[Liversidge]

I have just found a source for Key Card Blackwood as I have described it on Richard Pavlicek'website - the Advanced Partnersip Bidding section - under Suit Slam Bidding.
http://www.rpbridge.net/3m00.htm

What follows is a direct cut and paste. he does not mention RKCB, queen ask etc., just the basic system I have been describing.

"The best of the many ace-asking conventions is “key-card” Blackwood. The basic concept is to count the king of trumps — always an important card — just like an ace. Thus there are five key cards, and your partnership needs at least four of them to warrant bidding a slam".

From comments made on BBO in the past I gather that he is well respected, which is odd given the comments on this thread about Key Card Blackwood. All very confusing.

[Zelandakh]

Liversidge, on 2017-December-16, 15:41, said:

What follows is a direct cut and paste. he does not mention RKCB, queen ask etc., just the basic system I have been describing.

If you page down to the responses he suggests
5♣ = 0 or 3
5♦ = 1 or 4
5♥ = 2 or 5

This is obviously meant as a simplified form of RKCB (leaving out the trump queen) rather than the KCB you described. The idea is presumably to make the transition to RKCB itself easier. He also specifically mentions the possibility of asking about the trump queen further down. What I do not like is that he includes voids in his responses. I think this is much less important than the trump queen and would personally prefer to add complexity in the order where it brings the most benefit.

[Liversidge]

Zelandakh, on 2017-December-16, 15:52, said:

If you page down to the responses he suggests
5♣ = 0 or 3
5♦ = 1 or 4
5♥ = 2 or 5

This is obviously meant as a simplified form of RKCB (leaving out the trump queen) rather than the KCB you described. The idea is presumably to make the transition to RKCB itself easier. He also specifically mentions the possibility of asking about the trump queen further down. What I do not like is that he includes voids in his responses. I think this is much less important than the trump queen and would personally prefer to add complexity in the order where it brings the most benefit.

I don't see how his article can in any way be described as a simplified form of RKCB. He doesn't mention the trump queen anywhere in connection with the responses. Anyone who is not already familiar with RKCB would just see it as a 5 ace showing system. How could they see it as anything else?

As for his sequences, I missed that, and I think it's counterproductive as it stands. The logical extension to standard Blackwood - 5♦ = 1 or 5, is easier to remember and he gives no explanation for his sequence, which looks odd on the face of it, no hint that it's in preparation for something yet to come.
But the point I was making is that he has described / recommended a system called key Card Blackwood, not Roman Keycard, and yet there have been some rather dismissive comments about it's very existance and worth that have rather shaken my tree.

[dsLawsd]

First question: How often do you play?
Secondly: How many different partners have you (both)?

Advanced methods are great for partners who have hours of play together and a disadvantage when used by new, non-expert players.

I recommend reading Edwin Kanter's great books on the subject- and he would point out the misadventures that even World Class players have
had with RKCB!
Some great players used only a very few conventions because they
concentrated on card play and judgment ( Try Mike Lawrence's fine books on the subject)AND especially partnership defense.
Use conventions only when both are comfortable with them.

Need a place to find the books- check out The Bridge World website.

[helene_t]

I thought RKC was 1430 while KC was 0314. Obviously this makes almost zero difference. Play 0314 if you find it easier or play 1430 if you believe is is more common to have 14 than to have 03.

Anyway: 04-15-2-3 is one of those nonstandard conventions which absolutely should not be taught. I suppose the motivation is that you sometimes can't distinguish 0 from 3. But if asker has only two KCs himself then he should assume that 03 means 3, since otherwise we would have been at the 5-level with only two keycards, and in that case asking for keycards was misguided in the first place.

So just play 0314 or 1430, and interpret the answer as 3 or 4 if possible, and as 0 or 1 if 3/4 would be impossible.

[Liversidge]

helene_t, on 2017-December-16, 22:09, said:

I thought RKC was 1430 while KC was 0314. Obviously this makes almost zero difference. Play 0314 if you find it easier or play 1430 if you believe is is more common to have 14 than to have 03.

Anyway: 04-15-2-3 is one of those nonstandard conventions which absolutely should not be taught. I suppose the motivation is that you sometimes can't distinguish 0 from 3. But if asker has only two KCs himself then he should assume that 03 means 3, since otherwise we would have been at the 5-level with only two keycards, and in that case asking for keycards was misguided in the first place.

