zasanya Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=s109xxxhaqxxxxdxca]133|100|Scoring: IMP1♦-1♥3♥-4♣4♦-?[/hv]You are playing 2/1.You have already cued ♣ denying ♠ control.Does your hand warrent a further move slamward? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 absolutely, In fact, I am thinking about possible grand slam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuroth Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 These things always confuse me so. Am I showing first round control, or merely first OR second round control? Does partner's willingness to show in diamonds mean that we don't have 2 quick losers in spades, or might we still? Even if I decide that partner has spade help, what next? 4NT if it's keycard seems like it will help, but if it's not? 5♥? 6♥ and hope? V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 After this strong auction I cannot see partner passing 4H if he holds the ace of spades. If he holds Kx we are already down to a 50% slam. So I just bid 4H. I would expect partner to reason as follows: If partner did not want me to move past 4H when I hold the ace of spades, he should not have bid 4C. I guess advanced partnerships sort this a little better by use of the serious or non-serious 3NT, but there is no reason to think that this is being played here. I would revert to the more fundamental logic I describe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 Strongly disagree that partner won't pass 4H with the ace of spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 After this strong auction I cannot see partner passing 4H if he holds the ace of spades. If he holds Kx we are already down to a 50% slam. So I just bid 4H. I would expect partner to reason as follows: If partner did not want me to move past 4H when I hold the ace of spades, he should not have bid 4C. I guess advanced partnerships sort this a little better by use of the serious or non-serious 3NT, but there is no reason to think that this is being played here. I would revert to the more fundamental logic I describe. Assuming we are playing first or second round control cuebids, 4♦ already showed a spade control. Bidding 4♥ now should mean "please bid on if you have extras". I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 This would be a lot stronger of a sequence if 4♣ either showed or denied serious slam interest as well. If I had this auction, my 4♣ call would have been a non-serious move, and bidding on would be 100% obvious. But, then I might have bid 3NT myself with this hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. I play that 1D.. 3H denies a 1NT opening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 Does your hand warrent a further move slamward? Yes :) I would just bid blackwood now. Even on the slight chance we have a grand, I don't think it's easy to find out from here that the spade situation is ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=s109xxxhaqxxxxdxca]133|100|Scoring: IMP1♦-1♥3♥-4♣4♦-?[/hv]You are playing 2/1.You have already cued ♣ denying ♠ control.Does your hand warrent a further move slamward? yes rkc now...stop worring about pard having xx in spades :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 After this strong auction I cannot see partner passing 4H if he holds the ace of spades. If he holds Kx we are already down to a 50% slam. So I just bid 4H. I would expect partner to reason as follows: If partner did not want me to move past 4H when I hold the ace of spades, he should not have bid 4C. I guess advanced partnerships sort this a little better by use of the serious or non-serious 3NT, but there is no reason to think that this is being played here. I would revert to the more fundamental logic I describe. Assuming we are playing first or second round control cuebids, 4♦ already showed a spade control. Bidding 4♥ now should mean "please bid on if you have extras". I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. I concede that this makes sense to me. I hadn't thought of it, but I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effervesce Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I RKCB now. Your hand is an absolute monster for the bidding so far, and partner may pass 4♥ thinking he's already shown a good hand and already cooperated with a slam try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 This is worth KC now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Assuming we are playing first or second round control cuebids, 4♦ already showed a spade control. Bidding 4♥ now should mean "please bid on if you have extras". I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. I'm a bit confused, are you saying that holding ♠xx ♥KJxx ♦AKQxx ♣KQ opener would not cue-bid over 4♣? Or, are you saying that he wouldn't cue-bid a second round diamond control without control of spades, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Assuming we are playing first or second round control cuebids, 4♦ already showed a spade control. Bidding 4♥ now should mean "please bid on if you have extras". I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. I'm a bit confused, are you saying that holding ♠xx ♥KJxx ♦AKQxx ♣KQ opener would not cue-bid over 4♣? Or, are you saying that he wouldn't cue-bid a second round diamond control without control of spades, too? Yes, opener should not cuebid (showing interest in slam), since he knows that slam cannot legitimately make (they are off two spade tricks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Since I've denied a spade control, 4♦ from partner shows a spade control, since without it he'd sign off in 4♥. I'll just KC now. I'm more concerned about a possible grand than not making six. