[hrothgar]

Quote

Why? I disagree totally. Does it matter that responder doesn't try to describe any of these hands specifically as one suiter, two suiter or balanced?  

1)    xxx AKQTxxx AK  x
2)    x  AKQTxxx  AK  xxx
3)    xx AKQTx  AKQJ xx
4)    xxx AKQTx AKQJ  x
5)    x  AKQTxx  AKQ  xxx
6)    xx AKQTxxxx  A  xx
7)    x  AKQTx  AKQxx xx
8     xx  AKQTx  AKQxx  x

I think that these hands expose the crux of our disagreement.  I would never respond 1H on hands
1, 2, 5, or 6.  I consider all of these to be classic examples of strong jump shifts.  My understanding is that most "standard" systems still use Strong Jump Shifts over minor suit openings.  As specific examples, the best consensus regarding 2/1 is undoubtedly Bridge World Standard which explictly uses strong jump shifts over minor suit openings.  As I recall, Washington standard uses WJS in competition, but uses strong jump shifts in non-competitive auctions.  SAYC is also based on Strong Jump Shifts.

Avoiding "perversions" like the need to rebid 3D on these hand types is a major reason why strong jump shifts are still part of standard.  Rebidding 3D on any/all of these hands make it impossible for partner to intelligently cooperate with the bidding process.  He will have no way to understand which conver cards and distributional controls are significant.  Your slam invitational sequences later in the auction will be reduced to uni-dimensional "min-max" range asks with no way to focus the auction.

For what its worth, I wasn't being faceitious when I suggested looking at relay systems. [I prefer them to standard]  If you want to play a system in which one player is captain and master-minding the contract, then you might as well chose a bidding system that is optimized for this type of information exchange.  Your attempt to force "standard" into the same mold is a dreadfully inefficient use of bidding space.

[inquiry]

I have tried relay systems, including a one week horrible result with Moscito, but I do quite alright with SAYC and 2/1 and normal precision.

It is true that many systems use jumpshifts as strong, but many do not. Bridge Base Online Advanced, for instance. I assumed a jumpshift would be weak, but it doesn't change my bidding or the meaning of captaincy. It was just to illustrate the point that the CAPTAIN doesn't have to describe his hand, he is trying to give specific information, but rather recieve it.

As an aside, I don't prefer play jump shifts as weak or strong. The disadvantage of strong jumpshift is it is too rare (even if you include the hand with a five+ suit and good fit for opener and just enough to force to game as a minimum), and the weak jump shift, while more frequent experience shows it is of marginal value, if wide-ranging, and less frequent if very disciplined (in competition, wjs is obviously better). I myself, however, use all jumps to major or minor as FIT JUMPS and the appropriate stregth for the level of the bid. At very least, it helps me and my partner to judge degree of fit quickly for LOTT decisions, and there is negative inference for auctions were fit jump was not made, and support shows up later. Also solves some rebid problems with four card minor fit and a five card major.  

[bglover]

Some thoughts here...

(1) As to captain-crew and this hand... After 3D in sequence originally given, if partner chooses NOT to bid 3N and 3H shows a minimum (re Easy's post), then 4D is CLEARLY a slam try with most likely 5-5 reds. Given that information, to NOT bid 4s over 4d is, to me, beyond comprehension because it can easily be deduced partner has 1 or 0 clubs. It is for this reason that I have found all arguments blaming responder for NOT CUE BIDDING HIS CLUB STIFF unpersuasive.

It also brings up a secondary point... RESPONDER IS IN CONTROL. He has asked 2 TIMES about spade controls and 2 TIMES opener hides them and yet Ben and others continue to focus on responder not showing his second round control in clubs. I don't think this is right at all given these circumstances. I think opener (crew) is obligated to show his spade cards... I've read all the posts and I think Richard is the only one who got it right (of course that is my opinion only). 4D so clearly paints a picture of responder's hand that the rest should be a cake walk for opener...

(2) As to jump shifting... Well, it isn't wrong, but it sure isn't right either when 5-5. To start the bidding at the 2 level with responder's hand with all that information to be passed, well, it's just a problem because he has to bid diamonds 2 times in a lot of cases,,, and 3nt may well be the best spot absent fitting cards in opener's hand if there is a misfit.. Don't get me wrong, i am a big propenent of strong jumps, but they must be used judiciously because they use up so much space... A 5-5 hand shouldn't usually jump unless it can guarantee the 6 level on its own (this hand was very nice, but not that nice).

