[jillybean]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-August-27, 06:35, said:

It's interesting, for us, we play 2♦ neg, and 2♣-positive F4N unless an AK known to be missing, so we don't have the 3N issue there, and in general use it as the most expensive cue, in this case diamonds denying a spade control which allows partner to cue clubs.

2♦ neg, and 2♣-positive F4N I don't understand this?

"in this case diamonds denying a spade control", a spade control here is positive, not shortage?

[pescetom]

mw64ahw, on 2025-August-27, 06:07, said:

That was my problem so I now use it to show weak honours; less than 2 for the suit bidder and zero for the suit supporter.

In some situations I play it similarly, but in others as suggesting a minimum for my bidding so far, in others I just don't use it and it should probably be Turbo or denial of the Q instead. Like anything, the important thing is to be on the same page as your partner, and avoid agreements that are over complicated for you.

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2025-August-26, 15:07, said:

If anything it seems getting on is even more of a hassle, the forums freezing

I had an interesting mishap here yesterday in this respect. When I tried to post my reply to Jillybean, I got the forum bug home page (server busy or maintenance, try again later or click on this link to the forum to complain that you cannot access the forum) but later discovered that my reply had been posted. Nothing unusual so far (alas), but this time: the post on the forum contained only the quote of the message I was replying to, without the text I had written.

I've never seen this before, although I doubt it is a new problem in the problem. Probably what is different is that I was on a slow phone network. But I find it interesting because it suggests yet again that there is some fundamental error in the network protocols of the BBO server, as also suggested by the frequent failure of the play server to recognise that the client is no longer responding.

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2025-August-27, 07:13, said:

2♦ neg, and 2♣-positive F4N I don't understand this?

"in this case diamonds denying a spade control", a spade control here is positive, not shortage?

OK:

2♣-2♦ is negative, not waiting for us

Positive responses to 2♣ are forcing to 4N unless a suit is known to be open, so 3N is forcing in these sequences

Depends how the exact auction has gone, but if partner has bid spades naturally, 3N would deny a high card spade control, if he hadn't, then I would bid 3♠.

We find it a big problem with the 2♦ waiting that you don't know if it's a 4 count or a 10 count

[mycroft]

If you promise that the opponents won't bid, I'm happy to open 2♣. I even am "guaranteed" to be able to show my primary hearts-secondary diamonds hand at 3♦ by system.

This time CHO had the spades, which as we can see here is a problem. But especially at unfavourable, the chance that I'm going to be at 3♠ (or 4♠!) before I have shown *either* of my suits is really quite high, and the fact that the trumps break X-0 isn't likely to be too much of a barrier - frankly, it will be harder to determine if we're 800 into no slam or 5 or 8 or 1100 into 1370 or 1430 (or 2210!) And that's a *bigger* problem.

Bridge is an optimist's game, and maybe I am too conservative. But the people who just expect with a void in the boss suit, at the best vulnerability to come in, that the opponents will be silent just because we've made our "big bid", while they are right more than half the time, are way too surprised the rest of the time (or don't play in the games I do).

[jillybean]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-August-27, 08:14, said:

OK:

2♣-2♦ is negative, not waiting for us

Positive responses to 2♣ are forcing to 4N unless a suit is known to be open, so 3N is forcing in these sequences

Depends how the exact auction has gone, but if partner has bid spades naturally, 3N would deny a high card spade control, if he hadn't, then I would bid 3♠.

We find it a big problem with the 2♦ waiting that you don't know if it's a 4 count or a 10 count

Ok, that's different. Are your 2♥ 2♠ 2nt 3♣ responses natural, positive?

[jillybean]

mycroft, on 2025-August-27, 09:31, said:

Bridge is an optimist's game, and maybe I am too conservative.

Good argument, for opening 1H Yes, I am aggressive, most of my partners are pussy cats in comparison.

Here's the full hand

I'm trying to do contortions, I think partner FTBTH. It's hard to imagine that 4♥ is the right bid.

---

[mike777]

If you open 2C, rebid hearts, partner will look for grand, never stop in game

[mw64ahw]

My KI5 auction
1♥-1♠ forcing (weak or 5+♠ GI)
2♦ 4♠ or some strong hands - 3N 5233
4♣ SI ♥-etc.

[mw64ahw]

mike777, on 2025-August-27, 20:12, said:

If you open 2C, rebid hearts, partner will look for grand, never stop in game

A possible 7N

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2025-August-27, 16:37, said:

Ok, that's different. Are your 2♥ 2♠ 2nt 3♣ responses natural, positive?

