[CSGibson]

---

You have shown a 15-17 NT, and a hand with a spade control/values & support in clubs. Partner has shown a slam try with hearts and clubs. 4H is undiscussed, but ostensibly natural. Do you move on from here, and if so, how?

[Cyberyeti]

What is your cue bidding style, in my world, partner has categorically denied a diamond control, are you playing minorwood or KB if he wanted to ask aces in ♣ ? I also don't know what hands he's denied by no taking other routes.

[rogerclee]

6C

[CSGibson]

partner had the option of showing specific shortness and a 6 card heart suit. Our cue-bidding style is to always bid first round controls, and to bid 2nd round controls only if it seems likely to be useful to partner. 3S does not demand a cue-bid. We do not have minorwood/kickback available in this partnership, cue-bidding will have to suffice to determine whether you can use 4N as keycard safely.

[paulg]

I move when partner is making slam tries and I hold AKQ in his suit.

[mr1303]

I would worry two things here.

1) 3C could be somewhat tentative with a hand that doesn't want to bid no trumps.

2) Does 3S absolutely agree clubs? Or could it just be a denial of the ability to bid something else (3H, 3NT?)

3) 4H sounds worryingly like a suggestion to play on a "wheel has come off" auction.

I'm going to bid 5C here. Hopefully partner can work out that we don't have a diamond control. But I imagine I'll be discussing this hand later. I much prefer 4C on my previous turn.

[billw55]

I have all my bids. I prefer clubs to hearts. I don't have a diamond control. 5♣

[Phil]

6♣ if 3♣ really is slammish.

Curious what do you do as responder with xx AQxxx Kx Jxxxx after a transfer if 3♣ is a slam try.

[CSGibson]

Phil, on 2013-April-24, 12:12, said:

6♣ if 3♣ really is slammish.

Curious what do you do as responder with xx AQxxx Kx Jxxxx after a transfer if 3♣ is a slam try.

Call the director?

[CSGibson]

mr1303, on 2013-April-24, 11:36, said:

I would worry two things here.

1) 3C could be somewhat tentative with a hand that doesn't want to bid no trumps.

2) Does 3S absolutely agree clubs? Or could it just be a denial of the ability to bid something else (3H, 3NT?)

3) 4H sounds worryingly like a suggestion to play on a "wheel has come off" auction.

I'm going to bid 5C here. Hopefully partner can work out that we don't have a diamond control. But I imagine I'll be discussing this hand later. I much prefer 4C on my previous turn.

This partner does not get creative with their bids, 3C guarentees 4+ clubs. 3S is absolutely forward-going with a club fit, as described in the OP. You can safely assume that the OP is not trying to trick you, and that the information there is solid.

[aguahombre]

Phil, on 2013-April-24, 12:12, said:

6♣ if 3♣ really is slammish.

Curious what do you do as responder with xx AQxxx Kx Jxxxx after a transfer if 3♣ is a slam try.

I agree with your objection to the methods. "Natural, forcing, and might be slammish" is our choice. And obviously your 2-5-2-5 hand, if adjusted slightly to 1-5-2-5 would sign off in 3NT after the 3S control bid for clubs denying 3 hearts, so I think we agree on that point too.

With the OP situation, including its conditions about 1st round control, etc., I still would blast 6C as Roger originally suggested. Partner should have taken a different route with a slammish hand containing no diamond or club control; so we are not off two cashing diamonds, and I can show my super clubs.

[Phil]

CSGibson, on 2013-April-24, 12:15, said:

Call the director?

Fine, take away a spade and stop dodging the issue...

[CSGibson]

Phil, on 2013-April-24, 12:26, said:

Fine, take away a spade and stop dodging the issue...

3N in this partnership.

[aguahombre]

CSGibson, on 2013-April-24, 12:31, said:

3N in this partnership.

Of course, with Phil's hand to which you were referring, your partnership would not be at that point. It is not slammish.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

3C should be GF, slammish..... but it is normally supposed to show a "good" 2nd suit...
normally a 2nd 5 card suit or at least a very good 4 cards .

What bothers me is partner is missing the top 3 honors in ♣. S/he must have a really good ♥ suit and possibly a 6 card ♣ suit to the J 10 .... maybe a 6-6 .

I think I'd just blast to 6C also after 3C .

EDIT: I also don't think 3S over 3C is an advance cue for ♣ as trumps .

[aguahombre]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-24, 12:53, said:

3C should be GF, slammish.....
EDIT: I also don't think 3S over 3C is an advance cue for ♣ as trumps .

I would agree with the first item if you meant opener should presuppose 3C is slammish while allowing for the possibility of responder merely having doubt about 3NT.

I just flat disagree with the "edit".

[CSGibson]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-24, 12:53, said:

I think I'd just blast to 6C also after 3C .

EDIT: I also don't think 3S over 3C is an advance cue for ♣ as trumps .

Giving up on grand...hmmm...

Also, I am not saying that 3S over 3C is an advanced cue for clubs in all partnerships. I'm saying that this partnership has defined it as such. So you are just flat wrong to say that it isn't, since this problem is from the perspective of my partnership agreements.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

CSGibson, on 2013-April-24, 13:29, said:

Giving up on grand...hmmm...

According to OP's auction, if 3S is the cheapest Ctrl-cue for ♣, then it denies a ♦-Ctrl.
Then Opener's 4H should be a Ctrl-cue ( and actually should show at least 2 of the top 3 ), and also denying a ♦-Ctrl .
[ Why should 4H be natural if ♣ were agreed ? ].

Soo, maybe my 6C blast is too optimistic if there are at least 2 quick ♦ losers ....( but I blasted over the 3C bid ) .

[aguahombre]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-April-24, 15:18, said:

According to OP's auction, if 3S is the cheapest Ctrl-cue for ♣, then it denies a ♦-Ctrl.
Then Opener's 4H should be a Ctrl-cue ( and actually should show at least 2 of the top 3 ), and also denying a ♦-Ctrl .
[ Why should 4H be natural if ♣ were agreed ? ].

Soo, maybe my 6C blast is too optimistic if there are at least 2 quick ♦ losers ....( but I blasted over the 3C bid ) .

Their cue-bidding style as stated does not deny second round diamond control. We can assume 2nd-round diamond control because of the slam try and our club holding. If we are wrong about that, then perhaps responder will reconsider what a slam try looks like and how to better explore with his actual hand.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

aguahombre, on 2013-April-24, 16:08, said:

Their cue-bidding style as stated does not deny second round diamond control. We can assume 2nd-round diamond control because of the slam try and our club holding. If we are wrong about that, then perhaps responder will reconsider what a slam try looks like and how to better explore with his actual hand.

I finally read Gibson's post # 4 .