[mr1303]

S KJ873
H Void
D A987
C KQJ3

1S 2NT
3H 4D
?

MPs, you deal. 2NT was a limit + spade raise, 3H shows shortage and a non-minimum, GF, 4D was a cue.

What do you bid here?

[blackshoe]

I'll guess our control-bidding style is "Italian" - that we show first or second round controls indiscriminately, so 4♦ is either second round control or a void. The latter seems unlikely, as partner could have splintered instead of bidding 2NT.

I would bid 4♥, which would show the ♥ void (or singleton ace).

[lalldonn]

I think it's good enough to just go with exclusion since partner has slam interest. If he has like Axxxx KJx Kxx Tx it's not like I can just expect him to bid beyond game on his own. Even on the same hand with 4333 it's not so terrible to be there.

(And 4♥ would show club control, not say anything about hearts, since partner denied club control.)

[blackshoe]

Hm. I thought about exclusion, but none of my current partners will play it, so I don't have a lot of experience with it. However, given you can't stop in 5♠ over exclusion unless partner bids it, you're effectively, I thought, making a GS try if you bid 5♥. I don't know if it's reasonable to do that.

I can see that 4♥ would show club control, but why would it not say anything about hearts? Oh, perhaps you mean "anything new", since opener has already shown second round control with his 3♥ bid?

I suppose it may boil down to which one of us is a peer of the opening bidder.

[Quantumcat]

You can rebid 4♥ to show the void/singleton ace & club control, then after partner bids 4♠, bid 4NT keycard, partner should be smart enough to exclude the ♥A from his number of keycards if he has it. (Pard said nothing new with the 4♠ bid, so if we can keycard now we could have keycarded before, so the 4♥ bid must have been for a purpose and excluding ♥A from pard's # keycards must be it). If partner has the ace of hearts he might keycard himself (now that he's heard we have club control), if he doesn't have it and still chooses to keycard, hopefully he assumes we have a void not a singleton ace and counts the total keycards correctly.

lalldonn, does 4♥ really not show first-round control in hearts? What are the rules defining when you show a control twice that it might not have first-round control?

By the way why is this in the rulings forum? Sounds like it will be an interesting story!

[lalldonn]

- Partner does not have a club control since he bypassed clubs to cuebid 4♦. Therefore, any bid we make except signing off in 4♠ must promise a club control.
- Partner may have a hand good enough to take control and bid keycard or force to slam if he knows about our club control. Therefore, we must tell him if we have one.
- We may have a hand with a club control which is not good enough to risk going beyond 4♠.
- There is only one bid that doesn't bypass 4♠ and doesn't deny a club control. That is 4♥ so that's what it shows.

It's really just an application of last train. If partner has denied a control then the last train bid must promise that control. It can't also promise a control in the suit we are bidding (ignoring that in this particular example we have already promised one) since you might have a club control but no heart control, and based on the above reasons the club control must be shown.

Just imagine you hold KJxxx x Axxx KQx. You don't want to risk the 5 level in case partner is just inviting slam, as we would reject that invitation having already shown a non-minimum with heart shortness. If partner has Axxx Axx KJxx xx then the 5 level is in real danger though I would hardly blame partner for his slam try. But partner could have Axxx Ax KQxx Qxx in which case he just needs to know you have a club control to bid keycard and place the contract, and he wouldn't want to get to 5♠ in case you had KQJxx - AJxx JTxx since that can go down rather easily on a club ruff.

I didn't even notice this was in a laws forum. Weird

[Cyberyeti]

Three questions:

1: Does the 2N response deny the ability to splinter ?
2: What is 1♠-2N-4♥ ?
3: What would 3N rather than 4♦ have meant ?

I don't play any form of last train, so 4♥ would show the heart void as well as a club control, but I wouldn't have been so high in the first place.

[iviehoff]

lalldonn, on 2012-September-25, 17:48, said:

(And 4♥ would show club control, not say anything about hearts, since partner denied club control.)

I presume that this is how you have agreed to bid with your partnership, not a general lesson on control bidding for the average club player.

[mr1303]

You guys are good! There was indeed a laws and rulings problem.

Your partner forgot to alert the 3H bid as showing shortage. After the 4D cue, this hand signed off in 4S. Partner had indeed forgotten that 3H shows shortage.