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zasanya Posted October 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 [hv=d=n&v=n&n=shkjxxdaqjxxckjxx&s=s109xxxhaqxxxxdxca]133|200|Scoring: IMP1♦-1♥3♥-4♣4♦-4♥?[/hv] On both tables South bid 4♥.Now does North hand warrent a further move slamwards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 The north hand is pretty huge here. Partner has shown a club control (very likely the ace, could be singleton I suppose) and a good enough hand to cuebid (so probably including ♥A). Most likely partner bid only 4♥ over the diamond cue because of a poor spade holding. I think the spade void (i.e. we have no losers in spades even if partner has a truly lousy holding like xxx) combined with the potential source of tricks in diamonds makes the north hand a mandatory bid over 4♥. How could this hand be any better and not have forced game after hearing 1♥? I wouldn't have bid 4♥ with the south hand either though; sixth heart is too big of a card for that. South hand sounds more like xxxx AQxxx xx Ax or the like (still a fine slam opposite north hand, but would not be so great a slam if north had singleton spade instead of void). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 Assuming we are playing first or second round control cuebids, 4♦ already showed a spade control. Bidding 4♥ now should mean "please bid on if you have extras". I would expect partner to pass 4♥ with Ax Kxxx AQxxx Qx. I'm a bit confused, are you saying that holding ♠xx ♥KJxx ♦AKQxx ♣KQ opener would not cue-bid over 4♣? Or, are you saying that he wouldn't cue-bid a second round diamond control without control of spades, too? Yes, opener should not cuebid (showing interest in slam), since he knows that slam cannot legitimately make (they are off two spade tricks). Oh, I see, you bid 1st or 2nd round controls in order regardless of whether they are 1st or 2nd or high card or shortness controls, so 4C denied any control in spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuroth Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 The "1st OR 2nd" seems to have its advantages. I'm cautious about playing it undiscussed, though. How standard is it? I looked at BWS (for example), but couldn't really tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 The "1st OR 2nd" seems to have its advantages. I'm cautious about playing it undiscussed, though. How standard is it? I looked at BWS (for example), but couldn't really tell. It's not standard. It's part of what's called "Italian style cuebidding" and seems to be gaining increasing acceptance in the expert world though. The prime alternative is sometimes called "American style cuebidding" where you cuebid first round controls up the line and then show second round controls only later. The Italian style seems superior, primarily because most people play a version of blackwood (or keycard, or turbo) which allows you to sort out whether you are off an ace. Thus the main goal of cuebidding is to avoid a suit with two quick losers so as to be sure that if you are off only one ace you still have a shot to make your slam. It can also be important to locate a source of tricks (i.e. knowing whether partner has the king in your AQJxx suit is huge). It's worth mentioning that there are some additional cuebidding variants within this style. For example: (1) Many will not immediately cuebid shortness in a suit which partner has bid naturally because this may cause partner to mis-evaluate certain strong holdings (i.e. KQJxx is great opposite a cuebid of the ace, not so wonderful opposite a cuebid of void, and basically garbage opposite a cuebid of singleton). (2) Some require that a cuebid of a suit they have already bid naturally show two of the top three honors. The same folks will sometimes cuebid a queen in a suit partner has bid naturally. (3) Some agree that the last available cuebid below the game level is "last train" and does not show a control in the suit named. Instead it shows control in any suit where partner has denied control (i.e. slam suitability). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 So, does 1D-1H; 3H-4C; 4S promise any diamond control? Or, could it be some thing like AKQx KJxx QJx Qx? Edit: added club honor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 So, does 1D-1H; 3H-4C; 4S promise any diamond control? Or, could it be some thing like AKQx KJxx QJx xx? Could be something like that (plus a club honor so it's not a 1NT opening). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 Playing this style, with a hand like x AQxxx xx AJTxx, if the auction starts 1D-1H-3H, one has to cue-bid 3S instead of 4C? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 Playing this style, with a hand like x AQxxx xx AJTxx, if the auction starts 1D-1H-3H, one has to cue-bid 3S instead of 4C? Yes. BTW I am only advocating the style in a B/I context, otherwise your prior example could bid last train to show a spade control of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts