Unassuming Cue Bids

[Echognome]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skxxxhkxdkjxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

P - (1♥) - X - (P)

?[/hv]

 

I'm trying to get my head around how everyone bids these type of hands in standard. At the table I chose the amorphous 2♥ to first show a maximum pass and then leapt to 4♠ over partner's 2♠ response. Although the auction was successful at the table, it didn't feel like great bidding.

 

How would you bid this using standard methods? I.e. saying you would transfer to diamonds and then bid spades isn't that helpful.

[Blofeld]

I think I would bid 2♥ but just try 3♠ if partner bid 2.

[Miron]

p - 1♥ - x - p

2♠

 

I would bid 2♠. I play it as 8-10, 4+♠. That's what I have (I don't like the ♥Kx, but 5-4 and 7(10) HCP).

[Fluffy]

I woudl bid 2♠ to show 8-11 with exactly 4♠, sadly this doesn't show 5♦ wich might be important.

[luis]

2♠ shows exactly 4 spades to me too and about 8+ - 11-

 

Luis

[MickyB]

I'm not sure how the title of the thread fits in with the hand. As far as I know, an Unassuming Cuebid is a cue of opener's suit after partner has overcalled, showing a good raise. It is now commonly (mis)used as a cue of overcaller's suit, showing a good raise of opener's suit.

 

If you start off with a cuebid, it certainly seems better to just raise 2♠ to 3♠ - that Kx isn't really pulling its weight, and some like to make lightish doubles opposite a passed hand.

 

Fluffy and Luis, what would you do here with 5♠?

[cherdano]

I don't understand what is wrong with bidding 2♠ directly here, unless you play it shows 5 spades. Forcing to game seems a clear overbid.

 

Arend

[Guest Jlall]

I also would just bid 2S, but I don't think it shows any specific number of spades. The shape is good, but the HK is bad. I think 2S is about right on values.

[cherdano]

I am surprised noone has suggested 2♦ yet, with the plan of bidding spades in the next round :) (I wouldn't do it, and wouldn't expect to see it at the table, but would very much expect to see it in a bidding forum. :o)

 

Arend

[Guest Jlall]

I am surprised noone has suggested 2♦ yet, with the plan of bidding spades in the next round :) (I wouldn't do it, and wouldn't expect to see it at the table, but would very much expect to see it in a bidding forum. :o)

 

Arend

2D doesnt show any values. If one were to bid diamonds it would most likely be 3, then spades will be very hard to find as all pass will be a likely scenario.

[inquiry]

no no no.. don't bid 2♥. That should be for uncertain direction and points or true game force. You have neither. You have a fairly nice hand with spades. Bid 2♠ (a jump to show real values). 3♠ is an overbid, 1♠ is an underbid, 2♥ just confuses the issues and forces you to at least 3♠ and I doubt you could even stop there.

 

2♠ is "just right".

[luis]

I'm not sure how the title of the thread fits in with the hand. As far as I know, an Unassuming Cuebid is a cue of opener's suit after partner has overcalled, showing a good raise. It is now commonly (mis)used as a cue of overcaller's suit, showing a good raise of opener's suit.

 

If you start off with a cuebid, it certainly seems better to just raise 2♠ to 3♠ - that Kx isn't really pulling its weight, and some like to make lightish doubles opposite a passed hand.

 

Fluffy and Luis, what would you do here with 5♠?

With 5 spades and the same range 3♠

[joshs]

As to the bid, I would underbid slightly with 2S (good shape, bad heart K) to protect the heart K, and keep you low if partner doesn't have 4 spades.

 

By an unpassed hand, the Cue bid would be forcing until suit agreement, or game is reached. So, 2H-3C-3D would be forcing (but 2H-2S-3S would not be forcing). By a passed hand, responder can't pass any of opener's new suits after cuebidding, but opener can pass responder's new suits, since he is limited.

[mikeh]

no no no.. don't bid 2♥. That should be for uncertain direction and points or true game force.

I disagree, Ben. Your treatment is non-standard, at least in NA. A cue is a one round force, with a promise to rebid. The cue establishes a force until a suit has been bid and raised or to game.

 

Thus the sequence of 2♥ 2♠ 3♠ is non forcing.

 

I agree with your choice of 2♠, since in my opinion, this shows 8-10 (roughly: just adding points as a guide to values is not recommended beyond the beginner stage) with 4+♠.

 

ironically, the overbid of 2♥ almost assures that this hand will be dummy, and thus robs the ♥K of much value, while the more conservative (appropriate) bid of 2♠ preserves that card's value.

 

BTW, no one should even consider bidding ♦ here: 2♦ is woefully inadequate, showing no values at all and 3♦ almost guarantees that you will not reach ♠.

[Finch]

This hand is remarkably similar to one of the hands in the latest English Bridge magazine, where you have to bid

 

AQ

10xx

Jxxx

AKJx

 

opposite

 

J10xx

Kx

KQxxx

Q10

 

after you pass (sound opening) and LHO opens 1H.

 

give partner a 3244 (a more typical double) and you still want to play in 5D.

[inquiry]

no no no.. don't bid 2♥. That should be for uncertain direction and points or true game force.

I disagree, Ben. Your treatment is non-standard, at least in NA. A cue is a one round force, with a promise to rebid. The cue establishes a force until a suit has been bid and raised or to game.

This is what I said in different words.. I said it showed points and uncertain direction (I could have spades for this bid btw) but not sure the strain or level. or it can be true game force. This is many words to say what you said... it is one round force and promises a rebid....

