Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:31 PM
 
Subject: Tactics - Q bids

 

PITBULLS:

 

    When there are opponents in the auction all the time ( tactical or otherwise )  , the frequency of Q bids increase . Misunderstandings of what is a Q bid can occur if you and partner have not discussed the various situations ... I got this from the net and edited it a bit ...

 

A practical way to handle this kind of problem is to have what might be called "default" agreements -- simple rules that are broadly phrased to cover all undiscussed sequences.

  S-Void   H-842   D-K75   C-KQJ9865

Playing a two-over-one forcing-to-game system, partner opens 1♠ and you bid a forcing 1NT. Partner now rebids 3♠ and it's your call.

What should 4♣ mean in this auction? There are merits for both treatments -- natural or a cuebid -- but neither meaning has value unless you and partner interpret it the same way.

Best, of course, would be to have a specific agreement about this auction before it happens. (You may well have one after the hand, especially if you have a disaster.) In practice, though, it's impossible to discuss every sequence that might come up at the table. No matter how long you play with your partner, you'll always encounter unique situations that aren't covered by your current agreements or conventions.

Default #1: An ambiguous new-suit bid at the 4-level or higher is a cuebid

Using Default #1

If you and your partner make #1 your default agreement, you can't use a 4♣ bid to suggest a new trump suit. To show long, strong clubs, you'd have to jump to 5♣. Partner should have no trouble interpreting this as a long suit, especially since he knows your default agreement prevented you from bidding a natural 4♣.

You could also choose to make Default #1 more specific by stipulating that it applies only if partner has shown extra length in his suit.  You do not compete with partner in misfit auctions. If partner has shown extra length or two suits with extra length , your bid is a Q bid. This would clarify the meaning of auctions like these: 

      You    Partner  




 
 
(1)    --      1♠   
       2♥      3♣ 
       3♥      4♦ 




 
(2)    1♥      1♠  
         4♥      5♣   




 
       You   LHO   Partner   RHO 
(3)    1♥     2♦     Dbl*    4♦       *(negative double)   
         4♥    Pass   4♠  




 

In all three auctions, you can safely interpret partner's last bid as a cuebid showing support for your hearts. However, if you use the "extra-length" requirement, your default agreement would not apply to this sequence: 

     You    Partner    
      1♠      2♥   
      3♦      4♣   

Here, partner's 4♣ should be natural (and forcing), since you haven't promised extra length in either of your suits.

Keep in mind that the key word in these agreements is "ambiguous". The default rules are in effect only for situations you haven't previously discussed and for which an alternate meaning isn't obvious. For example, if you use Default #1, it would not apply in these auctions: 

     LHO   You   RHO   Partner  
     3♦       3♠    Pass   4♥   




 
     You     Partner      
      3♠      4♥ 




 

In either case, there should be nothing ambiguous about partner's 4♥ bid. In the first auction, it's his first chance to show a long suit and you haven't promised significant extra length in spades, so 4♥ must be natural. You also have the inference that if partner wanted to show strong spade support, he could have cuebid 4♦ or jumped to 5♠.

In the second auction, there's already a "standard" interpretation that partner's 4♥ bid is to play (unless you've previously agreed on another meaning). In addition, common sense tells you there would be little reason for partner to intend 4♥ as a slam try, since this would mean he lacked controls in clubs and diamonds.

Do not forget the forcing 1NT auctions with a strong jump shift . The 4 level is reserved for a Q bid .

1♠            1NT

3♥            4♣/♦      is a Q bid is support of hearts or spades

The 3 level is natural

1♠              1NT

3♣              3♦/♥    ( natural )

Playing a two-over-one forcing-to-game system, you open 1♥ with:

  S-AQ4   H-KQ962   D-KJ109   C-5

Partner responds 2♦ and you rebid 4♣ -- a splinter showing diamond support and a singleton club. Partner now bids 4♥.

How do you interpret partner's 4♥? If you believe your auction has absolutely set diamonds as trumps, then you can probably assume 4♥ is a cuebid for a diamond slam. Partner might have a hand like   S-832   H-A   D-AQ8752   C-Q65 where he needs only to hear a spade cuebid from you to be able to use Blackwood.

Or is 4♥ a natural call? If partner is trying to show a minimum with 3-card heart support --   S-KJ   H-854   D-AQ762   C-K75 -- you'd better pass before you get too high.

Dilemmas like this one come up often, even in the most practiced partnerships. It's impossible to discuss every sequence that might come up at the table, but if you have a few "default" agreements in place, you can improve the chances that you and partner will interpret an unusual auction in the same way.

Default #2: A game bid in a major suit previously bid by either partner is an offer to play there.

Worded more simply, Default #2 is a variation of the broader default "If it could be natural, it is";  In practice, #1 will probably help you handle more common problems, especially those that arise in crowded auctions. Default #2 also conforms to the old bridge tenet of "game before slam" (which can function as a default agreement all by itself). This popular advice suggests that when making choices about how to structure your system or interpret a bid, finding the best game should take priority over searching for slam. This means that when in doubt, you should treat an ambiguous bid as a natural suggestion of a trump suit or as a try for game, rather than as an advance cuebid for a possible slam.

Using your default

Let's see how these agreements can help you sort out what's going on in other auctions. Would you interpret the last bid in each sequence below as natural or as a cuebid? 

     You    Partner        
(1)   --       1♠   
      1NT     3♣   
      4♣       4♠   




 
(2)   1♦      1♥   
       2NT     3♦   
        3♠      4♥




 
(3)   1♦      1♠   
       2♥      3♦   
       3♠      4♥  




 
(4)   --      1♦  [2♥ overcall]
      DBL*    3♥                  * (negative double)   
      4♦         4♠ 




 
(5)   1♠      2♦   
        2♠      3♥   
        3♠      4♥   




 

Without a previous discussion or a default agreement, these auctions would cause problems for many partnerships. If you rely on Default #2, though, you can safely assume partner's last bid was a natural suggestion of a final contract.

