Liversidge

My partner and I feel we are ready to adopt cuebidding for slamming, in preparation for splintering etc.. I have been brushing up on the traditional version, 1st round controls followed by 2nd round controls, but partner has attended a seminar on slamming where Italian Cuebidding was recommended. I sense that Italian cuebidding is more popular among experts, and that the general trend is in that direction. Does it matter much for players at our level? Are Italian cuebids eventually going to take over the world like weak 2's? If so we might as well start with them.

Thanks both. I checked my references afterwards, but could only find examples of responsive doubles like the one you have given, and none that dealt with my specific case. BBO is a fantastic resource!!

LHO opened a weak 2♠. Partner bid 3♦ and RHO raised opener to 3♠. I had 11 HCP, five good clubs, five good hearts one spade and two diamonds. Was I unwise to double for takeout, seeing as how we have not come across this situation nor discussed it? (Partner passed thinking it was for penalties. Opps made 3♠ doubled.)

Thanks. Helps a lot. I will work up some examples to demonstrate the points you have made.

My partner wants to learn about splinters. I was thinking about introducing him to the Jacoby 2NT first and then move on to the principles of splinters and wasted values. Are there any benefits in the Jacoby 2NT when playing Acol and 4 card majors, other than in those cases where partner has a splinter? I can show a 12+ HCP hand with 4 card support for partner's major by bidding a 4 card second suit or by lying in a minor, and then bidding game in the major, to distinguish it from a weak 7 loser hand with 5+ card support where I would jump straight to game in partner's major. I have tried and failed (so far) to construct any pairs of hands where the Jacoby 2NT finds a better contract than could be arrived at using natural bids.

I look forward to / yearn for the time when I introduce my partner to splinters. Next convention on our list is the Jacoby 2NT, then slam cue bidding, splinters by responder, by opener and finally self-splinters. Last week, as a teaser, I sent partner and example of a 13 HCP 7 loser hand opposite two 13 HCP almost identical 13 HCP hands with 7 losers and a side suit singleton, the only difference being two side suits swopped opposite the splinter suit. A small slam was solid in one and game dubious in the other. I asked him if he could think of how to find the slam in one and avoid it in the other. He is still thinking about it.

I follow, like and have bookmarked it! :)

My thinking was that partner's 1NT showed a heart stop, and his 2NT probably showed a club stop as well (which he didn't have). My 3♣ bid was to show that I had clubs covered so my failure to bid 3NT must show some concern about how good his heart cover was. When he bid 3♦ I took that to show he was not that confident so with my small heart singleton I opted to invite game in diamonds. I didn't appreciate that my 3♣ bid showed four clubs. I had AJ3. In any event, we were both 'winging it' as neither of us has a good grasp of the technicalities of this type of sequence, hence my post.

I understood this bit. It was the later bidding I was unsure of.

Apologies Apollo, I now remember the bidding went slightly differently. 1♦-(1♥)-1NT-(P)-2♠-(P)-2NT-(P)-3♣-(P)- 3♦-(P)-4♦-(P)-5♦. It was I that bypassed 3NT because I was worried about stops. I took partner's 3♦ as him not being confident enough about his heart and club holdings to bid 3NT. Opps (friendly) suggested his two bids in No Trumps made 3NT worth a shot.

I opened the bidding, which went: 1♦-(1♥)-1NT-(P)-2♠-(P)-2NT-(P)-3♣-(P)-4♦-(P)-5♦. We made 5♦. When discussing it afterwards we were not sure what partner's bidding suggested in terms of stops. His 1NT bid promised a ♥ stop. Did his 2NT rebid suggest a club stop? What did his 4♦ bid suggest. He had ♥Axx and 6HCP. I had 19 HCP and 4153 with a singleton heart. Not sure whether 3NT would have made. The other team also bid and made 5♦.

Thanks for that helpful suggestion.

