[pescetom]

 Flem72, on 2021-August-04, 08:19, said:

1D-2C (GF, 5+C)2D (required if 5+D)-2H (4cd H)3H (4cdH, stronger than 4H)-4C (slam try denies S control)

This is all Mike Lawrence's stuff; the key is the 3H call: Even if your p'ship allows opening on Jx Jxxx AKQxx xx, this is not going to be opener's hand. For my p'ships, 4S after 4C would be KB showing a S control. You should now be able to stop in 5H if there is no QH and no AS.

After 4C, we play that 4D shows the missing S control and 4S denies. Now things are clear again and we can resume the dance.

[Gilithin]

To understand 4♠, do we not need to know which agreements are in place? specifically whether 4♦ would have been control-showing, control-denying or LTTC. I cannot see any way of empowering partner to make a better informed decision than we would be able to after RKCB, so that seems like the obvious route after 4♠; but most likely Winston is right and this is heading to a small slam absent something fairly extraordinary turning up. The main slightly awkward hands I could envisage are partner showing 1 without ♥Q, or showing 2 with ♥Q and (since we are apparently not playing kickback) we now lack a good way of finding out about ♠K below 6♥. Since this reached BBF, I am tipping that the layout will be the latter.

[DavidKok]

You don't need to find out about the ♠K below 6♥ on hearing 2+Q, you just need to stop in 6♥ if it's missing. So pull out your king ask and proceed to 7♥ (or 7NT) if partner produces the spade king.

[Winstonm]

 DavidKok, on 2021-August-04, 03:16, said:

Partner bypassed 4♦ - is this partnership agreement or does this imply partner does not have the control? Or would this be last train?

Another point of note is that partner does not have a weak NT (by virtue of not opening 1NT), so any minimum is unbalanced or semibalanced. Does the failure to splinter over 2♥ imply that partner is either 3=4=5=1 or 4=4=4=1 (don't splinter in partner's suit), 2=4=5=2 or perhaps 1=4=6=2 with a singleton honour in spades? I agree with the auction up to here and would bid 4NT next (although I think in a weak NT system there might be a case for having 2M over 1♦-2♣ not promise extras), but I'm a little worried about partner's shape. I don't know how to distinguish, say, ♠Axxx♥QJxx♦AQxx♣x from ♠Ax♥QJxx♦AQxxx♣xx (or are these ruled out by failure to bid 4♦?). Swap the ace of diamonds for the king on the first of these two hands and 6♥ is not safe (especially not on a spade lead, for example). But I guess we just take our losses in 6♥-1 opposite this nightmare hand and defence.

In my favored partnership of old, these two hands would cue bid 4D. not 4S. The cue below game is not initially as encouraging as one above game.

After 4D it would proceed:

4H-4S
4N-5x

[jillybean]

 DavidKok, on 2021-August-04, 03:16, said:

Partner bypassed 4♦ - is this partnership agreement or does this imply partner does not have the control? Or would this be last train?

Another point of note is that partner does not have a weak NT (by virtue of not opening 1NT), so any minimum is unbalanced or semibalanced. Does the failure to splinter over 2♥ imply that partner is either 3=4=5=1 or 4=4=4=1 (don't splinter in partner's suit), 2=4=5=2 or perhaps 1=4=6=2 with a singleton honour in spades? I agree with the auction up to here and would bid 4NT next (although I think in a weak NT system there might be a case for having 2M over 1♦-2♣ not promise extras), but I'm a little worried about partner's shape. I don't know how to distinguish, say, ♠Axxx♥QJxx♦AQxx♣x from ♠Ax♥QJxx♦AQxxx♣xx (or are these ruled out by failure to bid 4♦?). Swap the ace of diamonds for the king on the first of these two hands and 6♥ is not safe (especially not on a spade lead, for example). But I guess we just take our losses in 6♥-1 opposite this nightmare hand and defence.

Partner bypassed 4♦ denying a diamond control.
Partner would not splinter in your suit - clubs.

[Winstonm]

 jillybean, on 2021-August-04, 12:12, said:

Partner bypassed 4♦ denying a diamond control.
Partner would not splinter in your suit - clubs.

Partner, with AKx, Jxxx, QJxxxx, void would have bid 4H over 2H (fast arrival principle)?

[jillybean]

 Winstonm, on 2021-August-03, 17:05, said:

It would be great to be playing some serious/not serious slam gadget but what to do if not having that option?

Over 3H I will bid 4C. I assume partner bids 4S. This should be a cooperation, not a forced response, yet pard can’t be certain about trumps so I expect good ones and a reason to think slam is likely. AKx, QJ96, KJxxx, x

I don’t think I can find out about the spade king and pard could not go past 4H without a diamond control so I think I will settle for 6H over 4S . GS is possible but I don’t think we can find out enough to bid it.

Is partner not free to cue above game without D control now that the partnership have made their first cue bid 4C?

 Winstonm, on 2021-August-04, 12:19, said:

Partner, with AKx, Jxxx, QJxxxx, void would have bid 4H over 2H (fast arrival principle)?

