[AL78]

---

Matchpoints. Your call.

[smerriman]

To me, 5♣ showed concern about spades, and 5♦ showed spades were covered (not necessarily anything about diamonds). I have the ace of diamonds and good trumps so I'm bidding 6♥.

[edit] Oh wait, matchpoints, I never know when to bid 6NT instead of 6♥ at matchpoints.. but I'll stick with 6♥, partner could always bid 6NT if they wanted to.

[nige1]

AL78 'Matchpoints. Your call?'
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Not much clue. Look forward to reading others' views. Guessing. I rank...
1. 5♠ = CUE Extras so catch up by passing the buck.
2. 6♥ = S/O Timid but there's danger of a wheel coming off.
3. 7♥ = Lots of controls so should have some chance.
4. Pass. Although 5♥ isn't forcing it's highly invitational

---

[Cyberyeti]

Depending on your exact agreements, 4♦ might be a better way of agreeing hearts showing a nice maximum and no club control so presumably well stuffed in spades also which might allow partner to keycard.

[mikeh]

I’m not passing since I have close to a max and partner invited slam. Note that he couldn’t/shouldn’t keycard if he has no control in either or both spades and diamonds, since the ‘wrong’ response leaves him guessing.

I’m not bidding 5S.

I can’t easily construct a hand that gives us good play for grand yet makes his bidding a non-forcing 5H plausible. And if I could, through great dint of effort, I can’t see how partner could ever know enough to bid grand…or tell me enough to allow me to do so with confidence.

So since I’m not settling for 5H and not probing for grand, 6H it is.

6N is, imo, silly.

Firstly, we’re not bidding slam on pure power…partner hasn’t forced to slam

So we may well need a ruff or two to get to 12 tricks

Secondly, while I don’t expect 13 tricks to be close to cold, so as to justify bidding a grand at mps, there will surely be some hands on which the ability to ruff will lead to an overtrick

Thirdly, since partner didn’t drive to slam it’s possible that some pairs may stop short. Then making 6H when 6N was available will still score ok, but failing in 6N with 6H making is a disaster.

Finally, and probably irrelevant to 99% of bridge players, there are techniques available to those declaring trump contracts (beyond mere ruffs) that aren’t available in notrump…however, trump squeezes are both uncommon and often overlooked.

[akwoo]

I would have to work hard to imagine a hand with a spade ace where I would pass. I suppose there is some merit in 5♠; partner could have xxx Kxxx KQxxxx -, but I'll just bid 6♥.

[mw64ahw]

xxx
Kxxx
Kx
Axxx
and
xxx
Kxxx
x
Axxxx
would put me in slam territory and perhaps warrant a 5♥ bid after the slam exploration. I wouldn't consider North having extras with 5 points in the 'quacks' so 6♥ would be the best I would manage.

[AL78]

A unanimous choice to bid on to slam which is reassuring as that is what I did. I correctly guessed partner held a slam going hand with two top spade losers and that is why she didn't go through RKCB, and I felt I had enough extras to justify going on. The full deal:

---

It turns out whatever I do we are destined for a bottom. I couldn't make 6♥ and drifted one off for a bottom on the ♣J lead (I ducked, RHO won and returned a diamond, but I still couldn't quite do it). Two pairs were in 4NT making 11 or 12 tricks, one in 6NT=. They all conveniently got a diamond lead into the AJ which gives declarer a 12th trick with the ♣K right as well.

Glad to know I can occasionally get these types of bidding judgements correct, even if on this occasion it was punished.

[P_Marlowe]

6H?

Partner should have a club void, I have basically no wastage in clubs.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

AL78, on 2021-October-27, 02:11, said:

<snip>
Glad to know I can occasionally get these types of bidding judgements correct, even if on this occasion it was punished.

I would say, it is more a judgement call from partners side.
He knowes, the partnership has only a 44 fit, at best 32HCP with 2 (semi) bal. hand facing each other.
Add to this MP, I am not sure MP is a reason to bid tight small slams.

[Douglas43]

P_Marlowe, on 2021-October-27, 06:39, said:

I would say, it is more a judgement call from partners side.
He knowes, the partnership has only a 44 fit, at best 32HCP with 2 (semi) bal. hand facing each other.
Add to this MP, I am not sure MP is a reason to bid tight small slams.

Good point. I think 4♥ without cue-bidding showed a minimum, so responder should be thinking, what are my prospects of making six opposite a suitable 20 count? Despite the 11 count and fit, they are not that great. Ax, AQxx, AQJ, QJxx would do, but it needs opener to have three great diamonds, only two spades to allow a useful discard on the fourth diamond, and a 3-2 trump break.

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2021-October-27, 06:39, said:

I would say, it is more a judgement call from partners side.
He knowes, the partnership has only a 44 fit, at best 32HCP with 2 (semi) bal. hand facing each other.
Add to this MP, I am not sure MP is a reason to bid tight small slams.

Your hand is about as unsuitable as it could be with the duplicated spade doubleton. AKx, AQxx, AQJ, xxx is arguably a worse hand but cold unless trumps are 5-0. Would be interesting to see a simulation how often slam makes on a 19-20 2N that would accept an invite.

[mw64ahw]

Seeing the NS hands it is definitely slam territory for me although I feel playing Kickbo provides more clarity in the bidding without having to guess on the double ♠ stoppers

After 4♥
4♠ (2 keycards) - 5NT (all keycards & K♠)
6♥ (not enough for the grand)

Some you win some you loose when opponents distribution is unfavourable and the lead. is optimal

[akwoo]

I don't like North moving over 4H at all, given South didn't make any move over 3S.

As far as I'm concerned, North's sequence says "Bid 6 if you have spades controlled". (If partner wants to play smerriman's way, then it's "Bid 6 if you have diamonds controlled.") You're too high for more subtle questions. North doesn't have a hand that wants to play 6 as long as spades are controlled.