[MarkDean]

A friend gave me this hand:

Scoring: MP

---

Auctions starts:

1♠ (P) 2♥ (P) (2♥ = GF)
3♠ (P) 4♥ (P)

A bunch of questions:
in your opinion does 3S show a solid suit?
Do you agree with 3S?
Is 4H an offer to play, a mandatory cue, or a cue liking slam prospects?
What is your call?

[rogerclee]

3♠ shows good spades but not necessarily solid. One loser opposite small stiff is generally my criterion.

4♥ is a cuebid. 3♠ requests a cue but does not demand one.

I would just bid 6♠. I don't see myself stopping below slam, and partner will bid 7♠ on hands like ♠xx ♥AKQxxx ♦Qx ♣Jxx if i go the 4NT->5NT route. Even ♠xx ♥AKQJx ♦Qxx ♣Jxx is not a fantastic grand. If I had a doubleton heart I think this would be a WTP 4NT->5NT.

[kenrexford]

6♠.

Responder has the A-K in hearts and stuff in diamonds, but no diamond King. I can shake the club loser on the heart, and I might pick up the diamonds for no losers, but it is on a hook. So, 6♠ seems clear.

3♠ set trumps. 4♥ was a cue, denying any 1st/2nd round minor controls, but showing two top hearts. With no minor controls, no spade card, and just AQ topping the hearts, partner would just bid 4♠.

If Responder strangely has AQ in hearts, I will need one of two minor hooks (or diamonds and hearts working) to make. Good chance.

If partrner has AKQJx in hearts, with sufficient spades to get there, he'd bid 4NT over 3♠.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 3S is fine
#2 4H is an offer to play, any other suit bid would be a cue for spades.
If you are missing a cue in diamond and in clubs, you dont
want to play 6S anyway (I assume you play 1st and 2nd round
control cues)
=> 4NT to get information about the heart suit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

> in your opinion does 3S show a solid suit?

It's a matter of definition. Some play solid, others not. Most 2/1 textbooks define it as solid (which I disagree with).


> Do you agree with 3S?

No, whatever your methods are. With your nice hand and pard having cards, a diamond slam is possible (even a grand!), so 3♦ is probably the right bid.


> Is 4H an offer to play, a mandatory cue, or a cue liking slam prospects?

Depends on your agreements, and on previous agreements for 3♠. If 3♠ was solid, this can be a cue (slam liking, not courtesy). Otherwise it's just hearts.


> What is your call?

Without agreements, 6♠.

[paulg]

'Game before slam' is a good general principle - that is, when we don’t have an agreed trump suit, all ambiguous bids should be interpreted as an attempt to get to the right game, not as cue bids showing slam interest.

p

[Free]

imo in such a sequence, 3♠ should set trumps. So 4♥ should be considered cue.

[kenrexford]

cardsharp, on May 29 2008, 05:29 AM, said:

'Game before slam' is a good general principle - that is, when we don’t have an agreed trump suit, all ambiguous bids should be interpreted as an attempt to get to the right game, not as cue bids showing slam interest.

p

"Ambiguous" is not precisely defined as "I don't know what this means."

"Game before slam" is not always applicable. For example, I would not bid 5♦ in response to Blackwood because of game before slam principles.

[brianshark]

Agree with those who believe 3♠ sets trumps and 4♥ is a cue. 3♠ doesn't need to be solid, it can have a single loser and just needs to be good enough to say "spades are trump".

[pclayton]

4♥ is a cue showing 2/3 honors. It also denies a minor suit A or K for us. Both of these statements depend on your cue bidding style.

This is a knotty problem. Opposite something like x AKQxxx Qxx Qxx, I want to play 6♥, not 6♠. I think I'll try one more time with 5♣. Maybe pard can re-cue hearts.

[pclayton]

rogerclee, on May 28 2008, 08:16 PM, said:

I would just bid 6♠. I don't see myself stopping below slam, and partner will bid 7♠ on hands like ♠xx ♥AKQxxx ♦Qx ♣Jxx

I'm leading a heart (hopefully not out of turn).

[neilkaz]

brianshark, on May 29 2008, 09:02 AM, said:

Agree with those who believe 3♠ sets trumps and 4♥ is a cue. 3♠ doesn't need to be solid, it can have a single loser and just needs to be good enough to say "spades are trump".

Same style from me. 3♠ shows a superb suit, and extra playing strength but need not be rock solid.

[Apollo81]

3♠ shows extras and sets the trump suit. I would bid only 2♠ on the hand in question because i am more interested in hearing a shape rebid than a cue. Because 3♠ sets the trump suit, 4♥ is a cue. Standard is that below-game cuebids are not mandatory.

[kenrexford]

pclayton, on May 29 2008, 10:07 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 28 2008, 08:16 PM, said:

I would just bid 6♠. I don't see myself stopping below slam, and partner will bid 7♠ on hands like ♠xx ♥AKQxxx ♦Qx ♣Jxx

I'm leading a heart (hopefully not out of turn).

Partner will bid 7NT with that hand, I hope.