[HeartA]

Your lho opened 1♠ and you pd dbled. The bidding went:
(1S)-x-(P)-2C
(P)-2S-(P)-2N
(P)-3S(!)-(P)-?

Can you construct a hand that justifies the second cue-bid (3S) by dbler (your pd) after you bid 2C and 2N?

[flytoox]

It should show a hand with club fit and spade control, and slam interest. I guess pd is looking for slam but consulting your opinion. After all, 2C guaranteed nothing and 2N promised only a stopper.

How about A,AKQx,QJT,AKTxx?

[awm]

I prefer to play the first cuebid as showing "a good hand, unsure of the proper strain." Certainly a stopper-ask is the most likely interpretation over partner's minor suit bid. As for the second cue, it suggests to me more of the same. Perhaps doubler holds:

---

Opposite the spade ace and king-fifth of clubs, a grand slam will be pretty likely. On the other hand, if responder has a slow spade stopper and a weak club suit, 3NT could be the best spot, and if responder has the spade ace but weak clubs then it's possible that 6♦ will be ideal. I'd interpret this second cue as an ask for:

(1) Holding a non-ace spade stopper (for example Kxx, QJx) bid 3NT.
(2) Holding the spade ace (or a dubious stopper like JTxx) with good clubs, bid 4♣ to set clubs and look for slam.
(3) Holding a decent hand with four or five BAD clubs and the spade ace, try another strain for slam.

Surely if opener wants to look for a slam in clubs, he can just bid clubs. In this auction (after the cuebid and 2NT rebid) 3♣ has to be forcing. And an initial 4♣ raise should also be forcing (why bypass 3NT to invite when 3♣ and 2♠ are free bids).

[ritong]

any mega ♣ fit :-)

[ochinko]

0=4=5=4 and 17+ HCP seems to justify partner's bidding.

Partner's weakest possible hand would be something like:

-
AKxx
AKxxx
Kxxx

After doubling, then cue-bidding twice I'd expect a sure spades void.

Petko

[Chamaco]

three-suiter short in spades, about 20+ with good controls nothing wasted.

Clubs is pretty much agreed now, after his 2nd cue, probably doubler will ask keycards for clubs with any method you have agreed upon.

[HeartA]

Have you guys considered the possibility that pd has almost nothing (maybe a little in ♠) and 3♣s only?

[inquiry]

Any hand with void or stiff spade and great club support would have been 3♠, not 2♠. Any great hand fitting hand without spade support would have been cue-bid followed by a raise, which should be forcing.

So I think we can eliminate spade shortness with club support or spade legnth with club support.

Partner could have done something creative like bid a new suit after the cue-bid with at GOSH (good-one-suited-hand), so we can eliminate that.

So 3♠ by default is one of three meanings. Figure out your partner to figure out which one it is....

• 1 - I have really good spade suit, lho psyched and I was not strong willed enough to pass 1♠
  
• 2 - I have a very good hand, and maybe your 2NT was lebenhshol weak, maybe it was real stopper, I want you tbid 3NT with real stopper
  
• 3 - I have a very GOOD red two suiter, so good in fact, I didn't want to use michaels to start off with for some odd reason and then show stregth

I think with most partners of normal ability I would eliminate #1 as a choice, but with some players I would think this is the best bet. I would also eliminate #2, unless I thought 2NT was in fact some good/bad thing to show a poor 2♣ bid, but then I would know what I have (not shown). #3 is a real possibility, although I play michaels can be very strong indeed. So this would not be an auction I would typically use to show this hand. So I guess partner is something like (to be wildly speculative)...

void
AKxxxxxx
AQJxxx
x

He could be stronger in hcp, of course, and he could have less shape. But he wants you to pick between his suits. Now you see why I end up in the soup all the time, partner never has what I think he should have for his choice of sequences... :-)

[whereagles]

I really doubt I'll ever see a hand like that.. My guess is pard has some sort of strong 3-suiter in the 18-20 region.

[inquiry]

whereagles, on Apr 12 2005, 01:10 PM, said:

I really doubt I'll ever see a hand like that.. My guess is pard has some sort of strong 3-suiter in the 18-20 region.

