[kenberg]

Suppose the bidding begins (3♥)-4♣-(Pass)

Suppose that 4♣ shows clubs and says nothing about anything else.

Suppose you have some spades.


Partner probably won't have four spades but he might well have three. Or none. It seems that a call of 4♥ could help sort this out, using it to ask for three spades. With that meaning available, bidding 4♠ directly can show a hand that needs less support (even if I wouldn't be delighted with a void). With a little work this could be adapted to (3♦)-4♣-(Pass) as well.

I imagine I am not the first to think along these lines. Does anyone play it? I recognize that it gives up on 4♥ as a slam try in clubs but I think sorting out the games might be more useful.

I was discussing (3♥)-4♣ with Helene, who mentioned she sometimes played it as showing clubs and spades. I don't think I like that (comments welcome) but it got me to thinking about problems that I have had with the sequence (3♥)-4♣ .

[TylerE]

If (3[HE)-4♣-(p)-4[he] is spade interest, how do you show a good club raise?

[kenberg]

As I say, it could be a problem for a slam try. It's not impossible to develop some ways, but for the most part I think you give up on slam tries to improve the finding of games this way

[gnasher]

I prefer to play all such cue-bids as looking for the best game.

[whereagles]

You might want to try transfer advances here...

[jdonn]

I definitely prefer to play 4♣ as 5-5 clubs and spades. Many/most disagree. I think it's an important hand to be able to show, relatively frequent, and that almost all the time if you hold clubs any of P/X/3NT/5♣ is either your best bid or will suffice.

[helene_t]

Brink/Drijver and also Cherdanno/Han play similar things when opps preempt over their minor suit openings so they probably also play it here, unless they discovered that it sucks.

[hanp]

We do? I believe you but I have no recollection of such a thing.

[mikeh]

Transfer advances (as whereagles suggested) are a big help. Use 4♥ as a spade transfer.....you have to agree on when overcaller accepts...my suggestion is that he accepts with 2 or 3, otherwise bids something else....usually 5♣ but 4N is permitted to show secondary diamonds (you will very rarely have a hand that can keycard given that advancer's hand is largely undefined and hands that want to bid a natural 4N will almost always have chosen 3N over 3♥).

You can decide, if you choose, to use 4♦ as a transfer to hearts, thus a strong club raise, and 4♠ as a transfer to diamonds or, in better keeping with most transfer advance schemes, start the transfers at the cuebid, leaving 4♦ as natural and 4♠ becoming the strong club raise.

[awm]

While I like (and sometimes play) transfer advances in this auction, I don't think it really solves the problem in the original post.

The issue was that you want to have a way to say "I have some spades, but prefer to play 5♣ if you have a singleton or void in spades" as well as a way to say "I have lots of spades, let's play in spades no matter what." The critical thing is being able to stop in 4♠ with both hand types when it's right. Transfer advances don't help since 4♠ is presumably a strong club raise; basically you need two different 4♠ bids to fix this problem.

Of course, that's assuming you consider the problem significant; I don't feel like occasionally playing 5♣ when we have a 5-2 spade fit (or playing 4♠ in a 6-1 fit instead of 5♣ in a better fit) is a huge issue.

[gnasher]

How about two-step transfers? That is:

4♦ = spades. Then 4♥ shows doubt about strain.
4♥ = good club raise.
4♠ = diamonds. Then 4NT shows doubt about strain.

I'd never agree to such an obscure and specific piece of system, but it does solve most of the problems.

[aguahombre]

gnasher, on Nov 30 2009, 12:17 PM, said:

How about two-step transfers? That is:

4♦ = spades. Then 4♥ shows doubt about strain.
4♥ = good club raise.
4♠ = diamonds. Then 4NT shows doubt about strain.

I'd never agree to such an obscure and specific piece of system, but it does solve most of the problems.

Agree that is a great idea, and agree that it should be appreciated rather than adopted.

[kenberg]

I would say that it is not rare for me to have five spades when partner comes in with 4♣, Not everyday, but not rare either. After a preempt there of course will be some guess work. If I have clubs and good values for slam, sure I can just bid 6♣ on the thinking that if we get to a makable slam over a 3♥ preempt then that qualifies as a reasonable day's work. But other times I would say the situation is more like: Well, I don't really know if 5♣ will make or not, I suppose I more or less must bid it with any excuse, but it sure would be nice to stop in a ten trick game if one is available. It's in this situation that I want my two ways to bid spades.

Good or bad, it does not seem like a totally crazy convention and I assume someone has tried it. Otherwise I apply for copyright protection .

