[jerdonald]

BBO forum,
As south I had this auction today.

S W N E
1NT P 2D P
2H P 4NT P
5D P P!!

Partner said he intended the 4NT to be quantitative. Why would he
bother transferring me to hearts first? How do I distinguish his 4NT
from ace asking.

Jerry D.

[Siegmund]

I think Quantitative would be the large-majority view of that 4NT bid. He might have a 16-ish hand that can make 6NT opposite 17, or 6H opposite 15 and a great fit, but needs to stop in 4NT if you have a minimum and no fit.

A common agreement is that 1NT-4D(Texas)-4H-4NT is Blackwood, while 1NT-2D-2H-4NT is not; after Jacoby, 4NT only is Blackwood if you have agreed on a suit (1NT-2D,2H-3C,3H-4NT could be ace-asking again once the 5-3 fit is found.)

[jerdonald]

Alchemist,
Thanks for the reply.

So how does responder explore for a slam in hearts with this sequence?

Jerry D.

[Stephen Tu]

This is just a straight quantitative ask with an assumed 5332 responder. Opener should judge on the relative merits of 4nt, 6h, and 6nt based on distribution, strength, honor placement, honor type.

With other slammish hands, responder has other options. With 6+cd hearts and a singleton, can transfer then jump as a splinter. Or without singleton can transfer to 2H then bid 4H as an invite (signoff in game just bids 1nt-4d). Or can Texas then RKC if appropriate. With only 5 hearts, typically with 5332 you use the quantitative sequence, with a 4+ minor you bid the minor, game forcing, then start cue bidding if you find a fit. With 4 spades depends on agreements, most with 45 majors start with Stayman sequence rather than transfer.

[jodepp]

 jerdonald, on 2015-October-27, 19:08, said:

Alchemist,
Thanks for the reply.

So how does responder explore for a slam in hearts with this sequence?

Jerry D.

Either with a new-suit bid, a jump in a new suit (which many play as a splinter), or as stated previously:

Jacoby-then-4NT is quantitative;
Texas-then-4NT is ace-asking.

One other caveat - playing this structure, jacoby-then-jump-to-game-in-the-major is a mild slam try without side-suit shortness.

BTW, I would think your 5♦ would be a tentative 'accept' of the slam try with four diamonds, checking for a diamond fit and offering to play in 6♦. Even though that's not what you meant, your partner dropped the ball by passing 5♦. It's forcing to at least 5♥.

[keithhus]

Would you not use gerber (4C) to ask for aces, when opening bidding is in NT. I thought it could be used on 1st and 2nd round? Or is this Acol only? I am a beginner, so forum is not for me but thought I would ask.
Thanks

[helene_t]

 keithhus, on 2015-October-28, 06:57, said:

Would you not use gerber (4C) to ask for aces, when opening bidding is in NT. I thought it could be used on 1st and 2nd round? Or is this Acol only? I am a beginner, so forum is not for me but thought I would ask.
Thanks

You could, but if you are missing one ace you will need to have king and queen of trumps in order to bid slam. So if you are missing one of them (or both), you need to set trumps first so that you can ask for keycards.

If you don't play Texas transfers because you want the flexibility to allow responder to declare, you may consider South African Texas: The responses to 1NT include
4♣: hearts
4♦: spades
4♥/♠: to play

Alternatively, you can play a direct 3♥/♠ response to 1NT as natural and forcing, demaning a control bid. Then you can start by bidding that and then ask for keycards in the next round.

[manudude03]

 keithhus, on 2015-October-28, 06:57, said:

Would you not use gerber (4C) to ask for aces, when opening bidding is in NT. I thought it could be used on 1st and 2nd round? Or is this Acol only? I am a beginner, so forum is not for me but thought I would ask.
Thanks

Gerber is good if the number of aces and kings enable you to count up the tricks, a hand like Kx KQJTxxx Ax Kx would be perfect for that.

However, more often partner might have a proposed trump suit of something like AJxxxx and really needs to know if you can fill the suit in. Gerber won't achieve that (and not even the king ask part will if you find you are missing one)

[billw55]

 Siegmund, on 2015-October-27, 18:42, said:

I think Quantitative would be the large-majority view of that 4NT bid.

While I agree that it should be quantitative, "large majority" clearly depends on what population you are polling. With pickup partners on BBO - including "advanced" and "expert" - the large majority perception is that 4NT is always ace asking no matter what context.

[baraka]

Read jdonn slam bidding series.
If you have a way of showing your fit and dont use it, 4NT is quantitative. If you show your fit with a cue bid, in this case a forcing to 4 cue like 4C, 4D, Partner cues and after 4NT is blackwood.

[Caitlynne]

4NT is quantitative. Because Goren said so.

And this is absolutely 100000000000% standard. Why?

Because after a Stayman inquiry, with any slam try in support of opener's major, Goren said to bid 3 of the other major. (There is no good or logical natural meaning for a rebid in 3 of the other major by responder.) If responder subsequently bids 4NT, that is ace asking.

As I understand it, this scheme has been part of Standard American since approximately 1940.

