a Cuebid at the 7 level?

[Fluffy]

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=skq62h10dakj864c62]133|100|Scoring: IMP

S - N

1♦-1♥

1♠-2♣

3♦-3♠*

4♦-4NT

5♠-5NT*

6♦*-7♣

??[/hv]

 

3♠= We have ♠ fit and maybe slam

5NT= promises all the keycards on our side, asks for specific Ks

6♦=

Denies ♣K

Shows ♦K

Doesn't deny ♥K

it tends to deny ♦Q because when we have all keycards and a side suit as good as (A)KQ 5th+ we just bid 7.

 

What do you bid now and why?

[mr1303]

I think partner here is asking for HK for 7NT. If I've denied DQ already then I'll try 7D to show playable diamonds (presumably showing DJ here) and probably denying HK. If partner now bids 7H I'll bid 7NT, otherwise I believe he can pass 7D and I'll pass 7S here.

[mikeh]

What is going on here? Partner must be Axxx in ♠ and therefore concerned about a 4-1 trump break. If you held KQJx♠, 7♠ would be clear.

 

He is hoping that you have the 'right' card to make 7N better.

 

That right card may be the ♥K or the ♦J.

 

The ♥K requires him to hold Axxx AQJxxx x AK or the equivalent: he needs 8 tricks in the rounded suits to get to 13, and he needs the ♥QJ in order to make 7N better than 7♠.

 

The ♦J requires that he hold the ♦Q, either Qx or singleton, and also needs far less from him in terms of rounded suit high cards: he needs some combination of 4 top winners.

 

Can I cater to both? I think so.

 

My choices are 7♦/♥/♠/NT

 

I would bid 7♠ with KQJx of trump.

 

I would bid 7N with both the ♥K and the ♦J

 

I would bid 7♥ with the K and no ♦J

 

So I bid 7♦ here to show the ♦J and deny the ♥K and the ♠J.

 

 

I sure hope we are on the same wavelength. If we are, then I know that we have the makings of a fine partnership :D

 

If not, one of us has to learn to be less subtle :)

[Guest Jlall]

7D. I think partner wants to be in the fit that we have the jack in. So I agree completely with mikeh.

[awm]

Partner could've bid 6♥ over 6♦. This seems like an unambiguous ask for a heart card. So I don't think partner's really looking for the ♥K.

 

It's possible that 7♣ is asking for the club queen for 7NT. Or it might just be trying to pick the best grand (bid the suit where you have the jack). In either case 7♦ seems right to me. Same bid as Justin and Mike... but perhaps for slightly different reasons.

[mikeh]

It's possible that 7♣ is asking for the club queen for 7NT. .

I initially considered this: however this is inconsistent with the auction.

 

He has shown at least 4♥ and 4♠. He cannot have 5♣ (with 4=4=0=5 he should have bid 2♣, not 1♥, and it is impossible for him to be looking for 7N on such a hand).

 

He is presumably counting 3♠, and 2♦, and therefore needs AKQJx AKx in the round suits (and maybe that is not enough... when did you deny a ♥ void?) or AKQJ AKJx in the round suits. I just do not see these hands being sufficiently frequent.

 

Bear in mind that bidding space constraints restrict the questions he can ask. If you approach it as I have, then he can use 7♣ to ask about 3 suits: ♠, ♥ or ♦. If it asks about the ♣Q, you would need to bid 7N if you held KQxx x AKxxxx Qx and that would be really, really bad opposite Axxx AQJxx x AKx

 

(where, had you bid 7♥, he'd bid 7N)

 

or Axxx AKxx Q AKxx (where, again, he'd bid 7N if you showed the ♦J and 7♠if you did not)

 

Now you are in a far inferior contract to 7♠. Yet what else are you supposed to bid if you think his question involves the ♣Q?

 

Also: are we clear that 7♥ would not be to play? How would you handle, as responder, Axxx AKQJ109 x Ax?

 

I like my chances in 7♥ much more than I do in 7♠ or 7N, and setting ♠ was essential in order for me to discover the ♠KQ. In ♥ I can pull trump and ruff a ♦ or two (with 2♠ entries available) and make 7♥ with never having to worry about the ♠ suit.

[kenrexford]

I have not analyzed this hand completely, but one note. If the cuebidding is Italian, Opener's 4D cue promised two top diamond honors (cue in own suit), denied a club control, and showed non-serious slam interest.

 

When Responder ultimately bids 5NT, therefore, Opener need not have the club King to respond 6C. In fact, he cannot have that card, already denied. Thus, 6C should show a specific Queen of clubs, the highest possible club honor at this point. Responder could then seek clarification of the diamond position by bidding 6D.

 

What this all means is that, using this style of cuebidding (not answered yet), 7C cannot be asking for a club honor already denied.

 

All of this bolsters the theory that 7C is a punt bid, asking partner to bid the grand with the Jack. Perhaps partner holds Axxx in spades, Qx(x) of diamonds, and a few great roundeds.

 

The thing is, partner has no idea that Opener is 6-4 yet. 3D could be 4252 or so, and 4D, not serious, confirmed that possibility. Hence, Responder seems to have unexpected values in the rounded suits. So, I would actually take 7C as inviting 7D if Opener has extra length in diamonds OR the diamond Jack. Note that the extra length in diamonds reduces the length in the roundeds, allowing a pitch of the fourth spade if needed.

