[gszes]

 ArtK78, on 2015-April-21, 14:56, said:

You are dreaming if you think that partner can ethically bid 6♠ over your 5♠ signoff or bid 7♠ over your 6♠ call after 4NT.

If I ask for the aces and p shows one then I ask for the Q and p shows it and I then try to sign off in 6s P would have to realize we have all of the controls and that merely having the controls and the spade Q were not enough to bid 7 but a couple of extra spades (which I cannot possibly know about) should be more than enough to allow p to very ethically bid 7:)

[ArtK78]

 gszes, on 2015-April-23, 17:17, said:

If I ask for the aces and p shows one then I ask for the Q and p shows it and I then try to sign off in 6s P would have to realize we have all of the controls and that merely having the controls and the spade Q were not enough to bid 7 but a couple of extra spades (which I cannot possibly know about) should be more than enough to allow p to very ethically bid 7:)

If your asking bid showed all the controls, then partner could bid 7 over the asking bid. If he answered the asking bid and, after you signed off in 6, then he bid 7, I suggest to you that something in the manner of your sign off suggested that he bid 7. He obtained no additional information from your sign off to suggest that he bid 7. Therefore, it must have been the way you signed off that suggested to him that he should bid another.

[zenbiddist]

Some experts like to play that where 4NT is pick-a-minor, you can use it then correct to 5M as a slam try.

[Jinksy]

 ArtK78, on 2015-April-23, 22:02, said:

If your asking bid showed all the controls, then partner could bid 7 over the asking bid. If he answered the asking bid and, after you signed off in 6, then he bid 7, I suggest to you that something in the manner of your sign off suggested that he bid 7. He obtained no additional information from your sign off to suggest that he bid 7. Therefore, it must have been the way you signed off that suggested to him that he should bid another.

In any case, since when does asking for the trump Q show all the controls? Can't we ever have hands where we think it's necessary to make small slam a good proposition?

[ArtK78]

 Jinksy, on 2015-April-28, 11:47, said:

In any case, since when does asking for the trump Q show all the controls? Can't we ever have hands where we think it's necessary to make small slam a good proposition?

In traditional slam bidding, making a second ask after the first ask guaranteed all of the first round controls (and, in the case of RKCB, the trump king as well). If you play that way, then responder can bid the grand with significant extras immediately over the second ask. What he cannot do is respond to the ask and then, when asker signs off, bid one more.

If you play that making a second ask after the first ask does NOT guarantee all of the first round controls, then responder can NEVER bid one more.

In either case, there is NO circumstance where responder can answer the second ask and then bid a grand after the asker signs off.

[MrAce]

 ArtK78, on 2015-April-28, 12:16, said:

In traditional slam bidding, making a second ask after the first ask guaranteed all of the first round controls (and, in the case of RKCB, the trump king as well). If you play that way, then responder can bid the grand with significant extras immediately over the second ask. What he cannot do is respond to the ask and then, when asker signs off, bid one more.

Art...do you have any written source that suggests, even just as an alternative, to play RKCB in a manner which says "we have all missing keycards" when one asks for Q? Let alone it being traditional?

Because this is the first time I heard about it. Blackwood was invented in early 1930s if I am not wrong. Later RKCB was invented by Italian team. Traditional slam bidding of RKCB; required minimum for small slam 5 keycards or 4+Q. All this time I thought this was the traditional slam bidding when it comes to RKCB. And that asking Q is a must frequently in small slam bidding. I am horrified with the idea that my pd can jump to grand thinking that we have all other key cards and/or not being able to ask Q just because we are missing a keycard and all I need is trump Q.

[PhantomSac]

lol, can't wait to see the reply to this

[mikeh]

 MrAce, on 2015-April-28, 15:01, said:

Art...do you have any written source that suggests, even just as an alternative, to play RKCB in a manner which says "we have all missing keycards" when one asks for Q? Let alone it being traditional?

