[viaduct]

PROGRESSIVE VOID GERBER

Any totally unexpected, weird, “non-system” bid made higher than 4♣s, is Progressive Void Gerber.

How often have you had a problem including/showing a void suit when considering a slam, and have to settle for game, and very often making 6 or even 7?

The reason for this is, so often you don't know if one of your partner's Aces is the ace of your void suit (therefore of limited value), or if it's a more important Ace (like the Ace of the suit that they bid)!
Similarly is one of the kings your partner holds, the king of your void suit, or a more valuable king?

Showing voids safely makes Progressive Void Gerber the ultimate addition to Progressive Gerber.

All you have to do, if you have a void suit, and think a slam might be on, is bid 4 of your void suit (except if ♣s, then bid 4NT), and your partner will show his Ace count, excluding your void suit Ace, and likewise also omit your void suit King if next you ask about his Kings!

Example 1♦ – 3♦ - 4♥, says, (OK ♦s are Trumps), but I have a void in ♥s, so please tell me your Ace count EXCLUDING ♥s (my void suit), using the normal step system (4♠=0, 4NT=1, 5♣=2 & 5♦=3), and if a King 'ask' is subsequently instigated, now also EXCLUDING the K♥ (0, 1, 2 or 3).

An even more unexpected example, 1NT – 2♣ – 2♥ - 4♠, (says ♥s are trumps) and I have ♠ void, so please tell me your Ace count EXCLUDING ♠s (my void suit), using the normal step system (4NT=0, 5♣=1 & 5♦=2, 5♥=3), and subsequently if requested, EXCLUDING the K♠ (0, 1, 2 or 3).

1♠ – 4♥, means love your ♠s, have a void in ♥s, if your Aces include the A♠ we could be in 7♠!

[Vampyr]

Using 4NT as Exclusionary Blackwood eliminates a much more frequent meaning, is RKCB. Your method probably works best if playing Kickback; then 4NT could be Exclusionary in the suit you would have bid for Kickback.

[fromageGB]

Vampyr, on 2015-November-24, 12:54, said:

Using 4NT as Exclusionary Blackwood eliminates a much more frequent meaning, is RKCB. Your method probably works best if playing Kickback; then 4NT could be Exclusionary in the suit you would have bid for Kickback.

I think you miss the point, as 4♣ is the "no-void" ace ask rather than 4NT regardless of trump suit, so RKCB does not apply and 4NT is therefore available for a club void ask. As for a kickback comparison, using 4♣ rather than 4T+1 keeps the bidding lower. For dedicated "4♣ is always the ace ask" players, this is a reasonable idea, comparable to the normal 4NT+x being voidwood.

[fromageGB]

viaduct, on 2015-November-24, 12:28, said:

Any totally unexpected, weird, “non-system” bid made higher than 4♣s, is Progressive Void Gerber.

I think the problem is that there are no "non-system bids" higher than 4♣. They are typically used as cue bids when they do not have other specific meanings. The question you then have to ask is how you rate both the frequency and the relative importance of cooperative slam suggestions (or possibilities) compared with a unilateral outright slam blast, where your shortage may be either beneficial or a detriment.

You might consider an approach where you show a shortage and let it be discovered whether it is void or not before ace asking, but this is impractical if you always want to use 4♣ as asking. For example, with spades as the trump suit and NT as the ace asking bid, 1♠ 4♣ could be game going spade support with a club shortage. If this knowledge helps opener to look for slam, 4♦ asks singleton or void, and the reply of 4♥ or 4♠ says singleton or void respectively. Opener can then ace ask and correctly interpret the answers. Conversely, when you are strong enough to ace ask yourself, you may show a void beneath game - this can be done with other methods too, such as starting with a game forcing fit 2NT reply - and then you can ace ask.

With regard to king asking, it is often more useful to hear about specific kings rather than a quantitative reply, as this has a wider utility.