4S just made, losing a club and 2 trumps. Partner's hand was as follows:

9652
AKQ3
K5
642

Opponents call the director to the table. Do you adjust?

[Cyberyeti]

mr1303, on 2012-September-26, 10:15, said:

Opponents call the director to the table. Do you adjust?

No, if I had another go, the auction would go 4♦-4♥-4♠ and probably stop there.

[aguahombre]

Opener might have been afraid (because of the failure to alert) that 4H would end the auction. Hence, a ruling should be considered.

How to avoid the ridiculously high exclusion bid pointed out by Blackshoe would be the subject of a non-laws thread; but it would involve 4H followed by RKC.

[blackshoe]

IMO, with that hand, 4♦ is a poor bid. I think responder should have jumped to 4♠ over 3♥. Be that as it may, he bid 4♦, and now the question is whether opener, with UI, has an LA to his 4♠ bid. On the bidding, it's pretty clear from the thread that he does — 4♥. However, what will responder do over 4♥? I bet he'd bid 4♠. Will opener pass that? Or does the UI still constrain him to bid on?

[mr1303]

Partner thought that 3H was a second suit and a non-minimum. Would that influence any thoughts about how partner would respond after 4H?

[lalldonn]

I still think 5♥ is the best bid so clearly I consider it an LA. I don't know how I am supposed to project the auction from there but I'm sure there is at least a reasonable chance it would reach 6♠ (at least).

Even if they aren't playing exclusion then I still think the hand is worth a drive past 4♠ so that would be an LA.

[jvage]

lalldonn, on 2012-September-26, 11:57, said:

I still think 5♥ is the best bid so clearly I consider it an LA. I don't know how I am supposed to project the auction from there but I'm sure there is at least a reasonable chance it would reach 6♠ (at least).

Isn't it "standard" to use 0314 responses to Exclusion (even when using 1430 responses to regular RKCB)? Then the response will be 5♠ (0 aces excluding hearts), which will end the auction.

Since we are told there were only 10 tricks in spades, one down at the 5-level may result in about the same poor score as bidding higher (noticing this was MP). However, the question may become wether we allow the player to "wake up" and realize that 5♥ is Exclusion. I think we need a bit more information about the players and their agreements to answer that.

John

[lalldonn]

But the responder to exclusion thought 3♥ was natural so I assumed they would take 5♥ as asking for good trumps and do something more. I suppose it's fine if you argue the 5♥ bid would simply wake them up. My main point is I think it's (more than a) LA to go beyond 4♠.

[TimG]

mr1303, on 2012-September-25, 17:37, said:

S KJ873
H Void
D A987
C KQJ3

1S 2NT
3H 4D
?

MPs, you deal. 2NT was a limit + spade raise, 3H shows shortage and a non-minimum, GF, 4D was a cue.

What do you bid here?

I think 4H followed by a move over 4S; or 5H exclusion, are both reasonable options. I would not be content to settle in 4S.

I do wonder whether 4D was something of a courtesy or said something about the suitability of responder's hand for slam (why didn't responder bid 3S to allow opener to show a club control and is there any inference available from this?).

[phil_20686]

lalldonn, on 2012-September-25, 17:48, said:

(And 4♥ would show club control, not say anything about hearts, since partner denied club control.)

iviehoff, on 2012-September-26, 08:21, said:

I presume that this is how you have agreed to bid with your partnership, not a general lesson on control bidding for the average club player.

I think last train has passed into General Bridge Knowledge. Even most intermediates seem to play it now. I would assume its on for sure opposite any advanced player.

I would basically drive a slam now, not too fussed really about the sequence, probably would just bid 4h atm, then make another effort over 4S. Could bid exclusion. I don't think bidding/passing 4S is at all normal.

[aguahombre]

phil_20686, on 2012-September-27, 09:09, said:

I don't think bidding/passing 4S is at all normal allowable.

Altered your post to conform with the UI issue. That doesn't mean I disagree with what you said.

IMO, either bidding 4S now, or passing 4S after a 4H continuation, would be subject to adjustment and/or other adjudication --- the direct 4S being a more blatant use of UI than the delayed one.

Other posters are projecting how far the TD or AC should adjust the runaway train to go.