[bd71]

---

Matchpoints. Vanilla 2/1.

How interested in slam are you?

[Antrax]

Aren't you worried you're off ♠AK?

[bd71]

Antrax, on 2012-October-14, 01:28, said:

Aren't you worried you're off ♠AK?

Of course. Perhaps I should rephrase...are you interested enough in slam to start cue bidding which will tell you along the way about spade controls?

[wyman]

Enormously. Partner should have a really suitable hand for us here, and we'll easily find out the spade situation.

[to give a sense: at this point, I'd rather bid 6C than 5C. But this is magnified by the fact that this is MPs and 5C is a priori very unlikely to be the right spot. I'd Q at imps too though]

[TWO4BRIDGE]

deleted

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Antrax, on 2012-October-14, 01:28, said:

Aren't you worried you're off ♠AK?

3♣ in my book is GF, slammish.

4♣ by Opener is accepting ♣.

Now if one uses Zel's treatment, after 4C:
4D = negative and the next 4 steps SHOW RKC...
.. 4H = 1/4, etc...

So, because of the 2S interference, maybe Responder uses the 4D = negative BECAUSE of NO ♠ Ctrl.

4H ( "next step" ) by Opener according to Zel ASKS for key cards ( implying ♠ Ctrl ).

5C ( reply by responder ) then is the 3rd step = 2 - ♣Q .

[Antrax]

bd71, on 2012-October-14, 08:45, said:

Of course. Perhaps I should rephrase...are you interested enough in slam to start cue bidding which will tell you along the way about spade controls?

I would expect my partner to bid 3NT instead of 4♣ with a spade control, but it may be matchpointitis.

[Zelandakh]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-October-14, 11:34, said:

Now if one uses Zel's treatment, after 4C:

There is a difference here though, in that it is the limited hand that is bidding 4♣. That means that it is not per se a slam try. More than this, Opener could have agreed clubs by bidding 3♦ or 3♠ as control-showing bids over 3♣. In other words, I would like to know more about the methods being used since by my reckoning the 4♣ bid does not make a lot of sense. Notice how much simpler second round transfers would have made our life on this one.

What would happen if we responded 3♦ on every hand with a club fit and no heart fit? Actually, this would not be so bad, considerably better than the jump to 4♣ for sure! For example:
3♦ = club fit
==
3♥ = slam try (3NT = bad, others = good)
3♠ = serious, asks for spade control (3NT = no, others = yes)
3NT = serious, asks for heart control (5♣ = no, others = yes)
4♣ = serious, asks for diamond control (5♣ = no, others = yes)
4♦ = RKCB


It is somewhat cramped and requires care (unnatural 3NT here is easy to forget) but is infinitely better than wasting the entire 3 level. You could also take a hand type out and move it to another response if it seems too much. The great thing is that any responses left over can be used to show an immediate double fit. So
(after 3♣)
==
3♠ = double fit, bad hand for slam
4♣ = double fit, good hand for slam, no spade control
4♦ = double fit, good hand for slam, spade control, no diamond control
4♥ = double fit, good hand for slam, spade and diamond controls


The above has been written from a standpoint of Frivolous with denial cue bids/asking bids. It is easy to re-write it in terms of positive cue bids of course, although Serious does not work.

Perhaps I sound like Ken here but I honestly do not understand an approach which involves making a decision about cue bidding at the 4 level when we could have done so at the 3 level while simultaneously getting across slam suitability and some distributional information.