[arepo24]

Partner opens 1C followed by 1D by opponent and you bid 1 NT with 9 pts. P has 19 points and wants to ask for aces in hopes of getting to slam in NT. Can Partner bid Gerber 4C after a club has already been bid or must Partner bid 4 NT? Wouldn't you think partner was using 4NT as quantitative rather than Ace asking and pass at 4NT?.

[barmar]

If partner has lots of clubs he can bid 3♣, there's no need to use 4♣ for this. 4♣ is almost always Gerber when it's a jump over a natural NT bid.

He can also show a strong hand first by cue bidding 2♦.

[pescetom]

 arepo24, on 2020-June-09, 11:57, said:

Partner opens 1C followed by 1D by opponent and you bid 1 NT with 9 pts. P has 19 points

As barmar said he could cuebid 2♦, or he could bid 2NT with a stop in ♦: both show his range of strength.

 arepo24, on 2020-June-09, 11:57, said:

P has 19 points and wants to ask for aces in hopes of getting to slam in NT.

That is not clear thinking.
He has little idea of your distribution and it is not particularly likely that a slam is on the cards even if you have the maximum for 1NT and all aces are present.
Bidding is a collaborative process, even more so when one has pressing need for more information.

[arepo24]

I asked the question the wrong way.
All we need to know is: When one is ready to ask for aces, can they bid Gerber when both a club and a NT have already been bid, or can one ask for aces with 4 NT?
One person said they still must use Gerber, because 4 NT would be considered quantitative. Is this correct?

[DavidKok]

On auctions like these (you give 1♣-(1♦)-1NT-(P)-?) typically the aces are the least of your worries, and trying to ask for them at once is poor bridge. I personally think ace-asking bids are overrated to begin with, but on this action in particular jumping the gun by so many levels does not make sense, and I doubt any experienced partnerships will have an ace-asking bid available on the second round of the bidding.

That being said, if you absolutely insist then it's a matter of which poison you'd rather pick. You can either say that Blackwood requires a trump suit, and therefore 4NT is quantitative, and by extension demand that 4♣ is Gerber. Or you could say that any weird jump to 4NT is RKC for the last bid suit, in this case clubs. I don't see much of a difference in quality between the two agreements, both sound poor.

[pescetom]

 arepo24, on 2020-June-09, 14:07, said:

I asked the question the wrong way.
All we need to know is: When one is ready to ask for aces, can they bid Gerber when both a club and a NT have already been bid, or can one ask for aces with 4 NT?
One person said they still must use Gerber, because 4 NT would be considered quantitative. Is this correct?

I'm lukewarm about Gerber, unlike many who are downright hostile
But it can often get in the way and in general is not very useful.
My suggestion is to use it only directly over 1NT or 2NT openings or at most after 1NT 2♣ 2♦.
Yes IMO 4NT should be quantitative after 1♣ 1NT.
So you don't have any way of asking for Aces until another suit has been shown, and neither can ask for keycards until a fit has been found.

[smerriman]

IMO, after 1♣ (1♦) 1N (P), 4N is pretty much undefined, rather than quantitative or Blackwood. If you have a balanced hand that wants to play 6N opposite a maximum 1N, surely you were too strong for 1♣..

[arepo24]

Pescetom:
I appreciate you honing in on my actual question. I should not have given a "for instance" question in the first place.
All I really needed to know was the RULE for when to do Gerber vs NT under the circumstances I outlined. (forget about the bidding sequence and stuff--it's not pertinent to the rule answer I need)
And I think you answered it pretty well. Obviously the rules must state that one must bid Gerber if one wants an Ace answer, because a NT bid will be quantitative under the circumstances.
Thanks again.

[johnu]

 barmar, on 2020-June-09, 12:07, said:

If partner has lots of clubs he can bid 3♣, there's no need to use 4♣ for this. 4♣ is almost always Gerber when it's a jump over a natural NT bid.

He can also show a strong hand first by cue bidding 2♦.

A 3♣ rebid isn't forcing so you wouldn't want to play a potential slam hand in a partscore. I would assume 4♣ was Gerber if there was no prior agreement, and that rebidding 2♦ would be the way to go with a powerhouse hand that didn't want to ask for aces right away.

[johnu]

 pescetom, on 2020-June-09, 13:43, said:

As barmar said he could cuebid 2♦, or he could bid 2NT with a stop in ♦: both show his range of strength.

With a flattish 19 and a stop in diamonds, I would expect opener to just raise to 3NT.

[barmar]

 johnu, on 2020-June-09, 15:30, said:

A 3♣ rebid isn't forcing so you wouldn't want to play a potential slam hand in a partscore.

