Jump to 4 after 1 or 2 N

[nekthen]

My partner and I are experimenting with all immediate jumps to 4 being RKCB in the suit bid, after an opening 1N or 2N and after a 1N or 2N rebid. Has anyone else done this?

It appears to make it easy to check controls and find a key Q, which is especially useful when choosing between playing in a suit or NT and choosing between 6 or 7.

It has always seemed to me that transfers make the leap to 4 as a sign off redundant

 

example

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sj843hj43dt84ct98&w=sak96ha97daqj5cq4&n=s52hq865d9763c763&e=sqt7hkt2dk2cakj52&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=2np4cp4d(3%20key%20cards)p4hp4s(KS%20and%20QC)p7nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Less than half the field bid 7, and I bet those who did were not 100% certain it was cold

[eagles123]

well how do u show natural slam tries if you're using the four level all for keycard?

[nekthen]

well how do u show natural slam tries if you're using the four level all for keycard?

 

Transfer to a major and then cue bid

Minors can be awkward any way. I think 4c as RKCB for clubs is as good as anything and better than Texas

[eagles123]

okay, so if for example u want to show a natural slam try in clubs, u would make up a transfer to a major and then bid 4c??? what do u do when u actually have a major/minor 2 suiter?

[Cyberyeti]

okay, so if for example u want to show a natural slam try in clubs, u would make up a transfer to a major and then bid 4c??? what do u do when u actually have a major/minor 2 suiter?

 

You can use 2N-3♠-3N-4m as one minor with 4M on the end as both.

 

If you're prepared to take the risk of forgetting 2N-3N is not to play and go through the previous auction if raising, you have even more options. I would not use 3♠ as 3N/clubs and 3N as diamonds.

 

It does occur to me that you could use this instead of gerber if there's a key queen you want to know about even with a 4 card suit and no intention to play in it.

[mikeh]

How often will responder have a hand where the only issue is 'how many keycards does opener hold?' While this is true over 2N, it is even more so over 1N.

 

Of course, many non-expert players use keycard in situations where they are left guessing after entirely foreseeable responses, because they don't know how to bid cooperatively. My advice: learn how to bid cooperatively. It will improve your game, and make you a better partner.

 

On the example hand, the gadget admittedly worked out well, and even pairs with good methods over 2N might struggle to bid 7N with confidence.

 

 

My partnership would survive, because we have methods that allow responder to show a club slam try, and opener to show a good hand for a club slam, and then keycard info is exchanged but that isn't my main point.

 

My main point is that in most cases responder needs to hold a huge hand, as well as a good suit, in order that the simple 'how many keycards do you have' allows for accurate placement of the contract. One can play a lot of bridge without holding a combined 36 count.

 

So you are constructing a method that simplifies a very tiny percentage of hands, most of which can be reliably bid using other, more mainstream, methods and you are doing so at a tremendous cost.

 

I don't see the gain, for example, over 2N 4D 4H and then keycard. One must surely have 5-level safety if one is using keycard so how is the immediate bid better? Meanwhile, those of us who use texas, as here, have exclusion available after we transfer. While good hands with voids are not common, they do exist, and in my experience arise more often than our holding a good 16 count and having partner open 2N.

 

Meanwhile, anyone who thinks Texas isn't useful isn't thinking clearly or is not using transfers properly.

 

One of the biggest pluses of texas is (as is so often the case with good conventions) linked to when one doesn't use it.

 

Thus 2N 3D 3H 4H is a mild slam try in hearts. How else do you make a mild slam try? There are hands that offer a good play for slam when opener likes his hand, and yet are in danger at the 5 level when opener has a poor hand in context.

 

This method smacks of someone who encountered a hand on which the gadget worked well and then thought that that meant that the gadget was a good idea. As in most aspects of life, simple solutions are rarely good solutions.

 

Let me suggest a different approach:

 

Use 3S as a puppet to 3N, over which

 

4C is clubs, slam interest

4D is diamonds, slam interest

4H is both minors, short hearts, slam interest

4S is both minors, short spades, slam interest

 

 

 

Over 4C: opener bids 4D with all hands that have no interest in cooperating, and other bids are keycard responses. Same is true over 4D: 4H is 'I don't like my hand for slam'.

