|
Cue Bidding
Roman Key Card Blackwood is a powerful slam bidding tool, but it's not the solution to all our problems. Sometimes, cue-bidding works better, or should be used as a prelude to Blackwood, in order to make sure that there are not two top losers in one suit.
2nd June, 2010 Both Vul
East has a pretty good hand opposite a 2♣ opening, but standard methods will prevent him from showing his Clubs, the suit is just not good enough for a 3♣ response. So, East makes a 2♦ “waiting” bid. The next time around East still cannot bid 3♣ naturally, as this usually shows a “second negative” (a rotten hand, in plain English). Our East decided to bid 2NT, despite the Heart weakness, at least that is a bid which does not consume bidding space, and it shows some values. Bidding 3♦ instead is also tempting, at least that is where East’s stuff is.
After West rebids his Spades, you (as East) will be happy to play in that suit. But your hand is too good simply to bid 4♠, you must try for slam. It would be misguided to charge into Roman Key Card here, better to bid 4♦ instead. This cannot be long Diamonds (you would have bid 3♦ earlier), it has to be a cue-bid in support of Spades.
6th October, 2010 N-S Vul
West has a pretty good hand, in the circumstances. Is it worth a slam try? On the plus side there is that Spade singleton, also some very nice minor suit cards, and a fifth trump. On the down side West has poor trumps. We think that West should make a slam try, and the real question is “Which slam try?” Here are some possibilities: - Roman Key Card? This is not a good hand for 1430 responses! If West bids 4NT, he’ll get an answer of 5♦, leaving no room for a Queen Ask. So, forget about Roman Key Card unless you happen to be playing 3014 responses. - A Raise to 5♥? What does this mean? Some would say “Slam try with two Spades losers” … others might think that it should ask for good trumps. Actually, in this auction, neither of those makes much sense. East has announced a big hand and must have considerably more than just good trumps or a Spade control. We’d say that a 5♥ bid here should actually show a Spade control and ask the simple question “Do you like your hand?” Without a Spade control, West could always cue-bid a minor to highlight the Spade problem indirectly. - A Cue-Bid? Our own choice of cue-bid would be 4♠, by which you can deduce that we have no problem with showing a second-round control in this situation.
We like the 4♠ cue-bid, partly because it gives East the chance to use Roman Key Card if appropriate. On the actually deal it would be most appropriate and would get E-W to 6♥, making six.
5th October, 2011 Both Vul
South wheels out the Jacoby 2NT machinery and North’s 3♦ shows shortness in that suit. South has no wasted values opposite that shortness and her hand is accordingly improved. 3♥ is a cue-bid, of course, what next? From North’s point of view, the key to making slam is getting some Club help from South. If North cue-bids 4♣ now, that doesn’t really address the issue. Better for North to bid 3♠, saving bidding space and giving South the opportunity to cue-bid Clubs. South obliges and now North sees that slam will have at least a play provided that the partnership has enough Key Cards.
2nd November, 2011 E-W Vul
Let’s assume that this is a 2/1 style of auction, whereby 2♦ is forcing to game. That being so, there is no rush for South to show her extra values, she can take things slowly. By the time that South bids 3♠, North knows that South has at least six (quite likely seven) Spades, in which case North has a pretty good hand for Spades. But if North simply bids 4♠ now, it will sound like reluctant support. And a holding of King doubleton in trumps and a singleton in the unbid suit, is far from reluctant, it should be downright enthusiastic. So our suggestion here is for North to bid 4♥. This cannot possibly be a natural bid, we don’t introduce the fourth suit at the four-level, in an uncontested auction, and expect to play it there. No, 4♥ is an encouraging bid with secondary Spade support, as opposed to a 4♠ bid which might well be made on a hand with a small singleton in Spades and a weak Heart holding that is unsuitable for 3NT, such as:
♠ 4 ♥ J9 ♦ KQ984 ♣ KQJ72
Should 4♥ be considered as a cue-bid, guaranteed to contain a Heart control? No. 4♥ is the only bid available which shows real Spade support, as opposed to reluctant support, and nowhere else to go. For example, North might hold something like:
♠ K4 ♥J9 ♦ KQ984 ♣ AK72
That’s a good hand in support of Spades even though there are two Heart losers. So, it’s also a 4♥ bid.
After North bids 4♥, South will zip into 6♠, which is a fine (and making) contract.
