[Liversidge]

My partner and I feel we are ready to adopt cuebidding for slamming, in preparation for splintering etc.. I have been brushing up on the traditional version, 1st round controls followed by 2nd round controls, but partner has attended a seminar on slamming where Italian Cuebidding was recommended. I sense that Italian cuebidding is more popular among experts, and that the general trend is in that direction. Does it matter much for players at our level? Are Italian cuebids eventually going to take over the world like weak 2's? If so we might as well start with them.

[blackshoe]

There are pros and cons to both styles. Personally I prefer the Italian style, as it provides negative inferences that can in some cases allow you to stop in game, knowing that a side suit is wide open. For example:
…
4♣ - first or second round control, spades being trump.
4♥ - first or second round control, denying a diamond control.
4♠ - slam's out of the picture.

Any other bid than 4♠ would imply a diamond control.

[Stephen Tu]

I like Italian better because you can avoid 5 level better when a cue is bypassed and there is no hope for slam. I feel like aces first was for an earlier era where shortages weren't identified earlier in the bidding as often and you didn't want to cue K opposite a stiff.

Recommend you read up on Fred Gitelman's articles on 2/1 GF here:
http://bbi.bridgebas...cles/index.html
with discussion of serious 3nt and last train.

Andrew Gumperz also has some articles on his blog on the opposite treatment "frivolous 3nt".

[rmnka447]

The big difference between the two methods is that if you use Italian cue bidding, you almost always have to use an A asking convention (Blackwood, RKCB, 1430, etc.) to ensure you're not short 2 1st round controls. Sometimes having to A ask can interfere with bidding the slam.

OTOH, if you use 1st round controls before 2nds, some hands come up where you can have difficulty initiating slam exploration and finding out about a needed control below game. That's because you don't have a low enough 1st round control so partner can show the needed control below game.

I think most experts are trending toward Italian cueing as A asking variants and extensions have become more sophisticated.

[steve2005]

Also, if one hand is (known) weaker it leaves the weaker hand often with no way to cooperate with slam with just Kings and needing aces to cue.

[msjennifer]

I ,personally,prefer the Italian cue bids and asking bids as described in Super Precision.However,I also like the natural cue bids.Anyhow either of these are to be used very judiciously.

[Zelandakh]

I personally prefer inverted Italian control bids, more commonly known as denial cue bids, as I think these are simpler to use for non-experts and it also avoids the issue raised by steve2005. Given a choice between normal Italian cues and first round first, it is pretty clear that Italian cues are the better choice. I actually think that some form of Serious or Frivolous (and I include LTTC within this family) combined with a good understanding of RKCB is more important than cue bidding style at the end of the day but that is perhaps a discussion for another thread.

[Winstonm]

The question is: what should an inexperienced player learn?

Italian-style cue bids are more nuanced and in some of their systems 4NT in a cue-bidding sequence was used as a general cue bid. These are difficult ideas to utilize without considerable bidding experience.

I think to get in the groove of slam bidding by cue-bidding, first-round controls are best for inexperienced players with the admonition than when you become comfortable with cue-bidding, Italian style should be adopted as it will be easier at that point.

IMO, when you reach the point where you are frustrated by the problems inherent with first round cue bids, it will be time to move on to better methods.

[helene_t]

Using control bids to verify that we don't have two immediate losers in a side suit. Than rkc to verify that we have four keycards. This is Italian style and very simple. First control first requires more judgment. I wouldn't teach that to beginners. Or intermediates.

[Winstonm]

 helene_t, on 2017-December-13, 17:46, said:

Using control bids to verify that we don't have two immediate losers in a side suit. Than rkc to verify that we have four keycards. This is Italian style and very simple. First control first requires more judgment. I wouldn't teach that to beginners. Or intermediates.

I may be misunderstanding the terminology. To me, Italian style is first or second round controls along with a general slam try of 4NT. This is quite difficult without a lot of experience, IMO. But then Italian style to me is still Blue Team.

[NickRW]

 Winstonm, on 2017-December-13, 23:03, said:

I may be misunderstanding the terminology. To me, Italian style is first or second round controls along with a general slam try of 4NT. This is quite difficult without a lot of experience, IMO. But then Italian style to me is still Blue Team.

It is certainly true that Blue Club methods include a 4NT general slam try - or it could be a sign off - or Blackie depending on context. It is also true that would be too complex for beginners and, indeed too complex for many more experienced players to adopt without extensive discussion. However, "Italian style" cues (showing 1st/2nd round controls interchangeably) are not a mandatory part of that, nor vice versa - they just commonly go together.

[Winstonm]

 NickRW, on 2017-December-14, 07:48, said:

It is certainly true that Blue Club methods include a 4NT general slam try - or it could be a sign off - or Blackie depending on context. It is also true that would be too complex for beginners and, indeed too complex for many more experienced players to adopt without extensive discussion. However, "Italian style" cues (showing 1st/2nd round controls interchangeably) are not a mandatory part of that, nor vice versa - they just commonly go together.

Thanks.