Partner make 1 slam try and stop.

[benlessard]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakt3haj62daq4cj2&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1hp4hp5cp5dp5hp]133|200[/hv]

 

4H is balanced or 2452.

[mike777]

pass I could not have a worse hand.

 

I made what 2 slam trys? does pard really think I have nothing in spades?

for some reason pard did not bid rkc but chooses to make a confusing slam try cue bid.

 

------

 

 

I beg of you partner please stop with these 5 level cuebids or 4 level above kickback, over and over and over again....lets just play rkc, kickback.

 

 

I can live with one or two..but not always....

[Antrax]

Isn't it possible partner has a void? Possibly in diamonds so the cue bid was bad news?

[mike777]

Isn't it possible partner has a void? Possibly in diamonds so the cue bid was bad news?

 

 

if pard is void in d why not pass 4h.

anyway pass 5h.

[Trinidad]

The meaning of the auction after 4♥:

5♣: "Partner, I am interested in slam, I have a club control, but I have a leak in spades."

    5♦: "I want to cooperate in your slam try because I have spades controlled."

5♥: "We seem to have a leak in the diamond suit."

 

The continuation should be:

    5♠: "No, we don't have a leak in diamonds. As a matter of fact -when it comes to controls in the side suits- a grand might still be there. I have first round control in spades, and -since I am probing for a grand- must have first round control in diamonds. However, I don't know whether we will have 13 tricks (I have already limited my hand so you should be able to tell that) and I don't know whether you have first round control in clubs."

 

Rik

[mike777]

The meaning of the auction after 4♥:

5♣: "Partner, I am interested in slam, I have a club control, but I have a leak in spades."

    5♦: "I want to cooperate in your slam try because I have spades controlled."

5♥: "We seem to have a leak in the diamond suit."

 

The continuation should be:

    5♠: "No, we don't have a leak in diamonds. As a matter of fact -when it comes to controls in the side suits- a grand might still be there. I have first round control in spades, and -since I am probing for a grand- must have first round control in diamonds. However, I don't know whether we will have 13 tricks (I have already limited my hand so you should be able to tell that) and I don't know whether you have first round control in clubs."

 

Rik

 

 

so per you what does 5h say....over 5d...geez complicated who is saying all these bids, complicated

 

 

 

at this point we may be missing a of c and kq of trumps.

[PhilKing]

My experience is that a 4432 19 count is a raise to three. And that way 4♥ is unambiguous.

 

As bid, the decision is really close, but I will guess to pass. How dare partner ask me to use my judgment rather than mindlessly invoke RKCB!

[bigbenvic]

for me and my partner, this auction would show doubts about the spade suit. His cue then 5h after my cue suggests a hand with xx or xxx in spades.

 

As I have AK I bid 6h. If I was unbalanced say AK AJxx AQJTx xx I would bid 5S to try and find the perfect slam if pards had something like

xxx KQxxxx - AKxx which though a fantasy (ie perfect cards) is possible on the given bidding. However I'm not that strong and bidding slam does tell partner I have minimum for my 4h bid and the Ace of spades.

[Trinidad]

so per you what does 5h say....over 5d...geez complicated who is saying all these bids, complicated

I think I answered that already. It says: "I don't have a diamond control."

 

at this point we may be missing a of c and kq of trumps.

So partner made a slam try with 0 keycards (something like ♠QJ(x) ♥xxxx(x) ♦KJ(x) ♣KQ(x)), knowing that we have an 18-19 balanced? Do you believe that?

 

We have limited our hand accurately. That means that if partners makes a slam try, he expects that we have 12 tricks. He is not inviting slam as in "Go to slam if you are MAX, stop short if you are MIN.". The 12 tricks are there. He just doesn't know whether the opponents can take 2 tricks before we have our 12. So he needs to check on controls.

 

He obviously can't go Blackwooding since he lacks control of the spade suit. For the same reason, he can't bid 4♠. So, the only thing he can do is start to cue 5♣. At this point, we know that we should be in slam. Partner sees 12 tricks, we see the controls in diamonds and spades that he is looking for.

 

This means that -at the time- our 5♦ bid is not very helpful to him: At that point he knows that we have spades controlled, but he expects that diamonds will be a problem and bids 5♥. So, he doesn't have the ♦K, otherwise he would have gone to slam.