So just play 0314 or 1430, and interpret the answer as 3 or 4 if impossible, and as 0 or 1 if 3/4 would be impossible.

When I play RKCB (with one partner), I play the 1430 version, for the simple reason that it is slightly easier to say when asked by opps which version I play ("fourteen thirty")

I gather that the 0314 version was the RKCB version first published

Bridgeguys.com makes the following distinction between RKCB and Key Card Blackwood:

Basic Information

From the Blackwood convention, there is the variation of Roman Key Card Blackwood, which is an Ace-asking bid and where the King of Trump is counted as the fifth Ace or Key Card, and Key Card Blackwood.
Responses to Key Card Blackwood

5♣ : Shows 0 or 4 Key Cards
5 ♦: Shows 1 or 5 Key Cards
5 ♥: Shows 2 Key Cards
5 ♠: Shows 3 Key Cards

Bridgehands.com says:

Keycard Blackwood - A slam bidding variation from regular Blackwood, designed to increase the accuracy when considering the potential to reach slam or grandslam. This method recognizes the trump King as equivalent to other Aces, thus five "aces" or keys are considered. In response to a bid of 4 Notrump (Blackwood):

Response Meaning

5♣ 0 or 4 keys

5♦ 1 or 5 keys

5♥ 2 keys

5♠ 3 keys

[johnu]

Liversidge, on 2017-December-16, 23:44, said:

When I play RKCB (with one partner), I play the 1430 version, for the simple reason that it is slightly easier to say when asked by opps which version I play ("fourteen thirty")

I gather that the 0314 version was the RKCB version first published

Bridgeguys.com makes the following distinction between RKCB and Key Card Blackwood:

Basic Information

From the Blackwood convention, there is the variation of Roman Key Card Blackwood, which is an Ace-asking bid and where the King of Trump is counted as the fifth Ace or Key Card, and Key Card Blackwood.
Responses to Key Card Blackwood

5♣ : Shows 0 or 4 Key Cards
5 ♦: Shows 1 or 5 Key Cards
5 ♥: Shows 2 Key Cards
5 ♠: Shows 3 Key Cards

If you look at the end of the article where the updated version is described, the steps are

5♣ 0 or 3 keycards

5♦ 1 or 4 keycards (some people reverse the 5♣ and 5♦ responses)

5♥ 2 keycards without trump queen

5♠ 2 keycards with trump queen

The responses you have quoted are apparently from an original version of the convention. I have never played against anybody who used the original version and can only recall people playing the updated version which I have listed. The glaring weakness of the original version is that you can never ask for the trump queen after a 2 or 3 keycard response.

[fromageGB]

helene_t, on 2017-December-16, 22:09, said:

...Anyway: 04-15-2-3 is one of those nonstandard conventions which absolutely should not be taught.

I can't agree with this. Having a bid with two meanings is to be avoided is possible, but if not, they need to be identifiable in practice. Playing RKCB with a difference of 3, I have had hands that cannot distinguish between 0 and 3, or 1 or 4, because partner could logically have either. Playing a difference of 4 makes it much clearer - there is a significant difference between them.

It is not right to say that you should not be asking if the 3-difference can cause you to go wrong.

[Liversidge]

I really thought this would be a straightforward question.
I know and have played RKCB 3014 and 1430. Before that I played standard Key Card, which, according to a number of good references, was a recognised extension of Standard Blackwood that was perceived to be better than Standard Blackwood, but was soon overtaken by the much superior RKCB at intermediate level.
My question was simply whether Key Card might be a useful stepping stone for an average once a week player wanting to develop, but for whom RKCB might be a rather big leap.

I have had some replies that have made me feel like the whole idea is misguided/heretical, that standard Key Card (as per Bridgehands, Bridgeguys, Mr Bridge) is awful, or may never have existed as a recognised variant of Blackwood but is some deviant local abherration, or that RKCB with the peculiar 031422 steps but without any reference whatsoever to the trump queen somehow makes it better than Key Card (anything has to be better than Key Card!), even for someone who might never move on to full RKCB, as is the case with quite a few of my local club members who are happy sticking with standard Key Card. Was it a backward step to make the simple step up to Key Card? Is it likely to have adversely affected their bridge?


