|
Slam Bidding (intermediate
level)
Most players are familiar with general HCP
guidelines such as :
Small Slams : 31-33 HCP
Grand Slams: 35-37 HCP
These are approximate and surely depend on
distribution. At notrump, you usually need to be towards the high
end of the ranges above (especially if both hands are balanced).
With a long running suit, you might make 6NT with fewer HCP. For
suit slams, you could easily get by on less than 31 HCP with lots
of shape (voids, singletons, long suits).
Those HCP numbers are just basic guidelines.
Finding a trump fit (or notrump) is a starting point. Once you
think you are in the slam zone (not always easy to determine), it
is usually a good idea to check for aces. Thus, the Blackwood
convention. Blackwood is used to make sure you never bid a slam
missing 2 aces (or RKC to make
sure you are not off 2 keycards).
Not all slam investigations lend themselves to
Blackwood. There are two major handtypes that are unsuitable for
Blackwood.
1] VOIDS
If you have a void, you should not
use Blackwood. For example, Opener holds:
AKJ7642
--
K32
KQ3
You open 1
and partner makes a limit raise to 3.
You expect to be in the slam zone (no, you won't have 31 HCP--but
your distribution tells you that slam is a possibility). But, this
is not a Blackwood hand. Suppose you bid Blackwood
and partner shows 1 ace. Now what? If you jump to 6,
you could be facing:
Q1093
AK42
Q5
742
Oops. This is not a good slam--off 2 cashing
aces.
But, what if partner's "one-ace" hand
were:
Q1093
K432
A5
J42?
Now, slam is laydown. So, Blackwood should not
be used with voids. What should you do with a void when interested
in slam? Cue-bid. More on this to follow towards the end of this
article.
2] SUITS OFF 2 QUICK TRICKS
If you have a suit that could be off the first
two tricks (such as Qxx, or Jx), you shouldn't use Blackwood. For
example, Opener holds:
AKJ7642
AKQ
32
3
Again, you open 1
and partner makes a limit raise to 3.
Again you expect to be in the slam zone. This is not
a Blackwood hand. Let's suppose you bid Blackwood and partner
shows 1 ace. Now what? If you jump to 6,
you could be facing:
Q1093
J32
Q54
AQ5
You are in a slam off the ace-king of
diamonds--no good. But, what if partner's "one-ace" hand
were:
Q1093
J32
AK64
42?
Now, slam is laydown. So, Blackwood should not
be used when you have a suit off two quick losers. Just like with
voids, the solution for these non-Blackwood hands lies in
cue-bidding.
Cue-Bidding
First, let's explain what a cue-bid is. The term
"cue-bid" is a bit misleading. If the opponents open 1
and you bid 2,
that is a Michaels Cue-bid, showing hearts and a minor. This has
nothing to do with a "cue-bid" for slam bidding. I
prefer to use the new term (thanks to Bridge World
magazine) which is "control-bid" (more specific than the
term "cue-bid"). When looking for a slam, we show a
control. A "control" is an ace or a king (or, if in a
suit contract, a void or a singleton). Think of a control this
way: "If we have a control, the opponents can not take the
first 2 tricks in that suit." We use control-bids when we
have agreed on a trump suit and are moving towards slam.
Example:
AKJ7642
AKQ
32
3
You open 1
and partner bids 3
(invitational). We saw above, that Blackwood is useless. Instead,
you "control-bid" 4,
to show that you are interested in slam, and have a club control.
In this case, your "control" is a singleton. You know
that the opponents cannot cash 2 club tricks. You are worried that
they may be able to take the ace-king of diamonds. Your partner
will now control-bid 4
for you, if he has a control in that suit. If he has:
Q1093
J32
Q52
AQ5
he will hear your 4
control-bid, and will have nothing to contribute. He will bid 4--he
has no control in either red suit.
If instead, responder held:
Q1093
J32
AK64
42,
He would control-bid 4,
and opener would know there are no suits off the first two tricks.
Opener could then use Blackwood to make sure two aces weren't
missing.
When is a new suit a control-bid?
A good rule of thumb is :
Below 3NT, there are no
control-bids. Above 3NT, once a fit has been found
(a suit has been raised), a new suit is a control-bid (ace, king,
void, or singleton).
Example of NOT a
control-bid:
1
2
3*
*Not a control-bid. This says nothing about the
ace or king (nor length) in clubs. Most partnerships use it as
some sort of "naturalish" game try. It is not a slam
try.
Example of a control-bid:
1
3
4*
This shows a control in clubs.
Those are the basics of slam bidding. There are
many issues to explore for more experienced players.
Advanced Topics:
1) Should you learn other slam-related
conventions and how should they be played? (Splinter Bids, Serious
3NT, Kickback, Gerber, Asking Bids, etc.).
2) Should you ever use control-bids just to see
if partner is interested in slam?
3) If so, is it always mandatory to show a
control? (In other words, can you bypass showing a control and
sign off in game if you have a dead minimum?).
4) When showing controls, what order should you
show them in? Should you show aces/voids first (with priority over
kings/singletons), or should you always bid the controls in order,
up-the-line?
5) Can you ever control-bid on the 3 level?
6) What if a control-bid is doubled? What do
redoubles mean (by the control- bidder himself or by the partner
of the control-bidder)?
7) What if the partner of the Blackwooder
has a void. How does he show it? Should/can he always show it?
These are all extremely difficult questions to
answer! There really is no "standard." I know of no good
book or article on this. I don't teach the subject. It is too
complex. I suggest mastering the basics of this article (and maybe
learning RKC). Worrying about issues such as #1-7 above is a
headache waiting to happen. Think, "diminishing
returns."
Sure, the world's top experts have discussed (ad
nauseam) these topics with their partners--but it is a pain. Trust
me. This is over the heads of 99% of intermediate players--it
causes more confusion than it is worth. I highly recommend
focusing on the first 90% of this article, which will cover 90% of
slam hands. If you really need to dig into items 1-7, suffice to
say that there is no "universal answer."
Return to Larry's
website
|
