Ill-defined cuebid in response to t/a double

[helene_t]

http://tinyurl.com/gtkkqog

 

So

(2♠)-x-(pass)-3♠*

just shows 11+ points? What is the difference between fast and slow? Am I somehow supposed to figure out that the robot has a spade stopper? I thought that standard was that slow shows to right-side the contract. However, with this good spade suit I would think an immediate 3NT is called for. Or would that show something else?

[Stephen Tu]

For Lebensohl over 1nt openings and interference, there are standards for meanings of slow/fast 3nt and slow/fast cue bid, and jump to 3S (when takeout of hearts) vs. slow 3S.

 

However, for Lebensohl after takeout double of weak 2, there simply aren't any standards, it's pretty much up to partnership agreement. I've perused a lot of different books and internet articles, many sadly omit these sequences completely, and others choose multitude different option combinations.

 

What I do think:

- it should be universal that direct 3nt be to play. There's no sense in bidding 3nt without a stopper (unlike when partner opened 1nt and is likely to have a stopper and is constrained to play the contract anyway). When 3nt is what you want to play it make sense to bid it directly and not give RHO a shot at a lead directing double or whatever bidding 2nt first.

- GIB is borked in a lot of situations over takeout doubles, cue bidding far too many hands.

 

As for the various options, the most common I've seen are:

- slow 2nt/3nt I've seen as either choice of games (4OM + stopper), or "doubt about 3nt = shaky stopper, not necessarily 4OM, might be interested in 5m".

- one of cue/delayed cue is 4OM, other asks for stopper.

- delayed 3S vs. jump 3S (when takeout of hearts) - either 4 cd invite vs. 5 cd invite, forcing vs. invitational, or invitational vs. forcing.

 

My preference in my partnerships:

- slow 3nt choice of games (4OM + stopper)

- jump to 3s over hearts = inv, 5+ spades

- slow 3s over hearts = inv, 4 spades

- direct cue = stop ask

- delayed cue = GF, 4 oM, no stopper

[iandayre]

The best article I have ever seen about this issue was in the ACBL Bulletin, by George Rosencranz, very early in my duplicate career (late 70's). I have been playing it with regular partners since. It uses the first 4 of Stephen's preferences. I am 100% in agreement that all 3NT bids, fast or slow, show stoppers. The only difference with Stephen is that the slow cue is played as showing a stopper - implying slam interest since 3NT was not bid. I recall once in a strong Swiss team match, I used that action and we reached 7D, an easy make. Our expert opponents languished in 3NT.

 

The same article, which ran over several issues of the Bulletin, covers all aspects of defense against Weak 2's. It is still valuable almost 40 years later.