[Lovera]

... about RKB approach in all its variants (minorwood, kickback, etc.) but i have seen very fews discussion for cue bid and subsequent 4NT by partner. Let's suppose that agree trump (i.e. heart) it happens enter third level and a player bids 4m with cue bid meaning and partner starts with 4NT. How do proceed bidding ? It must consider cue value or not in answere ? (I think that i'll have different solutions), thanks.

[fromageGB]

It depends on the meaning of the cue. Maybe most people use cues as a mechanism to determine that there is no suit with xx(+) opposite xx, and once that has been discovered, embark on plain ordinary ace and king asking with no adjustment. If you are playing first round control cues, and know partner does not have a void, then it makes sense to exclude that ace from the reply.

[Lovera]

 fromageGB, on 2015-October-04, 03:49, said:

It depends on the meaning of the cue. Maybe most people use cues as a mechanism to determine that there is no suit with xx(+) opposite xx, and once that has been discovered, embark on plain ordinary ace and king asking with no adjustment. If you are playing first round control cues, and know partner does not have a void, then it makes sense to exclude that ace from the reply.

Tx, it is part of one possible reponse. For instance this one it must base of agreement in partnership or part of RKB convention ? And more, there are correlated conditions aside ? I don't say that you have an answer now but i want to know how much this problem bidding is open.

[Lovera]

 fromageGB, on 2015-October-04, 03:49, said:

If you are playing first round control cues, and know partner does not have a void, then it makes sense to exclude that ace from the reply.

I was talking about cue bid of first/second round control. At this point we can have two possibilities : if partner continues to cue bid should have an Ace + King of trump agree whilest if bids 4NT shows two Aces (getting additional information).

[SteveMoe]

If playing Italian style (1st or 2nd round control bids below game level) then RKB is essential.

[Lovera]

 SteveMoe, on 2015-October-04, 21:28, said:

If playing Italian style (1st or 2nd round control bids below game level) then RKB is essential.

Infact. Than i.e. 4Cl(=cue to exclude in 4NT)-4NT(=Bw for query with trump heart agree). What i try to develope is : have you considered the possibility to change the meaning of 4NT Blackwood in this way ? Instead to answere for keycards Bw query for controlls putting K=1 controll, Ace=2 controlls and using the same schale of RKB (i.e. for controll1430 14 controlls-not keys-3or0 controlls,5♥=2 or 5 w/o Q, 5♠=2or 5 w Q and 5NT=6 c.= two Aces +2Kings). Let me know what is your thinking, bye.

[Zelandakh]

Your idea works well within the context of a relay system, where the exact shape is typically known, but not so well in a natural system. For methods of optimising RKCB you might consider searching for post from kenrexford, who has done some work in this area.

[Lovera]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-October-05, 08:04, said:

Your idea works well within the context of a relay system, where the exact shape is typically known, but not so well in a natural system. For methods of optimising RKCB you might consider searching for post from kenrexford, who has done some work in this area.

Hello. It is not just so because i will not change RKB at all (it's a good convention as structurated and for we have talk about). I suggested that "only in this case"- cue bid followed of 4NT by partner- instead of answering with keys indications have to show controlls. I have seen kenrexford works but i was talking (=try to see) of another thing, bye.

[kenrexford]

Actually, my book Variable Key Card Blackwood is directly on point. In that book, I note that cuebidding followed by RKCB has redundacies, like noted in this thread, and that these redundancies can be used to improve 4NT responses. For instanced, I structure responses to eliminate showing controls already denied or already shown, which enables more space to show unknowns. Thus, VKCB is exactly what you may be looking for.

[johnu]

 SteveMoe, on 2015-October-04, 21:28, said:

If playing Italian style (1st or 2nd round control bids below game level) then RKB is essential.

Not if you play 4NT as D.I.

[Lovera]

The argoument, as explained, it exuling from keycards answering on three suits aside of cue suit with controlls. It usually happens with club as cue having in the hand one or two kings more. It also interesting to confront keys answers vs controlls such as 5♦(=2A+K of trump) vs 5♥(=2A+ 1K w/o Q) or 5♠(=idem with Q) but King can be determinate if 4NT bidder has two kings.

[SteveMoe]

 Lovera, on 2015-October-05, 06:12, said:

Infact. Than i.e. 4Cl(=cue to exclude in 4NT)-4NT(=Bw for query with trump heart agree). What i try to develope is : have you considered the possibility to change the meaning of 4NT Blackwood in this way ? Instead to answere for keycards Bw query for controlls putting K=1 controll, Ace=2 controlls and using the same schale of RKB (i.e. for controll1430 14 controlls-not keys-3or0 controlls,5♥=2 or 5 w/o Q, 5♠=2or 5 w Q and 5NT=6 c.= two Aces +2Kings). Let me know what is your thinking, bye.