(3) And lastly, I entirely agree that if you respond 1nt instead of 2h this hand is so much easier to bid. Responder's 3D bid now makes the hand a snap.... The reason I mention this is that I have a partner that insists on 3 card raises, which I really do not like. Even with partners that insist on 4 card raises, I will occasionally raise with AJX of better... but as a rule, I have found that, when playing with partners that like 3 card raises always, these kinds of problems do come up frequently.

Even when I play SAYC (which I mostly do in "real life") I play 4 card raises because these sequences often create problems... The 1nt rebid conveys (for me anyway) a more accurate picture of opener's hand, and the various gadgets we use (checkback, NMF, etc.) give us clarity down the line if we need it.

I have found too often that playing 3n is correct even with a 5-3 fit. Since opener can have either 3 or 4 cards for his raise, you often miss 3n (one hand or the other can't bid it and you miss it) and play a poor fit at the 4 level... Just my 2 pennies on this treatment.

[inquiry]

Steve,

Could you please explain, in some details, your cue-bidding rules. I know you said you cue-bid first round controls before second round controls (which is wrong in my view, but I know it is very popular choice). Then after showing second round controls, you cue-bid second round controls (sometimes, obviousl to this day you refuse to show your second round control in clubs). What is the purpose of your cue-bids? And please, please, instead of just saying by not cue-bidding clubs you "assume" your partner has a club control. Explain to me your logic for DENYING a club control.

I will tell you my cue-bidding strategy in a situation like this (we will ignore Serious 3NT and LTTC for this)... let's just say that after opener showed minimum and three card fit, if responder is still cue-bidding, he is looking for slam.

Once, as opener or responder, I find all suits have at least first or second round control, then I can use BLACKWOOD if I like (since no two quick losers exist). So my cue-bid scheme is designed specifically to make sure that we are not off two quick losers in any specific suit.

With such a scheme, your sequence SHINES A BRIGHT LIGHT on the CLUB suit. As Captain, you are telling your partner that you are interested in SLAM and that you have NO CONTROL in clubs. Nothing could be simplier or clearer. You are seeking, primarily, information about clubs. Now, there is no doubt you also need information about spades, but only if your partner has a club control. Here are three hands, and how would yhou bid them....

S-  H-AKQTx  D-AKQTx C-xxx
S-x  H-AKQTx D-AKQTx C-xx
S-xx H-AKQTx D-AKQTx C-x
S-xxx H-AKQTx D-AKQTx C-

In the first case, your auction, 4D-4S- leads to down on a club lead. In the second case, it leads to a fairly safe, but extra high 5H contract, assuming that after 4S you can stop in 5Hs (although you may lose 2C and 1D and remember it is you who assumes partner has a club stopper, not me so you may still be in 6H). And of course the fourth, you still have a chance for 7 your way of course you still have a potential D loser.

But if you would be kind enough to cue-bid 4C on the two hands with a control in clubs, your partner will now show his spade control and you get to 6H on both. And if you bid a logical 4D on the two with two or three small clubs, your partner will rightlfully realize that you are off two club tricks and stop safely in 4Hs.  That is the purpose of cue-bidding, the sharing of information to make the appropriate high level decisions.

I wait for your theory of cue-bidding. Make it fairly detailed, because quite frankly, what I have seen doens't seem to make much sense. What are you trying to achieve?

[bglover]

Firstly, let me say I merely kibbitzed this hand... I did not play it, and if I did, I would have splintered clubs over a 2H raise.. It was a very slammish hand with a fit and that is how I bid these types of hands.

Now, as to my cue bidding.. I admittedly am old school... I cue bid 1st round controls mainly (if I have AK in an unbid suit I will of course cue bid the 2d round control too given the opporunity).

Now, having said this, I pick and choose which hands need cue bidding vs. which hands need RKC. IMHO too often people cue bid when the information needed is better found using RKC and if your risking a 5 level cue bid from partner which is going to destroy your RKC opportunity, i think treading carefuly is necessary.