I don't really mean to dis either the 5-5 treatment or transfers, but I am not convinced. Open to thinking on it, but not convinced. I think I get dealt hands with good values and six clubs more often than I get five-five. Bidding 4♣ rather than 5♣ allows partner to explore at least somewhat for a spade contract.

gnasher put up his response while I was typing this. I agree that the two step is a little complex, a related problem is that it works only after a 4♣ bid and not 4♦. For something that doesn't happen everyday, I want the same agreements to apply whether the minor is clubs or diamonds. Too much memory work for too little if it applies only to clubs.

[jdonn]

kenberg, on Nov 30 2009, 03:00 PM, said:

I think I get dealt hands with good values and six clubs more often than I get five-five.

But how many of the good hands with 6 clubs just bid 3NT anyway? Or double in case partner can pass or bid 3NT? Most, I would say.

[kenberg]

Perhaps so. After the 3H preempt, I suppose it could go: X-3S-4C-4H when fourth hand has spades of decent but not great length and 3S-4C-4S with a hand that doesn't need much help in spades. One problem with this is that after X-3S-4C I don't think partner can pass like he could over a direct 4C. A more important problem though is that after the double, if 3H is raised to 4H and partner bids 4S, I will be very nervous if I don't have the spade length that he is expecting. On the other hand, after 4C-(4H)-4S I will be more comfortable since I promised values, but he is promising the spades.

I'm working on this and I appreciate the comments. My predilections here and elsewhere, are: Natural bids unless I am convinced some device is better. Here this translates as starting with a natural 4C and then using a device to find a spade fit if we can.

Thanks,
k

PS I am still wondering if anyone has played with the agreement I suggest. An early reply frm gnasher supports the general concept being it, using a cue to find the best game rather tahn as a slam try (or, if I may read a little into it, the first interpretation of the cue is a search for the best game, maybe later action shows otherwise) but this will only work if the pair has some agreements about how the search is conducted.

[ron]

Seems like Zia/Rosenberg played something like this.

From Zia-Rosenberg CC notes:


(NOTE 44) CHOICE OF GAMES CUEBID: THIS OCCURS USUALLY AT THE FOUR LEVEL AND USUALLY AFTER OPPONENTS HAVE MADE A PREEMPTIVE BID OR RAISE. THEY DO NOT APPLY IF 4-LEVEL CUE BID IS ONE UNDER LAST SUIT WE BID. E.G. AFTER (3♦) 3♠-(P) 4♦, OVERCALLER SHOULD ROUTINELY BID 4♥ WITH 5-3 IN THE MAJORS, EVEN 6-3 WITH BAD ♠. REPEAT CUE OR JUMP PREFERENCE BY ADVANCER SHOWS SLAM TRY WITH CONTROL. (2♥) 2♠-(P) 3♥ SUGGESTS FEWER THAN 3-CARD ♠, UNLESS REPEAT CUE. RETURNING TO THE HIGHER RANKING OF TWO REMAINING PLACES TO PLAY IS A SLAM TRY. RETURNING TO PARTNER'S SUIT AFTER COG CUEBID IS A SLAM TRY.

[shevek]

kenberg, on Nov 29 2009, 09:03 AM, said:

Suppose the bidding begins (3♥)-4♣-(Pass)

Suppose that 4♣ shows clubs and says nothing about anything else.

Suppose you have some spades.


Partner probably won't have four spades but he might well have three. Or none. It seems that a call of 4♥ could help sort this out, using it to ask for three spades. With that meaning available, bidding 4♠ directly can show a hand that needs less support (even if I wouldn't be delighted with a void). With a little work this could be adapted to (3♦)-4♣-(Pass) as well.

I imagine I am not the first to think along these lines. Does anyone play it? I recognize that it gives up on 4♥ as a slam try in clubs but I think sorting out the games might be more useful.

I was discussing  (3♥)-4♣ with Helene, who mentioned she sometimes played it as showing clubs and spades. I don't think I like that (comments welcome) but it got me to thinking about problems that I have had with the sequence (3♥)-4♣ .

CoG (Choice of Games) cue bid is our style. We focus on finding the right game, prepared to take a hit on slams.

Had this the other day:

(3♦)  3♠  (no)  ?

♠65 ♥AQ762  ♦74  ♣KJ85

Partner bid 4♥ over my 4♦ with ♥JT4 which proved best.

Transfer advances not so useful with this example.
Not keen on non-leaping Michaels either. Was playing it the other day & held something like

AKxx  xx  x  KQTxxx

Over 3♥ I tried 4♣ anyway (5-5 blacks) but our 6-3 club fit proved better than the actual 4-3 spade fit we played.
I would l ike to bid 4♣ natural, depending on partner to bid 4♥ to check for a spade fit.

[kenberg]

Shevek and Ron,

Thanks, guys. Whether it's good or bad and whether we play it or don't, I was having great difficulty believing that this approach had never been tried. Hell, if Zia and MR play it, perhaps it even has merit.

Thanks again
K