Kickback?

[blackshoe]

Last night, my opponents had this interesting bidding sequence (sorry, don't remember the vulnerability): [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1dp1sp2hp4np5sp6dppp]133|100[/hv]

This pair do not play Kickback (it was a pickup partnership), but it occurred to me that it's a sequence that must bother Kickback players a lot. In theory 4♥ would be Kickback, setting ♦ as trumps. Or would it be natural, to play? And what about 4♠? Kickback for ♥, or natural?

 

West said later that she "knew" partner would take 4NT as RKCB for ♥, but bid it anyway (they'd already had a snafu involving a control bid at the four level - they ended up in a 3-2 fit when East passed) hoping to get enough info to ensure the slam was good. "Two with the Queen (of ♥)" didn't help though, as West wasn't interested anything in ♥ other than the ace, and the response left her unsure of the clubs. Note that if she could have bid 4♥ as Kickback, she could have bailed out in 5♦, where here she was already forced to the six level.

 

I suppose it's a matter of firm agreements. What do you kickback aficionados think?

[Cyberyeti]

Last night, my opponents had this interesting bidding sequence (sorry, don't remember the vulnerability): [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1dp1sp2hp4np5sp6dppp]133|100[/hv]

This pair do not play Kickback (it was a pickup partnership), but it occurred to me that it's a sequence that must bother Kickback players a lot. In theory 4♥ would be Kickback, setting ♦ as trumps. Or would it be natural, to play? And what about 4♠? Kickback for ♥, or natural?

 

West said later that she "knew" partner would take 4NT as RKCB for ♥, but bid it anyway (they'd already had a snafu involving a control bid at the four level - they ended up in a 3-2 fit when East passed) hoping to get enough info to ensure the slam was good. "Two with the Queen (of ♥)" didn't help though, as West wasn't interested anything in ♥ other than the ace, and the response left her unsure of the clubs. Note that if she could have bid 4♥ as Kickback, she could have bailed out in 5♦, where here she was already forced to the six level.

 

I suppose it's a matter of firm agreements. What do you kickback aficionados think?

4M is natural if it is sensible to be, so both 4Ms natural here IMO, 4th suit and bid 4♦ would agree them in forcing fashion. There is an argument that 4♠ would be kickback as 3♠ followed by 4♠ would be natural, but 4♥ must be natural without the slam forcing connotations of using 4SF first. An alternative is to play a non natural 2N to save space on the way.

[mike777]

Last night, my opponents had this interesting bidding sequence (sorry, don't remember the vulnerability): [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1dp1sp2hp4np5sp6dppp]133|100[/hv]

This pair do not play Kickback (it was a pickup partnership), but it occurred to me that it's a sequence that must bother Kickback players a lot. In theory 4♥ would be Kickback, setting ♦ as trumps. Or would it be natural, to play? And what about 4♠? Kickback for ♥, or natural?

 

West said later that she "knew" partner would take 4NT as RKCB for ♥, but bid it anyway (they'd already had a snafu involving a control bid at the four level - they ended up in a 3-2 fit when East passed) hoping to get enough info to ensure the slam was good. "Two with the Queen (of ♥)" didn't help though, as West wasn't interested anything in ♥ other than the ace, and the response left her unsure of the clubs. Note that if she could have bid 4♥ as Kickback, she could have bailed out in 5♦, where here she was already forced to the six level.

 

I suppose it's a matter of firm agreements. What do you kickback aficionados think?

 

 

playing kickback on this auction where 2h is a reverse:

2s would be spades, weakish

3s=gf with long spades

3h=sets hearts as trumps,,,4s now will be rkc in h by either pard

3d=sets diamonds as trumps......4h now will be rkc in d by either pard.

 

4h=natural, hearts, really would almost never exist on this auction.

4nt=quant.

[Phil]

Before I agreed to play Kickback, I would have good definitions about continuations regarding reverses.

 

I would not ever consider a jump to 4M in the OP's auctions as kickback in any of my partnerships, and this doesn't 'bother' me in the least.

 

What requires discussion is the subsequent 4M bids after responder supports, as in:

 

1♦ - 1♠

2♥ - 3♥

4x - 4♠

 

and

 

1♦ - 1♠

2♥ - 3♦

3 or 4 x - 4♥

 

The 1st is clearly KB. If responder wanted to offer spades, then responder should not raise hearts.

 

The 2nd conceivably could be an offer to play, or even a cue, but sensibly it should also be KB.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

As mike said, after the 2H Reverse , just agree ♦ with a forcing 3D bid.