[Vampyr]

fromageGB, on 2015-November-25, 05:10, said:

I think you miss the point, as 4♣ is the "no-void" ace ask rather than 4NT regardless of trump suit, so RKCB does not apply and 4NT is therefore available for a club void ask. As for a kickback comparison, using 4♣ rather than 4T+1 keeps the bidding lower. For dedicated "4♣ is always the ace ask" players, this is a reasonable idea, comparable to the normal 4NT+x being voidwood.

Ah, right, I didn't see the part about 4♣ being the "no-void" ace ask.

My regular partner and I play that 1♥-3♠ and 1♠-3NT as support with any void. It comes up roughly never, since the void is rarely the only feature of a hand and this is a bit high to begin to explore for slam.

This, by the way, is why I think that splinters should be very specific and be counted in controls rather than HCP, as so many seem to do. You are not going to get to the thin slams with 8-11 or whatever in Queens and Jacks. Similarly if you have controls but also the lower honours, you might make a slam on power but not have room to discover this if you start investigating at the 4-level (unless, of course, you have a slam-force and are going to bid again).

EDIT: Oh I see, it was the reference to Progressive Gerber. I'm afraid I don't know what that is.

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2015-November-25, 07:12, said:

My regular partner and I play that 1♥-3♠ and 1♠-3NT as support with any void. It comes up roughly never, since the void is rarely the only feature of a hand and this is a bit high to begin to explore for slam.

A good alternative is to use these as maxi-splinters, that is a splinter with too much strength for a normal splinter. Even better is to be able to give both normal and maxi-splinters for both singletons and voids but that requires the use of another response and not everyone has that available.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2015-November-25, 07:38, said:

A good alternative is to use these as maxi-splinters, that is a splinter with too much strength for a normal splinter. Even better is to be able to give both normal and maxi-splinters for both singletons and voids but that requires the use of another response and not everyone has that available.

Can you (not that there is any doubt) suggest a scheme?

[nullve]

Let

T = the trump suit
L = lowest suit excluding trumps
M = middle suit excluding trumps
H = highest suit excluding trumps

In many situations it's possible to play

4T+1 = L void or no void
...4T+2 = LA
......4T+3 = even KC
.........4T+4 = TQ ask
............5T = no TQ
............[5T+1]+ = TQ
......4T+4 = odd KC & no TQ
......5T = odd KC & TQ
......[5T+1]+ = *
...4T+3 = no LA & even KC
......4T+4 = TQ ask
.........5T = no TQ
.........[5T+1]+ = TQ
...4T+4 = no LA & odd KC & no TQ
...5T = no LA & odd KC & TQ
...[5T+1]+ = *
4T+2 = M void
...4T+3 = even KC outside M
......4T+4 = TQ ask
.........5T = no TQ
.........[5T+1]+ = TQ
...4T+4 = odd KC outside M & no TQ
...5T = odd KC outside M & TQ
...[5T+1]+ = *
4T+3 = H void & even KC
...4T+4 = TQ ask
......5T = no TQ
......[5T+1]+ = TQ
4T+4 = H void & odd KC & no TQ
5T = H void & odd KC & TQ
[5T+1]+ = *

* like 5T, but confident that 2+ KC aren't missing and worried that p will misread 5T

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2015-November-25, 09:34, said:

Can you (not that there is any doubt) suggest a scheme?

Sure, here's one I like and have posted a few times before:-

1♥
==
2♠ = any mini-splinter or maxi-splinter
... - 2NT = asks
... - ... - 3m = mini-splinter
... - ... - 3♥ = mini-splinter with spade shortage
... - ... - 3♠ = any void maxi-splinter
... - ... - ... - 3NT = asks
... - ... - ... - ... - 4m = void in m
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♥ = spade void
... - ... - 3NT = maxi-splinter with spade singleton
... - ... - 4m = singleton maxi-splinter
2NT/3♣♦♥ = GF/limit/mixed/weak raises
3♠ = any void splinter
... - 3NT = asks
... - ... - 4m = void in m
... - ... - 4♥ = spade void
3NT = splinter with spade singleton
4m = singleton splinter
--

