an auction

[jillybean]

2/1, 15-17 nt, MP, dealer north, vuln = none

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj74hakdakt742c6]133|100[/hv]

 

1N:2♣

2♠:3♦

4♣:?

[dickiegera]

I would bid 4NT asking for Keycards.

 

With 2 Keycards 6 Spades

With 3 Keycards I would bid 5NT showing all controls

and after hearing partner reply would think about 7Spades or 6NT

[Phil]

Why did I bid 3♦? That denies a spade fit and muddies up the auction. Some sort of good spade raise preferably showing club shortness looks warranted.

 

Now, 4♣ looks like a cue bid for diamonds, so I have to work backward. I do expect four diamonds, but I'll KC and over expected 5♥ or 5♠, 5N will get a 6♠ response (I have to be able to tolerate 6N) and I can 7N.

 

Hey, maybe 3♦ worked out all right since I know partner has some diamond length!

[TimG]

I would bid 4NT asking for Keycards.

I wouldn't know which suit it was for.

 

I wonder if there was a way to bid keycard over 2♠?

[jillybean]

Why did I bid 3♦? That denies a spade fit and muddies up the auction. Some sort of good spade raise preferably showing club shortness looks warranted.

 

 

I don't know if 3♦ does deny a ♠ fit. It shows a hand with atleast one major, diamonds and slam interest. What would you bid over 2♠?

[Phil]

I don't know if 3♦ does deny a ♠ fit. It shows a hand with atleast one major, diamonds and slam interest. What would you bid over 2♠?

 

If I had a gadget here I would use it and my gadget of choice is 3♥ to show a good raise with shortness.

 

If I were playing with a very intelligent partner who shunned gadgets, I would bid 3♥, which has to be a spade raise.

 

If I were playing with a novice that just learned RKC, I would roll out 4N, since my partner would not understand this to be a quantitative call.

 

If I were playing with an intermediate, 4♣ as RKC is a good idea.

 

Come to think of it, 4♣ (or 4♦) RKC is probably a good idea anyway, regardless of the level of my partner. I am so used to not using any form of Gerber that I have a mental block and do not use it even when its not a bad idea. :P

[Zelandakh]

I don't know if 3♦ does deny a ♠ fit. It shows a hand with atleast one major, diamonds and slam interest. What would you bid over 2♠?

4C over 2S showing a splinter raise looks normal. If you play the 3H concealed splinter gadget that is also a possibility. I think it is more common to use 3H here as simply a good spade raise though. Assuming you do this is also an option and, although you are unlikely to hear anything useful, you can at least RKC next time round with clarity as to trump suit.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Phil and Zel touched on the Stayman Structure for a GF, slammish Responder:

 

1NT - 2C

2S - ??

3H! = fit, shortness somewhere; next step (3S!) asks

4D! = fit, no shortness, artificial slamtry

4C! = fit, RKC Gerber for Sp

 

3C/3D = no fit, longer minor suit

4NT = no fit, quantitative

[gwnn]

This is a part of standard NT bidding that is unfortunately not well-established. 3♥ is indeed logically a spade raise, but with the majors reversed, 3♠ over 2♥ is not necessarily obviously an artificial raise (it could be a splinter or an "anonymous splinter" to quote my good friend kfay). 3♦ does, however, deny 4 spades, but of course if you later jump to 6♠ or something, your partner will understand, but don't expect him to co-operate intelligently until then (his only co-operation will be the pass of 6♠).

[TimG]

There's an article in the most recent ACBL Bulletin, Billy Miller maybe, about a structure similar to what some here have suggested. Milly calls it "modified Baze".

[the hog]

I don't know if 3♦ does deny a ♠ fit. It shows a hand with atleast one major, diamonds and slam interest. What would you bid over 2♠?

I would bid 4C over 2S. I don't like the 3D bid either; you have effectively buried the spade fit.

[wyman]

What I've always assumed was expert standard:

 

1N:2C

2M:

....3m = 4oM, 6m (Some do this with 5), GF of course

....3oM = anonymous splinter; next step asks (if 3H:3S, you can decide if N/C/D is H/C/D splinter or a C/D/H. I prefer the former.)

....4C = RKC

....4D = balanced slam try with 4 card supp.

 

Definitely this is worth discussing, since you can free up a 4D bid (for whatever you want) over the balanced slam try if you reverse the 4C/4D bids.