[Fluffy]

So far so good, most found that partner's got ♠Axxx, but after 7♦ he bids 7♥. What do you do now?

[mikeh]

 

 

The thing is, partner has no idea that Opener is 6-4 yet. 

This is a style point, I think. However, for me, I cannot imagine bidding 3♦ over 2♣ without 6 decent or better ♦.

 

Personally, my 1♠ bid already promised shape, but I appreciate that many bid up the line. Even then, surely a 4252 hand would be shown by 2♦? (Yes, with 4=2=4=3 and no ♣ stopper, an up-the-line bidder rebids 2♦, but does this mean that one cannot rebid 2♦ on 5?). Space-consuming bids in your own power auctions ought to be narrowly defined, otherwise you are destroying your own precious resource: bidding space.

 

I suspect that very few experts would treat 3♦ as possibly only 5 cards: I would be interested to know how others feel

[mikeh]

So far so good, most found that partner's got ♠Axxx, but after 7♦ he bids 7♥. What do you do now?

Weirder and wierder.

 

I have to stay consistent with my earlier post: I would have bid 7♦ to show that Jack and to deny the ♥King. So he is not interested in the ♥K, yet he is not committing the hand to either 7♠ or 7N

 

7N must, logically, be impossible for me on this sequence: I have nothing extra to justify it.

 

My main worry here is: what card could he need from me to make pass a logical choice? He already knows that 7♠ is a roughly 68% contract (If I had the 10, it would be slightly better).

 

I suggested last time that with Axxx AKQJ10x x Ax he'd bid 7♥, not 7♣.

 

Accordingly, I reject the notion that 7♥ is unilaterally to play. With a no loser 6 card suit, he should not have tortured us with 7♣.

 

Okay: he has no idea how many ♥ I have. I could be 4=2=6=1, for example, with Jx ♥. He might be Axxx AKQxxx x Ax.

 

Whatever he wants from me, I do not have. Therefore pass is out.

 

That leaves only 7♠.

 

I am happy I do not hold KQxx J AKJxxx xx: now I'd really have a tough call: I think pass would be right but I'd be nervous laying down dummy.... heck, I'm going to be nervous bidding 7♠, waiting to see dummy :(

[Robert]

Hello everyone

 

I think that partner should not make that 7C call without prior discussion. He is seeking a subtle meaning in an 'undiscussed' auction.' The odds for a disaster are great.

 

That being said, without prior discussion, he wants me to bid 7NT with the club Queen. Not holding the club queen. but 'looking' at the heart King I would bid 7H.

With neither card, I sign off in 7S.

 

If all that he needed was the King of Hearts, a bid of 7H might convince me to bid 7NT 'looking at the 'unshown' heart king and 'hearing him cuebid that very same King.

 

If my only fear in bidding a grand slam is a 4-1 split, my grand slam bidding odds are pretty good.

 

Why would partner start RKC and follow up with an asking bid for specific kings if he was really worried about a 4-1 trump break?

 

With Axxx AKQJ10x x Ax bidding seven hearts is a very deep position. Partner has shown at least KQxx ? AKxxx? ? If we can bring in the spades holding 'at least' AKQ and four opposite four, we make all 13 tricks in NT. If we cannot make four spade tricks, we might have a 'slight' problem taking all of the tricks in a seven spade contract.

 

Regards,

Robert

[000002]

PICK UP please

 

7♥?12tricks now.

[kenrexford]

I have to admit, I missed the jump here. 2C-P-3D???

 

Assuming that 2C is game-forcing, I'd anticipate 3D, actually, to be a Picture Jump Cuebid, in support of hearts, frankly. I'd imagine something like Axxx-Kxx-AQJxx-x, with three-card heart help, a source of tricks in diamonds, and a top honor in spades. Why else jump here?

 

This treatment would be vastly superior to a Splinter, as 4C is a tad rich for delicate cuebidding, as partner needs to set trumps still. After 3D, partner bids the major he was actually thinking about, presumably, or some other logical call.

 

3D to show a maxi 6-4, I suppose, would be the "basic" approach, but that seems a waste, especially if partner's 2C was designed to hopefully set a major as trumps at the two-level.

 

Once this problem is addressed, I suppose 7C takes on new and amazing meanings, especially after the continuation. The key question, here, in my opinion, is whether there is a bubbling sound in the room, perhaps right under the table where partner is sitting. I think he is smoking on a bong.

[Fluffy]

[hv=n=sa109xhakqxxxdxcaj&w=sxhxxxdq10xxck10xxx&e=sj87xhjxxdxxcqxxx&s=skqxxh10dakjxxxcxx]399|300|[/hv]

 

Here is the full hand, actually partner (me) wasn't looking for ♥K, sincee 6♥ would had probably asked for that card. So what is left is either ♦Q bare, or ♥AKJ10xx or ♥AKQxxx, or so I though. I would had liked that partner tried 7♦ then after a headache passed 7♥, since nobody sensible enough made this 7♠. Playing the ♠ on the way it doesn't also need a red suit breaking.

[Guest Jlall]

Doesn't seem like you want to be in 7H to me.

[Fluffy]

You don't wanan play it at the start, but it makes, adn 7♠ won't unless you see al lcards ;). So bad bridge here would had gave us a reward, instead we ahd a flat board :(