Yes, ace and a king or any 8 except 2N which is a bit stronger because it needs to be invitational opposite 22-23

So in this case:

2♣-2♠
3♥-

Would get quite awkward, but I'd be opening 1♥ anyway

1♥-1♠
2N (art GF unbal)-3♣(art, no extreme distribution)
3♦(6+-4+)-3♥(better than 4)
4♦(cue, no club or high card spade cue)-4N (club and spade controls)
5♦(AK)-5♠(AK)
5N (I need to know more)-7♥ ♣ control is the ace, I have ♥Q
7N

This auction is worrying in that if partner has AKQxx, xx, xxx, Kxx you can be going off in 6

Bizarro, if partner doesn't have Q♥ but does have ♦10, 7♦ in the Moysian is the grand with a prayer

[jillybean]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-August-28, 03:19, said:

Yes, ace and a king or any 8 except 2N which is a bit stronger because it needs to be invitational opposite 22-23

So in this case:

2♣-2♠
3♥-

Would get quite awkward, but I'd be opening 1♥ anyway

1♥-1♠
2N (art GF unbal)-3♣(art, no extreme distribution)
3♦(6+-4+)-3♥(better than 4)
4♦(cue, no club or high card spade cue)-4N (club and spade controls)
5♦(AK)-5♠(AK)
5N (I need to know more)-7♥ ♣ control is the ace, I have ♥Q
7N

This auction is worrying in that if partner has AKQxx, xx, xxx, Kxx you can be going off in 6

Bizarro, if partner doesn't have Q♥ but does have ♦10, 7♦ in the Moysian is the grand with a prayer

Fantastic. Your 2C follow up is quite different. It’s best I leave that alone, at least until I move back to the UK

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2025-August-27, 17:18, said:

Good argument, for opening 1H Yes, I am aggressive, most of my partners are pussy cats in comparison.

Here's the full hand

I'm trying to do contortions, I think partner FTBTH. It's hard to imagine that 4♥ is the right bid.

---

Passing 5H is nonbid.
But as I said, bid 4H, the beautiful diamond cue did burn a complete level without gaining anything.

Responder has a simple RKCB, he may also find out about the King of diamond,
and the missing King of Clubs. The poor club suit, and the mediocrite heart suit, opener is missing
the Q and only has a 6 carder improves the odds of a strong diamond suit
I am not able to count to 13, but 12 tricks are existing.

Before you start dreaming about the grand, get to the small.

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-August-28, 04:49, said:

Before you start dreaming about the grand, get to the small.

I would have been thrilled to be in 6

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2025-August-27, 02:21, said:

As I said earlier (once the forum bug finally permitted, so you may have missed it) I disapprove your rule (this example is just one reason why) and think it would be perverse not to show spades control here.
You get to stop in game if partner does not control clubs, which is exactly you want.

Getting back to this
There’s two of us at the table. If I cue shortness in partners suit and the auction continues (not necessarily this auction) , control can change from one to the other, could it cause confusion when I hold a worthless card, or no card when partner is looking for a positive cue?

[pescetom]

On a good day we might bid:

1♥ - 1♠
2♦ - 3♣
3♥ - 3♠
3N - 4♣
4♦ - 4♠
5♦ - 6♣
7N - P

South can count 2 spades, 6 hearts (if the J behaves), 4 diamonds, 1 club.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2025-August-28, 08:58, said:

Getting back to this
There’s two of us at the table. If I cue shortness in partners suit and the auction continues (not necessarily this auction) , control can change from one to the other, could it cause confusion when I hold a worthless card, or no card when partner is looking for a positive cue?

There is no real concept of captaincy once we start control-bidding, except when one decides to propose a slam: basically we are just both reading out our controls and retreating to trumps when we lack the ability to go beyond safely. It's paritary, passive and unpredictable (like all that or not), the cards are in control. But yes, each sees his own side of the picture and there is no guarantee that partner will immediately get to show or deny the control we are interested in. The mists gradually clear on each side and we are protected from losing the first two tricks in any case (except to a lucky void, or whatever). But sure, telling the truth can occasionally cause problems, perhaps almost as often as hiding it (see your auction here). I prefer to have as few agreements to hide the truth as possible.

Bidding shortness in partner's suit is rarely a problem if your style is to continue control-bidding to slam, whereas I can see it would be wise in general (but not here) to not bid a singleton if your style is to retreat to RKCB after an initial exchange (imagine partner looking at AQxxx thinking at least three tricks).
If you look at the continuous auction I just posted for your hand, see that both North and South (with 3NT) showed control in spades and neither had any doubt what the other held in that suit - North learned immediately that South is short and South learned gradually that North has AKxx(x). It's not always that easy, but the truth usually emerges (or no harm is done in any case).

[mike777]

jillybean, on 2025-August-28, 08:58, said:

Getting back to this
There’s two of us at the table. If I cue shortness in partners suit and the auction continues (not necessarily this auction) , control can change from one to the other, could it cause confusion when I hold a worthless card, or no card when partner is looking for a positive cue?

Yes, definitely try and avoid bidding a cue in partners suit with shortness, yes.

Here, if you could bid some artificial 3NT, as a stall, hoping partner can cue clubs great

Otherwise break the rule and cue spades.
This time partner has the AK and gets you are looking for club control

[jillybean]

Thanks. I misspoke when I referred to contol passing back and forth, thinking of Mike's reply re capaintacy.
We communicate back and forth until such a time that one player has enough information to KC or set the contract.
I need to know about a club control, faking a spade control showing an A or K is my only way to ask below 4D as we don't play Serious/Non Serious.
We need to change our agreements or add S/NS
I will discuss this, thanks again