifically do not play Exclusion or I know my partner has never heard of it), I would assume it is some sort of botched splinter.

[the hog]

Agree, EKCB - can't think of any other possible meaning.

[Free]

Exclusion Blacky

[skjaeran]

Codo, on Mar 19 2008, 02:10 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Mar 19 2008, 10:03 PM, said:

I've agreed with my regular partners that we don't play exclusion keycard, and I still can't think of any alternative meaning.

You may think about it as a void splinter?
I think Harlad f.e use to differ between single and void splinters, but I don`t know if he does so in this sequence.

But anyway if it was not explicit forbidden, this is Exclusion KCB.

3♠ would be a void splinter for me here, a jump to 3♥ would strongly suggest a spade singleton GI (1♦ is unbalanced unless 5332 18-19 for me). 4♠ is Exclusion BW - there's no other possible meaning.

[mikeh]

In one partnership, it is regular keycard... we use 4N as exclusion for spades. For all others, exclusion is the only plausible meaning

[twcho]

Thanks for all the responses so far. It is almost unanimous votes for EKCB.

May I ask what you will make out of this auction instead?
1♦ - 1♥
3♠ - 4♥
4♠?

What is the difference between this one and the previously posted one?

Another one:
1♦ - 1♥
5♣?
Again EKCB by analogy?

[kenrexford]

The splinter and then RKCB is used when the person wants to answer if possible OR where the Ace in the void suit is useful (side Ax for instance).

An ideal structure, however, would IMO allow a multi-way Exclusion/Asking scheme. To explain:

1minor-P-1♥-P-?

4♠ = 6KCB or RKCB but show my minor King and Queen instead of heart K/Q
4NT = RKCB
Splinter...4♠ = Exclusion
Splinter...4NT = RKCB, but I hoped to answer -- show the Ace in my void suit anyway.

Something like that.

You'd have to discuss, obviously.

[mikeh]

twcho, on Mar 19 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

Thanks for all the responses so far. It is almost unanimous votes for EKCB.

May I ask what you will make out of this auction instead?
1♦ - 1♥
3♠ - 4♥
4♠?

What is the difference between this one and the previously posted one?

Another one:
1♦ - 1♥
5♣?
Again EKCB by analogy?

If 4♠ over 1♥ is exclusion, then the slow route to 4♠ confirms a void (or, very rarely, a stiff Ace.. rarely because responder will assume a void and evaluate accordingly) and obliges responder to cue bid.

It cannot logically be exclusion: opener has learned NOTHING over the splinter other than that responder isn't interested. Opener cannot have a hand that wants to use exclusion now and not one round earlier.

[jdonn]

twcho, on Mar 19 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

Thanks for all the responses so far. It is almost unanimous votes for EKCB.

May I ask what you will make out of this auction instead?
1♦ - 1♥
3♠ - 4♥
4♠?

What is the difference between this one and the previously posted one?

Another one:
1♦ - 1♥
5♣?
Again EKCB by analogy?

First auction - splinter then cuebid, very strong hand with a void but not appropriate for exclusion.

Second auction - should be exclusion to me, but I think it's suicide to make this bid undiscussed. I have been passed in the very same auction in a 4-0 fit, after I thought? we had discussed it.

[Cascade]

Kickback RKCB

We play 4NT as exclusion RKC with a spade void.

[ArtK78]

Just out of curiosity, would anyone mind suggesting a hand that was not good enough to open 2♣ but over a 1-over-1 response now has the abilitly to ask for controls and force the auction to the 5 level?

I don't disagree with the suggestions that 1♦-1♥-4♠ should be exclusion RKCB (or kickback if it has been agreed that 4NT is exclusion), but I would like to see a hand that fits the bid.

[mikeh]

ArtK78, on Mar 19 2008, 04:20 PM, said:

Just out of curiosity, would anyone mind suggesting a hand that was not good enough to open 2♣ but over a 1-over-1 response now has the abilitly to ask for controls and force the auction to the 5 level?

I don't disagree with the suggestions that 1♦-1♥-4♠ should be exclusion RKCB (or kickback if it has been agreed that 4NT is exclusion), but I would like to see a hand that fits the bid.

This question brings to mind a hand I played on BBO a few years ago. I was playing for the first time with Farfie (Ritong's better half), and our only discussion was 'standard count and attitude'.. which, as you will see, didn't help much.

I picked up AKQx A10xx AKQ Jx and saw her open, in first seat, 1♣.

While starting to worry about how the auction wwould develop, I chose a fairly normal 1♥. Her next bid was 5N!

She had her bid.. and she didn't have anything close to a 2♣ opening bid.

[jdonn]

I'll bet you had your next bid too...