[Cyberyeti]

One thing I've often suggested in this precise sequence particularly if you don't play Texas is to use 1N-2♦-2♥-4♠ as ace asking even if you don't play kickback anywhere else.

It is not uncommon to respond to 4N quantitative when accepting with your number of aces just in case there are two missing and nothing else.

[keithhus]

 helene_t, on 2015-October-28, 07:14, said:

You could, but if you are missing one ace you will need to have king and queen of trumps in order to bid slam. So if you are missing one of them (or both), you need to set trumps first so that you can ask for keycards.

If you don't play Texas transfers because you want the flexibility to allow responder to declare, you may consider South African Texas: The responses to 1NT include
4♣: hearts
4♦: spades
4♥/♠: to play

Alternatively, you can play a direct 3♥/♠ response to 1NT as natural and forcing, demaning a control bid. Then you can start by bidding that and then ask for keycards in the next round.

Helene, thanks. I have read-up on Texas and Jacobs transfers. They seem fairly straight forward even for a beginner! (Don't know if I am over simplifying). Are they played in UK acol/?
I play weak NT but I assume it is better to use these transfer systems with a strong NT.?

[zillahandp]

Never quant ever it agrees hts and should be fove ace if you pla it black.
Get a new p and dont play wih anyone who thinks is quant

[sfi]

 zillahandp, on 2015-October-28, 16:53, said:

Never quant ever it agrees hts and should be fove ace if you pla it black.
Get a new p and dont play wih anyone who thinks is quant

That would certainly limit your choice of partners. The standard agreements are well covered above, with the observation that Texas seems to be primarily used in places where strong NT is the norm and South African Texas where weak NT is typical. Some version of Texas makes slam bidding when holding major suits much more precise.

[helene_t]

 keithhus, on 2015-October-28, 13:30, said:

Helene, thanks. I have read-up on Texas and Jacobs transfers. They seem fairly straight forward even for a beginner! (Don't know if I am over simplifying). Are they played in UK acol/?
I play weak NT but I assume it is better to use these transfer systems with a strong NT.?

Texas is not so popular among club players in the UK and indeed it may have to do with the weak NT. Most play a direct 3♥ or 3♠ as forcing and would use it with strong one-suited hands with which they just want to ask for keycards. So they don't need to play texas.

But I think Texas is fine in a weak NT system also.

[sfi]

 helene_t, on 2015-October-28, 23:41, said:

Texas is not so popular among club players in the UK and indeed it may have to do with the weak NT. Most play a direct 3♥ or 3♠ as forcing and would use it with strong one-suited hands with which they just want to ask for keycards. So they don't need to play texas.

But I think Texas is fine in a weak NT system also.

Don't get me wrong - Texas works in a weak NT system just fine. However, I was talking more about what is commonly played. My understanding is that there is less need to steer the contract into the NT hand when you're playing a weak NT system, so having two ways to get quickly to 4H or 4S is of more value than using 4C as (for instance) ace-asking.

3H/S can also be useful as artificial bids, so you give something up by playing them as natural and forcing when you have transfers. But that's the nature of any convention - you trade off simplicity for better definition. And the club standard here is much like what you describe, so it works well enough.

[eagles123]

 zillahandp, on 2015-October-28, 16:53, said:

Never quant ever it agrees hts and should be fove ace if you pla it black.
Get a new p and dont play wih anyone who thinks is quant

lol you and philG should form a partnership!

[Zelandakh]

 Caitlynne, on 2015-October-28, 11:45, said:

As I understand it, this scheme has been part of Standard American since approximately 1940.

"Standard American" in 1940 was actually Culbertson so you would have to go back a fair few years earlier. My knowledge of American bridge history sadly does not include what was standard before Ely.
--

While Texas may not be as popular in the UK as the US I think it is still more popular than SA Texas. The Texas variant I have played since a junior is to give up Gerber and use 4♣ as both majors.

There is also a point in playing both natural 3M responses and Texas at the same time. The former allows a cue auction to develop while the latter allows you to change sides for declarer as well as potentially cheaper void-showing calls. There are better solutions available but those are more complicated so it is a perfectly reasonable set-up for a club player.

As for showing aces (or key cards) opposite a quantitative invite, while I know some do this I thought it was standard to show a good side suit so as to facilitate reaching a good suit slam in a 5-3 fit. That strikes me as more useful than checking back for 2 missing aces, especially at IMPs. You also have the issue of support for Opener's 5 card suit in this case, so the players are going to have to remember to use a different scale to the normal one and that is probably a recipe for disaster at club level.

[Trump Echo]

I would think it has to be quantitative because if I opened 1 NT and my partner wanted to know about my Aces, he'd have bid gerber, not Blackwood. But I would not want to bid it this way. If I had a tenace or a Kx, I'd have responded 2 Clubs Stayman. Partner answers. I bid 3 Hearts, forcing of course. This would show my five Hearts. Partner bids 3 NT, and I raise to 4NT. Quantitative.

OTOH, if I had no tenace and no Kx, I'd be inclined to bid it the way this auction went. My regular partner would know it's not Blackwood. But yes, as mentioned above, I suspect a majority of the players on BBO would see Blackwood automatically, which is a shame.