[jillybean]

#2

---

[smerriman]

3♠ splinter seems perfect to me.

[pescetom]

And for me too... hoping to hear 4♣.

[mw64ahw]

3♠ seems fine.

[jillybean]

Yes, this is where I need my exiled splinter bid, it seems to be the opnly way forard, Splinters by responder caused me more problems.

---

[smerriman]

I'd bid 4♦ next; I'm always murky about how to count tricks with missing side suit queens, but if partner can take control it may be easier to find grand from their side. But over 4♥, then RKCB. If I get a 5♥ response, not sure - does 6♣ ask about third round controls?

[jillybean]

smerriman, on 2024-September-29, 17:55, said:

I'd bid 4♦ next; I'm always murky about how to count tricks with missing side suit queens, but if partner can take control it may be easier to find grand from their side. But over 4♥, then RKCB. If I get a 5♥ response, not sure - does 6♣ ask about third round controls?

4♦ 4♥ 4nt sounds fine.
I have never played 3rd round control asking. This may be about getting to the best possible contract vs. the best contract possible.

[mikeh]

Wow

Ok…why and when do we use keycard in slammish auctions?

One reason is to reach a grand, where we have a good idea that we have 13 tricks but need to check for keycards, the trump queen (unless we hold it) and (often) specific kings (or number of kings if we don’t show specific ones). The other, more common, reason is to check that we have adequate keycards (and strong enough trump) that we are not in jeopardy, on normal breaks, of losing two tricks in a small slam

In both cases, we should not use keycard until after the auction tells us that we rate to have sufficient tricks, provided we don’t have too many losers.

Why do we cuebid? In auctions where we cuebid in the hope that either we or partner can later use keycard, we do so partly to show at least some mild extras, partly to find out from partner if she has any extras, and partly (often combining the first two) to discover whether we rate to have enough winners to risk keycard…iow, that we rate to have 12 tricks unless keycard discloses an unexpected flaw.

Why the lecture?

Because I don’t understand why we’re supposed to bid 4N after partner signed off in 4H. Nor do I, even for a nanosecond, understand why anyone would think we have any chance at grand, let alone know when to bid it. Picture a grand slam layout and ask yourself…..would any halfway competent partner bid 4H with that hand?

What has happened so far?

We opened a routine 1D and partner pleasantly surprised us by bidding 1H. We splintered….and what did we tell partner by so doing?

That we want to be in game…that our hand is so strong that we’ll drive to game even though he hasn’t promised much of anything. We’re not saying game is cold…picture KQxx xxxx Jxx xx opposite….but we are showing a very powerful hand with good heart support and short spades.

Over that, she bid 4C. What does that tell us?

She has a club control….usually the king but it could be shortness with extra trump. It also says…’I have some mild, or better, slam interest but my hand is such that asking for keycards won’t help me decide’.

We bid 4D…I’ll come back to that choice later. What did that tell partner?

Tbh, not a huge amount….it would be surprising if we couldn’t cuebid 4D, having forced to game. But it wasn’t just a noise or a statement conveying positive information.

It not only showed a diamond control but it also said…‘thanks for the club control, I’m still interested but (getting back to 4N) I CANNOT take control via keycard…to reach slam I need at least a little more encouragement….because the answer to keycard won’t tell me whether slam is good’.

So…what did we learn over 4D? We learned that partner felt that she had no more encouragement to give us….and over that we now want to make the call we presumably felt unable to make over 4C??

Wtf did we learn from 4D that says that now…rather than the previous round….all we need to know is how many keycards we have?

The answer to that rhetorical question is: nada, zilch, nothing, sweet f**k all.

Our splinter bid might be on x AQxx AKQxx Axx, where we can reasonably expect 4 diamond tricks even opposite a stiff, or this type of 1444 hand where we need fillers or some additional source of winners to make slam. Partner’s 4C bid wasn’t a strong slam try…it might have been, but he’d not have bid 4H if it were.

Picture xxx KJxxx xxx Kx. Opposite the x AQxx AKQxx Axx hand, slam is a good contract. Opposite our actual hand, slam is a bad contract.

Now, with our actual hand, slam is good opposite something like xxx KJxxx Qx Kxx but don’t you think that partner should know that his extra trump, his lack of spade wastage, and that delicious diamond queen are all working? Don’t you think that he owes us more than a 4H signoff?

If you trust your partner, you pass 4H.

If slam is better than 50% I expect that partner has at most a dubious 4H call.

As I often say, bidding (perhaps slam bidding most of all) is a conversation to which both partners contribute and to which both partners must listen. Go beyond game only when the conversation suggests that’s it’s worthwhile to do so.

Now, given that this isn’t the expert forum, would I be surprised to find out that slam was good? No…but I’d definitely pass 4H playing with anyone whose bidding I respected.

Btw,misbidding due to not trusting either or both partner and one’s own judgment will sometimes lead to a good outcome…here, maybe partner shouldn’t have signed off….but it’s not the way to improve either one’s own game or partner’s. If partner should have done more, play 4H and have a discussion later about her decision. Bidding 4N here is a clear example of masterminding…asserting that ‘I know more about your hand than you do, and I’m playing you not to know how to bid properly’. Hardly conducive to good bridge. If you’re wrong, partner loses confidence and if you’re right, partner won’t feel any need to bid better next time, because you’re in charge (when you shouldn’t be).

