Distributional hand over partner's neg double

[kfgauss]

Imps, white vs red, 1st seat:

 

-- AKJ874 A4 106432

 

1H 3D X P; ?

 

What's your bid/plan?

 

Andy

[Blofeld]

4♣. I'll come up with a plan later. :P

[pclayton]

4H is my call, but this is one of those hands where 6C could be really good.

 

If I had more confidence pard had clubs, I might make a more agressive move toward slam.

 

But I expect some bad breaks on this hand and 4H seems like a practical, 'agricultural' call.

[whereagles]

4♣. I'll come up with a plan later. :P

Ditto.

[hotShot]

4♣. I'll come up with a plan later. :P

That's a good plan:)

[mike777]

4c...

 

 

My plan is 4d will be rkc for clubs but will not show my void yet.

[mikeh]

4c...

 

 

My plan is 4d will be rkc for clubs but will not show my void yet.

No! Kickback should NEVER be the reflex slam-oriented bid.

 

Imagine poor old partner after your 4♣ call.... (which is an enormous underbid.. more on that later).

 

He has a goodish hand with mild slam interest. He wants to agree that ♣ are trump... and bear in mind that very few players use the negative double to promise an unbid minor in this auction, so he cannot be bidding on the assumption that you KNOW he has ♣.

 

How can he make a slam try?

 

He cannot bid 5♣... that denies slam interest opposite a normal 4♣ bid

 

He cannot bid 4♥: that is a preference to your major

 

He cannot bid 4♠: that is natural and shows a long ♠ suit with not quite enough to bid 3♠... bear in mind that in standard, 3♠ is a de facto game force, no matter that we all tend to stretch a bit in this situation.

 

So what is he to do?

 

The answer is to cue bid!

 

Once again: ask yourself this: how often will partner hold a hand on which he can accurately place the contract merely by knowing how many keycards you hold?

 

Then ask yourself, how often (relatively) will partner have slam interest and need more info from me than simply how many keycards I hold?

 

My answer (obviously) is that the latter is FAR more freqent than the former. Not to mention, that most, if not all, of the hands in the first category can be adequately bid without keycard at all!

 

I am very serious in saying that anyone who thinks that 4♦ is best used as keycard should really try playing without any keycard asking methods for several months, or several dozen slam auctions, whichever comes first. I assure you that your overall bidding will improve immeasurably.

 

In my main two partnerships, we do not play keycard in minor auctions unless we jump to kickback (4♦ in ♣, 4♥ in ♦). We use 4N as a highly encouraging 'keep it going' type of stall, and otherwise we cue-bid. I am extremely comfortable with this method... and while I am not suggesting that this is superior to a well-constructed kickback/minorwood scheme, I am suggesting that it is infinitely better than the 'every slam try must involve kickback' approach.

 

 

As for the merits of 4♣: this is a far, far better hand than 4♣ suggests.

 

K2 KJ652 Jx Axxx.... would you bid 4♣? If not, consider the changes you'd need to bid 4♣ and then compare that hand to the one you hold.

 

To me, the choice is between 4♥ and 5♣, with 4♥ getting the nod because of two reasons.

 

1) Partner has not promised any ♣ length, and my suit is so weak, albeit surprisingly long, that I need a fit to have any chance of making 5♣

 

2) I have a ♦ control so am not facing an immediate loss of control in 4♥ even if I buy unluckily in that suit

 

I am a bit concerned that partner may have extra values over there, with a real ♣ fit, and my 4♥ eliminates the chances of reaching a ♣ slam: it is remotely possible that we may get into a choice of slams 5N scenario and we can backdoor our way into ♣, but that is a fantasy rather than a bidding plan. But game before slam, and on the information currently available, 4♥ is the spot so far... it does show a good hand, and so partner may still move when right.

[mike777]

1) I thought the choice between 4c, and pard passing and bidding 4H is close. I can understand both choices but will still take the risk of bidding 4c and that pard will just bid 4h with 2hearts.

2) I think Mikeh, as usual, lays out a strong argument. I have no doubt that for many players at his level, taking the slow, cuebid, use judgement approach can be a winning one.

3) For the rest of us I just ask that you reread the many many articles that Kantar has written on cuebid disasters at the top level of bridge and many others written by Zia and others on the simple approach of bidding blackwood more often and cuebidding less. As I understand the main counterpoint is that cuebidding can lead to many confusing auctions but can solve the more difficult bidding issues. Blackwood gains on the simple I need keycards hands but will lose on the more complicated hands. On this hand I want pard to be able to keycard when it is right and at a low level. This means I give up on the complicated...very complicated auction that MikeH embarks on with his 4D/4nt cuebid choice.

[han]

I had this hand and opened 4H. I didn't want to, but the colors made me do it.

 

Perhaps it makes sense to play 4♣ as forcing here. If not (or no agreement) then I'm also rebidding 4!h.

[mikeh]

3) For the rest of us I just ask that you reread the many many articles that Kantar has written on cuebid disasters at the top level of bridge and many others written by Zia and others on the simple approach of bidding blackwood more often and cuebidding less. As I understand the main counterpoint is that cuebidding can lead to many confusing auctions but can solve the more difficult bidding issues. 

 

An over-reliance on keycard is like using training wheels when learning how to ride a bicycle. You will rarely fall over, using training wheels, but you will never really enjoy riding your bicycle either.

 

I am morally certain that neither Kantar nor Zia would have the slightest doubt that 4♦ by responder, whether over 3♥, 3♠ or 4♣ by opener, is anything but a cue bid, agreeing opener's last bid suit and indicating slam interest... not even promising a ♦ control, altho most hands worth a slam try will not hold 3 such losers.