Others do seem to have recogised that I do have RKCB in mind as a potential ultimate destination for my partner if he wants it, but am thinking that maybe there is plenty of other low hanging fruit we can work on first, such as Negative Doubles, 4th Suit Forcing, cue bid raises, UCB etc.,that come up quite a lot - maybe we should prioritise some of these over advancing straight to RKCB. I don't know the answer, which is why I asked.

[Vampyr]

Liversidge, on 2017-December-17, 11:47, said:

RKCB with the peculiar 031422 steps but without any reference whatsoever to the trump queen

What is the 22 in this version?

[smerriman]

fromageGB, on 2017-December-17, 07:55, said:

I can't agree with this. Having a bid with two meanings is to be avoided is possible, but if not, they need to be identifiable in practice. Playing RKCB with a difference of 3, I have had hands that cannot distinguish between 0 and 3, or 1 or 4, because partner could logically have either. Playing a difference of 4 makes it much clearer - there is a significant difference between them.

It is not right to say that you should not be asking if the 3-difference can cause you to go wrong.

Isn't it standard that if you are in any doubt as to the response, you sign off - and partner raises to slam with 3 or 4 keycards? So it seems very unlikely you'd ever run into any difficulties.

[helene_t]

smerriman, on 2017-December-17, 18:22, said:

Isn't it standard that if you are in any doubt as to the response, you sign off - and partner raises to slam with 3 or 4 keycards? So it seems very unlikely you'd ever run into any difficulties.

With 4 keycards you obviously raise but with 3 I would not recommend it. First of all there could be situations where partner asks for keycard having zero themselves. Second, if a minor suit is trumps, asker could pass the response because they assume that it shows 0/1. It obviously depends on context - if you have opened a weak 1NT holding three keycards you obviously accept any slam invite and raise if partner signs off after your keycard response.

[smerriman]

That doesn't make sense to me - if 3 keycards aren't enough for slam, what were they going to do if you showed 2?

[gordontd]

smerriman, on 2017-December-17, 20:00, said:

That doesn't make sense to me - if 3 keycards aren't enough for slam, what were they going to do if you showed 2?

It depends on the context. In some sequences 3 is more than expected, in others it’s fewer.

[Zelandakh]

gordontd, on 2017-December-18, 02:47, said:

It depends on the context. In some sequences 3 is more than expected, in others it’s fewer.

This is why I gave the exclusion for 2♣ openers with 0 or 1 keycards. This is a simple and easy rule for improvers. A pair can add other special cases, such as a 2NT opening or JS rebid for example, later as they get more used to the concept.

[fromageGB]

smerriman, on 2017-December-17, 18:22, said:

Isn't it standard that if you are in any doubt as to the response, you sign off - and partner raises to slam with 3 or 4 keycards? So it seems very unlikely you'd ever run into any difficulties.

I think you are missing something important here. If partner has 3 or 4 and jumps to 6T (trumps), then you have completely lost the ability to investigate 7. Yet it is precisely when partner is that strong you do want to be able to investigate before deciding on 6 or 7. Why play something so bad in this context, when you could play something that either has no duality / ambiguity at all, or play something where the duality comprises a bigger difference in the two values, that has less likelihood of causing a problem?

[Zelandakh]

fromageGB, on 2017-December-18, 09:27, said:

I think you are missing something important here. If partner has 3 or 4 and jumps to 6T (trumps), then you have completely lost the ability to investigate 7.

Standard is actually to continue as if the 5M sign off was a trump queen ask but as we are discussing simplified forms for beginners it seems reasonable to use 6M (or alternatively 5NT) to show the positive.

[smerriman]

fromageGB, on 2017-December-18, 09:27, said:

I think you are missing something important here. If partner has 3 or 4 and jumps to 6T (trumps), then you have completely lost the ability to investigate 7.

I find it hard to imagine a hand where you believe it's possible for you to only hold 1 keycard between the two of you, yet at the same time also believe it's possible you have enough combined strength for a grand slam.

But surely the 04/15/2/3 approach is going to cause much more regular problems when you have no space to explore after a 3 keycard response.

[Zelandakh]

smerriman, on 2017-December-18, 14:31, said:

I find it hard to imagine a hand where you believe it's possible for you to only hold 1 keycard between the two of you, yet at the same time also believe it's possible you have enough combined strength for a grand slam.

You might find it helpful for your imagination to do a recount.

[smerriman]

Sorry, meant 2, not 1. But same idea applies