[tkass]

Scoring: IMP

1sp-p-2he-p
3he-p-4di-p
4he-p-p-p

---

We miss the slam. Playing 2 over 1, south feel that he has already bid the value of his hand with 3 he (instead of 4) and he is not ready to cue bid over the game level. North say that the 4he bid show a hand with a lack of control like: kqjxx-qjx-x-kqxx. With that hand south say he will not bid 3he.

Also , south think a cue bid by north below the game level may be made on a much weaker hand, so advance over the 4 level may be dangerous.

Is The fact south refuse to cue over the game level denies control?

Suppose north bid 4cl in the same sequence and south bid 4he, is this deny a di control?

But in the actual hand is the 4 he bid deny a sp or cl control?

so what went wrong in our sequence?


thx in advance for your help

i will appreciate ur guideline in cue bidding style

[mike777]

RKC over 4d....KISS.

[manudude03]

I would have rebid 2♠ over 2♥ and shown support later. I prefer 1S-2H-3H to show either 4 card support or 3 card support with extras- a balanced 15 count doesn't quite cut it for me.

I suppose in theory, North should bid 3NT or 3S (depending if you play serious or frivilous 3NT) as what he wants to see is a club cue, which often won't be seen over 4D.

4H over 4D doesn't deny controls for me, rather just says "I'm not strong enough to push on, but feel free to go on if you are"


Edit: Oops, miscounted, thanks Wayne

[TylerE]

I prefer 4♥ to 4NT, and the weaker north could be for the cue, the more I like it. South doesn't really have much in the way of extras, and most importantly, doesn't really have a source of tricks. IMO N should bid 5♦ over 4♥ (RKC is also acceptable, but might lead to 7 (You do have all the Ks, after all).

Also: I think there is real merit in opening 1NT on the south hand, which should work well, e.g.

1NT-2♦-2♥-3♦-3♥-RKC or some such.

[bid_em_up]

North should simply RKC over 3H, imo. And if not, definitely over 4H. South has to have something for his opening bid.

[dcvetkov]

bid_em_up, on Jan 6 2009, 11:47 AM, said:

North should simply RKC over 3H, imo. And if not, definitely over 4H. South has to have something for his opening bid.

I reaally disagree with this. Not only blacking with doubleton club, but South can have some dead beat minimum hand, where 5 level may not be fun.

Despite having anemic shape, South hand is better them minimal. He owns North cooperation by cueing something and 5 level should be fairly safe with both hands in slam zone.

I think problem is you need to cue what partner needs to hear ( in this case club control), and not spade ace, which is implied. After this, North has easier time visualizing slam

[skjaeran]

The south hand is too strong to rebid 4♥ over 4♦, 4♠ is adequate.

Btw1, I prefer to play serious 3NT (or non-serious) here, so north can distinguish between hands actively inviting for slam and hands just making a free cuebid.

Btw2, I'd open the south hand 1NT, not 1♠, with a balanced 15-count.

[Cascade]

manudude03, on Jan 7 2009, 05:36 AM, said:

I would have rebid 2♠ over 2♥ and shown support later. I prefer 1S-2H-3H to show either 4 card support or 3 card support with extras- a balanced 14 count doesn't cut it for me.

Luckily south has 15 HCP.

[Cascade]

South has an ace-king, an ace and the queen of trumps and partner is making a slam try.

The sign-off in 4♥ is extremely pessimistic.

[keylime]

1♠-2♥ auctions are a challenge just due to the space limitations one has if there's a raise.

On this hand, once a raise to 3♥ and rebid of 4♦ is tendered, with both black aces, and K♣ helping me, I'm taking a stab at slam, but not through RKC. I will cuebid 4S to listen to whether pard has a shortage in clubs (if 2-5-4-2 I have thoughts about getting too high).

[1eyedjack]

Do you play 3NT as a contract suggestion after the 3H raise? I only ask because of the possibility of its being "serious" or "non-serious", which may affect just how much slam interest is indicated by the 4D cue. Unless North is virtually forced to cue bid, South has enough to move to the 5 level over 4D, in my opinion. [EDIT - sorry I see Skaeran made a similar point]

On a side issue, I reckon that applying the principle of fast arrival to situations where partner is unlimited is a method that repeatedly (in my observation) causes bad results disproportionate to the theoretical expectation. The bland argument that 1S-2H-3H and 1S-2H-4H are auctions separated only by limits of strength, with the 4H raise being weaker than 3H, is not winning strategy in my view. 4H should be a very narrowly defined picture bid, and 3H could be weak or strong.

PS I also think South should open 1N if in range. Then North wheels out the biz.

[Fluffy]

Cascade, on Jan 6 2009, 07:55 PM, said:

South has an ace-king, an ace and the queen of trumps and partner is making a slam try.

The sign-off in 4♥ is extremely pessimistic.

I agree with you, but I don't find it too obvious, IMO with a flat 5332 south would bid 4♥ instead of 3♥, so he already showed something, and he doesn't have that mamy extras.

I still think he should make a move over 4♥ for the reasons you exposed, but wouldn't be surprised if I do exactly the same sequence at the table.

[kenrexford]

1NT opening, of course.

If that is not allowed by the partnership, then South instead gets the charge for analysis. AK-A on the outside, internal QJ, and the grown-up J-10 in diamonds?!?

If, however, the horrifying "Fast Arrival" principles are used, ugh!, then South did show extras. In that event, there's probably some tweaked analysis here, but I don't remember much about fast arrival thinking.

[whereagles]

I think it's a matter of agreement.

If a slam try can, by agreement, be rejected by a minimum hand, then North should probably go on.

If a slam try is compelling to show controls unless the hand is really junky, then South should bid something other than 4♥.

Without agreements, it's a bit of a guess, though I wouldn't rate the hand as a minimum in either case (has good controls and small honors in the best suit - hearts).

[mikestar]

For openers, fast arrival by an unlimited hand opposite an unlimited hand really and truly sucks--the jump to game should only show a minimum in those sequences where the bidder having a minimum effectively precludes slam. The classic example in the days
before transfers: 1NT-4♥ "I'll take a shot at game, drop dead!" while 1NT-3♥-3NT-4♥ showed slam interest. Here FA makes sense--not in the unlimited auction given here.

But given you play it in this sequence:

1) South should open 1NT if system permits, then North finds the ♥ fit and drives to slam.

2) North on finding South with extra values can't accept a signoff and should move toward slam--I'd try 5♦ which will focus on the ♣ situation.

3) South shouldn't have signed off--while given that North may be weaker he shouldn't Blackwood, he should take another bid. I might try 5♣.


But the best solution to this is not Serious/Frivolous NT--here 3NT may well be a contract correction. Italian style control showing works well for this type of hand. North's 4♦ would show a ♦ control, perhaps second round, and deny a ♣ control. So any bid other than 4♥ by South promises a ♣ control--here south bids 4♠ and North Blackwoods.