[mr1303_2]

---

Any suggestions here?

Obviously you want to make a slam try, but how?

[sfi]

What's 3NT for you?

[nige1]

mr1303 asks 'Any suggestions here? Obviously you want to make a slam try, but how?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I quite like 4♠ but depends on agreements. Perhaps.
-- 3N = ART. Serious slam try?
-- 4♣/♦/♠ = CUE (Italian 1st/2nd).
-- 4♥ = S/O
-- 4N = RKC. for ♠.
-- 5♥ = ASK.about minor controls? More likely a trump-ask?

---

[DozyDom]

nige1, on 2019-March-04, 20:29, said:

mr1303 asks 'Any suggestions here? Obviously you want to make a slam try, but how?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I quite like 4♠ but depends on agreements. Perhaps.
-- 3N = ART. Serious slam try?
-- 4♣/♦/♠ = CUE (Italian 1st/2nd).
-- 4♥ = S/O
-- 4N = RKC. for ♠.
-- 5♥ = ASK.about minor controls? More likely a trump-ask?

---

Somehow I'm not convinced that 4NT is RKCB for spades...

I'm with you on the best option, 3NT, as a serious slam try. I'm also defintiely with you on 5H being a terrible idea. But I don't think I like 4C/D - we don't have a first or second round control, and pretending we do might lead partner to bid a failing grand or slam. I feel they're both much worse than 4S.

[rmnka447]

3 NT has commonly become a slam try for most better players. But that is by agreement. It makes sense that if you have a 9+ card major suit fit as implied by a Jacoby 2 NT bid, then 3 NT is rarely the place you want to play. So 3 NT becomes a waiting bid allowing partner to show more information about his/her hand while conserving bidding space.

Here the first critical issue for slam is to ensure there aren't 2 losers in either minor. Provided there aren't, then the question becomes "Are there 2 losers anywhere?".

Let's see how 3 NT can help with those determinations. After 3 NT as a slam try, opener can bid a minor suit control below game, like:

1 ♥ - 2 NT
3 ♠ - 3 NT
4 ♣ - ?

4 ♣ should show a ♣ control. As responder you can now bid 4 ♠ showing continued slam interest and ♠ A. (Partner has already shown ♠ shortness so showing ♠ K isn't useful now.) But you have also denied a ♦ control by bypassing 4 ♦. Partner can focus on the hand as needing a ♦ control. With none, partner can sign off in 5 ♥. With a ♦ control, partner can continue on using RKCB or showing another control.

If partner instead bids 4 ♦ and this denies a ♣ control, then you can sign off in 4 ♥.

And, occasionally partner will have a hand where the only question over 3 NT is how good is our trump suit. In that case. partner can bid 5 ♥ over 3 NT and ask that question -- something like x xxxxx AK AKJxx.

[Cyberyeti]

We play 3N as the most expensive cuebid, so is a spade cue, ideal here.

[nige1]

DozyDom, on 2019-March-04, 21:38, said:

Somehow I'm not convinced that 4NT is RKCB for spades...

Thank you. I meant RKC for ♥

[fromageGB]

Have I got this right - North opened 1♥ and South has ♥AKQJ63?
If North then showed a spade shortage, he must have
♠x
♥xxxxxx
♦KQJ
♣KQJ
at worst, so 5 is solid, and it is simply a question of aces and kings. No alternative I can see to a simple whatever ace asking method you have agreed, and then kings if he has two aces, or 6♥ if he has one.

Why make a slam TRY? If partner has psyched and tried to rescue to spades, you are doomed already, so just go for it.

EDIT : skip kings. Just ask for aces then bid (5+ace count)♥.

This post has been edited by fromageGB: 2019-March-05, 07:20

[kuhchung]

blackwood

[sfi]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-05, 07:13, said:

Have I got this right - North opened 1♥ and South has ♥AKQJ63?
If North then showed a spade shortage, he must have
♠x
♥xxxxxx
♦KQJ
♣KQJ
at worst, so 5 is solid, and it is simply a question of aces and kings. No alternative I can see to a simple whatever ace asking method you have agreed, and then kings if he has two aces, or 6♥ if he has one.

Why make a slam TRY? If partner has psyched and tried to rescue to spades, you are doomed already, so just go for it.

EDIT : skip kings. Just ask for aces then bid (5+ace count)♥.

North could also hold
♠x
♥xxxxx
♦QJx
♣AKQJ

So aces aren't all you are looking for.

[BillPatch]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-05, 07:13, said:

. . .
EDIT : skip kings. Just ask for aces then bid (5+ace count)♥.

Isn't 7♥ cold if opener has both the two aces and any two kings. (Even though opener would not show the singleton K of ♠)

[Cyberyeti]

BillPatch, on 2019-March-05, 16:33, said:

Isn't 7♥ cold if opener has both the two aces and any two kings. (Even though opener would not show the singleton K of ♠)

Why doesn't he show that ? if he has K, xxxxx, Axx, AKxx on which 7♥ is not cold, it would be if you had ♠AQx and you'd want to know about it, although it's not enough on its own, Axxx, AKx instead in the minors and 2 discards are not enough.

[fromageGB]

sfi, on 2019-March-05, 15:23, said:

North could also hold
♠x
♥xxxxx
♦QJx
♣AKQJ

So aces aren't all you are looking for.

I'm happy with 6♥ here. Going via cue bidding of any sort will pinpoint the weakness, while pure unspecified aces leaves the likelihood that E will not lead the weak suit with A or K. On your hand, with a non-diamond lead you make +1. Moreover, if opener showed one ace he could easily have 2 kings and it is more likely to be cold than risky.