Why did my partner cue bid diamonds here?

[jillybean]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sj85hq52da84caqj6&w=s6hakt3dk762ck752&e=s4h876dqjt953c984&s=sakqt9732hj94dct3]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♣    Pass  1♠

 Dbl   1NT   2♦    3♦

 Pass  3NT   Pass  4♠

 Pass  Pass  Pass  

 

Hi,

Confused again, playing with pick up partner (expert). 3♦ alerted and explained as "cue". (from review of movie afterwards).

Should I have bid 4♣ ?

 

tyia

jillybean

[jtfanclub]

Confused again, playing with pick up partner (expert). 3♦ alerted and explained as "cue". (from review of movie afterwards).

Should I have bid 4♣ ?

Yes. Your partner's looking for slam, and needs to know where your stoppers are. So 4♣, showing a club stop but not a heart stop (you'd have bid the hearts first since they're cheaper), would show your hand perfectly.

 

I made up a name for what your partner was doing- I call it a "courtesy" slam try. He didn't seriously expect that you have slam, but he decided to show his hand fully just in case you had a better hand than you showed (say, AKxx in hearts and clubs). Probably no matter what you said, he was going to bid 4♠, and he'd trust you to bid on if your hand looked slammish.

 

Just my opinion- I'm certainly no expert.

[the hog]

Jilly your partner has a huge hand opposite your opening bid - 8 tricks in her own hand. She was hardly making a so called courtesy cue, this was a genuine slam try. This hand opposite gives you a finesse for 6S

xx

ATx

xxx

AKxx

 

Anything better and 6 is in the refrigerator.

 

A better bid than 3D woud have been 4D which many people play as an "auto splinter". Yes you should definitely have cue bid. Never mind you got to to a good contract.

 

Ron

[jillybean]

My 1nt rebid has shown a min 2♠, do I assume we are going to play in ♠?

If my partner had used "auto splinter", without other controls I could then sign off in 4♠?

 

thanks

[the hog]

My 1nt rebid has shown a min 2♠, do I assume we are going to play in ♠?

If my partner had used "auto splinter", without other controls I could then sign off in 4♠?

 

thanks

Yes that's right. If he bid 4D he would be showing a very good 6+S suit and a singleton or D void. You could easily bid 4S with xx.

 

Ron

[Flame]

Partner's 3d isnt a control showing cue bid, 3d and then 4sp showed you he had more then just a 4sp bid or else he would have just bid 4sp imidietly, bididng cue and only later 4sp showing you he is thinking of more then 4sp.

Now its your time to evaluate your hand.

No you shouldnt have bid 4c on 3d, your partner's 3d isnt showing a long spade suit, just showing strong hand for now, you should have bid 3sp since you already showed you dont have 4 card support now ur 3sp would show 3 card suit.

The bidding should continue

3D-3S

4D - 4S

 

4D after you have agreed on spade is now a cue bid showing a control in diamond and luck of control in club, 4sp show you dont have a control in heart, how partner lucking a control in his hand easily pass 4sp.

[jtfanclub]

Partner's 3d isnt a control showing cue bid, 3d and then 4sp showed you he had more then just a 4sp bid or else he would have just bid 4sp imidietly, bididng cue and only later 4sp showing you he is thinking of more then 4sp.

 

That's what makes it a courtesy slam try...in a normal slam try, partner asks you for information so he can place the contract. This time, he's going to describe his hand to you so you can place the contract.

 

No you shouldnt have bid 4c on 3d, your partner's 3d isnt showing a long spade suit, just showing strong hand for now, you should have bid 3sp since you already showed you dont have 4 card support now ur 3sp would show 3 card suit.

 

Flame's smarter than me, but I still disagree. 4 clubs says you have a club stop AND spades. By going past 3NT, you've agreed that you don't want to play in NT. Therefore you have spades. If you had club stops but two or fewer spades, 3NT would be the obvious bid.

 

4D after you have agreed on spade is now a cue bid showing a control in diamond and luck of control in club, 4sp show you dont have a control in heart, how partner lucking a control in his hand easily pass 4sp.

 

I would play a 4D after we agree on spades to show a control in diamonds, a lack of control in clubs, and a control in hearts. 4 clubs would show clubs but not hearts, 4 spades would show a lack in both clubs and hearts. The real point is, it's dangerous for your partner to assume you'll read 4 diamonds correctly.