I do play 4♣ as "old Fashioned Beta Ask" with several partners, with 2,3,4,5 etc step responses.

Better still I play 1M-2♣ as an artificial GF and bet ask (ONLY GF available to responder). Opener is presumed to hold to hold 3 controls so responses by opener are steps: 3, 4, 5, 6 etc.

I think the Italians had it right - get controls total known early then work on fit and shape.

Since slam typically takes 10 controls, the asker would have to hold 5 or more controls. If responder has more than 5 controls, the responses don't seem to work well?

[Lovera]

This type of information via controlls is more used in most artificial systems and istead is it few watching for 4NT bidding but already ruled (i.e. Smith, Norman) and this mine to relate with RKB has plus information for Queen. I have evindetiated answeres with more two controlls but to verify eventual ambiguities it is necessary to consider the other cases. Infact more probable reponse seems to be 5♦(=3 controlls -1A+1K) and when 2(=A) is it possibile to manage conv. to sure it for partner in according to previously biddings selecting ultheriorly all possible answeres (any in the complete schale can be incompatible with 4NT bidder hand).

[Lovera]

Between already indicate two similar conventions my schale is close to Norman 4NT. Let's put an hand: N ♠ AKQ104 ♥ K42 ♦ K4 ♣ A63 S ♠ J86 ♥ A5 ♦ AJ9752 ♣ K8 Bidding :N-S 1♠-3♦, 3♠-4♣(=cue 1or2 round), 4NT(=almost two Aces-Bw for controlls)-5♣(=1or4 controlls)-7♠. With the answer of 5♣ N knows that S has nor 4 Kings neither 1Ace + 2Kings than has two Aces plus King in club (having N the Ace) and the ending is automatic.

[Lovera]

The first cue (i.e. 4♣) should sure an hand with Ace(s) and one or more Kings in the suits aside plus almost a top honor (A/K) in trump agree but in case that partner had indicated a self-supporting suit (it doesn't applying when there are 1 or 2 controlls) and than we could have this schale (if it is considered that 5♦ for 0 controlls is available because otherwise useless) : 5♣ 2 A (4 controlls=c); 5♦ 1 A + 1/2 K (3/4 c); 5♥ 1 A + 3 K or 2 A + 1 K (5c) w/o Queen; 5♠ idem with Queen (the two cases can be differentiate); 5 NT 2 A + 2 K (6c).

[TomReynold]

 SteveMoe, on 2015-October-04, 21:28, said:

If playing Italian style (1st or 2nd round control bids below game level) then RKB is essential.

Actually, Not true. The original Neapolitan D-I works just fine. D-I by opener or responder with all positive bidding tempos shows 2 Aces. Responder responds with 1 Ace.

Key Card works if you want to keep it simple.

[TomReynold]

Using Neapolitan cue bidding works well with natural systems.

The old rules are in the old book by Charles Goren. Interestingly the copyright is owned by Harold Ogust who probably wrote the book. Later Blue Team books have relaxed these rules somewhat. The original Neapolitan notes are on the internet. They don't go into the detail that the Goren/Ogust book does.

Using Neapolitan D-I with the original rules is somewhat superior to RCKB. (I have not read Ken's book) D-I shows no 2 quick losers in your suits or the unbid suits and asks for NEW information. The auctions can get quite complicated. I have played D-I with my current partner for 40 Years.

However, playing Neapolitan cue bidding with another partner, we used standard RCKB (1430) except for clubs (0314. It was acceptable. It is somewhat redundant as Ken says.

My experience is that using D-I gets you to more good slams than RCKB, both using Neapolitan cub bidding structure, but also gets you to 50-50 slams(on a finesse)that you would stay out of using RCKC. If the opponents are expected to always get to the 5 level, 50-50 slams are actually odds on because they often go off in 5 with the right lead and the finesse off and they often make even if the finesse is off with the wrong lead. . However, this is an extremely aggressive approach that many partnerships don't favor.

Tom

[ahydra]

What's a D-I?

ahydra

[Zelandakh]

From the description it seems to be an older name for Turbo.

[Lovera]

 ahydra, on 2015-October-13, 11:32, said:

What's a D-I?

ahydra

D-I is for Declarative-Interrogative where 4NT is not Blackwood but a generic cue bid showing extra or values not yet known insert in a cue-bidding sequence.