[Kungsgeten]

This weekend we had the following auction:

1♣-1♠; [12-14 NT or 17+] -- [4+♠, GF vs strong hand]
2♦-2♠; [3+♠, 17+] -- [4 spades, balanced hand, 8-11 hcp]
3♦-4♦; [5+♦, wants partner to raise with support] -- [support, Optional RKCB]
4NT-5♥; [slam positive, 1 or 4 keycards] -- [we have all keycards and the trump queen]
6♦

So we play a raise of a minor to the four level as Optional RKCB. We play step responses here, so first step denies slam interest (or limits hands, whatever), and 2nd+ step shows keycards. If partner denies slam interest we can relay for keycards anyway. A problem with this method is when the 4m bidder just wants to show that he has trump support, he doesn't really want to ask for keycards and gain captainancy. This was the case in the auction above, I as responder held:

AKxx
Jxx
Qxx
xxx

So I knew we had all keycards, but I knew very little about my partner's hand. I figured I should show that we have all keycards as a courtesy, but I would never myself be able to bid a grand slam with these cards. If partner knew that I had the king of spades, he could have counted 13 tricks. Instead of bidding 6♦ he could have bid 5NT to show the king of hearts, but should I then bypass 6♦ and bid 6♠ in order to show the king of spades (probably)?

So the point of this post is really that Optional RKCB probably shouldn't be played in these situations, where it is clear that the hand bidding 4m really doesn't want to have caiptainancy. The problem is how to define when this is the case, and when not? For instance in the auction above it would make sense to have 4♦ just show support, and then perhaps opener can bid 4♥ as some sort of Kickback...

I welcome all suggestions, but try to keep it general about the Optional RKCB treatment, and not specific to this auction. Also I know that symmetric relays and what-not would have solved the auction in question, but that is off-topic

[nullve]

I think the notion of captaincy (and all other intentional language used to describe bidding, for that matter) is ultimately dispensable.

E.g.:

1♣-1♠; 2♦-2♠; 3♦-4♦; ?:

For example, with Responder as Asker/captain:

(...)
4N = extras, 1 or 4 key cards
...5♣ = asking about the trump Q
...5♦ = to play
...5♥ = confirming all key cards, asks about the ♣K, interested in grand slam
...5♠ = confirming all key cards, asks about the ♥K, interested in grand slam
...5N = confirming all key cards, asking about the ♠K, interested in grand slam
...6♣ = confirming all key cards, asking about the ♣Q, interested in grand slam
...6♦ = to play
...(...)
(...)

Equivalently, with Responder as Teller/non-captain:

(...)
4N = extras, 1 or 4 key cards, asking about key-cards
...5♣ = 0-1 or 3-5 key cards, no trump Q
...5♦ = 2 key cards
...5♥ = 1 or 4 key cards, trump Q (or trump Q irrelevant), no ♣K, grand slam "possible"*
...5♠ = 1 or 4 key cards, trump Q (or trump Q irrelevant), ♣K (or ♣K irrelevant), no ♥K, grand slam "possible"
...5N = 1 or 4 key cards, trump Q (or trump Q irrelevant), ♣K (or ♣K irrelevant), ♥K (or ♥K irrelevant), no ♠K, grand slam "possible"
...6♣ = 1 or 4 key cards, trump Q (or trump Q irrelevant), ♣K (or ♣K irrelevant), ♥K (or ♥K irrelevant), ♠K (or ♠K irrelevant), no ♣Q, grand slam "possible"
...6♦ = 1 or 4 key cards, grand slam not "possible"
...(...)
(...)

* "possible" = possibly good and safely reachable

[Vampyr]

Would it help to have not the next step but 4NT to deny slam interest?

Also You could try playing that kickback applies when 4m is the first bid by responder agreeing the suit.

[fromageGB]

I take it that the 5♥ bid (being > 5Trumps) is not showing any particular side K, but just confirming all 6 crucial cards. In that case, why not replace that with denial cues? 5♥ meaning "we have all 6 crucial cards, but I do not have ♥K".

The bidding continues with each party bidding 6♦(ie trumps) when a king is known to be missing (of course 6NT can be an alternative), but if partner denies a K that you have, you skip all the ones you do, in a ranking upwards "revolving" sequence, but then bid the next one you don't. You have room to show or deny all kings. Simple and perhaps standard denial methods so far.

In addition, there is the spare bid of 5NT. You can use this bid to mean "We have all the side kings so far, with me having any I have bypassed in bidding 5NT, but I cannot see 13 tricks even if all kings are held, so only continue with the kings process if you have designs on a grand. I don't". The message is clear. If partner has all the other kings and no grand slam interest either, he signs off in 6. If he can see or expect 13 tricks himself, he continues the denial kings process, and if YOU have the final king, KT-1, you bid the grand because partner has told you he wants to.

