[leebca]

I'd like the opinion of novices and beginners if the bidding sequence goes:

1♥-1♠-2♠-Pass.

You open with 1♥. Left hand opponent bids 1♠. Then your partner queue bids the opponents suit, in this case 2♠. Your right hand opponent passes.

How do you (opener) interpret this bid by your partner?

(Feel free to apply any convention(s) you know in expressing your interpretation, if you have or know of any convention).

Thanks for your time. Much appreciated.

[neilkaz]

The very common treatment nowadays and in many places going back at least a couple decades here in the US is that this is Q=LROB.

Cue bid = limit raise or better.

This allows jump support in comp. to be preemptive.

.. neilkaz ..

[ArtK78]

That is my understanding also.

[Stephen Tu]

"Cue" bid, not "queue" bid.

It's limit raise or better for some very huge percentage of players. It depends also on what you play the jump raise in competition, and potentially other bids. If the jump raise in competition is weak, you need bid(s) for limit+. If the jump raise in comp is still invitational, this can be played as GF, but that's very rare these days, although I think that's still the official meaning in SAYC not that a large percentage of players actually know that.

[leebca]

If the convention card is marked, for responses to 1 of a major: Double Raise Inv; and "After Overcall" is "Inv." then the 3♥ is preemptive?

[neilkaz]

leebca, on 2014-August-07, 13:47, said:

If the convention card is marked, for responses to 1 of a major: Double Raise Inv; and "After Overcall" is "Inv." then the 3♥ is preemptive?

If the CC is marked Double Raise after Overcall is "Inv" then that is what 3♥ it is, a limit raise. In that case 2♠ cue would likely show a GF raise or perhaps for some few another type of GF hand.

[leebca]

Thanks neilkaz. This is what I was expecting.

When you 'Google' for information about filling out the CC, the explanation under RESPONSES it is explained. However my newbie friend reading his CC read the "Double Raise:" line as being unconnected to the line below, "After Overcall:" (both of which were marked "Inv" on his CC).

I admit just reading the CC it isn't clear, however I did suggest he go and find out the meaning of this area by looking it up on the Internet. The "After Overcall:" means, a Double Raise After Overcall: marked "Inv." means the limit raise with interference (as in the example here) is to jump a level in partner's suit and that, hence, the cue bid was a strong bid of at least game, if not slam potential.

His explanation of what the "After Overcall:" line meant isn't worth repeating here.

[Zelandakh]

As far as Novices and Beginners go it depends where they are from. Americans are often taught SAYC in which this cue bid (not queue please!) just shows a general game force and does not promise support (although that is the most common hand type). There are some other places in which the cue bid just shows general values too, usually in conjunction with non-forcing advances. In the UK though, pretty much everyone learns the UCB (Unassuming Cue Bid) convention early on, which is the good (limit or better) raise already mentioned.

As to how to interpret it - if I were playing in the Acol club I would assume the good raise. Similarly if playing something like 2/1. With a pick-up partner and SAYC agreed the best advice is to try to cater to both possibilities and hope partner makes their intentions clear on the next round.

[Stephen Tu]

Zelandakh, on 2014-August-08, 02:11, said:

As far as Novices and Beginners go it depends where they are from. Americans are often taught SAYC in which this cue bid (not queue please!) just shows a general game force and does not promise support (although that is the most common hand type).

Really this cue bid in this position should show support 100% of the time. I know the SAYC booklet says "usually a raise", but whoever put together the SAYC booklet was horribly sloppy and it should be "always a raise". There's really no rational reason for it ever not to be a raise, as with other hand types, you can just use a forcing free bid in a new suit or a negative double.

Quote

There are some other places in which the cue bid just shows general values too, usually in conjunction with non-forcing advances. In the UK though, pretty much everyone learns the UCB (Unassuming Cue Bid) convention early on, which is the good (limit or better) raise already mentioned.

I think you are confused about when the term unassuming cue bid applies. This applies when advancing partner's overcall, not when responding to partner's opening over interference, e.g. (1C)-1S-(p)-(2C). The unassuming cue bid does *not* promise support. I think that's why it's called "unassuming", you can't assume support. Why it doesn't show support when partner overcalls -- because of the lack of forcing bids in new suits, mainly. If you are playing new suits as non-forcing, which is common (because it's not that often that you have such a good hand you need to force opposite a potentially only 8 pt overcall), then to force you have to do something else, and the common approach is to lump everything into the cue bid. If you play new suits as forcing, or do fancy stuff like transfer advances, then you can promise support in the cue bid or some other bid that substitutes for the cue bid.

[ahydra]

It's called a queue bid because when partner passes it, you immediately queue up at the bar.

Over a major-suit opening, I play it as INV+ with exactly 3-card support, while 2NT shows the same but with at least 4-card support.

ahydra

[leebca]

Of course it's "queue" for just that reason! [Actually the 'friend' insisted I write it up in the thread header exactly as he wrote it.]

I would play it that way too ahydra. Except, in a tournament one might assume partner is actually playing the way the CC is marked.

[Zelandakh]

Sorry Stephen but I do not agree with you. A UCB always promises support. The original usage (by Reese, even if the convention itself was in use earlier) applied only to an overcall but the term is also very often generalised to incorporate the case of partner opening and an overcall on your right and these are generally taught together. If you look around the web you will find plenty of references to the UCB applying to openings as well as overcalls. It may be that players near you use the term UCB as you describe (only after an overcall and not promising support) but that is not how it is defined in other places. The "unassuming" is generally said to refer to the fact that the cue bid does not promise the extra strength that a traditional game-force would show rather than to the nature of the support.

[Stephen Tu]

Hmm, I guess you are right about the "unassuming" term. Nevertheless, if playing non-forcing new suits after overcalls, it's best to not promise support, else you'd have no forcing options with good hands without support. In contrast, after an opening, you have many forcing options without support, so it's silly not to promise support with the cue.

[Zelandakh]

Use the UCB in combination with forcing or transfer advances. If you want advances to be NF then use the cue bid as a general force and not as a UCB - easy.