 

I guess my suggestion of playing without keycard is analogous to learning to ride without training wheels :P Risky, probably painful in the short term.

[pbleighton]

4H.

 

"Agricultural"?

 

LOL.

 

Peter

[Codo]

Hi mices, :P

 

I am a man and will bid 5 ♣. I am no superman, so I don´t get too fancy with 4 ♦, but 4 ♣ is for mices...

My pd simple has clubs or hearts or he has 5242 or 6232 which is not odds on after the bidding. (And I would dislike any bidding system, where he will X with a weak one suiter, in my opinion he should pass with weak long spades..)

 

And my hand has immense playing strength. If we have no slam, 5 Club is not much worse to 4 Heart, but if we have one, 4 Club will kill it.

 

If 4 ♣ is forcing, then it is another story, than that bid would be perfect.

[whereagles]

Well, I for one don't think it's a good strategy to double and later bid 4♠ on

 

KQxxxx

x

xxx

Kxx

 

but ok, some might do it.

[jdonn]

3) For the rest of us I just ask that you reread the many many articles that Kantar has written on cuebid disasters at the top level of bridge

There is no convention that has led to more misunderstandings and disasters than kickback. It is the most accident prone convention in existance. I now play it in one partnership at partner's insistance. In just the few months we have been playing we have (literally) spent over 2 hours discussing when it does/doesn't apply and (literally) spent about 6 hours bidding practice kickback hands. And I am still scared to bejeezus every time it either comes up or might come up except for on the simplest hands.

[Finch]

What jdonn said.

 

I've been playing Kickback in some very well-defined minor-suit slam auctions for about 5 years now, and it only ever comes up in BW challenge-the-champs type hands. It's never been used at the table.

[kfgauss]

As for the merits of 4♣: this is a far, far better hand than 4♣ suggests.

 

K2 KJ652 Jx Axxx.... would you bid 4♣? If not, consider the changes you'd need to bid 4♣ and then compare that hand to the one you hold.

I did bid 4♣ at the table.

 

I think 4♣ shows extra shape or strength, but is not quite forcing. With your example hand, I'd probably shoot out 3NT (partner shouldn't have nothing for double of 3♦ here) at imps and pass at matchpoints.

 

An example of a slight change would be K2 KJ652 x Axxxx, and I'm ok with this hand and my actual hand making the same bid, though I'm certainly not really happy about it. I do think partner should often correct to 4H with 2 to try to play game. 4H is certainly a viable option as well.

 

Perhaps this approach is overly game-oriented on potential misfits, but note that 3S on three and 3H with a good 5-card suit (KQJxx e.g.) are available for other variants of your hand (though I still might try 3NT/pass on some of these).

 

I'll be away for a few days, but feel free to discuss how silly you think my ideas are without me and I'll see what you've said when I get back. Also, see the follow-up thread for your next decision.

 

Andy

[mikeh]

I'll be away for a few days, but feel free to discuss how silly you think my ideas are without me and I'll see what you've said when I get back. Also, see the follow-up thread for your next decision.

 

Andy

I don't think your ideas (or your bid) are silly B) I disagree with the actual choice, but, in hindsight, my statement that your hand is 'far, far better' than a 4♣ bid is an overbid by at least one 'far' ;)

 

I still vote for 4♥... and my opinion on the continuation after 4♣ has alrady been posted.

[mike777]

What jdonn said.

 

I've been playing Kickback in some very well-defined minor-suit slam auctions for about 5 years now, and it only ever comes up in BW challenge-the-champs type hands. It's never been used at the table.

I do use kickback(all trump suits) all the time...suprised it never comes up for you but then I tend to never cuebid at the 4 level without a void or some worthless xx(rare). I do agree Kickback can be confusing and can lead to mistakes.

 

I think many bid 4H here to just simplify the auction and that is a good reason!

[whereagles]

your hand is 'far, far better' than a 4♣ bid is an overbid by at least one 'far' ;)

 

I still vote for 4♥...

Given the lack of space, I think 4♣ should show something like a good min to a med. Something like 14-17 or thereabouts. With a 11-13 (& no particular shape) some other bid is perhaps preferable, even if it's 3♥ on the same 5 cards you opened on. With more cuebid.

 

4♥ on the actual hand is ok, though. Certainly the less dangerous of bids (in terms of misunderstandings).

[Trinidad]

What jdonn said.

 

I've been playing Kickback in some very well-defined minor-suit slam auctions for about 5 years now, and it only ever comes up in BW challenge-the-champs type hands. It's never been used at the table.

Maybe you should start playing kickback for all slam auctions. Then it would certainly come up more often. (I myself find that the advantage of kickback is largest when hearts are trump. You can safely ask for keycards owning only one yourself without getting surprised by a 5♠ 2+Q response.)

 

For many players, kickback appears to be a hopeless and complicated convention. When does it apply and when doesn't it? What is the ace asking bid and what is natural?

 

In real life, it is exactly as complicated as RKCB. All the problems with kickback are based on uncertainty about the trump suit. So, you will go wrong with kickback in the same situations where you will go wrong in RKCB. The difference is the consequence of the mishap. In kickback, you will not know whether the last bid was a natural (cue)bid or kickback. In RKCB you won't know what the trump suit is and you will show the wrong king as the fifth ace or you will show the wrong queen. (Yes, you may luck out and have both kings or none. But don't tell me that this is good bidding.)

 

If you don't have these kind of problems with RKCB, chances are slim that you will ever have a problem with kickback.

 

Rik