3rd June, 2009 None Vul
West’s 4♣ was a splinter bid, showing Club shortness and Heart support. Now, East is interested in slam, being about as good as can be for a hand that passed originally. East also has a suitable holding opposite Club shortness and the Ace in West’s first-bid suit. So East cue-bids 4♦ to show a Diamond control. Could Partner construe that cue-bid as possible Diamond shortness? We don’t think so, shortness in Partner’s Diamonds would be a negative, not a positive, so Partner can rely on our 4♦ to be showing the ♦A or ♦K in this situation.
7th January, 2009 Both Vul
So far, North’s bids have meant as follows: - 2♦: Waiting - 2NT: If N-S are playing 3♣ as a “second negative” then 2NT must be used to show some values. There’s no rush to support Hearts with honor doubleton, that can be done later. Nor does it seem appropriate to introduce an xxxx suit by bidding 2♠ - 3♠: Natural - 4♣: This has to be a cue-bid in support of Spades. Responder cannot start introducing new suits at the 4-level expecting them to be a possible place to play. - 5♦: No Key Cards
Now, South’s 5NT is the King Ask (let’s assume that you are playing Specific Kings). The obvious bid is no doubt 6♣, but we ask you to consider the bold bid of 7♠, based on this logic: - South’s 5NT did not merely ask for Kings, it also announced that N-S had all the Key Cards. And the ♠Q, too, without that card surely South would have tried a Queen Ask of 5♥. - There is not much point in showing the ♣K, the earlier 4♣ has already laid claim to that card. - If Partner had wanted to know about the ♥K she could have made an earlier cue-bid of 4♦. That would have given North a chance to show the ♥K before South launched into Roman Key Card. So, if N-S are on the same wavelength then we’d say that 7♠ is a reasonable bid. How good is the grand slam? As it happens, Partner does not have a 5th Spade or the ♠J, so a 3-2 trump break is required (plus a modicum of reasonable luck elsewhere). Around 60% we would say.
9th August, 2006 Board 23 Both Vul
When we bid 2♠ we showed at least a game-invitational hand with Heart support ... when Partner bid 3♦ she was showing one of two hand types: (a) a hand which is still interested in game but not quite good enough to bid it directly; (b) a hand with (at least mild) slam aspirations . South has extras of her own, don't you think? Actually, she has extra extras, so, rather than just lazily bidding the game, we recommend a bid of 4♣ over 3♦, a cue-bid offering some hope for Partner if she has higher aspirations.
23rd August, 2006 Board 25 E-W Vul
Our 2NT agreed Spades and was game-forcing, then Partner showed us Diamond shortness. What next? We don’t have much in the way of extras here, but our values are slammish, and things were improved by that Diamond shortness. Often, when Partner is short in our suit, that is a bad thing, but here, with such a big trump fit (at least 5-5), we’ll probably be able to look after those Diamond losers with 3 ruffs in Partner’s hand.
With that in mind, we are certainly too good just to bid 4♠ here, that would say “Not only do I have a minimum hand, but also my hand has deteriorated thanks to your Diamond shortage”. We could bid 3♥ here, showing a Heart control, but that might send the wrong message, Partner might expect the Ace, and take an extra liking to his KQx. As a general rule, we are against cue-bidding shortness, unless we really like our hand and plan to take control, or if the auction is running out of space … here our hand is not bad, but nothing great, and we have plenty of space.
So, our choice would be 3♠, keeping things low, and awaiting developments.
30th August, 2006 Board 7 Both Vul
Partner’s 3♥ bid is not forcing, but it does show extras and at least a 6-card Heart suit. What are our options here? 4♥? No, altogether too feeble, slam is more than likely on this hand. 6♥? Usually, 6♥ will make, but we have 2 Club losers, let’s not be too hasty! 4NT? Again, we have 2 Club losers, so not a good bid.
Surely the proper bid here is 4♦, and, even more surely, this has to agree Hearts! When we are bidding the majors, in a strong auction, bidding a new minor at the 4-level can hardly be an attempt to find a minor suit fit. East’s 4♦ here would simply show a good hand, a Heart fit, something in Diamonds, but not in Clubs.
1st August, 2007 Board 2 N-S Vul
In this situation, it’s usual to play 3NT as 15-17 with something good in the unbid suit, and 3NT as a weaker hand with the unbid suit stopped. Nonetheless, we would bid just 2NT here. We are not completely sure that we want to play this one in NT, our 4th suit holding is not that good, and it may well be that a 6-2 Spade fit or a 5-3 Heart fit will serve better. So, we would make the very slight underbid of 2NT in the interests of finding the best game.
