Thursday, March 29, 2007 2:41 AM

KCB Inferences

PITBULLS:

Sherlock Holmes says “why did the dog not bark ?” . This negative inference helped him solve the crime. In slam try auctions , the biggest negative inference for a partnership is why didn’t partner use KCB ? There must be a flaw which prevented her from using KCB , perhaps a lack of a control in an unbid suit or a void. Playing Italian style Q bids , a partnership prepares themselves for the eventual use of KCB by Q bidding. American style Q bidding can continue forever beyond game without giving KCB any thought.

You hold ♠J10xx ♥KQx ♦void ♣AK10xxx and open 1♣. Partner responds 1♠ so you leap to 3♠ . Partner bids 4♥ so what now ? If you bid 5♦ , a red flag should come up. Partner should immediately say , why did partner not bid KCB ? If she has a diamond control & all the suits have been bid , why Q bid ? Partner is quite likely to hold a void in diamonds for NOT bidding KCB.

The last train slam try derives from the negative inference that partner did not use KCB. Obviously partner lacks a control in an unbid suit needed for KCB so a last train slam try is announcing that fact. In the above hand , the reason partner is not using KCB is because of the diamond void. Another inference you can take when partner fails to use KCB is that she is “all in” to use a poker term. She has nothing extra from what she already announced so its up to partner to continue proceedings.

In the above hand partner held ♠AKQxx ♥Axx ♦xxx ♣xx and you must get to 7♠. If partner reads you for a diamond void it is all over as you must hold the rest of the HCP’s for your bidding. If you had the diamond Ace , KCB was in order as you can take control. The so called “KCV inference” is very handy. Keep it your arsenal of bidding understandings.