[pclayton]

Mike: if pard has D AJTxx, slam is 75%. AJxxx its (really hard to calc, but its better than 50%). Only A - empty 5th gives a real prob.

That's why I like the idea of just inviting with 4D.

I have a hunch the key to the hand is finding 6D when pard has something like: Axxx, Ax, AKxxxxx, void.

By posting these splinter hands, I have a feeling Ben has an agenda here. Good! Expert bidding needs some clarification ion these areas.

[flytoox]

I think in Fred's articles about 2/1, he mentioned cuebid pd's suit when you hold the queen.

This is not a 2/1 sequence, but I thinnk same argument applies here.

So I think 4D is the correct bid.

Look forward to see Fred's bid, and other experts' vote of course.

[mike777]

pclayton, on Jul 13 2005, 09:51 AM, said:

Mike: if pard has D AJTxx, slam is 75%. AJxxx its (really hard to calc, but its better than 50%). Only A - empty 5th gives a real prob.

That's why I like the idea of just inviting with 4D.

I have a hunch the key to the hand is finding 6D when pard has something like: Axxx, Ax, AKxxxxx, void.

By posting these splinter hands, I have a feeling Ben has an agenda here. Good! Expert bidding needs some clarification ion these areas.

Yes, that was my point we could have very good slam or 4s may be more than enough, problem. I am afraid partner will take 4D for the K of D and bid a poor slam with many hand types but......

With your other example hand I rebid 4D not 4clubs

[inquiry]

The panel verified my thoughts that this was a very interesting problem by voting for every possible bid at the four level. Obviously, the panel varied from the wildly pessimtic 4♠ to the very ambitious 4NT. The cue-bidders were divided between the those who thought that cue-bidding the diamond queen was acceptable in Bridge Base Advanced (is it?), and those who tought that 4H was a heart cue-bid (is it?) Or is it LTTC, denying ability to cue-bid diamonds and showing some slam ambition after the splinter but not enough to blast with 4NT.

Let’s start with those who see nothing but wasted values on this hand. FLUFFY “4♠, And I hope we aren't too high already. This sentiment was echoed by Luis, who made an odd sort of prediction, given the wide variety of answers. “4♠, I predict this will be unanimous maybe I'm missing something but I really don't see any options to 4♠ so I wonder why this is supposed to be a problem.:” Well Luis, take a look at the views of the other 8 panelist, maybe there is more here than signoff and pray to make game.

Contrasting Luis’s approach was Gabor (ng), who went slamming immediately. ”4NT. RKCB in spades. I don't looking for problems when I can handle things simply. The heart singleton and diamond Queen are golden, so we have good chance for slam. If I get 5♥ (2, no Q), I will be sad and I bid 5♠. If I get 5♠ (2+Q), I pass. If I get 5♦(0/3), I bid 5♥ for spade Queen. If North bids 5♣ (1/4), I bid 6♠. Even 7♠ or 7♦ is possible, only need are wonder cards from North (AKQx, Axx, AKxxx, x or AKxx, Axx, AKxxxx, -), but I know Barry Crane's Eleven Commandments: 6th: Don't bid grand slams in Swiss Teams. 7th: Don't put cards in partner's hand. The Seventh Commandment was Barry's pet peeve. Nothing irritated him more than when partner made an unsuccessful bid and then said: "But if you had had such and such it would have worked." His answer always was, "I never do so don't plan on it."

Gabor, being the only one voting for 4NT was not as far from the main stream response on this hand which was to cue-bid a red suit. To show how close he was, let’s look at Fred’s answer, where he too considered the direct blast to 4NT. Fred ”4♦- The way I play, 4♣ shows a big hand so this hand is clearly worth a slam try (in fact, I briefly considered bidding 4NT). In my partnerships it is acceptable to cuebid a Queen in partner's suit and, since the DQ rates to be an important card, I am happy to do so here. The fact that 4♦is the cheapest bid makes it all the more attractive. If partner bids 4♥ I plan to bid 4♠and leave the rest up to him (her?).”

Joining Fred in cue-bidding 4♦ was our Russian expert Sergey, and our returning guest panelist, Arn all of whom, like Gabor, thought very highly of the ♦Queen Ritong “4♦ how sweet if i do not hear 4♥...“ Dinos1 “4♦. Despite so much pts in clubs. Perfect min for partner's hand: sKQxx-hAxx-dAK10xx-x. Thus we must show our high honour in D's. Over 4♥ I'll bid 4♠ leaving decision to partner.” cherdano ”4♦. Yes, I have a lot wasted, but my ♦Q may be golden, if partner has ♦AKxxx. Even if partner has a misfitting hand like ♠AKQx ♥Kxxx ♦Axxx ♣ x -- and we may still stop at 4♠ opposite this hand --, slam is not horrible.”

