Opinion: Blackwood or not?

[inquiry]

Here is a simple, everyday kind of auction. I wonder how well players agree on this. Fee free to defend your answer (could have used fourth suit forcing..so it must be _____, or so on).

 

1♦ - 1♥

1♠ - 4NT

 

What does 4NT show/ask?

[pclayton]

The only 4 ace blackwood I use is after 1x - 4N. Might be sensible to play it as 4 ace in this sequence too, or even kc for hearts; just a function of agreement.

 

However, I'm leery about creating too many 'special' key card auctions.

[inquiry]

The only 4 ace blackwood I use is after 1x - 4N. Might be sensible to play it as 4 ace in this sequence too, or even kc for hearts; just a function of agreement.

 

However, I'm leery about creating too many 'special' key card auctions.

So how did you vote?

[joker_gib]

I can show fit via 4th suit or cue bid so for me this is a simple blackwood for aces :)

[pclayton]

The only 4 ace blackwood I use is after 1x - 4N. Might be sensible to play it as 4 ace in this sequence too, or even kc for hearts; just a function of agreement.

 

However, I'm leery about creating too many 'special' key card auctions.

So how did you vote?

I voted for KC of spades without a lot of conviction.

[joker_gib]

I voted for KC of spades without a lot of conviction.

Same for me as I don't really like those kind of straightforward actions ! :)

[HeartA]

RKC for Spades.

[mr1303]

Doesn't exist :)

But if partner pulled that randomly on me I'd assume Key card for spades.

[inquiry]

Doesn't exist :)

But if partner pulled that randomly on me I'd assume Key card for spades.

Why doesn't it exist, I mean, you can define it as anything you want, anything. Surely it must serve some useful function. I think all bids should exist... and when you don't use them, you eliminate one type of hand (ro another).

[pclayton]

Doesn't exist  :)

But if partner pulled that randomly on me I'd assume Key card for spades.

Why doesn't it exist, I mean, you can define it as anything you want, anything. Surely it must serve some useful function. I think all bids should exist... and when you don't use them, you eliminate one type of hand (ro another).

Heh; I'm like you Ben, a systems nut.

 

I have a new approach, however. When we are making up a new sequence, frequently, we assign to a certain call: DOES NOT EXIST.

 

Aside from the intellectual exercise, we have decided that its better to assign 'no meaning' to a bid, than to assign a meaning and have something come up every 10 years ago that we rate to forget.

 

The subject sequence hardly qualifies however.

[Free]

RKC ♠, don't see any other reasonable meaning to this crazy bid :)

[EricK]

I have no doubt that this should be quantitative.

 

I can't imagine a hand which wats to ask for just Aces now but didn't on the first round

 

I can't see why I can't agree ♠ or ♦ or ♥ via a FSF auction

 

However, how else can I show the quantitative hand?

 

If I bid FSF and partner obliges with a NT bid then I can raise quantitatively. But if he bids a suit (♦, ♥, or ♠), especially with a jump, then my subsequent 4NT bid is surely RKB for that suit.

 

Eric

[Guest Jlall]

you can easily show a quantitative hand via FSF if you wanted to...

 

1D 1H

1S 2C

2x 2N

3x 4N

[EricK]

you can easily show a quantitative hand via FSF if you wanted to...

 

1D 1H

1S 2C

2x 2N

3x 4N

And if partner jumps to 3x?

 

Eric

[Guest Jlall]

then you can bid keycard because partner has a maximum and u had a quantitative 4N bid. Not even just a max, but significant extras

[the hog]

KC for S. Simple rule, if pd bids 4N without having gone through 4sf, 4N is KC for the last bid suit.

[EricK]

then you can bid keycard because partner has a maximum and u had a quantitative 4N bid. Not even just a max, but significant extras

If you are playing FSF as GF, partner does not need significant extras to jump the bidding. So if you happen to be missing two Aces, you won't be able to sign off in 5NT.

 

Also, if the bidding were to start 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ 2♦, opener's 3♣ rebid wouldn't even be a jump.

 

Nobody has yet explained why we might need to Keycard for ♠ straight away, instead of agreeing the suit first.

 

Eric

[the hog]

Nobody has yet explained why we might need to Keycard for ♠ straight away, instead of agreeing the suit first.

 

 

While I agree with your comment Eric, is not KC the easiest auction on

 

Kxxx AKQJxx x Ax

[Guest Jlall]

of course he would need significant extras to jump if fsf is GF. Jumps in game forcing auctions are descriptive and pretty rare. There would be no reason for him to jump willy nilly.

[Flame]

I would make it 5 aces for spade, not because its best but because i have limited memory and cant remember different meaning for any sequence possible.

[Fluffy]

It is possible to shwo a quantitative after 4SF, but it is also possible, and IMo even easier to show a GF with ♠ support, that is what would let me think about a quantitative one, but still the argument is quite weak to counter the standard meaning: RKCB in ♠.

[EricK]

of course he would need significant extras to jump if fsf is GF. Jumps in game forcing auctions are descriptive and pretty rare. There would be no reason for him to jump willy nilly.

Not at all.

 

In a GF FSF auction, partner will bid your suit at the 2 level with a doubleton honour in a 5422 hand, and will jump with 3 card support. That is the extra description required by the jump and it is not based on strength (in this instance).

 

Eric

[EricK]

Nobody has yet explained why we might need to Keycard for ♠ straight away, instead of agreeing the suit first.

 

 

While I agree with your comment Eric, is not KC the easiest auction on

 

Kxxx AKQJxx x Ax

It's certainly easy. What do you do if partner shows 0 keycards? If partners spades are weak, this hand will likely play better in ♥ (discarding your spade losers on dummy's minor suits). Can you systemically bail out in 5♥?

 

I accept that most "random" partners would take this as KC for ♠, but I have never held a hand whcih could accurately determine the correct contract simply by bidding RKC after partner has bid a couple of suits at the one level. Maybe such hands exist but they are as "rare as rocking horse manure", and can probably be bid other ways anyway.

 

I think most good players would agree that Blackwood is vastly over-used and over-rated. I am surprised that so many of them seem to want to use it in this sort of auction.

 

Eric

[cooee]

Hi

I think it is a natural bid asking pd to bid slam NT if strong enough.

No trump suit had been decided so it cannot be Blackwood can it ?

Cooee

[Guest Jlall]

with 3 card support partner will bid 2, and later bid 3 over whatever you bid.