[EricK]

 Interrobng, on 2014-June-14, 17:16, said:

This has been an interesting thread. Thanks to all who contributed.

I am a beginner, and in my life I think I might have used cue bids once. My impression was that cue bids generally show control. So, if I open 1S, partner responds 2S, and I realize slam is a possibility, on the given hand I might have bid 3D (had I remembered that cue bids exist). That would have said two things: I can't control clubs, and I can control diamonds.

I have never before heard of using a cue bid to ask if partner can help with a suit, as earlier responders have recommended.

When does a cue bid show weakness in a suit, and when does it show strength in a suit?

Thanks very much!

RobR

To make a slam in a suit requires three things: Good trumps, good controls, and enough tricks.

Good trumps are important because, for example, if you get to slam on a suit like Axxx opposite xxxx, then you will definitely go down, or with Axxxx opposite xxxx you will often go down no matter what you have in the rest of the hand.

Controls are important because you don't want the opponents to cash two Aces, or the Ace King of a suit.

But even if you have great trumps and lots of controls, you still need to find 12 tricks! eg ♠AKxx ♥Axx ♦Kxx ♣Kxx opposite ♠QJxx ♥Kxx ♦Axx ♣Axx has great trumps and loads of controls and still only makes 10 tricks most of the time.

When partner has supported your suit with some sort of limit bid (eg 1♠ 3♠, or 1♥ 1♠ 2♦ 3♥) you generally have a reasonable idea of whether 12 tricks is a plausible target. So slam bidding becomes a matter of determining whether you have good enough trumps, and sufficient controls. This is why one of the most common approaches to slam bidding involves the partners cooperatively cue-bidding suits with controls to ensure there is no suit uncontrolled; allied with some sort of Blackwood to determine if the trumps and good enough, and there aren't 2 Aces missing.

Game in a suit, on the other hand, does not require so much. You don't need great trumps; you don't need every suit controlled; in fact, if it looks like you have the playing strength for ten tricks, then you are best off just bidding game and hoping you can set up and make your ten tricks before the opposition can make four. However, a lot of the time, whether the two hands have the combined playing strength for ten tricks depends on how well they fit together. A common way of finding out is bidding a suit in which you need help, and allowing partner to make the decision. This is generally known as a 'trial bid'.

If you are the responder, how can you tell whether partner is showing a control or asking for help? If you are in a game forcing situation, then partner's bid must be looking for a slam, and so is a control. If you are already at the 3 level, then partner's bid effectively forces you to game, so again it is a control bid. However, if there is still room for the partnership to subside in 3 of the major, then responder should initially assume it is a trial bid asking for help with a view to seeing if the hands fit well enough for game. I say 'initially assume', because if opener is slam interested he can start with a trial bid and then bid on even if partner tries to sign off at the 3 level.

[Mbodell]

 Interrobng, on 2014-June-14, 17:16, said:

When does a cue bid show weakness in a suit, and when does it show strength in a suit?

A cue bid essentially always shows strength/control in the suit. A common agreement is the strength should be either first or second round control. That is either the A, or the K, or a void or a stiff. Further, if the suit is one partner has shown in the auction, then you only cue strength, not shortness, so just the A or K are shown. By cue bidding like this you are helping to figure out if there is a suit where you will lose 2 tricks in it off the go and hence you can't make slam. If partner skips cue bidding a suit, and you can't cue bid the suit, you know that game is the limit on the hand. But you usually only make cue bids when you are in an auction that is forcing to game and investigating slam.

The 3♣ bid as sort of "showing weakness" over the 1♠-2♠ auction isn't a cue bid. Commonly a new suit after a bid and simple raise of a major is some sort of game try in that suit. The most natural game try is a long suit game try, saying this is my second suit, can you help me in this suit. Exactly what holdings make a game try in that suit and what holdings from partner are good can be a little ambiguous and depend on partnership agreements and style.

Note that these game tries are called game tries because they are 95+% about deciding between a part score and a game. It is only occasionally that they might get used to decide between a game and a slam. So how should partner respond to 1♠-2♠-3♣? As follows (the 2♠ bidder should be between a good 5 to a bad 10 count so minimum, maximum, and medium are in terms of that range):

If you are a maximum and you have help for clubs, cue bidding a suit between 3♠ and 4♠ (not including spades!), as a way to accept the game try. If you can't cue or don't want to, at least bid game.

If you are a maximum and you don't have help for clubs, just bid game.

If you are a medium hand and you have help for clubs, just bid game.

If you are a medium hand and you don't have help for clubs, if you have help for a suit between this one and trump (so the red suits on this auction), bid the cheapest such suit at the 3 level. This is a counter-game try saying "I can't accept your help suit game try in clubs, but I can accept it in this suit".

If you are a medium hand and you don't have help for clubs and you don't have help for any suit between the help suit and trump, just bid trump at the 3 level (this is unlikely to happen in the 1♠-2♠-3♣ auction, but in a 1♠-2♠-3♦ auction you might have club help, but you know that is no good because partner didn't ask for help in clubs).

If you are a minimum hand, just decline the try and bid 3 of the trump suit (spades in this example). If you are a minimum with help you'll probably even make the contract.

