[mw64ahw]

Not sure I want to play ball and perhaps 5♣ is the correct call. I don't like the fast 4♣ and prefer bids below 3N which can retrospectively be viewed as control bids. In addition, I would prefer 4♦ as even KCs in ♣ if that is he case.

Alternatively 4♥, again odd KCs with ♥ control. Now bypassing 4N by either player denies the ♦ control playing Kickbo rather than Kickback.

[jillybean]

In that case...

MP

---

I am playing kickback over majors with only 1 partner.

[pescetom]

mw64ahw, on 2026-September-29, 05:39, said:

perhaps 5♣ is the correct call. I don't like the fast 4♣ and prefer bids below 3N which can retrospectively be viewed as control bids. In addition, I would prefer 4♦ as even KCs in ♣ if that is he case.

I too would prefer to use advance control-bids here in a better partnership. But that needs detailed discussion and practice, for instance does South bid 4♥ to affirm control after already bidding 3♥ that could have been a stopper for NT? Without such discussion the 4♣ bid is simple and clear.

mw64ahw, on 2026-September-29, 05:39, said:

Not sure I want to play ball

Fair enough.
I proposed this sequence in an attempt to avoid revealing both hands, which spoils things in many ways. But there is only one obvious continuation by South which Jillybean already provided and you are right that it is unreasonable to straight jacket the discussion into one set of methods, so let's roll back to North's bid instead.


MP

---

Your preferred bid as North?

[akwoo]

This depends on my partnership's slam agreements.

I definitely want to be asking for keycards. But if partner has a third spade I want to be asking in spades, not clubs.

My preferred approach would be to bid 3D, asking partner to bid 3S with a 3rd spade. But if partner doesn't have a 3rd spade, I probably don't have a way to set clubs and ask for keycards.

Given that, I would hope immediately bidding 4D is kickback, or that immediately bidding 4C is minorwood.

[mike777]

 pescetom, on 2026-September-29, 11:03, said:

I too would prefer to use advance control-bids here in a better partnership. But that needs detailed discussion and practice, for instance does South bid 4♥ to affirm control after already bidding 3♥ that could have been a stopper for NT? Without such discussion the 4♣ bid is simple and clear.


Fair enough.
I proposed this sequence in an attempt to avoid revealing both hands, which spoils things in many ways. But there is only one obvious continuation by South which Jillybean already provided and you are right that it is unreasonable to straight jacket the discussion into one set of methods, so let's roll back to North's bid instead.


MP

---

Your preferred bid as North?

4D kickback why? South has limited their hand
6C option2

[mw64ahw]

Tough one, but not sure I'd expect a slam with max. 23hcp even if the mod. losers tie up.
I guess I could stumble into 6♣ via 3♦ with a non-regular partner, but playing TW I'd find the double fit and then have a tricky choice between ♠ & ♣.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-September-29, 08:41, said:

I am playing kickback over majors with only 1 partner.

I think it is really useful over clubs, where 4NT makes no sense and it is relatively easy to disambiguate 4♦ as an ask.
I can live without it over diamonds (except in some conventions) and would not dream of playing it over hearts.

jillybean, on 2026-September-29, 08:41, said:

In that case...

MP

---

So how does it continue now you see both hands?

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-September-29, 14:56, said:

So how does it continue now you see both hands?

I think we would stop in 5

I agree, KB is useful over clubs, we just don't have it.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2026-September-29, 12:29, said:

4D kickback why? South has limited their hand
6C option2

Ridiculous comment, partner could have A, Axx, Axx, Axxxxx or A, KQx, Kxx, AQxxxx

It's difficult to be objective seeing both hands.

We would start 1♣(4+)-1♠-1N (15-bad 19) then there are choices.

Do you want to GF opposite a 2434 15 count ? is the basis for the decision.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-September-29, 18:02, said:

I think we would stop in 5

To proceed rationally I think you need to have agreed that 4♠ in this situation shows diamonds control and says nothing about spades control. Otherwise you would be stuck when North holds diamonds control but no spades control, even if South was to hold spades AK.

 jillybean, on 2026-September-29, 18:02, said:

I agree, KB is useful over clubs, we just don't have it.

All it takes is a few lines of meta rules about when 4♦ is RKCB for clubs (and when if ever 4NT is).
Plus of course a partner sufficiently flexible to get the follow ups (not just the initial reply, but Q and K stuff too) right with an asking strain different from NT.