[Flame]

Partner's 3d isnt a control showing cue bid, 3d and then 4sp showed you he had more then just a 4sp bid or else he would have just bid 4sp imidietly, bididng cue and only later 4sp showing you he is thinking of more then 4sp.

 

That's what makes it a courtesy slam try...in a normal slam try, partner asks you for information so he can place the contract. This time, he's going to describe his hand to you so you can place the contract.

 

No you shouldnt have bid 4c on 3d, your partner's 3d isnt showing a long spade suit, just showing strong hand for now, you should have bid 3sp since you already showed you dont have 4 card support now ur 3sp would show 3 card suit.

 

Flame's smarter than me, but I still disagree. 4 clubs says you have a club stop AND spades. By going past 3NT, you've agreed that you don't want to play in NT. Therefore you have spades. If you had club stops but two or fewer spades, 3NT would be the obvious bid.

 

4D after you have agreed on spade is now a cue bid showing a control in diamond and luck of control in club, 4sp show you dont have a control in heart, how partner lucking a control in his hand easily pass 4sp.

 

I would play a 4D after we agree on spades to show a control in diamonds, a lack of control in clubs, and a control in hearts. 4 clubs would show clubs but not hearts, 4 spades would show a lack in both clubs and hearts. The real point is, it's dangerous for your partner to assume you'll read 4 diamonds correctly.

Didnt understand your first point, partner bid 3d this is a general bid showing a good hand especially if you're playing with a pickup partner dont assume anything just bid what you have stay flexiable.

Second point, maybe im an old-fashion bridge player but for me showign stops almost always happend below 3nt, with the intention to play 3nt when we have all suits stoped and go for a suit game when we dont, i dont play 4c to show a stop when we are already above 3nt. again dont expect a pickup partner to ever think 4c is stoper showing.

Third point - i mention a normal italian cue bid style, maybe ur style is supirior but its only better when your partner know what you're doing, and again if you want partner to know what you do you better play standard systems even if you think you have better onse. I dont undersand the logic behind your system, how will you bid when you have diamonds but not clubs or heart control ?

Maybe you suggest all this because you believe partner's 3sp show lack of heart control, if this was true then 4d was showing heart +diamond but not club, but here a 3h wouldnt be a cue bid, 3sp didnt show lack of heart control, it was just a simple bridge to show 3 card support.

[jtfanclub]

Second point, maybe im an old-fashion bridge player but for me showign stops almost always happend below 3nt, with the intention to play 3nt when we have all suits stoped and go for a suit game when we dont, i dont play 4c to show a stop when we are already above 3nt. again dont expect a pickup partner to ever think 4c is stoper showing.

 

Interesting. So what hand would you have to bid 4c?

 

Maybe you suggest all this because you believe partner's 3sp show lack of heart control, if this was true then 4d was showing heart +diamond but not club, but here a 3h wouldnt be a cue bid, 3sp didnt show lack of heart control, it was just a simple bridge to show 3 card support.

 

That is what I believe, you're right. More specifically, I believe that 3D asks for controls, so any bid above 3H denies a heart stopper.

[Flame]

 

Second point, maybe im an old-fashion bridge player but for me showign stops almost always happend below 3nt, with the intention to play 3nt when we have all suits stoped and go for a suit game when we dont, i dont play 4c to show a stop when we are already above 3nt. again dont expect a pickup partner to ever think 4c is stoper showing.

 

Interesting. So what hand would you have to bid 4c?

 

Maybe you suggest all this because you believe partner's 3sp show lack of heart control, if this was true then 4d was showing heart +diamond but not club, but here a 3h wouldnt be a cue bid, 3sp didnt show lack of heart control, it was just a simple bridge to show 3 card support.

 

That is what I believe, you're right. More specifically, I believe that 3D asks for controls, so any bid above 3H denies a heart stopper.

 

 

Stopers and controlls arent the same, Q10x is a stoper but isnt a control, same as J10xx.

Some bids when you look for NT you bid your stopers, other bids after you have raized and you think of slam, you talk about controls.

Now after this general 3D bid you dont know if you have a fit or not, if you bid 3h i would think of it as a stoper not a control.

True this all could be played differenly but again dont assume anything when you arent with your regular pd in a sequence you have discussed before, even if you play vs someone very smart just like you, that can make the needed calculation and understand that 3h is now showing control and spade fit, even then he will not know that you also know this and assume you dont. Trust me and my many many bridge playing years, simple is not stupid, simple is gold in bridge.

About 4C, i would say no such bid.