So the 95% of the time that your partner does this they'll pass any game or signoff you make and reevaluate if you make a counter-try or cue bid. But a small percentage of the time they were trying for slam and will correct your 3 level signoff to the 4 level and investigate slam over your more positive responses. Note confusingly sometimes people will call this 4♠ bid a slam try (in the auction 1♠-2♠-3♣-3♠-4♠), but really it isn't a slam try but instead is placing the contract and revealing that the 3♣ bid was a slam try that you've already turned down.

[Winstonm]

I'd really like to know your partner's hand as your bidding was fine but his/hers may have been less than good. A void with 4 trumps is pretty powerful at times. Most likely your hands simply fit perfectly and there is no way to know that in the bidding UNLESS partner can make a stronger bid than 2S.

A fairly reasonable rule of thumb is that an auction that begins with a simple raise will almost never produce slam - this hand looks like the exception. Oh, well, no rule of thumb is perfect.

[Interrobng]

Many thanks to those who took the time to reply in detail to my question about cue bidding. Those were very helpful posts.

RobR

[1eyedjack]

Winstonm makes a good point. A slam after 1M-2M raise is a rare event. For that very reason, a slam try following such a sequence shows a rather special hand. So, rare it may be, but it can be catered for.

It may not be the place for this sub-forum, but a new suit following 1M-2M raise could be, with partnership agreement, one of two hand types: A game try or a slam try. And the hand types could vary depending on which of these options he holds. That does not initially matter, because the new suit is a forcing bid, and clarification can follow later. You assume the weaker option initially (ie game try) and bid on that assumption. If partner happens to have the slam try then that will be confirmed. So you bid on the assumption that partner had only a game try for his bid of the suit, and that bid might (by agreement) indicate weakness.

If accepting the game try, and you wish to be sophisticated, you could build in some continuations that preserve bidding space to cater for the unlikely event that partner had the slam try possibility. This risks giving additional information to the defenders when the practical reality is that it is very unlikely that partner had the slam try for which such additional information would be of value. That level of complexity is not appropriate here. Indeed there is a strong argument that sophisticated methods have no net benefit here: a low frequency of value and a high frequency of redundant information given to the opponents.

All that having been said, it is quite common for a new suit to show (initially) a *game* try asking for help in the suit, and then later, when showing a slam try, clarifying that that the earlier bid was a strength-showing control.

[Zelandakh]

 1eyedjack, on 2014-June-15, 14:58, said:

It may not be the place for this sub-forum, but a new suit following 1M-2M raise could be, with partnership agreement, one of two hand types: A game try or a slam try.

It should really be one of (at least) 3 hand types with a bluff to induce a misdefence included. Fred wrote a decent BBF article on this sequence a few years ago.

 1eyedjack, on 2014-June-15, 14:58, said:

If accepting the game try, and you wish to be sophisticated, you could build in some continuations that preserve bidding space to cater for the unlikely event that partner had the slam try possibility.

Not so sure this counts as sophisticated. Andy (gnasher) is one of the leading proponents of this approach on BBF and it is hard to see any reason not to follow his advice.

 1eyedjack, on 2014-June-15, 14:58, said:

All that having been said, it is quite common for a new suit to show (initially) a *game* try asking for help in the suit, and then later, when showing a slam try, clarifying that that the earlier bid was a strength-showing control.

Is it? Most seem to play that the conversion just switched the game try to a slam try rather than this being an advance cue situation. Of course the style of help try is also relevant - if we are playing SSGTs (or two-way) then you could argue that it turns into a shortage-showing cue bid but that would be a strange definition. One advantage of playing your two-way game tries reversed (HSGT direct, SSGT indirect) is that jumps can retain their "natural" splinter meaning without duplicating sequences.

In any case, two-way gives you many options here. For example, with our suit spades we have 4♣♦♥; 3NT; 3♣♦♥ followed by 3NT over a non-accept; 3♣♦♥ followed by 4♣♦♥ over a non-accept; 2NT followed by 3NT; and 2NT followed by 4♣♦♥. That is 5 different sorts of slam try plus an extra one if Responder does not accept the direct game try. Those might correspond to singleton splinter; void splinter; natural slam try; Frivolous (general) try; and serious cue, with the extra optione separating out two different types of natural try. However you organise, there is enough space here to cater to almost everything you might think of.


Edit: wrong forum for this again. Please ignore if your name is not Jack.

[gszes]

 Interrobng, on 2014-June-14, 17:16, said:

This has been an interesting thread. Thanks to all who contributed.

I am a beginner, and in my life I think I might have used cue bids once. My impression was that cue bids generally show control. So, if I open 1S, partner responds 2S, and I realize slam is a possibility, on the given hand I might have bid 3D (had I remembered that cue bids exist). That would have said two things: I can't control clubs, and I can control diamonds.

I have never before heard of using a cue bid to ask if partner can help with a suit, as earlier responders have recommended.

When does a cue bid show weakness in a suit, and when does it show strength in a suit?

Thanks very much!

RobR

Do not confuse the concept of a HSGT Help Suit Game Try with cuebidding. The HSGT does not promise game it
can merely be a form of game invitation. Cue bidding is definitely a slam going auction meaning that we
have already decided on at least game and we are showing a control in case either one or both of us prefers
to go to slam. If you adopt HSGT then cue bids will take place after a HSGT or other game forcing auction
has happened (that is why 1s 2s 3c (HSGT) 4d is a cue bid since it is agreeing to play game in spades and
the cue bid happens because opener may have more than just game interest).