I am not fond of 2d round cue bids... they are misleading in my opinion.. If partner isn't looking at the ace he will always assume it IS the ace and now you reach 7 off an ace (seen it happen more than once).

Having said all this, I will say that NOTHING REPLACES GOOD JUDGMENT. The reason i posted this little ditty was because I thought it would stir up a debate... Well, it succeeded. I can find fault with the way the hand was bid by either party... but, honestly, this was not a hard slam to bid using 3 or 4 card raises, precision or Moscito or whatever... It required both parties using good judgment and sound deduction, and I thought there was a failure on this hand, and the opener had the same argument as the others...Why didn't my partner cue bid his stiff club?

To repeat from my last post...4D clarifies the responder's hand so well that to continue to hide the AKQ of spades was not a system failure in my opinion, it was a judgment failure.

Sure, the auction could have been more artful by responder, but he conveyed ENOUGH information for opener to reevaluate his holdings IMHO.

This was the true failure of the sequence to me... unless, of course, he didn't belive his partner had 5 diamonds along with 5 hearts... but he should have. Once that information was conveyed there was nothing more to worry about.. Partner had 1 or 0 clubs... Absolutely. Why? Because he was worried about SPADES. The auction clearly shows that....

[inquiry]

2/1 said "Now, as to my cue bidding.. I admittedly am old school... I cue bid 1st round controls mainly (if I have AK in an unbid suit I will of course cue bid the 2d round control too given the opporunity)..........I am not fond of 2d round cue bids... they are misleading in my opinion.. If partner isn't looking at the ace he will always assume it IS the ace and now you reach 7 off an ace (seen it happen more than once)."

Well, if you NEVER cue-bid second round controls, so that bypassing clubs, no matter how many times, is neutral on whether or not you hold a club control, I guess bidding 4S is right. But the problem is your treatment is totally illogical. I find it Illuminating that you never addressed any of the hands were responder NEEDS a club control for slam not a spade control. Why is that? How would you bid those?

2/1 said "Having said all this, I will say that NOTHING REPLACES GOOD JUDGMENT. .....the opener had the same argument as the others...Why didn't my partner cue bid his stiff club? .

Actually SOMETHING DOES REPLACE good judgement (to use your terms). What replacements judgement is captaincy. Responder became full fludged captain, maybe even admiral or president, after openers 2H and 3NT rebids. When responder bid 4D he, as captain, he isn't asking opener to use judgement, instead he gave a DIRECT command to his partner. This command was simple, it said, I do not have a club control If you don't have one either SIGN OFF in 4Hs. If you do, make some kind of useful noise. Judgement has nothing to do with this other than what useful noise he makes with a club control. The Admiral/Captain/President has spoken, and it is your job to follow their orders.

2/1 said "This was the true failure of the sequence to me... unless, of course, he didn't belive his partner had 5 diamonds along with 5 hearts... but he should have. Once that information was conveyed there was nothing more to worry about.. Partner had 1 or 0 clubs... Absolutely. Why? Because he was worried about SPADES. The auction clearly shows that...."

To the contrary, the auction showed that responder had a singleton in spade if either black suit. His AUCTION specifically showed concern about CLUBS, not SPADES. That is how cue-bidding works and that is how the opener took it, very correctly in my opinion. I have said this plenty of times, and I will not reply to this thread again, as I think I am repeating myself way too much. But I will end with a repeated plea to STEVE, tell me how you would bid the same hand responder had but with the black suits reversed. Explain that one to me, with a logical reason for opener to stop safely in 4Hs when that hand exist.

[easy]

Good job Steve! When u first suggested to me that this hand should be posted here in forum i thought to myself "is he kidding? This is crystal clear that pard has denied a club control. "

I have enjoyed the discussion of this hand immensely but like you my position hasnt changed.For those of you that arn't aware i was the opening bidder on this hand. Now i will give you my perspective on the hand.

Holding AKQ  jxx  xx  QTxxx In my opinion raising hearts is a much better alternative than rebidding 1nt. Raising hearts works immediately on all hands where pard has 5 and still allows you to get to nt from the correct side when pard has only 4h and inv or forcing to game values.