Conversely, if you had bypassed 5NT, such as bidding 6♣ to deny that one, the 5NT bypass says that you DO fancy a grand. Partner will sign off in 6♦ if he sees a missing K (or doesn't see it!) but otherwise he continues the denial process and he bids the grand if he has the last K.

This works I think for all suits as trumps, playing 4T+1 type methods, and in your case the bidding goes
5♥(denial) - 5♠(has K♥ but not K♠)
5NT(have K♠ but do not fancy a grand) - 7♦(but I do, and have K♣)

Naturally if partner denies a K and you can see it does not matter (eg singleton) then you continue as if you have it.

Using this concept of 5NT as "no desire for grand" means that there is no captaincy involved.

[Trick13]

Vampyr, on 2017-April-24, 07:37, said:

Would it help to have not the next step but 4NT to deny slam interest?

Also You could try playing that kickback applies when 4m is the first bid by responder agreeing the suit.

Usually playing optional KCB, after the negative next next step response, asker can bid the next step to force responder to show keys anyway. You would lose this if 4NT was your negative.

[Trick13]

I wish there was a solution for minor suit ace asking. I am leaning towards Turbo, except in defined situations where optional keycard works really well.

The only defined situation I have at the moment is when partner has pulled 3NT to 4m (not from weakness) and you haven't supported the minor, e.g.:

1NT - 2♣
2♦ - 3♣
3NT - 4♣

or

1♦ - 1♠
2NT - 3NT
4♦

[Zelandakh]

I think you are on the right lines with your thinking. OKCB is esentially a similar beast to F3NT and can be similarly adapted. I tend to think in terms of the less- described hand rather than Captaincy but this is just semantics and they are really the same thing. For F3NT, when the undefined hand bids it, it is a general slam try; when the defined hand bids it though it is more of a curtesy call in case partner wants to look for slam, denying the ability to make a "serious" call.

Similarly for 4m here, when the undefined hand bids it it is a slam try but for the defined hand it really needs ro be just a curtesy raise. Exactly what hands are included is going to depend on the specific auction though. If we have already agreed diamonds and therefore have calls above 4m available to show stronger slam interest then 4m should actually be a negative precisely like F3NT in a similar spot. If 4m is the trump agreement, meaning that we essentially only have 4m and 5m to show support, it obviously has to be the more positive action and does not show much else other than not having complete dreck. Even as a fan of OKCB generally, I think playing it in that type of auction is pretty bad.

Now on your specific auction there is a second solution possible within your current rules. Responder could have bid 3♥ over 3♦ and continued with 4♦ if Opener continues with 3NT. This would surely show diamond support without wanting to use OKCB, That is not as good as the more general solution as it can get messy if Opener continues with something other than 3NT but does require fewer rules so it is a simpler option you might consider.

[nullve]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-April-24, 00:57, said:

So we play a raise of a minor to the four level as Optional RKCB. We play step responses here, so first step denies slam interest (or limits hands, whatever), and 2nd+ step shows keycards. If partner denies slam interest we can relay for keycards anyway.

Instead of

4♦(ORKC, hence S/I+)-?:

4♥ = would reject a S/I
...4♠ = RKC
......Now either
......4N-5♦ = (reduced scale of) RKC responses (ending in 5♦)
......or
......4N-5♥ = (full scale of) RKC responses (ending above 5♦)
...5♦ = to play
4♠-5♦ = would accept a S/I, (full scale of) RKC responses (ending in 5♦)

perhaps it's better to play

4♦(ORKC, hence S/I+)-?:

4♥ = would accept a S/I, RKC
...4♠-5♦ = (full scale of) RKC responses (ending in 5♦)
4♠-5♦ = would reject the S/I, (full scale of) RKC responses (ending in 5♦)

?

[Zelandakh]

nullve, on 2017-May-15, 09:13, said:

perhaps it's better to play

You are rather missing the point here. It is not really a case of the undefined hand rejecting or accepting a slam invite so much as having or not having slam interest. If 4♥ over 4♦ collects a key card response then it is simply Kickback by another name. Having the 4♠-5♦ calls as key card showing without slam interest is simply information leakage and never useful, so those can be done away with.

[benlessard]

captaincy is overrated, when you make a bid that ask but doesnt show anything its often not optimal.

When you show something even if you where captain initially partner can usually deduce what you need next.

over 4NT i would suggest my last train inversion.


5C= to play 5D (we are missing 2 keycards) or I have all the keycs + Q of trumps
5D = we are missing one keycards but im not sure for slam, or if you prefer we are missing one keycard and possibly the Q of trumps) NOT FORCING
5H = we have all the keycards, i dont have Q of trumps & i dont have K of S
5S = all the keyc but missing Q of trumps,and the K of clubs but i have spade king..

obviously 6D is to play, missing one keycard or simply to play vs a limited hand.