[harikannan]

At IMPs, we open 1h and partner raises 3h, 4 card support invitational. We hold:

K
AKJ72
K652
A42

Despite lack of intermediates in minors and likely wasted SK, it appears slam chances are good in view of most likely ruffing value in one minor. Should we worry much about his hand being like Qxxx, Qxxx, ATxx, Qx (or) Qxx, Qxxx, Axx, Kxx? How good is the slam?

[mw64ahw]

It all depends on the quality of the limit raise which you can't tell from this sequence.
One way to find out is to bid 4♣. To me this denies a ♠ control, shows a ♣ control and decent ♥ honours. Now if partner takes bidding beyond 4♥ you're in business and your K♠ has value. This sort of sequence may have different meanings for others so best to know what you're doing.
The other option is to blast ahead given you have controls in all suits and be prepared to stop in 5♠ if you get a weak answer back.

This is one of the reasons I play 1♥-2♠ as 4+,lim+ so I am in a better position to judge on the quality of the limit raise prior to making a move for slam.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you need p to hold minor suit values, spade values are wasted, ..., you may have 2 discards, but thats it.

Since you play 3H as inv. with 4+ support, you could use 3NT as showing slam interest starting a cue seq.
If you in addition play the first cue as honor based, you may get the information.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

 harikannan, on 2025-May-14, 08:48, said:

At IMPs, we open 1h and partner raises 3h, 4 card support invitational. We hold:

K
AKJ72
K652
A42

Despite lack of intermediates in minors and likely wasted SK, it appears slam chances are good in view of most likely ruffing value in one minor. Should we worry much about his hand being like Qxxx, Qxxx, ATxx, Qx (or) Qxx, Qxxx, Axx, Kxx? How good is the slam?

None of your examples are a limit raise for me but I grant your example2 is borderline, so let's not quibble about that one. I expect more.
As such I will start with 3S cue and see what partner says.
Right on the slam borderline.

[mw64ahw]

mike777, on 2025-May-14, 11:46, said:

None of your examples are a limit raise for me but I grant your example2 is borderline, so let's not quibble about that one. I expect more.
As such I will start with 3S cue and see what partner says.
Right on the slam borderline.

I'd say the 2nd one is OK

[Huibertus]

harikannan, on 2025-May-14, 08:48, said:

At IMPs, we open 1h and partner raises 3h, 4 card support invitational. We hold:

K
AKJ72
K652
A42

Despite lack of intermediates in minors and likely wasted SK, it appears slam chances are good in view of most likely ruffing value in one minor. Should we worry much about his hand being like Qxxx, Qxxx, ATxx, Qx (or) Qxx, Qxxx, Axx, Kxx? How good is the slam?

I wouldn't be overly optimistic about ruffing power in partners minor, especially not if you play intermediate splinters in some form.

As to the question how good would it be;
Opposing Qxxx, Qxxx, ATxx, Qx; BAD, you have a ♣ a ♠ and at least one ♦ loser, and you can only discard one of your losers. If they start with ♣ to the Q and K and A you are down no matter what.

Opposing Qxx, Qxxx, Axx, Kxx, still bad (♣ loser, ♦ loser, ♠ loser, but at least now you have both minors stopped twice so if they lead them you can drive out ♠ Ace without them cashing a minor. But even then you only have 11 tricks and only have a remote squeeze chance.

Both of these hands are proper invites, so YES you need to worry about it.

You need harder and more usefully placed values in dummy for slam to be good enough. Something like AQXX, QXXX, KJX, XX to make it reasonable, but that in my book would be a GF response, not an invite.

Initially I was going to write "the hand is worth a try" but the more I think about it the less convinced I am about it.