When pard rebid 3d i took that as either 1) game try with hearts as trump or 2) slam try with a diamond q bid. (could be natural but always slamming)
If pard was making a game try i wasnt interested in playing game with my minimum and 10 of my hcp in my short suits. if pard is making a slam try over 3h he would let me know by making another q bid.(note: based on many of the comments re my bid of 3h over 3d it seems that either most dont make game tries when playing or they would accept the game try with my hand and bid 3n.... I 'd like to here from those that bid 3nt as to what their reasoning was.

When pard bid 4d i knew he was slamming and DENIED  a club control. Now although i had great spade control that wasnt going to help if we were about to lose the first 2/3 clubs. I've seen your comments re: the need for a spade q bid and i dont buy your reasoning but that's ok as long as u and your partner agree with your style. My style of q bidding is as follows.
1st rd controls, then second rd controls. So when my pard bid 3d initially it was a game try, the second time it was a 2nd round control of d and denied 1st or 2nd round control of clubs. (3d had become a 1st rd control q bid after i had turned down his game try and he q bid again)


One thing this thread has shown me is that q bidding although done by everyone doesnt mean the same thing for everyone. So if you are planning on developing a regular partnership here on bbo (or anywhere else) you had better have some in depth discussions about style!

[bglover]

This is to Ben's response: If you think that responder's bidding showed CLUB concern and not SPADE concern we live on differtent planets. He would RKC the hand with a singleton spade but not if he has 2 fast losers in the suit. HE KNOWS HE DOESNT HAVE 2 FAST CLUB LOSERS BECAUSE HE IS LOOKING AT THE 2D ROUND CONTROL. Opener has an easy inference of this. Your argument is made of tissue.

Sorry.

Now, as to Fred's comment... HE SHOWED FIVE DIAMONDS (most likely) and therefoire you could infer he had 1 or 0 clubs.. or at least cater to the possible 2551 hand.... That to me was your failure in judgment.

I have said all I can on this hand... Obviously there is room for different interpretations and that's why this board exists.. But I am all talked out on this one...

[Codo]

Hi again,

besides repeating that the view of the inquiry is just right, there are still some open questions.

Easy wrote:

Raising hearts works immediately on all hands where pard has 5 and still allows you to get to nt from the correct side when pard has only 4h and inv or forcing to game values.
.

It rightsides the NT? So you had bid 1 NT with AQx,Jxx,xx,KQTxx? Just to rightside your contract?
Wow interessting way. How do you decide when to "rightside" the contract?

And there are one or two ways to play the 5-3 fit even after a 1 NT rebid. If you wish, check the next bridge library about  new minor forcing, texas, checkback etc.
With strong hand you really have no problems at all. But with weaker hands, you just play 2 Heart with 3433 opps 3334 instead of 1 NT. What a great idea.

There are hands, where a direct raise is just good bridge. But to do so at every hand is nothing what bigger players then we do.

But I totally agree with most of your stuff. It is very very important to discuss the Q-bid style and of course your pd denied a club control.

2/1 wrote:
[u][This is to Ben's response: If you think that responder's bidding showed CLUB concern and not SPADE concern we live on differtent planets. He would RKC the hand with a singleton spade but not if he has 2 fast losers in the suit. HE KNOWS HE DOESNT HAVE 2 FAST CLUB LOSERS BECAUSE HE IS LOOKING AT THE 2D ROUND CONTROL. Opener has an easy inference of this. Your argument is made of tissue.
/u]
Luckily for Ben, he is not alone on his planet. His planet is called "Bridge World Standard" :-)

I do believe, that it is no good bridge to cuebid shortnesses in pds suit first. Buit even if  I accept your style with cuebiidng first round controls first and second round control later: You denied club control.
Of course you KNOW, that you don´t have club looosers. Great. But you did not show that to your pd. No you just said: NO SIR, I DON`T CONTROL THE CLUBS.

But anyway, you won`t accept this. But feal free to ask an expert panel somewhere. But they will live on a different planet too...

Kind Regards

Roland

[inquiry]

Quote

But feel free to ask an expert panel somewhere. But they will live on a different planet too...

ROFL  ;D

[bglover]

Well i said i was done with this.... but I just went thru BWS and looked at every instance where a cue-bid is used and could find nothing to substantiate Roland's statement... Just trying to piss me off or were you making it up to fortify your position (which i tend to believe was the case)? No matter...