[EricK]

Partner's 3♦ shows a big hand certainly. Whether it says much else about his hand I can't say.

 

I would have rebid 3♠ with your hand to let him know about the ♠ support. Then, if he were to rebid 4♦ that would be a clear-cut cue-bid. After which you can sign off in 4♠ ( not having a heart control ).

 

This hand is much easier if partner simply bids the obvious 2♠ on the first round. But I understand that pre-empting partner with weak jump shifts is all the range these days.

 

Eric

[HeartA]

Agree with Eric.

[paulg]

As we've often seen over the past two weeks, players often take different actions from the Vugraph commentators as they cannot see all four hands. I wonder whether we'd have seen different answers here if you had just posed the single hand problem?

 

I think this is a difficult problem for North as you are not allowed to bid both 3♠ and 3NT. Clearly partner's 3♦ shows a game forcing hand, but as you've only implied a club stop I see no reason why this shouldn't be asking for a diamond stop. How else would partner bid with ♠AKxx ♥AKx ♦xxx ♣xxx ? And he'd just love to hear 4♣ now :D

 

The problem is whether to show the stop or 3-card spade support.

 

I'd probably bid 3♠ but would never call 3NT wrong. The advantage of 3♠ is that partner can bid 3NT implying doubt. I wouldn't have considered 4♣ at the table but it may have some merit. All routes should lead to 4♠.

 

Paul

[Flame]

Yes you have a point, but first usually to show 3 card support come before showing a stop, and second the 1nt already showed (or atleast almost did) a diamond stop since the double already showed diamonds.

[jtfanclub]

How else would partner bid with ♠AKxx ♥AKx ♦xxx ♣xxx ?

If he's my partner, he'd better bloody well double. If we can make 3NT, we can crunch this good. If we can't make 3NT (such as if don't have a diamond stopper), 2DX is by far the preferable contract. This is IMPs- you don't leave an opportunity like this lying around because you're afraid you might only make 500 instead of 6.

 

Besides, do you really want to end up at 3NT across the hand she actually had...without one of the queens? That still fits her bidding, and 2DX is still going down hard.

[paulg]

How else would partner bid with ♠AKxx ♥AKx ♦xxx ♣xxx ?

If he's my partner, he'd better bloody well double. If we can make 3NT, we can crunch this good. If we can't make 3NT (such as if don't have a diamond stopper), 2DX is by far the preferable contract. ...

My expert partner would double too.

 

However I'm very happy to play with beginners and intermediates who do not double when its meaning is unclear to them.

 

p

[the hog]

This is amusing!

[luke warm]

If he's my partner, he'd better bloody well double.

i've played bridge for a very long time and i honestly can't recall even *thinking* such a thing, much less actually saying it

 

i suppose if one bids perfectly all the time it's ok to say what partner *bloody well* should do... however, reverse it... say you make a bidding error and partner says this to/about your bid... wouldn't it then sound a tad condescending, arrogant even?

[jtfanclub]

If he's my partner, he'd better bloody well double.

i've played bridge for a very long time and i honestly can't recall even *thinking* such a thing, much less actually saying it

If my partner makes a mistake, I don't have a problem with it. If he's a casual partner or or sub or whatever, that's fine. If it's a beginner, well, I'm not in the teaching business, and I'm not going to contradict whoever is teaching them.

 

But if a regular partner of mine insists that anything other than double is the right bid, I don't want to play with them. It's like opening 1♠ with 11-15 HCP and 5 hearts (and no spade suit). I'm not saying it's a bad system.

 

It's simply not a system I wish to play.

 

If that's arrogant, so be it.

[Flame]

OK but what if partner has more offensive hand like:

Axxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

Does he still double 2D ?

[jtfanclub]

OK but what if partner has more offensive hand like:

Axxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

Does he still double 2D ?

Given the vulnerability and scoring, I think under normal bidding it's a 3♣ bid. It's a guaranteed fit (partner opened 1♣), invitational but not forcing...partner has enough information now to determine where the hand should go.

 

This is a close call between 3♣ and X for me. The long clubs imply that we may have fewer club tricks than we think- we may have a 10 card club fit, for example. If we do, that makes for a dangerous X. So I guess it isn't a close call for me after all- it's 3♣.

 

What it is not is a 3D bid. You don't have a hand capable of a game-forcing bid, and you don't have much in extras. If partner doesn't have a real diamond stop, 3♣ is the limit of the hand.