OK, we bid 2NT, now Partner bids 3♠, showing 6-4 in the majors. What next? It looks as if we’d be better off in Spades in that 6-2 fit. Does that mean that we should bid 4♠? No! Surely we are worth a cue-bid along the way, and our own choice would be 4♦, showing belated support for Spades, a Diamond control, and an unusually good hand for our previous 2NT rebid.
13th September, 2006 Board 1 None Vul
2NT was Jacoby, showing game-forcing values and a Spade fit, and 3♣ showed shortness. There goes Problem # 1, namely the potential Club loser. Now we are simply left with Problem # 2, which is the potential Heart loser. We cue-bid 3♦, and Partner now bids 3♥. Can we be sure that this cue-bid shows the A♥ and not the K♥? Maybe, maybe not! We’ll offer up two methods of cue-bidding, but be assured that we are merely scratching the surface of a most complicated subject: Aces First: According to this method, we don’t cue-bid a King until we have denied the Ace, or until Partner has shown the Ace. The straightforward style works like a charm on the actual hand! Ace or King: In this style, the first cue-bid of a suit shows either a first- or second-round control, and is well-suited as a prelude to Roman Key Card … first we make sure that there are no two-loser side-suits, then we try Blackwood. Using this method, it won’t be obvious whether that 3♥ bid is the A♥ or K♥. But, perhaps it should be … after all, North has space to deny the A♥ and show the K♥, both below game. So, we’d say that the 3♥ bid shows the A♥, but now we would be testing the partnership agreements quite severely.
12th July, 2006 Board 30 None Vul
After that 1♣ 1♥, 2♥ start, West is fairly certain that the final contract is going to be 6♥ ... it's unlikely that Partner has the magic hand for seven ... and, similarly, it's unlikely that 6 will either not be cold or at least have a decent play. True, the defense might have two cashing Diamonds, which would be unfortunate, but even if they do they may not cash them. Do you bash directly into 6♥? Or do you scientifically probe for slam? We are unabashed Bashers, our judgment is that we'll lose more here by science than we are likely to gain.
The Scientists Gain When ... - the AK♦ are missing and the defense cashes them; - the KQ♥ and the A♦ are missing and the slam is hopeless.
The Bashers Gain When ... - the AK♦ are missing but the defense fails to cash them; - the defense has a killing lead, but fails to find it due to the uninformative auction ... for example, imagine an off-side K♥ and an off-side K♦ ... if West cue-bids Spades and East cue-bids Diamonds, surely it is the killing Diamond that will be led by North. - similarly, the defense may need to grab their A♦ at Trick One or else lose it ... for example, perhaps East has: ♠ 8 ♥ KT92 ♦ K82 ♣ KQJ62, and Declarer has 13 tricks without the Diamond lead ... if so, no need to help them find that lead with a revealing auction. - if the K♠ is off-side, it maybe that a Spade lead is the only way to give us the contract. For example, picture East with: ♠ J8 ♥ KQT9 ♦ K98 ♣ KT76, how nice if they would lead a Spade! Why would we want to cue-bid the A♠ and give them a reason not to?
Well, you get the general idea, we're sure.
10th October, 2007 Board 5 N-S Vul
We have a good hand for a Strong Jump Shift, but let’s assume that this is not part of the partnership methods. 3♣ was game-forcing and (the way that many pairs play this) artificial, not necessarily with Clubs, being analogous to the New Minor Forcing convention after a 1NT rebid by Opener. Presumably, East does not have 3-card Heart support when he bids 3♦. Nonetheless, we bid 3♥ (forcing, of course) and finally Partner supports our suit.
What next? Slam is still on the horizon, of course, but we can hardly use Roman Key Card here holding two losers in the unbid suit. We could cue-bid 5♣, but surely the straightforward bid here is 5♥. What does this show? With one suit conspicuously unbid, and with a 4♠ cue-bid available if we wanted to show a Spade control of our own, what can this bid mean other than “Do you have a Spade control?”
How does Partner respond to this 5♥ bid? - Pass obvious denies a Spade control - It makes sense that 5♠ would show the Ace (in case Partner can bid the grand slam) - It further makes sense that, if Partner has the Kx of Spades, he would bid 5NT, right-siding the contract if 6NT is playable. - Therefore, it’s logical that 6♥ should show a singleton or the KQ♠.
We wouldn’t classify these responses as conventional, merely practical logic.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
