Cue bid or natural

[Bende]

After a sequence such as 1M-3M (invitational), does it make the most sense to play a new suit as a cue bid (A, K, singelton, or void) or should it be natural, showing shape to make it easier for partner to evaluate their hand for slam?

 

In this video (

), Peter Hollands and Justin Howard explain that they like shortness showing bids so in sequences like this, they would play new suit as shortness and 3NT as slam interest without shortness. I have also seen some players using new suit as cue but always A or K, not shortness.

 

I think it is logical to have some way of making partner evaluate their hand for slam since we know so little about the hand after 1M-3M. For this reason I play that new suits are natural with one of my partners. We tried to have a meta agreement that a new suit is natural even after we find a fit if we haven't shown any other suit. However, in some sequences we still find it difficult to know if the bid is a cue or natural.

 

So far I have failed coming up with some simple rule to follow for situations when we have agreed a major on the three level.

[Zelandakh]

Andrew Robson recommends using these as natural slam tries with a second suit. The majority of experts prefer them as cue bids, usually in combination with Serious or Frivolous 3NT. If you want to use the former approach, or one based on shortage, which is similar, then I would suggest tracking down one of Robson's books on the subject and using that as a basis. His rules for when a new suit is natural after a 3 level raise are quite simple and would probably work for you and your partner.

[Bende]

Andrew Robson recommends using these as natural slam tries with a second suit. The majority of experts prefer them as cue bids, usually in combination with Serious or Frivolous 3NT. If you want to use the former approach, or one based on shortage, which is similar, then I would suggest tracking down one of Robson's books on the subject and using that as a basis. His rules for when a new suit is natural after a 3 level raise are quite simple and would probably work for you and your partner.

 

Thanks! Do you have the name of those books?

[SteveMoe]

An older treatment (Mathe Asking bid) over 1M-3M was to rebid 3N (some use Step 1 instead) by opener to ask for a short suit. That allows other bids to be control showing. Frankly playing some from of mini/maxi splinter handles the short suit by responder better. I find control bidding best.

[kuhchung]

I love help suit slam try, never really understood controls (might be why I like help suit slam try)

[apollo1201]

Usually after a sequence showing a 9+ card major fit, you don't play 3NT (whereas with a 5-3 or 6-2 fit, you could really consider playing 3NT).

So 3NT after 1M-3M can be used as a slam try asking for the lowest ranking control, which freezes bids in a suit to show a clear 2-suiter needing some complement for slam (and please partner, discount heavily the KQJs in the other suits).

If respondent feels the hands fit well, he is expected to cooperate (control, 5-level bid...) while if he has lost points he is supposed to go back to 4M, not denying the skipped controls (if any) but just showing doubts about higher contracts.

Of course with ❤️ you can make sth fancier to save 1 level vs. ♠️.

On the few occasions I had to bid like this, we called good slams and avoided a bad one. But as experts have diverse views, it is essential that you and your partner play the same thing, whatever it is!

[fourdad]

Things are not a matter of beter or worse in most bridge scenarios. About 90% of the questions asked here boli down to "what is your agreement with your partner?"

[msjennifer]

We use the SST(Short Suit Try) and LST (Long Suit Try) tries as were published in two articles published in the Bridge World monthly magazine published more than 40 years back.A copy was given me by my teacher.We have found them excellent.They can be used also on a single raise major suit bid like 1S-p-2S-p or 1H-p-2H-p wherein responder having the inquired requirements can bid game and lacking these sign off in 3 of agreed major.

[RD350LC]

After a sequence such as 1M-3M (invitational), does it make the most sense to play a new suit as a cue bid (A, K, singelton, or void) or should it be natural, showing shape to make it easier for partner to evaluate their hand for slam?

 

In this video (

), Peter Hollands and Justin Howard explain that they like shortness showing bids so in sequences like this, they would play new suit as shortness and 3NT as slam interest without shortness. I have also seen some players using new suit as cue but always A or K, not shortness.

 

I think it is logical to have some way of making partner evaluate their hand for slam since we know so little about the hand after 1M-3M. For this reason I play that new suits are natural with one of my partners. We tried to have a meta agreement that a new suit is natural even after we find a fit if we haven't shown any other suit. However, in some sequences we still find it difficult to know if the bid is a cue or natural.

 

So far I have failed coming up with some simple rule to follow for situations when we have agreed a major on the three level.

I prefer to use new suits after 1M/3M as control showing, and a mild slam try if it is below game. This could be either A/K or a singleton/void. If the suit is repeated, then it definitely shows first round control.

[dave_beer]

We use the SST(Short Suit Try) and LST (Long Suit Try) tries as were published in two articles published in the Bridge World monthly magazine published more than 40 years back.A copy was given me by my teacher.We have found them excellent.They can be used also on a single raise major suit bid like 1S-p-2S-p or 1H-p-2H-p wherein responder having the inquired requirements can bid game and lacking these sign off in 3 of agreed major.

"Two Kinds of Game Tries?" by Bob Ewen appeared in the 1st issue of The Bridge Journal (Sep 1963).