Yes, or I'd like to think so.

[jillybean]

---

Here's the full hand, the auction was not ours but I was asked to look at the hand.
One pair bid and made 6H, one pair was allowed to make 6nt, and one pair got to 6C but went -1 Everyone else stagnated in 3/4nt, or 4/5 hearts.
Yes, this says a lot about the level of play.

[mikeh]

If 4S denied a diamond control, then it was a terrible bid.

There is no hand I can construct where responder should force beyond game, merely because responder made a mild slam try, with no diamond control.

Bear in mind that all we’ve done is to announce that we have mild slam interest, and he’s already announced some extras by not bidding 4H over 2H.

If, therefore, he bids 4H over 4C, we’re not playing him for a hopeless hand…that would have bid 4H rather than 3H.

I can’t construct a hand on which he has no diamond control and we lack 5-level safety so I would have bid keycard over 4H (for me, 4S since I play kickback, but 4N should be safe if that’s your keycard)

Bidding 4S with no diamond control is strange, not to mention bad. Why do we have to have this hand?

AKx QJxx QJxxx x is great when we hold this hand….not so much when we hold Qx A10xx xx AKQJx, and have told the opps to lead diamonds

That hand, 2=4=2=5, is worth 4C since opener might hold say Axx KJxx Axxxx x and 6H is excellent even on a spade lead….fly the Ace, cash top hearts, and play clubs from the top. Hearts 3-2 and no opponent with a stiff club, and we are close to claiming…well over 60%. Or duck the spade, then safety play trump if that works, otherwise hope hearts are 3-2 and we win the hook…% depends on the propensity for the opps to lead away from the spade king, on an auction that probably suggests a spade lead (although it gets complicated if there was a chance to double a 4S call).

Since first drafting this, I’ve seen the hand. So why can’t responder hold Qx AJxx xx AKQJx….an even better 4C cue holding….and once again we’ve told the opps to lead diamonds. Now even the 5-level is decidedly unsafe.

[Winstonm]

 jillybean, on 2021-August-04, 12:22, said:

Is partner not free to cue above game without D control now that the partnership have made their first cue bid 4C?

I can only answer based on how Bob and I used to play.

It all depends on the strength allowed for the initial slam try. If it can be somewhat mild, then opener should not cue bid 4S without a diamond control because responder has not shown that control. If responder has a "serious" slam try, he will cue again after the sign off. Note, if opener bids 4H over the 4C bid, he denies a hand that looks valuable for slam purposes, not any particular control. With a hand that is more slam inclined, 4D is available if that control is held.

Please understand that we played before the advent of things like Last Train so our arsenal was comprised of cue bidding and keycard. I like to think it honed our judgment, but I may just be fooling myself.

[jillybean]

Ok, we have not honed our system to include mild or serious slam tries. Everything is a slam try.

---

With partner making a mild slam try (4♣/3♥), 4♠ would show first round, not second, ♦ + ♠ control?

[DavidKok]

Responder has failed to bid 3♠. Therefore classically 4♦ shows a ♦+♠ control and 4♥ denies having both (but may have either one). A very annoying situation. Exploring which control is missing (it is very improbable opener has neither) may well take the partnership beyond the safety level - opener could well have ♠xxx♥QJxx♦AKQJx♣x or the likes and the defence might take the first three spades.

The direct 4♠ is not much better, because it is guaranteed to take the partnership beyond 4♥ (failing if responder has longer empty diamonds). But I don't see a good solution either (well, last train).

[mw64ahw]

Using the 1♠ GF gadget was an approach I picked up from fromageGB. It provides extra bids to shape out and show strength compared to 2♣

In this case:
1♦-1♠ GF
2♥ (4♥6+♦ Min)-3♥ SI (with an MLT of 4.5 this is well within bounds otherwise just place the contract)
3♠ (♠ control)-5♣ (3KCs w. ♣ & ♦ controls and at least 1 ♥ honour)
6♥ (We have the combined strength to make the small slam)

Using 2♣ as GF I would bid 4♥ denying the ♦ control or 2♥ honours. North has the strength to then continue the slam bidding.

So far I've avoided using frivolous/serious NT/Last train as I find the nuances a touch opaque.

[Winstonm]

 jillybean, on 2021-August-04, 14:50, said:

Ok, we have not honed our system to include mild or serious slam tries. Everything is a slam try.

---

With partner making a mild slam try (4♣/3♥), 4♠ would show first round, not second, ♦ + ♠ control?

Partner has to be thinking not simply bidding. What does partner know? A slam try has been made without a spade control. That should mean good trumps. Pard has cue bid his long suit - sounds like a pretty good suit, a source of tricks. Opener’s job now is to tell partner if his hand is suitable for slam. AKx, xxxx, KQxxx, x 4H the heart support is too weak.