Because this is the first time I heard about it. Blackwood was invented in early 1930s if I am not wrong. Later RKCB was invented by Italian team. Traditional slam bidding of RKCB; required minimum for small slam 5 keycards or 4+Q. All this time I thought this was the traditional slam bidding when it comes to RKCB. And that asking Q is a must frequently in small slam bidding. I am horrified with the idea that my pd can jump to grand thinking that we have all other key cards and/or not being able to ask Q just because we are missing a keycard and all I need is trump Q.

Sorry to spoil things, especially Justin's hopes for the response, but I think you are being unfair to Art, probably due to not having tracked how his last post came about. I think that the 'second ask' to which he references is to asking for Kings, which in normal keycard or blackwood has long guaranteed all the keycards/Aces.

He started the posts that led to the one you responded to in response to a weird post by gszes who suggested that he would use keycard, then ask for the Queen, and sign off even if partner showed it, and that he would 'leave it to partner' to go to 7, because by asking for the Queen he had shown all the keycards, and partner could work out that he needed something more than just all the keys and the spade Q. Art quite properly took exception to this, but the 'second ask' phrase crept in somewhere, and left his last post reading quite differently from the messages he was posting earlier.

See posts 12 and, especially, 21, and Art's posts in response

[PhantomSac]

 mikeh, on 2015-April-28, 15:59, said:

Sorry to spoil things, especially Justin's hopes for the response, but I think you are being unfair to Art, probably due to not having tracked how his last post came about. I think that the 'second ask' to which he references is to asking for Kings, which in normal keycard or blackwood has long guaranteed all the keycards/Aces.

He started the posts that led to the one you responded to in response to a weird post by gszes who suggested that he would use keycard, then ask for the Queen, and sign off even if partner showed it, and that he would 'leave it to partner' to go to 7, because by asking for the Queen he had shown all the keycards, and partner could work out that he needed something more than just all the keys and the spade Q. Art quite properly took exception to this, but the 'second ask' phrase crept in somewhere, and left his last post reading quite differently from the messages he was posting earlier.

See posts 12 and, especially, 21, and Art's posts in response

Yeah fair enough. His response to jinksy's question of "In any case, since when does asking for the trump Q show all the controls? Can't we ever have hands where we think it's necessary to make small slam a good proposition?" seemed like he was saying that asking for the trump Q traditionally shows all the keycards but I see that that is not what he was saying. Reading comprehension FTW

[ArtK78]

The point that I was trying to make, however inartfully (pun intended), is that there is a bid by the original RKCB or Blackwood bidder that guarantees all of the key cards. Responder is invited to either respond to that ask or bid a grand if the fact that his side has all of the keycards is sufficient for a grand. In no event may responder respond to the ask and then, when opener signs off, bid the grand. This opens the door to all sorts of accusations of breaks in tempo (hesitation blackwood)

[mike777]

I will go out on a limb and suggest that Art was saying:
1) asking for trump q DOES NOT promise all aces, it is not a grand slam try.
2) asking for kings, or specific kings, does promise all aces, all trump kings, all trump queens, it is a grand slam try.


For many us point 2 was a learning point in bidding
IN time we refuse to show kings and just jump to 7 level, even more confusing we may jump oto 7 level in lower ranker suit to confuse pard even more.

[MrAce]

 ArtK78, on 2015-April-28, 19:58, said:

The point that I was trying to make, however inartfully (pun intended), is that there is a bid by the original RKCB or Blackwood bidder that guarantees all of the key cards. Responder is invited to either respond to that ask or bid a grand if the fact that his side has all of the keycards is sufficient for a grand. In no event may responder respond to the ask and then, when opener signs off, bid the grand. This opens the door to all sorts of accusations of breaks in tempo (hesitation blackwood)

Ok my bad then. I really thought you were saying that in traditional slam bidding, asking Q promises all the other key cards. Sorry m8.