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.

 

 

9th August, 2006               Board 23      Dealer South      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      Dealer North       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      Dealer South       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      Dealer East       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 4^th 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      Dealer North       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      Dealer East       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      Dealer North       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