Shall I run Bridgebrowser? Like I said it doesn't have to be 6-6.. 5-5 is fine... The thing is, parnter doesn't want to bid a red suit as it would be a strong one-suiter, and to show the second suit, he would have to carry beyond 3NT (assuming you bid that). He could easily be...

x
AKJxx
KQJTx
Ax

For instance, it depends a bit on what you have for 2C and 2NT (seeing your hand, you could construct such a hand for your partner). But if he was 18-20 short is spades, with fit, as your comment suggest, 3♠ over 2♣ would show that quite nicely AT A MINIMUM. No need for two ways to say the same thing. And what you do need is a way to say, HAND TOO GOOD for micheales cue-bid (I am not sure there is such a thing...., but this is what I would take this bid to mean). Alternatively, if partenr now shows support (after this 3♠ bid), I would take it as three card support, with a great diamond suit of his own... and spade shortage.. but that requires yet another bid to determine.

[HeartA]

So far, ben's analysis is the best. We know opps and they don't psych. Secondly, we didn't discuss lebensohl in such a sequence. So, as ben said, #1 and #2 are eliminated.

By the way, it was team match and NV to NV.

[luke warm]

i'd be very surprised if partner didn't have either a void or the stiff ace of spades here... i can't see any possibility of his spade bids showing spades else he'd have passed the first time... i think ben's construction is likely, with the stiff ace (or the void)

[HeartA]

Justin,
I completely agree with you. In my opinion, there is NO such hand that justifies the 2nd cue-bid. I think pd's 2♣ and then 2NT were telling a very weak hand, not enough to bid 1NT at first turn, and was unable to bid 3NT at 2nd turn, a choice with 6-7 hcp or so. And surely he has at most 4-card of ♣s.

With the hand given by Hongjun, 3NT after pd's 2NT should be the right bid. 3N (or 3♦?) after pd's 2NT would be my choice, with awm's hand. With a huge hand of mega ♣ fit, 4♣ after 2NT should be good. While with the hand given by ochinko, I don't think it is strong enough to cue-bid even once. Even if you want to cue-bid once, 3♣ after 2NT should be sufficient.

As the first hand given by Ben, dbl 1♠ is not good (if pd converts it to penalty?). But if you didn't find a good bid at first turn and decided to dbl 1♠, 2♠ after 2♣ is OK. After pd's 2NT, I would bid 4♥ directly. For the second hand, I would bid 2♠ (michaels) as Justin suggested.


Since I couldn't construct a hand that justifies the 2nd cue-bid and I don't really trust my pd's bid (why would I partner with her? that's another story), I PASSED 3♠. It turned out that her hand was 12-count of 1444 (opener had 15 with 5134 and her pd 9 hcp of 2542). The good news is, it was not dbled and we got -300 only. The bad news is, our teammates didn't make 3NT (-1). Another good news is, our opps were blaming each other for not doubling .

Finally, my hand was, ♠J7xxx, ♥6xx, ♦xx, ♣K9x. My hand took two trick with CK and a ruff of ♦, while my pd's hand took one trick only (♦A).

[HeartA]

Jlall, on Apr 12 2005, 06:55 PM, said:

well I don't agree with passing a cuebid just because youre not sure what partner is doing

If you were my pd, I would not pass. I knew it would go to nowhere. If 3♠ were not dbled, it would not be a big loss. If 3♠ got dbled, let my pd bid whatever she would.

[the hog]

"Justin,
I completely agree with you. In my opinion, there is NO such hand that justifies the 2nd cue-bid. "

Hmm, wasn't there a James Bond film titled "Never Say Never Again".

Talk of deja vu, this hand cropped up in an insignificant event yesterday.

(1C) X (P) 1D
(P) 2C (P) 2D
(P) 3C (P) 3NT

The hands were
AKx
AKQJxx
Ax
xx

xxx
x
Jxxxx
JTxx

Pd held the strong hand ; he bid it well.

[HeartA]

Ron,

Did you see the difference of the sequences? The one you gave, dbler's pd rebid 2♦, while in mine, dbler's pd (me) bid 2NT at 2nd turn.

[the hog]

I did, and I did not say the sequences were the same. Your 2NT bid does not 100% guarantee a stopper, Txxx is possible if you have nothing else to bid, so your pd's 3S bid is asking whether the stopper is genuine, as Ben pointed out in one of his earlier posts.