KJx, QJxx, AQxxx, x 4D ok and I have diamonds controlled

So, what would 4S mean? At worst, AKx, Q9xx, KQxxx, x

With two aces and the queen the bid would be 4D

[Gilithin]

 DavidKok, on 2021-August-04, 15:51, said:

Responder has failed to bid 3♠. Therefore classically 4♦ shows a ♦+♠ control

Classically it would have shown first round control, thankfully very few pairs still use classical slam methods. In modern bidding 4♦ typically shows a ♠ control and denies the ability to go beyond game. That will often be because of a missing ♦ control. Standard modern slam bidding methods are actually pretty complex for most club players and there are simpler alternatives that achieve a similar effect without needing so many special rules and inferences. That such a simple auction as this is already open to so many shades of interpretation without specific agreements in place is an example of the issues that can easily arise.

[Gilithin]

 DavidKok, on 2021-August-04, 09:57, said:

You don't need to find out about the ♠K below 6♥ on hearing 2+Q, you just need to stop in 6♥ if it's missing. So pull out your king ask and proceed to 7♥ (or 7NT) if partner produces the spade king.

You miss the point, the king ask is 5NT so let's say partner shows the ♦K with 6♦. Now what? Even if partner only has the ♠K, most pairs play that showing a king above the trump suit is optional so there is no guarantee that you will hear 6♠ rather than 6♥. And that is even without considering partner holding a singleton ♠A or ♦AKQ. It is just very difficult to cover all of the various possibilities with any certainty.

[mw64ahw]

There seems to be a lot of over thinking here.
If South's denied a ♦ control there aren't a lot of hcps left to hold i.e.
AK♠
QJ♥
QJ♦ max.
Take out K♠ and South is opening light with 10hcp. If 4♠ is Kickback then continue cue-bidding with 5♣ (also the Kickbo bid if you use that approach) instead of asking for KCs to clarify if partner has K♠. Skipping 4NT as a proxy for ♠ control says bid the slam if you have a the ♠ controls we need. With a duff ♥ suit or w/o K♠ sigh-off in 5♥

[DavidKok]

 Gilithin, on 2021-August-04, 20:23, said:

You miss the point, the king ask is 5NT so let's say partner shows the ♦K with 6♦. Now what? Even if partner only has the ♠K, most pairs play that showing a king above the trump suit is optional so there is no guarantee that you will hear 6♠ rather than 6♥. And that is even without considering partner holding a singleton ♠A or ♦AKQ. It is just very difficult to cover all of the various possibilities with any certainty.

Ah, for me 6♦ would show the king of diamonds or the other two kings (not possible here), in particular it denies the king of spades. 6♣ would show the king of clubs or the other two, i.e. the other two. And 6♠ shows the king of spades (or the other two) and therefore denies the king of diamonds, but that's fine since we can count 13 tricks.

[fromageGB]

1♥

The benefits of "2/1 GF" apply to a major, but not a minor. Over a balanced club you want to describe your hand, and over an unbalanced diamond your priority is to find your fit or hear opener's shape. 1♥ is forcing if you want to play "natural", and I have no problem with forcing to game after that, so you do not need a GF bid.

1♦ 1♥, 2♥ - this shows 4 card support, and a common gadget after major support is 2M+1 to ask for strength.

1♦ 1♥, 2♥ 2♠, 2NT - his step1 shows 12-13. (Step2 would be 14/15, etc.) As opener is unbalanced the most important thing to find out next is his short suit, so next step asks :

1♦ 1♥, 2♥ 2♠, 2NT 3♣ - There are 2 suits it could be, so using "low/high", step1 shows short suit in clubs.

Normally the next most important thing is to discover whether singleton or void, so next step would ask for that, but here with my clubs I am not bothered. I can see a 29 count excellent fit so slam may be possible, but I am concerned about my spades. I need to cue to discover a stop before ace asking.

The concepts of "non-serious" and "grand slam try" do not apply when partner is well defined, so the 3 bids below game can be assigned as 4M-3 / 4M-2 / 4M-1 for controls of the "low", mid", high" side suits. I bid 4M-1 to ask for control in spades. "Control" is any of void/singleton/A/K. If partner does not have that control he is forced to sign off in game, but if he has control he is forced to deny a higher control (if there were one), or show his ace response as if asked with the normal 4M+1 ace ask.

1♦ 1♥, 2♥ 2♠, 2NT 3♣, 4♦ 5♣ - 2 steps above a 4♠ ask shows 2 crucial cards (AAAAKQ) so I know he has spade control and 2 keycards. We are missing an ace (or trump Q), and if an ace I do not know whether diamonds or spades. A missing diamond ace is of no concern, but nor is spades as we have KQ, and any other losers in that suit can be thrown on my clubs for a ruff.

1♦ 1♥, 2♥ 2♠, 2NT 3♣, 4♦ 5♣ , 6♥

6♥ is looking solid.

[jillybean]

Playing 2/1 or std, I want to bid my 5 card ♣ suit before my 4 card ♥'s.

All of these detailed agreements are fine if you have a partnership willing to put in the time and effort needed to master it.
I don't have that, so keeping things simple is important right now.