OK... one last time cuz I am SICK of this now.... I (personally) play that asking bids of the nature here are for UNBID SUITS only. So, that is MY PLANET and if your planet is different, then we are indeed on different ones. Responder is in CONTROL... Opener had UNDISCLOSED CARDS.. 4D says TELL ME MORE! He had a lot more and didnt show them...

I don't believe any of us disagree that 4D constituted a slam try... I stand by my earlier comment that opener should be catering to the 2551 hand... NOTHING HAS CONVINCED ME OTHERWISE.

NOTHING HAS CONVINCED ME THAT 4D SHOULDN'T BE A BID LOOKING FOR A SPADE STOPPER...I acknowledged that there are differing opinions but do not, repeat, DO NOT throw BWS at me cuz I know BWS.

[hrothgar]

From my perspective, the crucial problem with this hand is that after the 4D bid, there is NO convincing way to determine whether responder is 1552 or 2551.

I've seen arguments from both sides, however, I haven't seen anything especially convincing.  In my own cue bidding style, the 4D bid would be strong, but ambiguous regarding a club control since responder can't cue bid a club shortage.

As I mentioned originally, I tink that inviting slam with a 5H bid to ask about trump quality is the right way to go.  Worst that can happen is that partner raises to 6H holding a hand like

x
AQJTxx
AKQxx
xx

However, even here, we could easily make 6H if the opponents chose a passive trump lead or misguess which black suit to lead.

In the absence of an unambiguous way to sort out the black suits I chose to focus on what I think is the key to this hand.  Responder's heart suit.

[the hog]

This talk that responder has to be 5-5 is arrant nonsense. The hand I described earlier - viz
xxxx
AKQx
AKJ
Jx
Perfectly fits the bidding to date. After
1C   1H
2H   3D
3NT  4D    (or 3H 4D as in the actual case. Here opener  guarantees 4H)

It is 100% obvious that the 3D bid is an advance cue bid. What is responder looking for here. It seems just as perfectly obvious that this is a C control. Where on earth is this 5-5 rubbish coming from?

[hrothgar]

Quote

This talk that responder has to be 5-5 is arrant nonsense. The hand I described earlier - viz
xxxx
AKQx
AKJ
Jx
Perfectly fits the bidding to date. After
1C   1H
2H   3D
3NT  4D    (or 3H 4D as in the actual case)

It is 100% obvious that the 3D bid is an advance cue bid. What is responder looking for here. It seems just as perfectly obvious that this is a C control. Where on earth is this 5-5 rubbish coming from?

I don't think that the hand in question is remotely strong enough for the bidding sequence.

The auction started

1D - 1H
2H

Showing a balanced semi-balanced hand with ~11 - 14 HCP.

Responder then made a game/slam try by bidding 3D.
Opener rebid 3H, typically showing a minimum hand that hasn't been improved by partner's Diamonds.

Opposite this, responder is now cue bidding 4D as a slam try.  I can't picture many hands consistant with the bidding  that would be able to make slam opposite the 19 count that you posted.

[easy]

hi roland

I was somewhat surprised by your sarcasm but I thought u mite be interested in the response.

"It rightsides the NT? So you had bid 1 NT with AQx,Jxx,xx,KQTxx? Just to rightside your contract?
Wow interessting way. "

I dont raise with 3 for  the purpose of rightsiding the contract i do it because the other alternative (rebidding nt with a worthless doubleton) is less attractive. Right siding the contract is just an added plus. And yes i would raise pard with the above holding.


"How do you decide when to "rightside" the contract?"  

Quite simple, with a minimum and a worhtless doubleton or a singleton i raise my pard. If you are really interested in the reasoning behind it check out a thread i started some time ago re "When to raise with 3 trump.
or check out Mike Lawrence's "2 over 1 Workbook. It has an entire chapter re when to raise with 3.

"And there are one or two ways to play the 5-3 fit even after a 1 NT rebid. If you wish, check the next bridge library about  new minor forcing, texas, checkback etc. "

Thx but i'm well aware of those conventions. Although im not sure how texas (as I know it) applies to the above auction.

"With strong hand you really have no problems at all. But with weaker hands, you just play 2 Heart with 3433 opps 3334 instead of 1 NT. What a great idea. "

None of the above  examples would be hands where i would raise pard.