 

edit: of course, I come from the same 'school' as kfay (he was in the honors program, though).

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The small slam is a given.

 

The proper grand slam needs a bit of info.

If all the key cards are found, you don't need to ask about Kings:

 

1NT - 2C

2S - 4C! ( RKC Gerber for Sp )

4D ( 3 keys) - 6D! ( 3 Rnd Ctrl ask )

??

..6S = x x x ( no 3rd Rnd Ctrl )

..7S = x x ( small doubleton )

..6NT = dQ

..7D = dQJ

 

With the 6NT or 7D reply, correct to 7NT .

 

With the 7S reply, just pass .

 

With the 6S reply, Edit: just pass

 

 

Edit....since this is RKCG, 5D! can be the 3rd Rnd Ctrl ask ( bypassing the K-ask step of 5C )

[awm]

What I've always assumed was expert standard:

 

1N:2C

2M:

....3m = 4oM, 6m (Some do this with 5), GF of course

....3oM = anonymous splinter; next step asks (if 3H:3S, you can decide if N/C/D is H/C/D splinter or a C/D/H. I prefer the former.)

....4C = RKC

....4D = balanced slam try with 4 card supp.

Not only would I say that this is not expert standard, but I believe this treatment (sometimes called Baze) is pretty bad...

 

The method I believe to be standard (without special agreement):

 

3OM = slammish raise of partner's major suit

4x (not 4M) = splinter raise of partner's suit

 

Why do I think this is better? The main reason is that you can have a sensible cuebidding auction when you have two (semi)-balanced hands with a fit. The 4♦ balanced slam try suggested above leaves no space at all below 4M to get controls sorted out. Anonymous splinters have some advantage when partner will often bypass the asking bid, thus giving less information to the opposition.. but here with opener quite limited in strength and responder effectively unlimited, it's not clear when/whether/how he should choose not to ask. If he's always asking, it's better to splinter directly. Basically the only gain from the "Baze" structure you gave is the ability to bid RKC and then bail in 4M. But hands where the right treatment is to bid RKC right away without any cuebids and where you really need to be able to bail below 5M (so bidding 3OM...4NT in my approach gets you too high) are quite odds-against. I'll take my ability to cuebid sensibly over this any day.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't think anything is standard here.

 

We play 3♥ as a minor suit enquiry and 4m as natural and forcing with 4♥/5 or 6m (we play 3m NF), so I'd bid 4♥ as a slam try here, now 4N over partner's 4♠ will be keycard.

 

Looking at your actual heart holding, if 4♥ is exclusion you're in equally good shape to use it.

[bucky]

It is imperative to have bids that set up major suit as trump after 1NT - 2C - 2M. Just as a general principle, being able to set up trump in earlier bidding will greatly clarify later bids. The 3♦ bid here, even if agreed as not to deny spade support yet, runs the risk of complicating further bids with the ambiguity.

 

Some of the bids mentioned by others are semi-standard (e.g. 3OM showing support with stiff somewhere, 4C as RKC, 4D as balanced slam try with support), although recently I saw an article advocating to switch the meanings of 4C and 4D to conserve room after balanced slam try. Lacking these methods, a simpler agreement is to use the OM bid as setting up M as trump. Here, after 1NT-2♣-2♠, 3♥ is pretty much an idle bid in many structures, therefore it can be used to announce spade fit and at least mild slam interest.

[jillybean]

Thanks all, I'll be talking with my partner to revamp our responses after 1N:2C 2M

[mike777]

2/1, 15-17 nt, MP, dealer north, vuln = none

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj74hakdakt742c6]133|100[/hv]

 

1N:2♣

2♠:3♦

4♣:?

 

 

4h kickback(in d)... I think you play kickback in other posts.

 

 

1) 3d=nat gf

2) we all learn here on the forums over the years that 4c=cue agree d.......

 

 

3) 3s at first will just be a try for 3nt... On this auction all bids under 3nt =try for 3nt at first.....

[jillybean]

4h kickback(in d)... I think you play kickback in other posts.

 

 

1) 3d=nat gf

2) we all learn here on the forums over the years that 4c=cue agree d.......

 

 

3) 3s at first will just be a try for 3nt... On this auction all bids under 3nt =try for 3nt at first.....

 

Sorry, I dont understand your post.

 

4h kickback(in d)... - are you suggesting I bid 4♥ as kickback after 4♣?