1♠
==
2NT = any mini-splinter or maxi-splinter
... - 3♣ = asks
... - ... - 3♦♥ = mini-splinter
... - ... - 3♠ = mini-splinter with club shortage
... - ... - 3NT = any void maxi-splinter
... - ... - ... - 4♣ = asks
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♦♥ = void in suit bid
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♠ = heart void
... - ... - 4♣♦♥ = singleton maxi-splinter
3♣♦♥♠ = GF/limit/mixed/weak raises
3NT = any void splinter
... - 4♣ = asks
... - ... - 4♦♥ = void in suit bid
... - ... - 4♠ = heart void
4♣♦♥ = singleton splinter
--

A simpler version that I have used in the past is for the step below 3M to be the maxi splinter with the same continuations, ie:-

1♥
==
3♦ = any maxi-splinter
... - 3♥ = asks
... - ... - 3♠ = any void maxi-splinter
... - ... - ... - 3NT = asks
... - ... - ... - ... - 4m = void in m
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♥ = spade void
... - ... - 3NT = maxi-splinter with spade singleton
... - ... - 4m = singleton maxi-splinter
3♠ = any void splinter
... - 3NT = asks
... - ... - 4m = void in m
... - ... - 4♥ = spade void
3NT = splinter with spade singleton
4m = singleton splinter
--

1♠
==
3♥ = any maxi-splinter
... - 3♠ = asks
... - ... - 3NT = any void maxi-splinter
... - ... - ... - 4♣ = asks
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♦♥ = void in suit bid
... - ... - ... - ... - 4♠ = heart void
... - ... - 4♣♦♥ = singleton maxi-splinter
3NT = any void splinter
... - 4♣ = asks
... - ... - 4♦♥ = void in suit bid
... - ... - 4♠ = heart void
4♣♦♥ = singleton splinter
--

This simpler structure allows you to keep 2NT as the GF raise over both 1♥ and 1♠ if you prefer that at the cost of losing (at least) one of the other raise types.

[fromageGB]

Vampyr, on 2015-November-25, 09:34, said:

Can you (not that there is any doubt) suggest a scheme?

My method is to use a GF 2NT 4 card support (or, rather, a 2M+1 bid) for a 13+ count and then show the shortage naturally if partner bids the next step on a non-strong non-shortage hand.

This means a normal splinter, such as 1♠ 4♦ is restricted to 11/12, and of course judgement comes into it regarding quacks. Over this, if opener is considering slam, next step asks singleton or void in steps, but in this 4♦ example the void would be shown by the ace response, as you are otherwise above the ace ask bid. You can't do this with the T-1 suit, so 4T-1 is the void, and 3NT is the singleton splinter in that suit.

A 9/10 mini-splinter in the other major is 3M-1, and a mini-splinter in a minor is 3M-3, with next step asking clubs or diamonds, which information might be wanted for game decision as well as slam decision.

Of course this means I am happy for all bids of 2M+1 and higher to be 4-card support bids, and play a forcing next step (eg 1NT). You may have other uses. (I use 3M-2 as no-shortage 9-12 count.)

This post has been edited by fromageGB: 2015-November-26, 06:39

[Fluffy]

I have a partner who rejects to play exclusion blackwood. I will teach him progressive void gerber at the 5 level, maybe he likes it

viaduct, do you happen to know any ocnvention for when you want to play slam, but you don't know which strain to play it in?

[Zelandakh]

Fluffy, on 2015-November-26, 06:37, said:

viaduct, do you happen to know any convention for when you want to play slam, but you don't know which strain to play it in?

I have a "Gerber" version like that - 4♣ asks partner to bid 4♦ and then 4♥ is RKCG for diamonds, 4♠ for hearts and 4NT for spades. A direct 4♦ takes care of clubs - we can call that kickback Gerber if you like. Of course there is the traditional 4 suit KCB but that would be boring...

[fromageGB]

Zelandakh, on 2015-November-26, 06:59, said:

I have a "Gerber" version like that...

Regular kickback seems simpler, but I think the question was not when teller doesn't know what suit to play it in, but when asker doesn't know what suit he wants to play in. I think "choice of games" and "choice of slam" might fit poorly in a progressive void gerber method.