 

We know that we wanted to be in slam as soon as partner bid 5♣. So we make sure we get there. If we bid 5♠ now, we show first round control in spades and diamonds. Then it is up to partner to tell whether he see 13 tricks.

 

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

My experience is that a 4432 19 count is a raise to three. And that way 4♥ is unambiguous.

 

As bid, the decision is really close, but I will guess to pass. How dare partner ask me to use my judgment rather than mindlessly invoke RKCB!

We use the 3N rebid for this sort of thing where we have a big hand with <5 diamonds and 4 hearts.

[PhilKing]

We use the 3N rebid for this sort of thing where we have a big hand with <5 diamonds and 4 hearts.

 

It's difficult to play in 3♥ that way.

[Cyberyeti]

It's difficult to play in 3♥ that way.

True, but if you're going to force to game, doing it in such a way that you have a load of 4 level cues available must be better than 4♥.

[benlessard]

Playing kickback you still would make a 5C cue. Partner 5D wasnt a denial in D since since when you bypass RKC there is good chance of voids somewhere so using 5D as value there and confirm controls in the bypass suits make a lot of sense But i agree with trinidad that usually 5D is i have the S control but im not sure or ive got the S control and lack the D control. We dont respond as light as many players and we were in Imps so only a few 18 bal would be 3H bid.

 

In general me and my partner have no problems RKC instead of cuebidding and losing the 2 first trick if they find the lead if we feel that cuebidding will not solve all our problems. So here you can be sure that either hes got a D void either hes got another reason for believing RKC will not work so well.

 

In my favorite universe 2S (cheapest J-Shift or cheapesrt reverse would be artificial) and all others bid would be fairly precise. I so i agree that bidding 4H with many hands and 3H INV rather than forcing is a terrible method.

[Free]

Passing is beyond my comprehension. Partner needs a ♠ control and perhaps one in ♦ as well, we have both Aces.

[Phil]

Partner is simply inviting slam and I would expect something like KQxxx of trump and the club Ace + a little more like a 6th trump or another minor suit honor.

 

Partner didnt key card because partner had no idea what to do over the right response.

 

How do we do opposite xxx KQxxx xx AQx? Not so hot although you might get a helpful opening lead.

 

Xx kqxxxx xx Axx? On a hook or magic spades.

 

xxx KQxxxx xx Ax. Blecch.

 

I pass.

 

P.S., using 4M to show a balanced 18-19 is one of the worst bids you can have in your arsenal.

[benlessard]

Responder hand was

 

J9xx

KQxxxx

--

Axx

 

6H is 50% while 6S is great on a non club lead and 50% on a club lead.

 

The hand could also be

 

Qxxx

KQxxxx

---

Kxx

 

where 6S is cold and 6H is 50%

 

VS

 

QJx

KQxxxx

---

Kxxx

 

6S is a lot better than 6H.

 

Once you think that responder is likely 4603,4504,3604 its clear that 5Nt PAS is a much better bid than 6H.

[Trinidad]

Why was responder stopping in 5♥ when he had first round control of diamonds? Didn't he understand that 5♦ showed control of the spade suit (rather than the diamond suit)?

 

Rik

[TWO4BRIDGE]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakt3haj62daq4cj2&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1hp4hp5cp5dp5hp]133|200[/hv]

Responder:

J 9 x x

K Q x x x x

void

A x x

 

Another way for Opener to show a GF hand is with the artificial 2S!-jump over the 1H response:

 

1D - 1H

2S! ( GF, may be artificial )

..... - 2NT! ( asks )

??

  3C! ( other minor ) = real Spades ( 4s ), no 3h

  3D = long Diam, no 4s, no 3h

  3H = 3h* , no 4s

  3S = 3h* AND 4s

 

After:

3S - 4S

4NT ( 6 Ace RKC )

..... - 5H ( 2 - ♠Q )

6S

________________________________________________________________________

* Can always show the 4th ♥ by bidding 4H if opener rebids 3NT

[benlessard]

Why was responder stopping in 5♥ when he had first round control of diamonds? Didn't he understand that 5♦ showed control of the spade suit (rather than the diamond suit)?

