With my partners I always ask that Gerber is off once a suit is bid naturally in opening notrump (or two clubs followed by notrump rebid) auctions. Hence, in the BWTA auction our clubs would indeed be Gerber for us. So, our four notrump would clearly be quantitative.

This brings me to two questions:

1) If Gerber and Blackwood are both off in the BWTA auction, how would the partnership check for aces?

2) With my partnership understandings, I think the right bid is four notrump. Do you agree?

Good morning Mr. Wolff

Since W has shown the QD already,
shouldn’t W play it and then switch to the 9S herself

Small stuff

Hi Jim2,

While your ace asking theories are close to the norm and would apply over 2NT, there is a positive tweak available over 2NT (or starting with 2 clubs then 2NT). 4 clubs would become a 2nd suit and 4NT would indeed be quantitative, making a jump to 5 clubs asking for aces. Complications set in concerning space available leaving either 5D=0-3, 5H-1-4, 5S=2 with no queen ask since 5NT asks for number of kings, or 5S=no queen and 5NT=queen of the transferred suit and no asking for kings.

My experience with 5 clubs asking for aces with 4NT=quantitative is all positive with no remembrances of complications and I recommend it. Four clubs definitely needs to be available for showing a natural suit simply because it becomes needed every now and then. Of course a direct jump to 4 clubs over 2NT is, of course, asking for # of aces.

If the truth be known however, I believe that the hallowed KCBW is overrated since it makes it much easier for those wily opponents to defend a slam better by being able to lead away from the jack of trump (or even lead the suit without, fearing partner may have that key queen), but when the opponents have shown the queen and also take a winning sacrifice when they have a long suit since those slam bidders often seem to be sure of making after announcing that key queen.

More often than most realize (I suspect) confident slam bidding results in a loss if the opponents are zeroed in on what to do (and, of course, have the choice of doing it).

However, the above is only my opinion subject to illusions of the moment, but it seems, through the years, to have worked for me. Like the three bears, the porridge becomes the right temperature when both sides have to deal with their opponents confidence in addition, of course to the exact hands dealt.

Sometimes winning bridge revolves around stealing some situations, when available, and not always positive to play aces and cinches like it sometimes deveops in poker.

Finally in answer to question #2, I am not wild about treating the column example as a NT hand, since with a 5-2-2-4 pattern the five card suit sometimes needs to be set up, making clubs (in this case very playable opposite a super four or more relaxed most 5’s.) Of course if responder holds 5 good clubs he can jump to 6 clubs, but what if he decides not to.

Maybe the answer would be to merely bid a natural 4 clubs over the accepted transfer to spades, risking partner thinking that suit may be better.

Only the Shadow knows!

Hi Peter,

Yes on this hand it might work, but everything considered my trusted partner should know better than I (while only he is looking at his spade holding and is in better position to make that critical decision)

One of the difficulties of jumping forward quickly in the hopes of getting better fast in bridge is that for it to happen it is much smoother for both partners to be close to the same ability, but still having the enthusiasm and work ethic to accept getting better.

When there is a disparity in desire or ability to succeed, often there is a problem which is unlikely to be overcome, unless those two players go different directions. Alas, sad, but it can be overcome with changes, sometimes in the best interests of both.

Getting back to your question, have trust in the ox you are playing with and just perhaps he or she will surprise you with excellent play.

Anyway, let that be the positive thought of the day.