[gwnn]

Axxxx
x
AKxxx
xx

1NT-2♥-
3♠-?

MP, all white

[skjaeran]

4♦ cue, wtp?

[cherdano]

It is clear to make a slam try. I will just cue 4♦ and give up if partner doesn't move to slam by himself over that, I don't think I am good enough to bid keycards over partner's 4♥ cooperation, although it is close.

[mcphee]

It would be nice to know what this super accept shows. I use this jump to show 4 trumps and all side suits controlled max. I know they do not have that hand. So I am guessing a bit but I also know we have now agreed S and will bid 3NT to see if partner is able to cue bid C.

[helene_t]

I know 4♦ is the correct bid but I would probably just bid 6♠ at the table. Might prevent opps from finding the killing lead.

[inquiry]

There was no double of 2♥ and if you bid 4♦, helene is right, you will get a club lead against slam. I think just bid 6♠ and hope for the best. Sometimes too much science is a bad thing.

[pclayton]

inquiry, on Jan 27 2008, 09:48 AM, said:

There was no double of 2♥ and if you bid 4♦, helene is right, you will get a club lead against slam. I think just bid 6♠ and hope for the best. Sometimes too much science is a bad thing.

Same here. Why do I want to give them a clue where their winners are? 6 should be a good contract opposite most superaccepts and 7 is out of the question.

A club card isn't necessarily the key to slam anyway.

[whereagles]

I'll just bid 6♠ here. Even if we're out ♣AK, LHO might not find the lead. Basically, agree with ben

[han]

I'll vote for science.

[skjaeran]

Hannie, on Jan 27 2008, 08:29 PM, said:

I'll vote for science.

Me too. My experience is that opps (far) more often than not finds the club lead if I just blast slam.

[Fluffy]

science is good, 4♣ is also good, the sequence 4♣-4♥-4NT.... might induce a diamond lead.

EDIT: 4♣ is stupid I just realised we are not declarer and are trying to get a lead directional double :S.

[Halo]

4D now , and 5D if partner signs off (I don't need a heart stop for slam).

The questions for me are:

Can we can make seven, for example:

KQxx
Axx(x)
Qxx
Ax(x)

Can we make six:

KQxx
Kxxx
Qxx
AKx

Can we only make five:

KQxx
AKQx
Qxx
xx

[gnasher]

Does everyone really play 4D as just a cue bid here?

I think it should show a second suit. Partner needs to be able to evaluate secondary honours and ruffing values; if 4D says merely "I have the ace or king of diamonds", how is he supposed to know that xxx-AQx in the minors is bad, and Qxx-Axx is good?

To initiate an exchange of cue bids you can bid 3NT, which doesn't have much use in a natural sense and will often be more economical anyway.

[MFA]

gnasher, on Jan 27 2008, 04:35 PM, said:

Does everyone really play 4D as just a cue bid here?

I think it should show a second suit.  Partner needs to be able to evaluate secondary honours and ruffing values; if 4D says merely "I have the ace or king of diamonds", how is he supposed to know that xxx-AQx in the minors is bad, and Qxx-Axx is good?

To initiate an exchange of cue bids you can bid 3NT, which doesn't have much use in a natural sense and will often be more economical anyway.

I play 4x as splinters, and 3NT as slamgoing without splinters that you want to show.

What did the superaccept show? I'm used to a minimum hand with 4 trumps. Better hands would bid something else on the way.

Opposite a minimum, I will guess to splinter 4♥ and then pass 4♠.
Opposite a maximum, I will try 3NT and blackwood to slam over 4♣.

[sceptic]

ignore someone asked it

[pclayton]

gnasher, on Jan 27 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

Does everyone really play 4D as just a cue bid here?

I think it should show a second suit. Partner needs to be able to evaluate secondary honours and ruffing values; if 4D says merely "I have the ace or king of diamonds", how is he supposed to know that xxx-AQx in the minors is bad, and Qxx-Axx is good?

To initiate an exchange of cue bids you can bid 3NT, which doesn't have much use in a natural sense and will often be more economical anyway.

Nice idea but I think this Fantasyland.

How would we bid with: Axxxxx xx Ax KQ. Im sure we'd all make the 'obvious' 4D cue looking for a heart control before RKC.

Even if 4D is interpreted correctly, how is pard supposed to know xx and xxxx is OK but xxx isn't?

[jdeegan]

I love this hand, and I want to shoot it out at 6♠, and I would do this in a heartbeat if I had another high card (even a queen) so that the odds favor our having 12 tricks sooner or later. Let the opponents find the killing defense - fat chance. Alas, as it is, we may lose a diamond plus a heart or a club and that would be that.

Surrounded by teammates who know what they are doing, I'm in favor of just making another slam try - like 4♦.

[cherdano]

IMO the bashers are overbidding this hand. Aside from the fact that a non-club lead is less critical with partner being declarer (in case he has ♣K) -- even if we are off the first two club tricks and avoid the club lead, there is no guarantee that we have 12 tricks.

[Codo]

pclayton, on Jan 28 2008, 01:15 PM, said:

gnasher, on Jan 27 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

Does everyone really play 4D as just a cue bid here?

I think it should show a second suit.  Partner needs to be able to evaluate secondary honours and ruffing values; if 4D says merely "I have the ace or king of diamonds", how is he supposed to know that xxx-AQx in the minors is bad, and Qxx-Axx is good?

To initiate an exchange of cue bids you can bid 3NT, which doesn't have much use in a natural sense and will often be more economical anyway.

Nice idea but I think this Fantasyland.

How would we bid with: Axxxxx xx Ax KQ. Im sure we'd all make the 'obvious' 4D cue looking for a heart control before RKC.

Even if 4D is interpreted correctly, how is pard supposed to know xx and xxxx is OK but xxx isn't?

What is fantasyland? If you play wj2005 f.e. it is more crutial to show second suits and/or shortnesses then just controls- For the reasons gnasher mentioned.

And to use 3 NT in this sequence as artifical is no brand new toy either. YOu have heard of trump cuebids and/or serious 3 NT, so this is normal too.


Btw: Your example is silly. I guess just a minority will bid 4 Diamond. Most will bid 4 Club.

But you can have it all: bid 3 NT to ask for cuebids and 4 in a new suit to show a second suit. (Or a shortness if you prefer that.) This works reamrably well in your example and in the actual hand.

And this is no fantasy island. There are people out there who play these methods.