 

And since agreement is BELOW the 4-level, I would use 4D! as Minorwood RKC .

[ This avoids confusion even in Phil's 2nd example ].

 

If ♦ suit agreement were ON the 4-level, then 4H would be kickback.

 

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

When ♥ are agreed, I prefer 4S-kickback if no confusion.

 

But in the following auction:

1S - 2H

3H - 3S .... this shows a double-fit ( 3S is support - - not a cue for ♥ )

 

Now, I would think only use 4NT as RKC and 6 Ace at that ( which would include the ♠ Q but not the ♥ Q in the replies ... The ♥ Q can be included in the Specific King Ask - 5NT if it gets that far ) .

[chasetb]

While I play Precision with my partner, we do use Kickback. The one big rule we use is: "Set trump before using Kickback". A corollary to that is "If it could be natural (or a splinter), it is". Here 4♥ is a weak distributional hand, to play IMO. Just set trump with 3♦ (hopefully playing Ingberman or lebensohl over reverses), and then 4♥ is Kickback. A partnership agreement that also helps is after trump is set, we save 4x+1 for Kickback use only, so it can never be misconstrued as a cuebid, even though we rarely cuebid.

[fromageGB]

I play a variety of kickback with a couple of partners, and reverses don't come into it. There are a simple couple of meta-rules.

 

1) If ace asking could be ambiguous, then if there is room, clarify the suit before ace asking.

For example, in this case of 1♦ 1♠ 2♥, then - as has already been said - bidding a forcing 3♦ sets the suit, then 4♥ asks for aces. If 3♦ was not forcing, then bidding 4th suit forcing then 4♥ is ace asking in diamonds. Because the room is there to do this, 1♦ 1♠ 2♥ 4♥ is unambiguously a natural game sign off.

 

2) If a bid can be ace asking then it is ace asking.

Rule 1 is more important than rule 2. But rule 2 implies that when there is no room for a forcing bid to clarify the situation, it is ace asking. A simple unscientific example could be 1♠ 2♥ 3♦ 3♥ 4♦ 4♥? where this is ace asking in diamonds. If you wanted to bid 4♥ to play, then hard luck - the meta-agreement says it is ace asking. If I really wanted to play in hearts with this sequence I would have to bid 4♠ over 4♦ - the meta-rule says this is ace asking in hearts - then drop out in 5♥.

[fromageGB]

<snip>A corollary to that is "If it could be natural (or a splinter), it is". </endsnip>

 

<snip> If a bid can be ace asking then it is ace asking. </endsnip>

 

Interestingly, these are diametrically opposite. The moral of the story is that if you want to play kickback you had better have firm agreements !

[fromageGB]

<snip>

1♦ - 1♠

2♥ - 3♦

3 or 4 x - 4♥

...

The 2nd conceivably could be an offer to play, or even a cue, but sensibly it should also be KB.

 

By my agreements, 4♥ is unambiguously ace asking in diamonds. You have on the previous round agreed diamonds (presumably in a forcing situation). I would take the "3x" as a stop for no trump purposes, and a "4x" as a cue, but either way 4♥ is an ace ask.

[aguahombre]

Since the Jump to 3NT is (in our world) 11-13 and 3-level bids are all natural and forcing, I don't see the need for 4M, 4m, or 4N to mean anything truly natural. I also don't see the need for 4x+1 to be kickback, since we can set trump at the 3-level.

 

If we didn't have Leben, which IMO is a must, the above would be all different.

[Cascade]

It seems easy to agree a suit and then bid kickback later. So there is no need for ambiguity in immediate jumps to the four level.

[Trinidad]

You are correct that a jump to 4♥ on this auction would not be kickback. But then again, a jump to 4NT on this auction is not RKCB...

 

Rik

[aguahombre]

You are correct that a jump to 4♥ on this auction would not be kickback. But then again, a jump to 4NT on this auction is not RKCB...

Nor is it quantitative. A responder too strong for a 3NT jump can bid 2NT and observe whether opener shows a minimum reverse.

[Trinidad]

You are correct that a jump to 4♥ on this auction would not be kickback. But then again, a jump to 4NT on this auction is not RKCB...

Nor is it quantitative. A responder too strong for a 3NT jump can bid 2NT and observe whether opener shows a minimum reverse.

How does opener show a minimum reverse? By passing 2NT?

 

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

How does opener show a minimum reverse? By passing 2NT?

 

Rik

Exactly, a lot of people seem to play their reverses forcing to game, I certainly don't, and people are suggesting that lots of bids are forcing that I don't think are. 17 opposite a misfitting 5 or 6 will be in game an awful lot of the time if all these bids are forcing.