Easy

[inquiry]

Quote

I just went thru BWS and looked at every instance where a cue-bid is used and could find nothing to substantiate Roland's statement... Just trying to piss me off or were you making it up to fortify your position (which i tend to believe was the case)? No matter....

I know I said I was done, but steve suggesting Roland is "making up" (euphemism for lying?) the cue-bidding sequence is part of BWS. This can not go unchallenged.

Although I never raised the spector of BWS, because there, 4D might very well be LTTC and didn't want to get into that discussion. But, actually Steve, Roland is right, and I think you owe him an apology or at least you need to look better at the BWS. I quote directly from BRIDGE WORLD STANDARD, version 2001. You can read this yourself starting at "Kaplan Control Principles where there is an agreed trump suit."

Approaches to slam decisions:
  Kaplan Control Principles: When there is an agreed suit:

(a) After a slam-try by one partner below four of the agreed suit,

(1) a non-signoff bid or redouble by the other is slam-positive and indicates a specific control;

(2) failure to show a control is slam-negative, but does not deny that control."

 Open suit: When one partner has requested that the other ("replier") bid slam with at least second-round control of a particular suit (the "open" suit) regardless of the rest of his hand, this scheme is used for replier’s actions: with no control in the open suit, pass or return to the agreed suit;... [/color][/b]

So, since BWS used KCP (kaplan control principle), you do cue-bid controls up the line. Second, in BWS, responder could skip a 4 club control cue-bid only if (see number two above) he has a "slam negative hand". Since your partner is balanced and weak from the bidding, responders slam try simply CAN NOT BE slam negative, so by BWS standards, responder SPECIFICALLY DENIED a club control making clubs currently an open suit (as is Spades). Roland was not "making this up" to back his arguement: It is RIGHT THERE in black and white ini the BWS documents.. (and quoted above in pink).

[the hog]

Richard, you have an 18 count for heaven's sake. I think you have been playing 9-14 openings for too long. rofl
(Picked up a nice 14 count opposite a 9-14 opening last night and we couldn't even make a 2 level part score) :

[inquiry]

hrothgar, you wrote (in yellow):
From my perspective, the crucial problem with this hand is that after the 4D bid, there is NO convincing way to determine whether responder is 1552 or 2551. Basically this hand (RESPOND 1)
x
AQJTxx
AKQxx
xx

Versus this hand, RESPOND 2
xx
AQJTxx
AKQxx
x

I don't know how you are not convinced by the natural cuebidding sequences that have been discussed. Let's give opener two hands....

OPEN 1
AKQ
J9x
xx
QTxxx

OPEN-2
KJT
J95
xx
AKTxx

Both times, responder is 5-5-2-1 only with black suits reversed. Both times opener has 12 points and 3-3-2-5 distribution. Let the auction go to 3NT as proposed by steve, with Responder to bid..... Let's see how the acution would go....

RESPOND-1  OPENER-1  4D-4H  (neither partner C control)

RESPOND-2 OPENER-1   4C-4S-4N-5D-6H (responder has club control, 5D = 1/4 key cards, or whatever response you use)

RESPON-1-OPENER-2      4D-5H - looking for good hearts, secure that both black suits are stopped

RESPOND-2 - OPENER-2   4C-   now opener knows that parnter has a singleton or void in clubs, and is worried about spades. With KJT, 6NT shows itself as a possible contract. Maybe you have 10 red tricks plus the CLUB AK. But now, you know that if you bid 6H, it likely be 50-50. your bid over 4C depends upon your cue-bidding style (and if 4D is LTTC). I would bid 4S.

So the convincing way to determine if North has a club control (responder hand 2) or two or more clubs (responder hand 1) is to cue-bid your controls. Simple, logical, sane.
   

[bglover]

OK I apologize... and fully admit that when I read the pink passage it still did not indicate to me that opener should not bid his spade cards... admittedly it's written in a way that is not entirely clear and I may well have misinterpreted it.

My humble apologies... Now, I did actually just do a "find text" search one the phrase "cue bid" and since the pink didn't actually use the term "cue bid" I probably missed it entirely (I wasn't gonna read the entire document but I should have done a more thorough search).

[hrothgar]

[quote]

All very simple, except for the fact that you are now cue bidding a shortage opposite partner's suit.  This is rarely considered to be a good thing.  Many authorities specifically state that this is not done.