The remaining panelist were not willing to cue-bid the diamond Queen, but where more than happy to suggest the possibility of slam by cue-bidding 4♥. Only one of the three clearly stated this was a cue-bid (as opposed to LTTC). This suggest that maybe LTTC is too complicated to use with a pickup partner after all. Something to think about. So let’s start with that reply. Walddk 4♥. Cue bid. “4♦ (fit showing to me) is a close second. We may even have an easy grand slam on. AKQx Axx AKJxx x. Responder can ask for 3rd round diamond control later (6♦). reisig . 4♥ (A small try..if I bid 4♦what will partner do with: AKQx xx AKxxxx x . To answer rich, playing LTTC, he will bid 4♥, showing slam interest but some problem. If you decide to take bull by the horns, you would then bid 5♥ (LACKWOOD), and 5♠ would be the contract. Anyway, that is my understanding of how LTTC works. In addition, lacking a ♥ control (after the splinter and cue), you might also just bid 4♠ over 4♥. Surely partner could have bid 4NT if he had control in the only suit in which a control was not shown. Poky “4♥ Despite the honor wastage in clubs my hand is too powerful to sign-off in 4♠. Without the queen of diamonds I would have bid 4♠. Even a grand slam is possible if partner holds AKQx-Axx-Axxxx-Q.”

So this problem has raised a lot of interesting points. From hand evaluation (sign off due to wastage to blast 4NT), to rather to cue-bid third round control in partners first suit (note how many people said it was an important card.. ng, fred, roland, dinos1, ritong, and cherdano). In fact, the queen of diamonds IS a very important card, and as such, a cue-bid of it is entirely appropriate.

I choose this problem because I wondered how the panel would view the slam possibilities with “misfit” and if they viewed slam as a possibility would they cue-bid the diamond queen. It is my belief that the diamond cue-bid is correct. There seems to be a lot of agreement in the expert community not to cue-bid shortness in partners first bid suit, but less agreement about the appropriateness to cue-bid thrid round control, as the bidding on this hand shows. And since 4♦ and 4♥ got equal votes, I have upgraded the 4♦ vote (it would have been my choice as well). Confusion seems to fall all over 4♥, or maybe it is just me, as to whether this is LTTC or not. 4♠, getting two votes, seems just too pessimistic to me and to the vast majority of the panel, so I downgraded it to a bit. And 4NT, while too optimistic, reflects the sentiment of the majority of the panel on hand evaluation, so I upgrade it a tiny bit. All in all, this and the problem C where the two most interesting to me. Scores,

4♦ 100
4♥ 80
4NT 70
4♠ 60

The individual votes were”
Fred       4♦
Luis        4♠
Walddk    4♥
Fluffy      4♠
cherdano 4♦
reisig       4♥
ritong      4♦
ng           4NT
Dinos1     4♦
Poky           4♥

[FrancesHinden]

I've been tempted into an essay into cue-bidding the queen in partner's suit.

There is a fairly general rule that one can cue the ace or king in partner's suit, even if you generally play first round cues before second.

I don't believe there is such a general rule about whether it is "acceptable" to do so with the queen. In fact, I think it is similar to the discussion about cue-bidding with shortness. "In general" you don't cue shortness in partner's suit, but there are auctions where it is acceptable. In fact, these are almost exactly the opposite of the auctions when you should cue the queen.

So, the times when the queen is a worth bidding:
1. You have shown a weak hand and partner is strong (e.g. partner has opened 2C). Now any high card is gold and worth telling partner about.
2. You are investigating a slam and don't know if there are 12 tricks available. Now it's not so much a cue-bid but more showing support for taking tricks in the suit.
3. You have already denied the A or K (OK, this one is obvious)
4. Partner is marked with a good suit and won't be confused by the cuebid.
5. You have a suitable hand for slam, don't have an alternative suitable cue below game and/or don't play LTTC

I think this problem fits under (2) above with some of (4).
The clearest auctions are those such as 2C-2D-2S-3C-3H-3S-4C-4H where I'd be delighted to have the HQ to cue.

The times when you shouldn't cue the queen are the same as the times when you can cue shortness

1. You have a huge trump fit and are looking only not to have two losers
2. You are marked with at most a doubleton and likely to have fewer
3. You want to take control of the auction, and it's a convenient bid to extract a helpful cue from partner in the next suit up.

1. is the most common. The auctions to get you there can be a bit system-dependant, but something like

1S (5CM) - 1NT (SF)
2D (nat NF) - 4C (huge D fit, slam interest, club length)
4H (cue) - 4S (cue, could be singleton or void)

is typical. Responder looking at, let's say, - xx Axxxxx KQJxx, knows that 12 tricks aren't the problem. If partner is looking at the miracle Jxxxx Ax Kxxx Ax you should now reach the grand. Responder will not bid 4S looking at Qx x Axxxx KJxxx as that could end in a silly contract.

[Elianna]

Contestant's answers:
4♥ 13
4♠ 10
4♦ 3
4NT 2
And one person declined to answer.