 

Remember, the guy bidding 3♦ isn't one of the beginners and intermediates who do not double when its meaning is unclear to them.. This is the expert choosing 3♦ over pass, X, 2♠, 2NT, and 3♣.

[Flame]

OK but what if partner has more offensive hand like:

Axxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

Does he still double 2D ?

Given the vulnerability and scoring, I think under normal bidding it's a 3♣ bid. It's a guaranteed fit (partner opened 1♣), invitational but not forcing...partner has enough information now to determine where the hand should go.

 

This is a close call between 3♣ and X for me. The long clubs imply that we may have fewer club tricks than we think- we may have a 10 card club fit, for example. If we do, that makes for a dangerous X. So I guess it isn't a close call for me after all- it's 3♣.

 

What it is not is a 3D bid. You don't have a hand capable of a game-forcing bid, and you don't have much in extras. If partner doesn't have a real diamond stop, 3♣ is the limit of the hand.

 

Remember, the guy bidding 3♦ isn't one of the beginners and intermediates who do not double when its meaning is unclear to them.. This is the expert choosing 3♦ over pass, X, 2♠, 2NT, and 3♣.

You are avoiding the problem, so you treat this as inv and not rnough for game, i could argue with you but why should i lets just add a bit so u will have a GF

AQxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

now what ?

btw jtfanclub im curios for how long do you play bridge ?

[jtfanclub]

You are avoiding the problem, so you treat this as inv and not rnough for game, i could argue with you but why should i lets just add a bit so u will have a GF

AQxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

now what ?

btw jtfanclub im curios for how long do you play bridge ?

Now a 3♦ bid is reasonable. But now, you'll notice, the last thing you want is some sort of ambiguous 3♠ call. 4♣ works fine- you'll end up in 5 or 6. So does 3NT. But 3♠ doesn't tell you anything you wanted to know about.

 

I've been playing for 23 years, and I'm still an Intermediate. Slow learner, I guess.

[Flame]

You are avoiding the problem, so you treat this as inv and not rnough for game, i could argue with you but why should i lets just add a bit so u will have a GF

AQxx

Ax

xx

Kxxxx

now what ?

btw jtfanclub im curios for how long do you play bridge ?

Now a 3♦ bid is reasonable. But now, you'll notice, the last thing you want is some sort of ambiguous 3♠ call. 4♣ works fine- you'll end up in 5 or 6. So does 3NT. But 3♠ doesn't tell you anything you wanted to know about.

 

I've been playing for 23 years, and I'm still an Intermediate. Slow learner, I guess.

3sp isnt ambigious its simply showing 3 cards spade and does so below 3nt so we can still play there if we got no fit.

I am very surprise to see you are playing bridge for 23 years.

I thought you are younger then 23 years old, a new player.

You say you're a slow learner so let me tell you one thing and pls dont be offended, you are oviously a smart guy, and lpaying bridge for a long time, i can think of just one resson why you arent an expert, and this resson is you do not open your mind enough, not a good listener, you should try to learn from others, even if someone is 99% wrong try and look at he 1% where he is right and learn from it, i suspect today you are more or less doign the opposite, you look for the 1% wrong.

Hope you take it for the good as i ment it.

[jtfanclub]

3sp isnt ambigious its simply showing 3 cards spade and does so below 3nt so we can still play there if we got no fit.

 

Should be fun. I forget, why do you think you don't have a club fit?

 

You say you're a slow learner so let me tell you one thing and pls dont be offended, you are oviously a smart guy, and lpaying bridge for a long time, i can think of just one resson why you arent an expert, and this resson is you do not open your mind enough, not a good listener, you should try to learn from others, even if someone is 99% wrong try and look at he 1% where he is right and learn from it, i suspect today you are more or less doign the opposite, you look for the 1% wrong.

 

There's a number of reasons:

1. I didn't take the game seriously until a year ago.

2. I play in the U.S., which retards my ability to learn defenses against some of the more unusual systems.

3. I'm in no hurry. I would rather not learn ten right things than learn one wrong thing. This is how I learn new things- I take an idea, and worry it in my teeth until its neck snaps. If it doesn't, then I adopt it, and only then. Unlearning is a pain in the glutes.

4. I am, in my opinion, more aware of my weaknesses than the average person here.

 

Hope you take it for the good as i ment it.

 

I'm not offended, but you don't even know my full name, you've never seen me play with a regular partner, you've never even spoken to me in real life. All you know about me is what you've seen on some message board.

 

If you think you can figure me, or anybody else, out so easily you're sorely mistaken.