 

1) agree

2) my partner bid 4c as ♣'s, he doesn't read forums

3) 3s at first will just be a try for 3nt.. - when? 3♠/2♠ is a game try in ♠, or nt

[mike777]

Sorry, I dont understand your post.

 

4h kickback(in d)... - are you suggesting I bid 4♥ as kickback after 4♣?

 

1) agree

2) my partner bid 4c and ♣'s, he doesn't read forums

3) 3s at first will just be a try for 3nt.. - when? 3♠/2♠ is a game try in ♠, or nt

 

 

Yes...yes yes

 

4c=cue in d...so

 

 

 

if not 4c you bid 4h.....4h=rkc in d

 

 

If you bid 4c(cue in c agree d) then 4h by anyone =rkc in d

 

 

4h=rkc ace in d.....d are trm ...........

 

 

assuming you play kickback per other posts yes easy. easy 4h.......ace rck in d

 

-------------

 

 

letme put it this way if d are trump then 4h is the way...only way to rkc in d.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Not only would I say that this is not expert standard, but I believe this treatment (sometimes called Baze) is pretty bad...

 

The method I believe to be standard (without special agreement):

 

3oM = slammish raise of partner's major suit

etc...

Maybe we can " have our cake and eat it too " ... at a small price to pay .

 

>> Create an alternative way to reach suit agreement at the 3-level ( which will keep awm happy by allowing control-cuebids at a reasonable level) and still retain the salient features of "expert standard" ( as described by wyman, bucky and myself ) <<

 

As is usually the case the natural Club suit bid (this time at the 3-level) takes a back seat:

 

In general:

1NT - 2C!

2M - 3C! = puppets to 3D! for further description

3D! - ??

3H!(always) = fit for M but need Ctrl cuebids

3S!(always) = no fit, but have 5+c and 4oM

 

For example:

1NT - 2C!

2H - 3C!

3D! - 3H!

3S! ( Ctrl cuebid ) This is something you wouldn't have if you were to use 3S! ( over 2H ) to show a fit, slammish.

 

Let's take a modification of the original hand:

 

♠ Q J 7 4

♥ A 3

♦ A K Q 7 4

♣ 6 2

 

1NT - 2C!

2S - 3C! ( forces 3D! for clarification )

3D! - 3H! ( Sp fit, asking for control cuebids )

4C! - 4D!

4H! - 4NT ( RKC )

etc

 

Yet we still have the direct 4C! = RKCG ( or 4D! if you so desire ) for the original hand as well as the splinter features, etc, etc.

The direct 3D! bid by Responder remains the same ( = no fit for M, have 4oM/5+d );

but now the "no fit for M but have 4oM/5+c " is made by an "indirect" 3S! bid .

[han]

Why did I bid 3♦? That denies a spade fit and muddies up the auction.

 

This.

[chebfarid]

I would bid 4C over 2S. I don't like the 3D bid either; you have effectively buried the spade fit.

Agree. Confirms fit, shows ♣control (or, if you play them, even is a splinter) and you go on cue-bidding up the line.

 

Cheers

Farid

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Perhaps crazy, but I thought of something else for the proposed system in my post # 21.

Add "baby RKC " to take the place of the direct 4C-RKCG.

 

In general:

1NT - 2C!

2M - 3C! = puppets to 3D! for further description

3D! - 3NT! = RKC for M

 

This will free-up the direct 4C bid; we have already rendered the direct 4D bid as impotent ( and I don't recall it ever used ); and most everyone prefers the more natural splinter bids.

 

Sooo, for example:

1NT - 2C!

2H - ??

3S! =

♠

splinter

4C! =

♣

splinter

4D! =

♦

splinter

 

And for Sp as trump:

1NT - 2C!

2S - ??

3H! =

♥

splinter

4C!/4D! =

♣

/

♦

splinters

 

( Anxiously awaiting Zel(andakh)'s reality/sanity check for me )

[han]

Common over 2S is:

 

3H = slam try in spades with some shortness. (3S asks for shortness)

4C = slam try in spades without shortness.

4D = RKC for spades.

 

If I remember correctly I've heard people calling this Baze, or actually reverse Baze (after Grant Baze, I think the original has 4C as RKC and 4D as balanced slam try). I wouldn't assume this without discussion btw.

 

After a 2H reply you can play the same, but then 3S shows the slam try with shortness.