 

Note that responder is far more likely to be able to place the contract well if he first finds out that opener likes his hand. What does opener need in order to 'like his hand'? Aces outside of the suit, honours in the suit, a preponderance of Aces and Kings and a relative paucity of Queens and Jacks (outside of trump). On those infrequent hands where responder can insist on keycard, we use the next step over opener's rejection as mandatory keycard.

 

On the example hand, opener has a clear 'I'm interested' response. While he is short in clubs, he is laden with controls, has ALL of the side Aces and the club Queen. So we'd have no trouble reaching the cold grand. Btw, I defy anyone, not playing a relay method, to bid 7N thinking it was cold....one needs to know about the diamond holding...not just the Jack but the length as well, since clubs do not need to break.

[Cyberyeti]

 

Meanwhile, anyone who thinks Texas isn't useful isn't thinking clearly or is not using transfers properly.

 

One of the biggest pluses of texas is (as is so often the case with good conventions) linked to when one doesn't use it.

 

Thus 2N 3D 3H 4H is a mild slam try in hearts. How else do you make a mild slam try? There are hands that offer a good play for slam when opener likes his hand, and yet are in danger at the 5 level when opener has a poor hand in context.

 

 

We've already broken the transfer on most hands that would qualify as interested (any hand with 4 card support or 3 card support and a decent side 5 card suit), never used Texas, never missed it.

[mikeh]

We've already broken the transfer on most hands that would qualify as interested (any hand with 4 card support or 3 card support and a decent side 5 card suit), never used Texas, never missed it.

everyone has an opinion and is entitled to it. Personally, I tend to give more weight to opinions, even my own, when based on experience with a method. Thus I don't like nor use flannery or mini-roman, but have used both in the past (distant past in the case of mini-roman). I think minorwood is silly, but have played it, which reinforced my view. When I read that someone dismisses texas, but has apparently never played it, well I tend to discount that opinion.

 

Put another way: I have played with some pretty fair players in my day, and have played texas with all of them. I have played on teams with other pretty fair players, and they played texas. I won't drop names but they include several world champions. So I'll stay with my view of the convention, at least for now.

[Cyberyeti]

everyone has an opinion and is entitled to it. Personally, I tend to give more weight to opinions, even my own, when based on experience with a method. Thus I don't like nor use flannery or mini-roman, but have used both in the past (distant past in the case of mini-roman). I think minorwood is silly, but have played it, which reinforced my view. When I read that someone dismisses texas, but has apparently never played it, well I tend to discount that opinion.

 

Put another way: I have played with some pretty fair players in my day, and have played texas with all of them. I have played on teams with other pretty fair players, and they played texas. I won't drop names but they include several world champions. So I'll stay with my view of the convention, at least for now.

 

I respect your experience, but particularly over 1N (weak) I like to be able to bid 4M to play and keep the distributional (and often similar strength) hand concealed, it's of more use over a strong NT, very few Acol/weak NT players seem to use it here.

 

That I've never used Texas is not that I never played it, I've played it rarely (pickup precision partners usually), but never had a hand that needed it which reinforces my opinion.

 

Edit, also playing 1N-3♥ natural and forcing as we do removes a lot of the mild slam tries from 1N-2♦

[Cyberyeti]

Unfortunately partner's hand was:

 

AKJxx

AQJ

AJx

xx

 

and you wanted to be in 7♠, GL finding that after starting with 4♣

 

We would bid as follows:

 

2N-3♣(5M enquiry)

3♦(no 5 but not 2♠/2-3♥)-4♣(nat 5+ cards, no side 4 card suit)

4♦(kickback)-4N (2 without)

5♠(all key cards + ♠K, no red K)-5N (interested in grand but don't want to commit right now

7N (if partner can bid like that knowing you have no red K, then you have everything he could possibly want)

[DozyDom]

Responder knows the pair has 36-38 points and has something approximating a source of tricks. Don't get too excited by finding 7NT on this hand.

