trump quality...

[Fluffy]

♠AKQ4

♥9653

♦J54

♣104

 

1♠-3♠

4♣-??

 

 

3♠ is a limit raise. 4♣ is a simple control, A, K, singleton or void.

[the hog]

Odd bid by pd without the Akq. However he could have asked with KC if he was interested in trumps.

 

4s.

[rhm]

5♠

 

Obviously partner must have a very good hand when his trumps are that weak.

Partner can not necessarily ask for keycards, because with weak trumps the five level might not be safe from partner's perspective.

 

Partner might have ♠Txxxx ♥x ♦Ax ♣AKQJx

 

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

Agree with Ron. If pard wanted to know about trumps, he could always trot out old'black.

[the_clown]

What Rainer said. I would be furious if my partner signed off holding 2KC and the queen on this auction.

[gszes]

What partner does NOT bid is just as important as their actual bid. What

would 3n by partner have been (surely some form of artificial bid). W/o

this information it is difficult to move. the AKQx of trumps is so unusual

when p is slamming that I agree a

 

5s

 

bid seems like the best alternative. I am unsure this will solve anything

since I might also be able to make a 5s bid with KQJxx of spades for ex

but it seems almost criminal to merely bid 4s when trumps are so good.

[the hog]

What Rainer said. I would be furious if my partner signed off holding 2KC and the queen on this auction.

 

Then you should bid more sensibly.

[akwoo]

I expect partner has 6 spades, AKQJx in a red suit, a doubleton without a control in the other red suit, and a club void. The void is the reason for avoiding Blackwood.

 

I bid 4♠, since I don't control whatever red suit partner is doubleton in.

 

I like the idea that 5♠ would show this hand, but I'm not sure partner would work that out at the table.

 

I take this post back if you're playing Exclusion.

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 4 ♠. It tells the story of my limit raise best -- namely no red suit controls. Partner ought to be able to infer that I must hold ♠ values if I can't cue anything.

[aguahombre]

The hand Rainer provided for his opinion about bidding 5S to show super trump quality and nothing else looks "sensible" enough to me. He even explains why the knee-jerk direct RKC would be wrong with that example hand.

 

5♠

[the hog]

The hand Rainer provided for his opinion about bidding 5S to show super trump quality and nothing else looks "sensible" enough to me. He even explains why the knee-jerk direct RKC would be wrong with that example hand.

 

5♠

 

So what is poor partner supposed to do with

AKxx

xxx

QJx

xxx

 

Now you have a H loser off the top and may well have a S loser. How is he supposed to diagnose whether pd has xxxxx in S or Q to 5?

[aguahombre]

So what is poor partner supposed to do with

AKxx

xxx

QJx

xxx

 

Now you have a H loser off the top and may well have a S loser. How is he supposed to diagnose whether pd has xxxxx in S or Q to 5?

Having shown an invitational raise, poor partner is supposed to bid 4S with that one. It will make six if Opener really had the Spade Q and should have bid a direct RKC, but Responder isn't supposed to worry about that. The given hand is a 5S bid, IMO. The hand you provided is not.

[Fluffy]

I expect partner has 6 spades, AKQJx in a red suit, a doubleton without a control in the other red suit, and a club void. The void is the reason for avoiding Blackwood.

 

I bid 4♠, since I don't control whatever red suit partner is doubleton in.

 

I like the idea that 5♠ would show this hand, but I'm not sure partner would work that out at the table.

 

I take this post back if you're playing Exclusion.

 

Having a void is an excuse not to bid blackwood when the cuebid is at the FIVE level. There is no excuse for not cuebidding and wasting all the 4 level when you can.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The hand Rainer provided for his opinion about bidding 5S to show super trump quality and nothing else looks "sensible" enough to me. He even explains why the knee-jerk direct RKC would be wrong with that example hand.

 

5♠

The trouble is that the normal meaning in this auction is that 5S "asks" , not "tells", about trump quality .

[Jinksy]

If P has the hand Rainer posted and sees us raise to 5S, he should figure out what we're up to. If he thinks we've gone nuts with a bunch of soft red suit values we'll be off in 5 anyway, so he might as well play us for sanity.

[Zelandakh]

The trouble is that the normal meaning in this auction is that 5S "asks" , not "tells", about trump quality .

Which is a fundamental weakness in the positive cue method. In general strong hands without flaws can take control (with RKCB or whatever) so it is the hands with flaws that we need to worry about. Rainer's hand is an advert for playing natural slam tries after a limit raise (as advocated by Andrew Robson) or of playing 3♦ (or 3♣) as your limit raise to allow for both natural slam tries and cue auctions.