In (1), opener is showing extra spade length. He may be 6-4, or he may have improvised a jump-shift with a hand like
  S-AQ10962   H-A   D-K83   C-AQ8 . If you instead use Default #2, partner's 4♠ would be a cuebid only if you agreed that 4♣ had set trumps. Most players treat 4♣ as a good raise, and it's a game-forcing auction, but you should discuss whether or not your default would apply here.

In (2), partner is showing a mild slam try with six hearts and a diamond fit (   S-4   H-AQ10762   D-K1052   C-83). His round-about auction shows a stronger, better-fitting hand than if he had jumped directly to 4♥ over 2NT.

In (3), you've both shown good values, but the auction has turned into a scramble to find the right strain. Even with all the strong bidding up to this point, partner's 4♥ should be considered passable. Since you've shown a 3-4-5-1 pattern (identifying the club weakness for notrump), partner is suggesting the 4-3 heart fit may be the right spot. He may hold
  S-J652   H-AQ8   D-Q1073   C-53.

You can apply the same reasoning to (4), the only difference being that spades were "bid" with a negative double. Partner's 3♥ cuebid was most likely a search for 3NT, but he's now willing to try the 10-trick game in a 4-3 fit.

Auction (5) came from the 1995 European championships, where opener, a French expert, thought his partner's 4♥ was a cuebid in support of spades. Holding a 6-2-1-4 hand, he followed with a 5♣ cuebid, which got his side dangerously high -- partner was 5-6 in the red suits and meant 4♥ as natural and non-forcing. A default agreement would have helped the pair stop in game on this misfit.

When is your default "off"?

It's important to remember that these agreements apply only to ambiguous situations. If you've previously agreed on another meaning for a sequence, or if there's already a standard or "obvious" treatment for it, those prevail. For example, Default #2 would not apply in these auctions: 

     You     Partner 
(6)   1♦      1♥   
        1♠      3NT  
        4♦       4♥  




 
(7)   --       1♠  
      1NT     3♥  
      4♥       4♠  




 

In (6), if partner really had extra heart length, he had plenty of room to show it earlier. Since your 4♦ suggested slam-try values, partner is cooperating by cue bidding the heart ace.

In (7), you've already found a good major-suit fit and you're in game, so there's no reason for partner to be trying to talk you into a different one. He's cuebidding for a heart slam and is probably hoping to hear about a minor-suit control from you.

Would this hand have caused a problem for you and your partner?

You hold   S-J10765   H-A8   D-KQ   C-9865 and this auction develops: 

    LHO    Partner   RHO    You  
     1♦     Pass     Pass   1♠   
     DBL     2♦      Pass    ?   

What is partner's 2♦? If this auction had come up at my table, I would have assumed (without, I confess, giving much thought to other alternatives) that 2♦ was a cuebid showing spade support and inviting game if I had a little extra for my balancing bid. I would have expected partner to hold   S-Q843   H-K4   D-652   C-AJ104 .

If your partnership has had this auction before, you probably have an agreement about the meaning of the cuebid. But if it's one of the hundreds (even thousands) of bidding sequences you've never encountered, would you have been on the same wavelength? With which of the two hands above would you or partner have bid 2♦?

Problems like this one demonstrate the value of default agreements -- simple, catchall "rules" that can be applied to situations you haven't discussed. To cover this sequence (and others like it), you and partner could agree to one of these defaults:

In auctions where our first action is an overcall, if an opponent makes a non-penalty double:

Default #3: A cuebid of the opponent's suit shows a constructive (or better) raise. It's artificial and forcing.

Fine-tuning your agreement

Without further partnership discussion, either one of these agreements may help you avoid a disaster in an ambiguous auction. You'll defeat the purpose of the default if you make the wording much more specific, but you can improve your communication by discussing how you'll evaluate your hands and handle rebids.

With Default #3, the cuebid by a passed hand will always show trump support and at least a mild game invitation. This will usually be the case if the cuebidder is an unpassed hand, too. However, many pairs agree that an unpassed hand can also use a cuebid to start the description of a non-supporting hand with forcing-to-game strength. The cuebidder clarifies his intentions at his next turn -- his bid of a new suit or notrump shows the strong hand without trump support. If you play new suits are non-forcing after an overcall, you may want to adopt this meaning. With #3, you'll also want to discuss the meaning of a redouble. It can be used as a lead director (showing a top honor in partner's suit) or as a show of general high-card strength, with or without support.

 

Would you be certain about the meaning of partner's bid in each of these auctions, or would they be potential disasters-in-progress at your table? 

     RHO    You   LHO   Partner
(1)   1♦    Pass   1♥     2♦    




 
(2)   1♦    Pass   1♥     2♥   




 
(3)   --     --    1♣     Pass  
      1♥     1♠    Pass   2♣  




 

Previously, we discussed agreements you could use to sort out the meaning of an ambiguous cuebid in an auction where the opponent has bid only one suit. Another source of frequent misunderstandings is a cuebid made after the opponents have bid two suits. In the above sequences, partner had a choice of two cuebids. Do both suits convey the same message, or should each have a unique meaning?

In auctions where the opponents have bid two suits:

Default #4: A bid of either of the opponents' suits is an artificial cuebid except if you are bidding directly in the sandwich position then it is natural ( either suit ) ; 

.Opponents open and respond on “non suits” . It is best to keep sandwich position of bidding their suits  natural. You have doubles and jumps in NT to show the other two suits so having the bid natural ( either the opening bid or the responders suit as natural) pays dividends.