[johnu]

Less than half the field bid 7, and I bet those who did were not 100% certain it was cold

 

Were you 100% certain 7 was cold? B-)

[hv=pc=n&w=sa963haqjdaqjcq96]133|100[/hv]

 

20 HCP, 3 key cards, queen of clubs. That's what you have discovered from your sequence. Make 7 without a spade lead (and if you get a spade lead, it's almost certain ♠KJ sit over the Q10)

[mikeh]

I respect your experience, but particularly over 1N (weak) I like to be able to bid 4M to play and keep the distributional (and often similar strength) hand concealed, it's of more use over a strong NT, very few Acol/weak NT players seem to use it here.

 

That I've never used Texas is not that I never played it, I've played it rarely (pickup precision partners usually), but never had a hand that needed it which reinforces my opinion.

 

Edit, also playing 1N-3♥ natural and forcing as we do removes a lot of the mild slam tries from 1N-2♦

I agree that 1N 4M is natural, to play, after a weak notrump. There’s lots of room to look for slam with 1N as the start, slam is less likely after a weak 1N, and sometimes one is out stealing, with, say, a 7 card suit and modest values. Since it could be 6 and game values, it is dangerous for 4th hand to act. These arguments are less valid after a strong notrump, especially the stealing bit, and completely inapplicable after a 2N opening. I don’t play Texas over weak 1N, usually, because in the only current weak nt partnership I occasionally play in, we use two way stayman and no transfers. 4D is pick a major.

[helene_t]

Transfer to a major and then cue bid

Minors can be awkward any way. I think 4c as RKCB for clubs is as good as anything and better than Texas

So

2NT-3♥

3♠-4♦*

 

is a one-suited hand with spades, and a diamond control? How do you bid two-suiters with spades and diamonds?

[msjennifer]

My partner and I are experimenting with all immediate jumps to 4 being RKCB in the suit bid, after an opening 1N or 2N and after a 1N or 2N rebid. Has anyone else done this?

It appears to make it easy to check controls and find a key Q, which is especially useful when choosing between playing in a suit or NT and choosing between 6 or 7.

It has always seemed to me that transfers make the leap to 4 as a sign off redundant

 

example

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sj843hj43dt84ct98&w=sak96ha97daqj5cq4&n=s52hq865d9763c763&e=sqt7hkt2dk2cakj52&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=2np4cp4d(3%20key%20cards)p4hp4s(KS%20and%20QC)p7nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Less than half the field bid 7, and I bet those who did were not 100% certain it was cold

Sir,I like the idea and it has given me the impetus to develop it further.Thanks.

[miamijd]

I don't see what you gain here.

 

For the majors, why is "suitwood" beter than Texas and then key-card? I can see one way in which it is worse: you lose the ability to use Jacoby and then 4M as a mild slam try in the major.

 

For the minors, over 1NT, why is "suitwood" beter than transferring to the minor and then using key-card?

 

For the minors, over 2NT< why is "suitwood" better than a minor sequence starting with 3S or 3NT (many play 3S as a relay to 3NT, which frees up 3NT over 2NT for other stuff -- just don't forget).

 

I just don't see the point of giving up Gerber, Texas, and some invites.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[nekthen]

Were you 100% certain 7 was cold? B-)

[hv=pc=n&w=sa963haqjdaqjcq96]133|100[/hv]

 

20 HCP, 3 key cards, queen of clubs. That's what you have discovered from your sequence. Make 7 without a spade lead (and if you get a spade lead, it's almost certain ♠KJ sit over the Q10)

 

I know my partner has K♠

[nekthen]

Unfortunately partner's hand was:

 

AKJxx

AQJ

AJx

xx

 

and you wanted to be in 7♠, GL finding that after starting with 4♣

 

We would bid as follows:

 

2N-3♣(5M enquiry)

3♦(no 5 but not 2♠/2-3♥)-4♣(nat 5+ cards, no side 4 card suit)

4♦(kickback)-4N (2 without)

5♠(all key cards + ♠K, no red K)-5N (interested in grand but don't want to commit right now

7N (if partner can bid like that knowing you have no red K, then you have everything he could possibly want)

 

A valid point have to agree that, with a 3 card major the bidding should start with some form of 5 card stayman

When you have a new toy you tend to over use it!