 

I also said the 2♥ would force you to three spades and that I doubt you could stop there. In fact. if partner bids anything but 2♠ you can not stop in 2♠, try it.., because after you bid 2♥ and partner bids, say 2NT, 3♠ is forcing. If partner bids 2♠ as you say a raise to 3♠ is not forcing, but is encouraging. This is why I said I doubt you can stop there, a lot of sequences will be forcing. For example should parnter might bid clubs or diamonds over the cue-bid even with 4♠ as well, turning 3♠ back to forcing.

 

For what it is worth, I like to bid only 1♠ with up to 10 hcp and four spades only spades. I save the jump for 6-10 with five card plus. With 11-12 and four spades, I will cue-bid or with true game force I will cue-bid also cue-bid. This seems reversed in many ways to how luis plays this. His jumps promise four card suits and his double jumps show five card suits. He plays the cards better than I so being in 3♠ with hands like this if he catches his partenr with a weak hand must work well for him. Me I play with people who make extremely light shapely takeout doubles and this hand will often be plenty high enough in 2♠s. My jump to three promises a sixth spade.

[Echognome]

I don't see how any of your bids (other than cue bids) are forcing. You are a passed hand. Partner can see fit to pass any of your bids.

[inquiry]

I don't see how any of your bids (other than cue bids) are forcing. You are a passed hand. Partner can see fit to pass any of your bids.

I was talking about new suits by advancer AFTER a cue bid,,,,,

[Echognome]

I agree if advancer is unpassed. ;)

[mikeh]

This hand is remarkably similar to one of the hands in the latest English Bridge magazine, where you have to bid

 

AQ

10xx

Jxxx

AKJx

 

opposite

 

J10xx

Kx

KQxxx

Q10

 

after you pass (sound opening) and LHO opens 1H.

 

give partner a 3244 (a more typical double) and you still want to play in 5D.

Agreed, but can you really have it both ways?

 

Admittedly the cue bid will work well on the examples you gave, while 2♠ results (on the first hand) in a violation of Burn's Law of Total Trump.

 

Maybe the answer to the dilemma posed by your first hand is that north should pass rather than double, and now the S hand will reopen, presumably with 1N. Now North can cue, and eventually establish a game force: whether that reaches a right-sided 5♦ is (to say the least) debatable: maybe 2♥ 2♠ 2N 3♦ 5♦... ?

[Echognome]

I believe the recommended bidding on that hand involved passing and protecting with 1NT. I also believe that they found 5♦ at the table. Nice.

[Finch]

The cue bid doesn't work very well on these hands either, you still tend to end in 3NT because you have loads of HCP and a heart stop. That's why it's set as a problem!

 

However, in general I prefer to cue on a 4252 11-count or so, because it gives us the chance of playing in diamonds. Particularly so when I am a passed hand, and we can bid P (1H) x 2H 3C 3D P. But even as a non-passed hand, with

 

Kxxx

xx

KJxxx

Kx

 

I'd be prepared to end up in 4D in my fit than in 2S in my non-fit, although this is a minimum hand for it - any less and I agree with 2S.

 

Also, I fully agree the Kx in hearts makes this route less attractive. Which is why this hand is a problem....

[joshs]

This hand is remarkably similar to one of the hands in the latest English Bridge magazine, where you have to bid

 

AQ

10xx

Jxxx

AKJx

 

opposite

 

J10xx

Kx

KQxxx

Q10

 

after you pass (sound opening) and LHO opens 1H.

 

give partner a 3244 (a more typical double) and you still want to play in 5D.

Thats a tricky hand: After P-1H-P-P-x-

with the opps silent:

2H-2S-3C-3D-?

Do you raise or bid 3H? I think with no help in hearts (jxx is the borderline case) you need to raise to 4D which partner would happily bid 5 over.

[mike777]

This hand is remarkably similar to one of the hands in the latest English Bridge magazine, where you have to bid

 

AQ

10xx

Jxxx

AKJx

 

opposite

 

J10xx

Kx

KQxxx

Q10

 

after you pass (sound opening) and LHO opens 1H.

 

give partner a 3244 (a more typical double) and you still want to play in 5D.

Thats a tricky hand: After P-1H-P-P-x-

with the opps silent:

2H-2S-3C-3D-?

Do you raise or bid 3H? I think with no help in hearts (jxx is the borderline case) you need to raise to 4D which partner would happily bid 5 over.

Is 3clubs really forcing here?

 

I am a passed hand and I have x'd and bid 2s....it seems I can pass 3clubs now?

Is 2h showing a 2 suited minor suit hand or one suited in clubs....that could not overcall 1h?

 

This is a very tough hand I can see at the table a lot of room for misunderstandings. Well done to those that get to 5D.

[joshs]

This hand is remarkably similar to one of the hands in the latest English Bridge magazine, where you have to bid

 

AQ

10xx

Jxxx

AKJx

 

opposite

 

J10xx

Kx

KQxxx

Q10

 

after you pass (sound opening) and LHO opens 1H.

 

give partner a 3244 (a more typical double) and you still want to play in 5D.

Thats a tricky hand: After P-1H-P-P-x-

with the opps silent:

2H-2S-3C-3D-?

Do you raise or bid 3H? I think with no help in hearts (jxx is the borderline case) you need to raise to 4D which partner would happily bid 5 over.

Is 3clubs really forcing here?

 

I am a passed hand and I have x'd and bid 2s....it seems I can pass 3clubs now?

Is 2h showing a 2 suited minor suit hand or one suited in clubs....that could not overcall 1h?

 

This is a very tough hand I can see at the table a lot of room for misunderstandings. Well done to those that get to 5D.

You are not a passed hand. Someone who passes before the opps have bid is a passed hand. Someone who passes after the opps bid can still have as much as a 17 count, and is not considered a passed hand.