[aguahombre]

The trouble is that the normal meaning in this auction is that 5S "asks" , not "tells", about trump quality .

Responder is not in control here, and it is not "normal", IMO for the hand which is being asked to provide information to instead ask for information.

[ggwhiz]

Responder is not in control here, and it is not "normal", IMO for the hand which is being asked to provide information to instead ask for information.

 

Very true but IMO I've been asked for a red suit control and I don't have one.

 

Maybe they will raise to 5♠ having forgot to do it already? (or trolling for a cue towards a grand) I have no idea what partner is up to but what is being asked seems clear and the confusion they have added is no reason for me to double down on it.

 

BTW, as little as something like ♠Jxxxxx, Kx, void, AKQJx is legit to bid this way if you play a graded GSF over a heart cue and will get us to six eventually anyway.

[mike777]

4s easy so far.

 

Per OP should deny a simple control in D and H.

[Fluffy]

I've heard a couple fo times that 5 of our suit, when it is not asking for control in theirs, shows either nothing in trumps, or everything in trumps. So this hand easilly qualifies.

 

As long as you don't go berserk and keycard yourself you should be ok on this hand. Suit quality is the least important thing for partner, he had J109xxxx AJ Ax AK.

 

This was one of the biggest scores I ever got for staying away from a slam.

[Cyberyeti]

I've heard a couple fo times that 5 of our suit, when it is not asking for control in theirs, shows either nothing in trumps, or everything in trumps. So this hand easilly qualifies.

 

As long as you don't go berserk and keycard yourself you should be ok on this hand. Suit quality is the least important thing for partner, he had J109xxxx AJ Ax AK.

 

This was one of the biggest scores I ever got for staying away from a slam.

 

This is the sort of hand where if I stay out of a slam, the punchline is that at every other table they led the K♦ and everybody made 6 :)

 

I would say that 5♠ here shows all the top spades because there is no other way of showing that, and I might well bid 6 over this with the other hand, there are plenty of things that give me chances here, partner has at least one more minor honour outside spades, Q♣ is plenty provided he has 3 or more, Q♥ puts it on a finesse if they lead a diamond, otherwise cold as long as he has 3+, Q♦ to 3+ puts it on at worst a finesse unless they lead a heart and partner doesn't have the 10 or has 10x, even ♥9xxx gives you a chance on a heart lead if the 10 drops in 3. ♦J10x ♥10xx gives you chances on any red suit lead and I think the balance of probabilities suggests the slam will make in practice more often than not.

 

I much prefer the method I play here, the auction would start with a 2N "raise to 3 or better" and then a "flat broke" 3♠ rebid after partner shows better than minimum. I'd expect 1♠-2N-3♣(long suit GT initially)-3♠-4♣(now combined with 3♣ shows AK)-4♠-4N-5♠ to be the auction and the big hand would know I had nothing useful other than ♠AKQ as with a Q outside in a 3+ card suit I'd likely be bidding 4♠ over 3♣.

[aguahombre]

I've heard a couple fo times that 5 of our suit, when it is not asking for control in theirs, shows either nothing in trumps, or everything in trumps. So this hand easilly qualifies.

 

As long as you don't go berserk and keycard yourself you should be ok on this hand. Suit quality is the least important thing for partner, he had J109xxxx AJ Ax AK.

 

This was one of the biggest scores I ever got for staying away from a slam.

Yep. All reasonable bids over 4C keep us out. 5S, and part will know there are two losing tricks. 4S, and Partner won't know anything except we might have three losing tricks. No bonus for bidding 5 instead of playing in 4. Life is good.

[Cyberyeti]

Yep. All reasonable bids over 4C keep us out. 5S, and part will know there are two losing tricks. 4S, and Partner won't know anything except we might have three losing tricks. No bonus for bidding 5 instead of playing in 4. Life is good.

 

He doesn't KNOW there are 2 losing tricks if we bid 5♠, AKQx, xxx, xxx, Qxx is perfectly possible where the slam is laydown (same hand with Q♥ rather than ♣ is on a finesse as is same hand with Q♦ and 10♥), but it's likely the slam is no better than a finesse.

 

I prefer 4♣-4♠-5♣-5♠ as with the hand above where it's cold, you will at least bid 6.

[fromageGB]

I'm bidding 4 ♠. It tells the story of my limit raise best -- namely no red suit controls. Partner ought to be able to infer that I must hold ♠ values if I can't cue anything.

That would be a wrong inference; what would you cue with Qxxx, QJxx, QJx, Ax ?