 

In my version of Puppet 3d shows at least one 4 card major and 4c would show 44 in majors and slam going has this been superceded? What on Earth do I bid now?

[Cyberyeti]

A valid point have to agree that, with a 3 card major the bidding should start with some form of 5 card stayman

When you have a new toy you tend to over use it!

 

In my version of Puppet 3d shows at least one 4 card major and 4c would show 44 in majors and slam going has this been superceded? What on Earth do I bid now?

 

I don't play puppet, I play the slightly more advanced version of Crowhurst's enquiry where 2N-3♣-3N is 2♠/2 or 3♥, so I can't help you.

 

What I'd like to play is:

 

2N-3♣-3♦(no 5M, not 2♠/2-3♥)

 

3♥ I don't have 4♥, I either have 4♠ or want to play 3N

3♠ I have 4♥, not exactly 4♠ but could be 5♠/4♥ no slam ambition in which case I'll remove 3N in the knowledge you have 3♠ if you haven't raised ♥.

3N 4-4 majors NF

 

Over 3♥ opener bids spades if he has them.

[pescetom]

A valid point have to agree that, with a 3 card major the bidding should start with some form of 5 card stayman

When you have a new toy you tend to over use it!

 

In my version of Puppet 3d shows at least one 4 card major and 4c would show 44 in majors and slam going has this been superceded? What on Earth do I bid now?

 

We too with that would bid to the grand starting from within Punch (our Puppet-like Stayman).

We play that diamonds simply denies a 5-card major, which enables partner to bid Stayman as garbage over 1NT and offers no gratuitous information about the strong hand to the opponents... but that's off topic here.

 

The thing I most dislike about your proposal is that it achieves no transfer, which is quite likely to cost you a trick if you end up in trumps, at least over 2NT.

 

If you want to be radically simple but effective then maybe you could play low-level transfers over both 1NT and 2NT, using spades for clubs, clubs for diamonds, diamonds for hearts, hearts for spades. Then if all you want is to keycard you just transfer and use your preferred Keycard asking method at 4-level (Kickback, 4NT or some compromise). That preserves a single Keycard asking scheme, maintains NT raises as natural (which is useful not just to avoid mistakes but to hide information from the opponents) and frees up most direct jumps to 4-level over NT for something else.

[msjennifer]

My partner and I are experimenting with all immediate jumps to 4 being RKCB in the suit bid, after an opening 1N or 2N and after a 1N or 2N rebid. Has anyone else done this?

It appears to make it easy to check controls and find a key Q, which is especially useful when choosing between playing in a suit or NT and choosing between 6 or 7.

It has always seemed to me that transfers make the leap to 4 as a sign off redundant

 

example

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sj843hj43dt84ct98&w=sak96ha97daqj5cq4&n=s52hq865d9763c763&e=sqt7hkt2dk2cakj52&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=2np4cp4d(3%20key%20cards)p4hp4s(KS%20and%20QC)p7nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Less than half the field bid 7, and I bet those who did were not 100% certain it was cold

Sir we have tried and used a method .We ask no.of controls by a bid of 4C and in the given hand the response would be 5C(7 controls)We then use the SPIRAL (a bid of 5H in this hand as we have the SQ with us) to find out the specific Queen/queens.We thus would easily find out the opener has Queens of D and C..Then it is clear that 5 club tricks,3diamonds 2 hearts and 3 spades are available and 7NT is the final bid.

[pescetom]

Sir we have tried and used a method .We ask no.of controls by a bid of 4C and in the given hand the response would be 5C(7 controls)We then use the SPIRAL (a bid of 5H in this hand as we have the SQ with us) to find out the specific Queen/queens.We thus would easily find out the opener has Queens of D and C..Then it is clear that 5 club tricks,3diamonds 2 hearts and 3 spades are available and 7NT is the final bid.

