[shevek]

Assume 3041, not that it matters.

1♣  1♥
3♥  4NT
5♣  5♥
?

5♥ is to play opposite 0 but you have 3 so you go on. What do your bids mean now? Is ♥Q in play? Number of kings? Cue king? 5NT? Etc.
What is "normal" here?

Is it affcted by the fact that partner had 5♦ queen ask available?
What if there were no queen ask (you bid 5♦).

Thx

[ArtK78]

You bid on as if partner's "signoff" were a second ask. If the trump queen has not yet been shown, you make the bid that shows or denies the trump queen. And so on.

[helene_t]

That makes sense, Art.

Btw I wouldn't bid on with 3 keycards here. Your 3♥ bid is quite precise w.r.t. strength so p can probably see you have 3.

[ArtK78]

helene_t, on Jun 5 2009, 07:33 AM, said:

Btw I wouldn't bid on with 3 keycards here. Your 3♥ bid is quite precise w.r.t. strength so p can probably see you have 3.

I disagree, Helene. If the asker was not prepared to bid a slam with a response showing 3 key cards, he shouldn't have bid RKC in the first place.

There are hands which are 3♥ bids but have no key cards. For example:

KQ
QJTx
x
KQJTxx

Besides, it is much easier to set a hard and fast rule that you must bid on after a signoff with the max response rather than try to enumerate sequences on which responsder is expected to have the max response and the signoff is really a signoff. The burden should be on the asker not to bid RKC if he cannot bid a slam opposite the "3" response.

[hrothgar]

Here's my take on matters:

1. The original RKCB ask commited us to at least the six level if we hold three key cards

2. The space between 5M and 6M should be used to make some kind of intelligent exploration for a grand slam

3. I'm not sure whether the Queen of Trumps is a particularly useful card to show. (In all seriousness, how often will partner make a slam try off three Key cards and the trump Queen?)

4. I suspect that the best meaning of the bidding space depends on a few different factors

Consider the following:

If I've shown a 5+ card side suit, it might be useful to be able to show how solid this suit is

If I'm the one holding short trump, I might want to show distributional controls to ruff losers

[hanp]

I play that 5H asks for the queen when we have 3. It is true that there may be hands where we want to ask for keycards and sign off when partner shows 3, but in my experience the above agreement is more useful.

In the above auction (where responder jumped all the way to keycards) I think it is better to play that 4NT forces to slam when partner has 3+ keycards.

[gnasher]

I also play that you respond to the queen ask. I thought that was standard. Isn't it in Kantar's book?

[shevek]

ArtK78, on Jun 5 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

You bid on as if partner's "signoff" were a second ask.  If the trump queen has not yet been shown, you make the bid that shows or denies the trump queen.  And so on.

So how do you respond to the queen ask?

Over a 5♦ queen ask, you would have bid 5♥ to deny it. Now what?

5♣   5♥ = conditional sign-off & queen ask

Do people play the step (5♠) as no queen?
I guess so but it's unclear with spades as trumps:

5♣   5♦  = ♠Q ask

some play 5♥ as the denial here and others bid 5♠ to deny ♠Q. Which is common and which does Kanter say?

In the actual, maybe 5NT is no ♥Q while 5♠ = ♥Q & ♠K. Unclear.
If you deny ♥Q, does asker bid the step to get you to cue that elusive king?

[hanp]

I think it is most common to play that a return to the suit says no queen, any other bid shows the queen. A different suit also shows the king in that suit, 5NT shows the queen but denies any side king.

Less common but I think superior in this situation is to play that the first step denies the queen. This has the advantage that partner can still try for a grand or play in a different small slam (not uncommon when missing the trump queen).

I think the second method is better whenever the queen ask is at or above 5M.

[aguahombre]

helene_t, on Jun 5 2009, 07:33 AM, said:

Btw I wouldn't bid on with 3 keycards here. Your 3♥ bid is quite precise w.r.t. strength so p can probably see you have 3.

I think Helene is right. Maybe partner needed 4 Keys. Certainly there are situations where partner could not blackwood without wanting to be in slam opposite 3 KK, but this is not one of them. 3H is a relatively descriptive bid in my methods. shapely because of failure to open 1NT, etc.

So a simple 5D Queen ask is a solution to Art's example.

[hanp]

I think Helene's reasoning is very dangerous. How many would open 1D and rebid 3H on KQx QJxx KQJxxx -? Having to decide on the spot whether the auction makes it clear that you have 3 is asking for trouble.

Of course, this doesn't hold if you play that 5H is always a sign off opposite 3.

[aguahombre]

hanp, on Jun 7 2009, 12:57 PM, said:

I think Helene's reasoning is very dangerous. How many would open 1D and rebid 3H on KQx QJxx KQJxxx -? Having to decide on the spot whether the auction makes it clear that you have 3 is asking for trouble.

Of course, this doesn't hold if you play that 5H is always a sign off opposite 3.

I guess i could buy that argument, if I could construct a hand where I had that aceless holding and partner (knowing I have a shortness somewhere as part of my raise) could bid "wood" opposite that example, or Art's above ---and not know whether the answer is zero or three. He would make his slam try in some other way. Either partner has the filler cards or I do, not both of us. One of us has bullets, the other has the fillers.

[gnasher]

In my part of the world, in reply to an explicit queen ask, it's more common to play that step 1 denies the queen. After

[hearts agreed]
4NT-5♣
5♥

I'd expect that 5♠ denies the queen of trumps, and anything else up to 6♦ shows the queen of trumps.

6♥ would usually show the queen but denying anything else useful. If, however, the 6♥ bidder is in a position to know from the bidding whether a grand slam is possible, it's just to play and denying grand-slam interest. That might occur if a limited hand had bid RKCB.