If you weren't strong enough to open 2♣, and partner can't bid over 3♣, it's not a potential slam hand.

[johnu]

 barmar, on 2020-June-09, 15:39, said:

If you weren't strong enough to open 2♣, and partner can't bid over 3♣, it's not a potential slam hand.

Just because it is not a slam hand doesn't mean it isn't a game hand

[P_Marlowe]

 arepo24, on 2020-June-09, 14:07, said:

I asked the question the wrong way.
All we need to know is: When one is ready to ask for aces, can they bid Gerber when both a club and a NT have already been bid, or can one ask for aces with 4 NT?
One person said they still must use Gerber, because 4 NT would be considered quantitative. Is this correct?

A common method is, to show the Aces count if pos. ver. a quantitative 4NT.

[dsLawsd]

Kantar talks about just every thing in his book
RKC the final word. Without agreement it seems that 4♣ should be RKC for CLUBS. 4 NT would be quantitative. The only thing that makes sense to me is that he has a solid suit with only 3 outside losers. Otherwise with potential cue bid first.
After 1♣ -pass- 1NT make a forcing bid first looking for some fit or strength first. 4♣would suggest that something makes his moose of a hand not suitable for a forcing 2♣.

[aawk]

Looking for slam in this situation is way to optimistic. But that aside using 4c as gerben should be on agreement. I would bid 2♦ (as cue bid) first to show a very strong hand looking for the best game or a possible slam.

[blackshoe]

"Rule" is the wrong word. It's a matter of partnership agreement, and a partnership can make just about any agreement it likes in this area. But as has been said, asking for aces early in an auction is usually the wrong approach. Bidding attempts to answer two questions: "where?" and "how high?" Most bidding system emphasize answering the first question and then the second. Also, Gerber and Blackwood and their ilk are intended as tools to keep a pair out of a bad slam, not to find out if you have enough to bid a good one. Especially when you aren't sure "where" yet. IOW, don't ask for aces or keycards unless you can see a probable twelve tricks and are only concerned with ensuring that the opponents can't take two tricks off the top.

[bluenikki]

 barmar, on 2020-June-09, 15:39, said:

If you weren't strong enough to open 2♣, and partner can't bid over 3♣, it's not a potential slam hand.

True. But you've just missed game.

[miamijd]

I think the original poster wanted to know when 4C would be Gerber and when it would be natural.

In general, 4C is standard Gerber when made (i) where no trump suit has been agreed (ii) over a 1NT or 2NT bid:

1x 1y
1NT 4C

1x 1y
2NT 4C

1x 1y
1z 2(fourth suit)
2NT 4C

1x 2y
2NT 4C

If you play "Standard expert," then 4C is RKC Gerber after a Stayman inquiry and a major suit response:

1NT 2C
2H/S 4C

It's sort of "standard" to play 3 of the other major as an unbalanced slam try; 4D as a balanced slam try; and 4C as RKC Gerber. That way, 4NT is natural, with no fit.

In other situations, 4C is generally NOT Gerber.

Cheers,
Mike

[nige1]

 arepo24, on 2020-June-09, 11:57, said:

Partner opens 1C followed by 1D by opponent and you bid 1 NT with 9 pts. P has 19 points and wants to ask for aces in hopes of getting to slam in NT. Can Partner bid Gerber 4C after a club has already been bid or must Partner bid 4 NT? Wouldn't you think partner was using 4NT as quantitative rather than Ace asking and pass at 4NT?.

Assume that you hold a strong hand and your partner is a human rather than a robot. Then IMO, over 1♣ (1♦) 1N (P) ??

• 2N = BAL 18-19 HCP.
• 3N = NAT based on good ♣s e.g. ♠ A ♥ Q x x ♦ x ♣ A K Q J x x x
• 4♣ = ART Gerber -- or better Keycard Gerber, setting ♣ as trumps (see previous posts).
• 2♦ = CUE General purpose force e.g. 3-suiter short in ♦.
• 3♣ = INV Good suit N/F. e.g. ♠ x x ♥ x x ♦ A K ♣ K Q J x x x x
• 2♥/2♠ = NAT F1 e.g. ♠ x x ♥ A K x x x ♦ - ♣ A Q J x x x
• 3♦/3♥/3♠ = SPL good ♣ e.g. ♠ Q x x ♥ - ♦ A x ♣ A K Q x x x x x
• 4♦/4♥/4♠ = ??? (void SPL? 7-6 2-suiter? I should have opened 2♣?)
• 4N = ??? Don't know but open to suggestions (perhaps asking for ♦ control?).