 

It strikes me as overkill in this case, but expert methods are always interesting.

After the 5C control reply, how does the fact that you have SQ make Spiral start in 5H (what would 5D/5S/5N mean) ?

And how exactly does the sequence go to reveal Queens of D and C?

Thanks.

[msjennifer]

It strikes me as overkill in this case, but expert methods are always interesting.

After the 5C control reply, how does the fact that you have SQ make Spiral start in 5H (what would 5D/5S/5N mean) ?

And how exactly does the sequence go to reveal Queens of D and C?

Thanks.

Sir,you have asked some nice questions. and here are the clarifications.After 5C If we did not possess SQ then we bid 5D.Since we have it already we would like to find out if he has the HQ and so we bid 5H.SInce he does not have it his reply is 5S.Now we want to find out DQ so we bid 5NT the next step. .Without DQ he bids 6C.With only the DQ he bids 6D and with CQ also he bids 6H which denies holding the SJ.( Which is the next important card in the Spiral.).And please excuse Sir, I am not an expert.A bid of 5S over his 5C would ask him about DQ.And a bid of 5NT over his 5C would ask him about CQ.

Sir,if you wish to know more details ,then I request you to see the article "ROSENKRANZ THE SPIRAL SCAN"which is available on the Google search.

 

 

 

'

[pescetom]

So if I understood rightly the Spiral (unless we skip steps to indicate otherwise) always starts from Spades downwards and continues through Queens to Jacks. Makes sense, thanks.

[mikeh]

Sir,you have asked some nice questions. and here are the clarifications.After 5C If we did not possess SQ then we bid 5D.Since we have it already we would like to find out if he has the HQ and so we bid 5H.SInce he does not have it his reply is 5S.Now we want to find out DQ so we bid 5NT the next step. .Without DQ he bids 6C.With only the DQ he bids 6D and with CQ also he bids 6H which denies holding the SJ.( Which is the next important card in the Spiral.).And please excuse Sir, I am not an expert.A bid of 5S over his 5C would ask him about DQ.And a bid of 5NT over his 5C would ask him about CQ.

 

Spiral scans, and bids that ask for controls, can be very useful. I have played a complex relay method over a strong 1N opening (and a different relay method over 2N), and (subject to memory load) the results are amazing. Once we diagnosed that we had zero play (not even a squeeze) for 13 tricks with 21 opposite 16, to win a slam swing when the other team failed in the grand, and once we lost a slam swing to Hamman-Wolff in a Bermuda Bowl when we reached a grand that failed when trump broke 4-0.

 

However, the notion of asking for controls starting at the 4-level and then asking about honours in suits starting beyond that leaves me very unimpressed.

 

For accurate slam bidding, one needs either overwhelming strength (or a very long suit) or detailed information about shape, fit, etc. Control information is never enough. When the spiral is about Queens, it is absurd, unless one has a combined 12 controls, since one really needs to know about Aces and Kings! Not merely how many but, often, which ones.

 

I'm all for players experimenting but there are already far better methods that the ones that we see here. The truth is that many players invent methods that work on the hands that prompted the idea, but in reality 99% of such methods are inferior, if not to what the player already used then to other methods that the player hasn't found out about yet.

 

Here, using a bid of 4x over 1N or 2N as asking, no matter what it asks for, is not going to enhance one's game. Yes, you can demonstrate hands where it works wonderfully, but that is only a minor part of evaluating any convention. Are there hands that one can no longer bid as well, because of the use to which we put the bids now? Yes....texas, or SA Texas, or other meanings definitely are useful on some hands.

 

DO we gain? Or are there other methods that allow us the same information yet don't create the problems? Yes.

 

Do the hands that we can now bid very easily come up very often? Here, absolutely NO.

 

And so on.

 

Oftentimes somebody's bright idea really is just a solution in search of a problem....there are lots of very good methods over 1N and 2N that allow for accurate bidding. The fact that the OP doesn't know them doesn't make his solution good.