Bidding 4D then 4N is the sort of auction that indicates that a mistake has likely been made….one of those two calls was almost surely an error.

[Zelandakh]

mikeh, on 2024-September-30, 10:46, said:

Over that, she bid 4C. What does that tell us?

Surely to answer this question, we first have to ask what our agreement about 3NT is. And for that matter our slam bidding agreements. I play one system where 4♣ shows serious slam interest and asks if we hold a ♣ control; another where 4♣ is a good old traditional natural slam try. That is aside from the presumed default of frivolous slam interest and a club control. Finally, for I suspect around half of the posters in this forum, 4♦ over 4♣ would be LTTC, and in that case what we found out by bidding 4♦ is that partner does not hold a ♦ control. Holding ♦AK, that's probably even more useless than the "do you have more?" option, which makes the call even more dubious. So while I absolutely agree with the greater point (concerning bidding 4♦ followed by 4NT) I do have a few nit picks with the logic used to make that point. In any case, we ought to have some agreement about how serious partner's slam interest is when they bid 4♣ rather than 3NT and that seems to me a relevant detail in deciding what this hand's next call should be.

[mikeh]

Zelandakh, on 2024-September-30, 11:08, said:

Surely to answer this question, we first have to ask what our agreement about 3NT is. And for that matter our slam bidding agreements. I play one system where 4♣ shows serious slam interest and asks if we hold a ♣ control; another where 4♣ is a good old traditional natural slam try. That is aside from the presumed default of frivolous slam interest and a club control. Finally, for I suspect around half of the posters in this forum, 4♦ over 4♣ would be LTTC, and in that case what we found out by bidding 4♦ is that partner does not hold a ♦ control. Holding ♦AK, that's probably even more useless than the "do you have more?" option, which makes the call even more dubious. So while I absolutely agree with the greater point (concerning bidding 4♦ followed by 4NT) I do have a few nit picks with the logic used to make that point. In any case, we ought to have some agreement about how serious partner's slam interest is when they bid 4♣ rather than 3NT and that seems to me a relevant detail in deciding what this hand's next call should be.

Well, forgive me for not assuming a non-standard treatment not described by the OP, lol. I play frivolous 3N in one partnership and an idiosyncratic approach in the other … where 3N over 3S would say…I have slam interest but lack a club control.

As it was, I was expressing my views on what I assumed was a method where no artificial 3N was in use since I assumed that the OP would have told us should it have been…because of course it affects the meaning of 4C. As for 4D being LTTC, I think the chances of opener having no diamond control and not holding AK of clubs nor spade ace are….if one rounds to the nearest integer….zero.

[jillybean]

It find it very difficult constructing an unbiased bidding sequence when I know both hands.
I think this is how the auction would proceed, I didn't play the hand.

wrong - ignore this, see full hand below

---

[mw64ahw]

Is 4♠ asking, showing or A♠?

As per the discussion above, what is 3N after 3♠. For me that would be my bid rather than 4♣ not having 2♥ honours.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2024-September-30, 14:06, said:

It find it very difficult constructing an unbiased bidding sequence when I know both hands.
I think this is how the auction would proceed, I didn't play the hand.

---

5♣, what else?
I would like it to show odd keycards too.

[jillybean]

 mw64ahw, on 2024-September-30, 15:46, said:

Is 4♠ asking, showing or A♠?

As per the discussion above, what is 3N after 3♠. For me that would be my bid rather than 4♣ not having 2♥ honours.

♠A

Not kickback

[mw64ahw]

 jillybean, on 2024-September-30, 19:03, said:

♠A

Not kickback

I think someone recently indicated that they would like full method disclosure:)

[johnu]

 pescetom, on 2024-September-30, 15:48, said:

I would like it to show odd keycards too.

Just show 3 fingers

[jillybean]

---

[Cyberyeti]

We play 1♦-1♥-3N as GF 4441 with support (because we play an art 2N rebid with all big hands with 5+♦/4♥ which can't cope with 4441s), 3♠ would be a void

So our auction would be 1♦-1♥-3N-4♠(Kickback)-4N(0/3)-5♣-5♦(Q♥?)-6♦(Q♥K♦ no black K)-7♥

If we both have stiff clubs, that's unfortunate, but looks like it fits well.

[mikeh]

After 1D 1H 3S 4C 4D, north has no excuse for not using keycard. Bidding 4S is clearly wrong. There is simply no way for opener to count tricks after he keycards, whereas it’s trivial for responder.

So 4N fetches 5D. Responder can plan the play in his head….if opener has either minor king, 7 will be making if he can ruff 3 spades in dummy. Since he’ll want to ruff his last spade high, to prevent an overruff, he should ask for the heart queen, via 5S. Sure enough, opener shows the heart queen and the diamond king. 7H is now odds on to make.

[pescetom]

There is however more than one way of frying an egg. As we play in my main partnership, after 4D North no longer has RKCB available and will bid 4S to show spades control and slam interest. Now South will bid 5C showing clubs control and odd keycards. North holding the remaining two will bid 5NT, denying further control in diamonds or spades and expressing doubt about the heart Queen. South will bid 6D denying further clubs control and affirming further diamonds control (must be AK) plus the heart Queen in safe hands. Now North can plan his play knowing the exact situation of club King absent but diamond King present and the heart Queen too, calling 7H.