[Zelandakh]

I think it is simplest when playing Kickback to agree that any bid is natural if it is logical for it to be so. As has been pointed out it is possible to make a natural (or transfer) forcing bid on this hand and then ask later. On this hand, if all was required is to key card in diamonds then bidding 4D is possible. Then Opener bids 4H to decline a slam try or gives key card responses (4S up) to accept. After 4H then 4S is key card. Alternatively Responder can bid 3D (or 3C transfer) and then key card later. On other auctions the latter approach is not always available leaving only the former.

 

@fromageGB, on your given auction would you lose alot by using 4H as natural and 4S as RKCB for diamonds? Obviously clarity is good but I think you could easily tweak the wording of the meta-agreement to be more effective overall.

[aguahombre]

How does opener show a minimum reverse? By passing 2NT?

 

Rik

Normally by bidding 3C; or by agreement 3D if they cannot handle 3C being passed if responder has 4-2-1-6 or somesuch. I earlier stated Leben was a "must", but those who don't use it should ignore the concept I was expressing. Apparently you overlooked that.

[Free]

This pair do not play Kickback (it was a pickup partnership), but it occurred to me that it's a sequence that must bother Kickback players a lot. In theory 4♥ would be Kickback, setting ♦ as trumps. Or would it be natural, to play? And what about 4♠? Kickback for ♥, or natural?

This sequence doesn't bother me at all since we can easily set each suit as trumps (except ♣). Jumps to 4-level are in no way Kickback, otherwise you're just a beginner playing with toys for big boys...

[JLOGIC]

Why does the logic "you can set trumps before bidding keycard" apply, but the logic "you can just rebid your suit before jumping to 4" does not?

[nigel_k]

Why does the logic "you can set trumps before bidding keycard" apply, but the logic "you can just rebid your suit before jumping to 4" does not?

Exactly right. You need firm rules about Kickback. There are situations where you can get by hoping that partner agrees with you about what is logical, but Kickback is not one of those.

 

One of the rules should be that there can only be one trump suit, and therefore only one Kickback bid. Just playing ordinary RKCB I would treat 4NT here as agreeing diamonds (or possibly quantitative) since the 2♥ bid may not be a real suit. So 4♥ is Kickback for diamonds and others are natural.

[fromageGB]

@fromageGB, on your given auction would you lose alot by using 4H as natural and 4S as RKCB for diamonds? Obviously clarity is good but I think you could easily tweak the wording of the meta-agreement to be more effective overall.

Well, if you did change the agreement so that a possibly ambiguous bid was natural, rather than kickback, and use a higher bid for ace asking, you lose the space that kickback gives. Without that space, we cannot show all aces and trump queen yet still stop at 5♦, and when your next bid is one level up to ask for specific kings, there is no room to show them precisely and stop at 6♦. So you would need some sort of condensed responses that would not cater for all circumstances, and, importantly, take more memory.

 

Of course, in my hypothetical sequence, you could not have 4♠ as ace asking in diamonds anyway, as this is kickback for my heart suit.

 

In practice, I have been playing it for years and not yet had any situation where I regret the metarule no 2 that "if it could be ace asking, then it is".

[Free]

Why does the logic "you can set trumps before bidding keycard" apply, but the logic "you can just rebid your suit before jumping to 4" does not?

Because with good hands you want to be able to go slow, and preferably show the difference to partner. With weak hands you want to hide as much information as possible, so you would prefer to jump. The principle of fast arrival.

 

For example, holding a minimum hand without slam interest but with 4♥, I would rather bid 4♥ denying any slam interest, than having to bid 3♥, letting partner pattern out or cuebid, and rebid 4♥ after that. It will be clear that I don't have slam interest, but perhaps we already gave away the best lead to opps by letting opener bid again. When I'm strong, the extra information we give away doesn't matter that much imo, because usually we'll play slam and control all suits anyway.

[fromageGB]

It's not easy, and not only do you need rules, but you need to be on the same wavelength as well.

 

1♦ 1♠ 2♥ 4♥ seems right as natural (fast arrival as Free says), and you have no problems agreeing diamonds first if you wanted it to be ace asking - you bid 3♦ then 4♥.

 

But 1♠ 2♥ 3♦ 4♥ - again a jump to the 4 level - has to be ace asking in diamonds, not natural. This time there is no room to agree diamonds first, so (rule 2) "if it can be ace asking, it is". In this sequence, there IS room (playing 2/1 GF) to bid 3♥ then 4♥ if you want to play in hearts.