I emailed No Fear to challenge the 'wrong' mark. They emailed back to confirm that it their marking was correct and referring me to the relevant teaching handout on their site. The quote in my post was from the handout. Here is their response: This is a specific use of Stayman only after 2C opening and 2NT response. It is mentioned in the handout on Strong Two Club opening and responses. You can find it the via 'Topic Pages' and 'Strong Two Clubs Opening and Responses'. Regards Steve

Two weeks ago I got a question wrong on the NoFear weekly quiz. After 2♣-(P)-2NT-(P)-? I was supposed to bid 3♣ (Stayman). I challenged this and the reply directed me to their handout on responses to the strong 2♣ which stated at the end of page 2: STAYMAN AFTER A 2NT RESPONSE After the 2NT response to a 2♣ opening (denying a 5 card suit), opener can use Stayman to investigate a 4-4 major suit fit. My partner and I play that the 2NT response shows 8+ HCP and denies a GOOD 5 card suit, so might not have a 4 card major. I was rather cheesed off that this unusual (for me anyway) use of Stayman was slipped in without explanation on a section of the site (not the 'advanced' section)that is supposed to be aimed at teaching novices.

We play Benji Acol, and 2♦-2♥(negative)-2NT is 'systems on' for us.

I have learned a lot from all the responses and partner and I have now settled on DONT, which we like - it is simple. "Redouble" says I have a 5+ card suit, "pass" accepts the double, and bidding a suit starts a scramble. And if the double comes from 4th seat opener bids a 5 card suit if he has one or passes. In the latter case partner carries on as above. So far it has worked every time, usually opps bid. I am sure it has it's weaknesses like all wriggles but it's better than nothing IMHO. I have stopped fretting about the strong hand being on the table. As has been pointed out, this is more relevant when playing the strong NT. As for switching to the strong no trump - it seems rather a drastic solution to this problem. Playing Acol in the UK, all our sources (books, websites, EBU system guide etc.) centre on the weak no trump.

I am making notes on this and am close to getting it. Just two (hopefully) more questions: I presume 'others' means 4♣/4♦? You say you use this system when playing split ranges, i.e. weak or strong, not intermediate. So if 3m is weak and 'others' is strong, what might 3M show in the way of extras?

Duplicate

What does "linked m" mean?

Yesterday partner bid 1♠ and an inexperienced RHO, who had 18 HCP and 5 good hearts, something like AKJxx and and 5 goodish diamonds, something like KQxxx, mistakenly bid 3♦ and they missed game in hearts. Afterwards when they were discussing with us the best way to show overcaller's strength, I suggested Michaels might be something to look at sometime in the future but for now overcaller might make a simple overcall in hearts and hope to show diamonds later. I have only ever bid Michaels with a weak hand (the strong hand option hasn't arisen), but checking up afterwards I could not see how overcaller could invite game after this sequence. After (1♠) - 2♠-(P)-3♥-(P)-?. Overcaller's partner may have 3 hearts but just 0-3 HCP. I should add that they play strong jump overcalls. We play intermediate jump overcalls and 'double - then bid" with a stronger hand, so I would probably done that here.

Just had the answer to the 'alert' part of the question on the Laws and Rulings board. Under EBU regulations, if you are unsure whether partner's bid might be alertable, you must alert. Thanks for expanding my understanding of Fourth Suit Forcing in general.

Thanks. That answers the question!

Thank you Marlowe. My query is about alerting or not alerting a bid of the fourth suit, as my last post tried to explain. In the situation I described, how is partner to know whether to alert when she is not expert enough to know for certain from the bidding whether my last bid must be natural or artificial and forcing? If she plumps for artificial does she have to alert before bidding 3NT and when asked say 'I am assuming that is artificial' If she assumes it is natural but bids 3NT anyway does she just say nothing. And if she thinks it might be artificial but would have bid 3NT either way......? This question would not arise after a bid of the fourth suit by responder on his second bid. Opener would simply alert every time. Am I dancing on a pin here or is my question valid? Please bear in mind that I am a novice and am now feeling a bit out of my depth following the responses.

This may be a stupid question but Kaitlyn gave as an example the sequence 1D 2C 2D 2H 2S where 2S might be natural or might be forcing. We are novices and new partners and will not have discussed this so how is partner to know whether to alert or not?

The source is a handout on FSF on the No Fear site. The example (in the 'other uses' section) is 1D 1H 2D 2S 3C. Opener has 14 HCP and three small clubs. Before learning about FSF I would have taken this as just a game forcing bid, a new suit at the 3 level, but the source includes it as an example of FSF, which is alertable. I wonder if the source has mislabelled the example. That would explain the contradiction with the Larry Cohen article.