 

Rik

 

Because hes got a D void and vs AQJ or AKx of D hes doesnt want to play slam. Note that without the T of Spades its only a 27% slam so since youve got AQx vs a void passing 5H is certainly OK. I agree that using artificial methods is a lot better than standard for those hands.

[Trinidad]

Because hes got a D void and vs AQJ or AKx of D hes doesnt want to play slam. Note that without the T of Spades its only a 27% slam so since youve got AQx vs a void passing 5H is certainly OK. I agree that using artificial methods is a lot better than standard for those hands.

What is artificial about 5♦ showing spade control? How else are you supposed to show spade control when 5♣ says: "I want to go to slam, I don't have a spade control, but I have a club control."

 

5♦ showing spade control (and doubt about diamonds) is not artificial. I wouldn't even call it standard. It is simple bridge logic:

- Without a spade control you have to bid 5♥.

- With a spade control and a diamond control you bid higher than 5♥ (immediately, or after 5♦-5♥).

- That leaves 5♦ for the hands with a spade control and without a diamond control.

 

This "artifical method" is forced on you by the lack of bidding room. Other methods are not possible.

 

Rik

[gnasher]

This "artifical method" is forced on you by the lack of bidding room. Other methods are not possible.

 

That's not true. There are two possible ways to treat this sequence:

(1) The auction is solely a discussion of controls. We always get to slam when the controls are sufficient, and we always stay out of slam when the controls are deficient.

(2) The auction is a discussion of controls and suitability. We stay out of slam when the controls are sufficient but neither partner has enough to insist on slam. We occasionally reach slam when the controls are deficient but one partner has enough to insist on slam.

 

I understand why you prefer the certainty of (1) to the ambiguity of (2), but in this sequence where both hands can have a wide range of shapes it seems better to be playing (2).

[Trinidad]

That's not true. There are two possible ways to treat this sequence:

(1) The auction is solely a discussion of controls. We always get to slam when the controls are sufficient, and we always stay out of slam when the controls are deficient.

(2) The auction is a discussion of controls and suitability. We stay out of slam when the controls are sufficient but neither partner has enough to insist on slam. We occasionally reach slam when the controls are deficient but one partner has enough to insist on slam.

 

I understand why you prefer the certainty of (1) to the ambiguity of (2), but in this sequence where both hands can have a wide range of shapes it seems better to be playing (2).

I fully agree with your whole post, except for the last sentence (and the first ;)). Opener has accurately limited his hand in strength and distribution (18-19 hcp 2=4=4=3, 3=4=4=2, 4=4=3=2 or 2=4=5=2). That makes it clear that responder has decided to go to slam... unless there is a problem with the controls. Suitability doesn't come into play because responder has already decided that the hands were suitable for slam.

 

When both hands are unlimited then suitability should also be investigated (your approach 2). In an uncontested auction it should not be necessary to start doing that at the five level, though.

 

Rik

[gnasher]

I fully agree with your whole post, except for the last sentence (and the first ;)). Opener has accurately limited his hand in strength and distribution (18-19 hcp 2=4=4=3, 3=4=4=2, 4=4=3=2 or 2=4=5=2). That makes it clear that responder has decided to go to slam... unless there is a problem with the controls. Suitability doesn't come into play because responder has already decided that the hands were suitable for slam.

 

When both hands are unlimited then suitability should also be investigated (your approach 2).

 

I agree that he's accurately defined his distribution, but that doesn't help much when you're investigating slam (or anything else, in fact). What would help would be if he had precisely defined his distribution. A definition that varies from "4=4=3=2 and worth game" to "2=4=5=2 and worth game" isn't precise enough for investigating slam.

 

In an uncontested auction it should not be necessary to start doing that at the five level, though.

Obviously the methods are poor, but we should still try to answer the question that was asked.

[cherdano]

Rik - the number of hands lacking a control in two suits, where you can insist on slam if partner has a control in each of them, but can't use RKCB, seems very small. Much smaller than the number of hands that want to make some sort of invite.

(I could argue that any bid by responder has to be a natural (or otherwise shape-defining) slam try, and that no other method is possible. But I won't.)

[the hog]

Passing is beyond my comprehension. Partner needs a ♠ control and perhaps one in ♦ as well, we have both Aces.

 

I agree with Free; I cannot conceive of passing on this hand. Mike, rkcb is NOT a panacea for all bidding ills.