[Fluffy]

♠632
♥Q84
♦AQJ109
♣J5
all vul, IMPs


(pass)-pass-(1♠)-double
(pass)-3♦-(pass)-4♠
(pass)-??

[the hog]

Well, I am happy. I can hardly have a better hand for partner as a passed hand, can I? 6D.

[lmilne]

I'm more worried about missing grand than going off in small slam. - AKxx Kxxx AKxxx is an example where we make grand (it's weird the opponents haven't bid more spades but whatever, sometimes they pass). The biggest problem to me is the best move towards grand.

I would just bid 4NT if the doubler has a way of showing a void in his responses. Hopefully he bids 5NT (odd + void) in which case I think I'll probably bid grand.

[Zelandakh]

This is an example of why I think it is better for a cue of their suit in auctions like this to deny first round control rather than showing it. If we had first round spade control and grand slam interest then we would surely be happy just to ask for key cards. So 5♠ as a grand slam try with first round control is essentially redundant. However, we often have no way to show a grand slam try without a control when we are unable to start asking. In such cases, it is rather nice if the cue bid shows that hand.

[gnasher]

I don't think we can have two top losers, because with a hand like x Kxxx Kxxx AKQxx he would probably just bid Keycard himself. Hence I bid 4NT and see what he does

If he does have a void, he's not required to show it - doing so implies that he thinks we have the wherewithal for seven, so with a hand like - Axxx Kxxxx AKxx he should just show his keycards. If he does show a void and three keycards, this hand must be enough.

[PhilKing]

I think a few of the replies are obsessing about missing grand slam unnecessarily. If we jump to 6♦, partner can raise to seven when he has the deck.

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2013-February-13, 05:48, said:

I think a few of the replies are obsessing about missing grand slam unnecessarily. If we jump to 6♦, partner can raise to seven when he has the deck.

Maybe, but what's the downside of bidding Keycard? If there isn't one, we should bid it and save partner any problem.

[PhilKing]

gnasher, on 2013-February-13, 08:01, said:

Maybe, but what's the downside of bidding Keycard? If there isn't one, we should bid it and save partner any problem.

I don't play it in this auction - 4NT is just showing a slam try for me. Besides, if I bid 4NT (RKC), I am not hugely confident as to how to proceed after a 5NT reply. I have merely transferred the problem. I think I would like to have the ♥K to invite grand, and I would do so by bidding 5♥ playing standard methods. In fact, I am virtually obligated to cue any relevant feature, since partner is unlimited.

I could reverse the tables and ask what is the downside of 6♦. Good trumps, good hand, nothing to cue.

[Fluffy]

partner has

♠J
♥AKxx
♦Kxxxxx
♣AK

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2013-February-13, 08:12, said:

I don't play it in this auction - 4NT is just showing a slam try for me.

I agree that if we didn't play Keycard it would be foolish to try to bid Keycard. I'm not sure what that has to do with the merits of bidding it in the context of a system which does include Keycard.

Quote

Besides, if I bid 4NT (RKC), I am not hugely confident as to how to proceed after a 5NT reply. I have merely transferred the problem. I think I would like to have the ♥K to invite grand, and I would do so by bidding 5♥ playing standard methods. In fact, I am virtually obligated to cue any relevant feature, since partner is unlimited.

If partner showed a grand-slam try with a spade void and all the other keycards, I would be quite confident as to how to proceed, especially if I had already denied ♥K by bidding 4NT rather than 5♥. Which hand are you worried about?

Quote

I could reverse the tables and ask what is the downside of 6♦. Good trumps, good hand, nothing to cue.

Maybe he has - AKxx Kxxxx AKxx or - Axxx Kxxxx AKQx or - AKJx Kxxxx Axxx, and would wonder whether there was a round-suit loser. By bidding 6♦ rather than 4NT, you take away the space for him to consult us.

Or maybe we can achieve the same result by bidding either 4NT or 6♦, in which case there's no reason to criticise either choice.

[mike777]

Fluffy, on 2013-February-12, 17:16, said:

♠632
♥Q84
♦AQJ109
♣J5
all vul, IMPs


(pass)-pass-(1♠)-double
(pass)-3♦-(pass)-4♠
(pass)-??

fwiw I assume 4s exclusion? will other posters?

[PhilKing]

gnasher, on 2013-February-13, 08:01, said:

Maybe, but what's the downside of bidding Keycard? If there isn't one, we should bid it and save partner any problem.

My mistake was responding to this bit at all.

gnasher, on 2013-February-14, 01:37, said:

If partner showed a grand-slam try with a spade void and all the other keycards, I would be quite confident as to how to proceed, especially if I had already denied ♥K by bidding 4NT rather than 5♥. Which hand are you worried about?

I am worried that the inference that I deny a king by bidding RKCB will, for some inexplicable reason, not filter through to partner. Now maybe you and I would both bid 5♥, but many would not (a further irrelevancy, just for your pleasure - I would not bid 5♥ because that would be Sand Wedge RKCB).

With - AKxx Kxxxx AQxx I would expect him to bid 5NT (odd + void) over RKCB, and grand will be rather poor. Anyway, it's all rather academic, since I don't expect partner to have anything of the sort given the lack of competition.

[PhilKing]

mike777, on 2013-February-14, 02:35, said:

fwiw I assume 4s exclusion? will other posters?

Not me. I play exclusion for major suits only. I think exclusion is icing on the cake and splinter takes precedence. When we are in a minor suit auction there is less often room for both.

[Fluffy]

PhilKing, on 2013-February-14, 05:45, said:

With - AKxx Kxxxx AQxx I would expect him to bid 5NT (odd + void) over RKCB, and grand will be rather poor.

Does poor mean the same for you as for me?

[PhilKing]

Fluffy, on 2013-February-14, 06:12, said:

Does poor mean the same for you as for me?

By "poor" I meant "cold on the bidding". Take away the queen.