[Hyperon]

The auctions goes 1♣-(1♥)-1♠-(2♥)-3♥, where 1♠ showed 5+♠. Is there a standard meaning of 3♥?

[Zelandakh]

Hello Hyperon and welcome to the BBO forums. This is a general cue bid showing values but no better bid. Typically it will be a big balanced hand without a heart stop or a club one-suiter just short of a 2♣ opening. It is also possible to bundle additional hand types, notably some good spade raises, if agreed, although whether this is necessary is questionable with so many raise options already available.

[PhilG007]

Hyperon, on 2016-February-14, 12:20, said:

The auctions goes 1♣-(1♥)-1♠-(2♥)-3♥, where 1♠ showed 5+♠. Is there a standard meaning of 3♥?

I would view the 3♥ bid as a DAB (Directional Asking Bid) asking partner for a heart stopper
with a view to a NT contract. I would have thought,though,that cue bids and their meaning are a
matter for partnership discussion/agreement.

[Vampyr]

I think that the main question here is whether responder's 3♠ can be passed. I think it should be, with anything else GF. But playing this cuebid as GF is reasonable and more popular.

[zillahandp]

It is a GF and asking for more info. It is slow arrival and suggests a slam interest, it is not neccessarily a cue bid at this stage. 4h would be a cue bid but p probably wants to know about minos suits and controls or indeed a heart control so bidding a minor would show a control now.

[Zelandakh]

zillahandp, on 2016-February-15, 09:57, said:

it is not neccessarily a cue bid at this stage.

It is by definition a cue bid. I assume what you mean is that it is not a control-showing cue bid and as far as I can tell noone has even suggested this as a possibility so far.

[zillahandp]

By cue bid I understand control showing, what do you mean by definition it is a cue bid,. It is an exploratlory bid cos 4hts would be a cue bid. If , say the nxt bid is 4s that would say no slam interest. If the next bid is 4c that would be a cue bid or a suit depending on style, if the next bid was 4d the same. Again slow arrival shows strength. I assme you have a different definition of a cue bid otherwise I disagree. Is a michaels bid a cue bid? Is an old fashioned acol of the same ilk a cue bid?

[zillahandp]

Hi Zeland, 204 hands I think I might help your play if you wish

[blackshoe]

The definition of "cue bid" is "a bid in a suit bid or shown by opponents." A bid that shows a control is a "control bid". Historically, both were called "cue bids" but the lack of differentiation was confusing (as here) so "control bid" is now used to avoid that confusion.

[zillahandp]

So 3hts is slow approach asking for info as stated not showing a control, and 4hts would be a control bid but not a cue bid so what is a cue bid? Is Michaels a cue bid?

[Vampyr]

Blackshoe has just explained what a cue bid is. Of course Michaels is a cue bid. Splintering in the opponents' suit is not usually referred to as a cue bid.

[zillahandp]

Well not in English (uk) but thanks two nations separated by a common language and not in Acol but who knows does the definition change when it is not an overcall? Certainly it was called a Michaels cue bid but the word Michaels said not control showing but distribution showing hence cue bid needed the word Michaels. tHis auction is quite different. U go your way, mine seems to work quite well

[Zelandakh]

zillahandp, on 2016-February-15, 13:36, said:

Hi Zeland, 204 hands I think I might help your play if you wish

It would be lovely if you could but it might take more than 204 hands. In the meantime, wiki may not be perfect but the definition of cue bid there is fairly standard regardless of system.

[akwoo]

It asks partner to bid 3N with a heart stopper and make the least bad bid without.

If the 3H bidder continues after 3N, it shows a hand with slam interest too strong to make a 4 level bid directly.

I would play that 3H does not promise another bid if partner bids 3S(6+♠), 4C(3+♣), or 4D(5+♦) (but any of them might be a lie suggesting the best 7 card fit absent a heart stopper). 4♣ after a 3♠ response is not forcing, showing the hand with long running clubs and not much else, but everything else by the 3♥ bidder shows extras.

[zillahandp]

204 is on the rrecord, by the way in the sequence unopposed 1h 3h 4d what is 4d?

[Vampyr]

zillahandp, on 2016-February-15, 14:08, said:

Well not in English (uk) but thanks two nations separated by a common language and not in Acol but who knows does the definition change when it is not an overcall? Certainly it was called a Michaels cue bid but the word Michaels said not control showing but distribution showing hence cue bid needed the word Michaels. tHis auction is quite different. U go your way, mine seems to work quite well

As far as I know, Zelandakh is in the US ; I am in the UK. It is true that here, "control bid" is not used much, so cue-bid has to do double duty. You can use whatever terminology you want, but you might as well accept the common usage when posting on a public forum.

[gordontd]

zillahandp, on 2016-February-15, 13:36, said:

Hi Zeland, 204 hands I think I might help your play if you wish

I can't help feeling you have intended to get at Zelandakh in your posts in this thread, especially this one, and I would like to defend him but unfortunately can't make enough sense of what you are saying to be able to do this effectively.

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2016-February-16, 00:48, said:

As far as I know, Zelandakh is in the US ; I am in the UK. It is true that here, "control bid" is not used much, so cue-bid has to do double duty. You can use whatever terminology you want, but you might as well accept the common usage when posting on a public forum.

I am currently in Germany but am very definitely English and am much more familiar with Acol than SA(YC) or 2/1. The term you find in English text books when wanting to distinguish between the two is typically "control-showing cue bid" (which would also be my answer to zillahandp). I have no problem with this being shortened to cue bid rather than control bid but do take issue with the other kind of cue bid being excluded. Otherwise such popular English terms as unassuming cue bid start to look a litle silly. The wiki link I gave allows for both to use the term and this seems the most standard and sensible approach in an international forum.

[zillahandp]

So to summarise then we have UCBs, asking cue bids, michaels cue bids and strong T/o double cue bids and goodness knows what else but cue bid n its own means a bid in a new suit after suit agreement, implyng suit agreement So a "a cue bid" unqualified is contorl showing first or second round control but to be clear we should always add the qualifirer eg control showing cue bid, however most people put cue bid on their card meanng control showing

[Zelandakh]

zillahandp, on 2016-February-16, 07:42, said:

but cue bid n its own means a bid in a new suit after suit agreement, implyng suit agreement So a "a cue bid" unqualified is contorl showing first or second round control

No and no, but I have done enough feeding for one thread so I will simply suggest you go back and read the source material more closely.