[tgphelps]

I'm referring here to the situation where a trump suit has been agreed on, and we are interested in slam.

Depending on what I read and who I listen to, a control bid shows only a first-round control, or either a second-round control. And if it shows a first round control, this means (depending on the author) specifically an ace, or either an ace or a void.

Is there general agreement on what a control bid means? Is there a simple set of rules that summarize things?

[Shugart23]

tgphelps, on 2024-March-24, 09:10, said:

I'm referring here to the situation where a trump suit has been agreed on, and we are interested in slam.

Depending on what I read and who I listen to, a control bid shows only a first-round control, or either a second-round control. And if it shows a first round control, this means (depending on the author) specifically an ace, or either an ace or a void.

Is there general agreement on what a control bid means? Is there a simple set of rules that summarize things?

This may be more than you asked for, but this is the scheme my wife and I used for control bids. We used to play our version of Precision (which was heavily influenced by Oliver Clarke's Precision system and his system can be found on the world wide web)


Steps
1 no control or 1st and 2nd round control xxx (x) OR A or Akx(x)
2 3rd round contr0l Qxx(x) or Qx or xx
3 2nd round control Kxx(x) or x or K
4 2nd and 3rd round control Kx or KQ or KQx(x)
5 1st round control Axx(x) or a Void
note, a void only counts for 1st round control
6 1st and 3rd round control Ax or Aqx(x) or AQ
7 1st , 2nd, and 3rd round control AK or AKQ(x) or AKQ

[jdiana]

See https://www.advinbri...k-in-bridge/406

The main advantage of Italian style control bids is IMO the negative inference. When partner skips a suit, you know that they have neither a first- nor second-round control so, if you also lack those controls, you sign off.

[pescetom]

I am probably the biggest fan of control bids on this forum. But as this is the Novice and Beginner section, my advice would be to keep it very simple at first and just show a side Ace at the level above 3 in the major trumps suit when you have some interest in slam. Partner will reevaluate his hand and either decide between game and slam or ask keycards if you already use that crutch.

[Shugart23]

pescetom, on 2024-March-24, 09:43, said:

I am probably the biggest fan of control bids on this forum. But as this is the Novice and Beginner section, my advice would be to keep it very simple at first and just show a side Ace at the level above 3 in the major trumps suit when you have some interest in slam. Partner will reevaluate his hand and either decide between game and slam or ask keycards if you already use that crutch.

Yes, I agree.. The scheme my wife and I used could be greatly simplified ( or tossed in the garbage). Just to clarify, this sequence is used when one player is asking his partner what round control his partner has in a specific suit and the answer is given in steps....probably not what you were asking about

[tgphelps]

I used think a control showing bid showed specifically a first-round control. But I recently read Audrey Grant's book on 2/1 GF, and she advocates showing first OR second round control. She says showing only first round controls wastes bidding space. I see her point, but I (not an experienced player) see a downside to not knowing which one is being shown.

I'll keep reading...

[jillybean]

Italian Style Cue Bids, First and Second round (google it) I believe are expert standard. It takes some work with your partner but the results are worth the effort.
There are a number of threads on here about Cue bidding and slam bidding. I will try to find some and add the link.

[DavidKok]

https://www.bridgeba...ontrol-bidding/ contains a longer discussion. The summary is that it is complicated and people have different approaches. Personally I recommend not treating any individual source as authorative, but rather exploring and finding a method that works for you.

As others have said the style where the control can be first or second round is far more prevalent these days.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2024-March-24, 11:00, said:

https://www.bridgeba...ontrol-bidding/ contains a longer discussion. The summary is that it is complicated and people have different approaches. Personally I recommend not treating any individual source as authorative, but rather exploring and finding a method that works for you.

As others have said the style where the control can be first or second round is far more prevalent these days.

I like to expose intermediates to Italian style control-bidding, both to push them in the right direction and as a litmus paper test of their ambition and capabilities. It's not (or doesn't have to be) that complicated, but it is poorly documented and intellectually challenging.
I have been shouted at for trying it with beginners, rightly so too: they have plenty of meat on the grill already.

[Douglas43]

I'm planning to run a session on this theme for our improvers, so really good question. There are two styles of control-showing bids.

Either: first round controls (aces and voids) first, then another round of control bids to see if there is a second round control, and if both are missing, stop. This was traditional in the UK and, I think, the USA. I'll call them "trad"

Or: Bid first and second-round controls immediately (the "Italian style" that other posters have referred to).

As with most things in bridge, neither is perfect. The trad style is probably better for bidding slams on control bids alone. But it can get you to the 5 level more often.

The Italian style is better for finding out quickly that slam is not on. "Oh, partner hasn't bid a diamond control and I don't have one either, we'd better stop". But, it can allow you to bid slam with two aces missing and you need to check with Blackwood / RKCB whatever.

Most of us like the comfort blanket of the Blackwood check anyway (me included) and I think Italian style is more popular these days.

[pescetom]

Douglas43, on 2024-March-24, 16:21, said:

I'm planning to run a session on this theme for our improvers, so really good question. There are two styles of control-showing bids.

Either: first round controls (aces and voids) first, then another round of control bids to see if there is a second round control, and if both are missing, stop. This was traditional in the UK and, I think, the USA. I'll call them "trad"

Or: Bid first and second-round controls immediately (the "Italian style" that other posters have referred to).

As with most things in bridge, neither is perfect. The trad style is probably better for bidding slams on control bids alone. But it can get you to the 5 level more often.

The Italian style is better for finding out quickly that slam is not on. "Oh, partner hasn't bid a diamond control and I don't have one either, we'd better stop". But, it can allow you to bid slam with two aces missing and you need to check with Blackwood / RKCB whatever.

Most of us like the comfort blanket of the Blackwood check anyway (me included) and I think Italian style is more popular these days.

There is a third and trival but effective style of the "courtesy" first round control to invite RKCB or simply slam, popular at lower levels and what I would suggest to a beginner.

I think the "trad" style of a round of first then second is as dead as the Dodo, and not just because some crazy Dutch guy arrived.
You can accuse the Italian style of being obsessively defensive (like their soccer) and eccessively revealing, but I assure you it could never allow you to bid slam with 2 aces missing and has no need for RKCB.

[mw64ahw]

The key point for 1st/2nd round control bidding is to avoid trying for the slam before it has been established that there aren't 2 quick losing tricks in a suit. Hence you can sign off in 4M/5m if trumps are set explicitly or implicitly at the 3-level. I often see players jump straight into RKCB/Blackwood and fail to utilise intermediate bids; they may be lucky, but often not. Sometimes you may not have the space at the 3/4 level to establish a sound slam try so you can extend the control showing approach by showing keycards & controls rather than asking for keycards. In its simplest form 4trumps+1 shows an even number of keycards, while higher bids show an odd number with a control in the bid suit; where 4trumps+1 is a suit a notrump bid now shows a control in that suit.