[eagles123]

---

needless to say I made the wrong desicion

Thanks,

Eagles

[whereagles]

obv 6♣ wtp

[ahydra]

The "p" may be that pard shows up with AQx xxx AQxx Jxx and you're instantly off. (Or on the flip side, Axx AKx QJxx Jxx and you miss grand?!)

I would go slower with 4C, eyes definitely on slam but looking for that H control.

ahydra

[blackshoe]

I considered 5♦ (EKCB for clubs) but I think it's a bit too unilateral, and besides I don't play it with anybody.

[helene_t]

In the Netherlands everybody bids 5h with this hand

[MrAce]

whereagles, on 2014-September-14, 14:32, said:

obv 6♣ wtp

Obviously if 6♣ was the winning bid it would not make it to forums

[mikeh]

You can't pass. On any line where 3N was cold, either 5♣ or 4N (or both, of course) are 99.9% to be cold, and meanwhile a hand such as Axx AJx KQxx xxx makes 6♣ or 6N very good, and AQx Axx KQxx xxx 6♣ is virtually cold.

You can't bid 6♣ because a hand such as AQx Jxx AQxx Jxx makes slam down off the top.

So take your time. Bid 4♣.

It is or should be a basic tenet of bridge theory that one NEVER runs from a voluntarily bid game, unless one is doubled, so bidding 4♣ is not running 'from' 3N, it is a try for a higher level contract and is forcing.

This doesn't answer the hand completely. For example, over 4♥ we still are not cold for slam but I would risk it. Over 4♦, this actually isn't good news in and of itself, so I would, with a partner I can trust, bid 4N, as an offer to play. Partner is allowed to bid on, given that I have made a slam try already. He can figure out I have no major aces by my failure to cue.

If I don't trust partner to understand 4N as regressive, then I would bid 5♣ over 4♦...again not a total signoff, having announced mild slam interest already.

Over 4♠ by partner, which would be very surprising, I would do the 4N/5♣ call depending on my view of partner.

In the I/A forum, I'd suggest 5♣ in those scenarios, reserving 4N for the post-mortem.

[MrAce]

mikeh, on 2014-September-15, 14:37, said:

You can't pass. On any line where 3N was cold, either 5♣ or 4N (or both, of course) are 99.9% to be cold, and meanwhile a hand such as Axx AJx KQxx xxx makes 6♣ or 6N very good, and AQx Axx KQxx xxx 6♣ is virtually cold.

You can't bid 6♣ because a hand such as AQx Jxx AQxx Jxx makes slam down off the top.

So take your time. Bid 4♣.

It is or should be a basic tenet of bridge theory that one NEVER runs from a voluntarily bid game, unless one is doubled, so bidding 4♣ is not running 'from' 3N, it is a try for a higher level contract and is forcing.

This doesn't answer the hand completely. For example, over 4♥ we still are not cold for slam but I would risk it. Over 4♦, this actually isn't good news in and of itself, so I would, with a partner I can trust, bid 4N, as an offer to play. Partner is allowed to bid on, given that I have made a slam try already. He can figure out I have no major aces by my failure to cue.

If I don't trust partner to understand 4N as regressive, then I would bid 5♣ over 4♦...again not a total signoff, having announced mild slam interest already.

Over 4♠ by partner, which would be very surprising, I would do the 4N/5♣ call depending on my view of partner.

In the I/A forum, I'd suggest 5♣ in those scenarios, reserving 4N for the post-mortem.

Mike, what do you think of 4♦ instead of 4♣? To tell pd that we do not really need any help in clubs but seeking for other stuff?
IMHO there needs to be difference between this type of hand and another, both of which are slam going, but one of them is something like AKxxxx AQTxxx AJTxxxx ♣ and other one is something similar to the one we hold in OP.

[mikeh]

MrAce, on 2014-September-15, 15:05, said:

Mike, what do you think of 4♦ instead of 4♣? To tell pd that we do not really need any help in clubs but seeking for other stuff?
IMHO there needs to be difference between this type of hand and another, both of which are slam going, but one of them is something like AKxxxx AQTxxx AJTxxxx ♣ and other one is something similar to the one we hold in OP.

To me, and this may be idiosyncratic, I like to think that 4♣ shows a hand that wants more hand help/evaluation from partner than does 4♦. IOW, 4♦ sounds to me like a very strong slam move, while 4♣ is merely some slam interest.

I confess, I don't recall ever discussing this nuance with anyone. I don't think it matters 'why' one hand is strong slamming and the other less so...IOW, it's not about specific suits, it's more about the way the hand feels. I'd see AJx Kxx void AQJxxxx as about the same hand. I will regress over a diamond cue so as to announce slam interest, not slam force. Were I to bid 4♦, and partner to bid 4♥, on the actual hand I would be guessing whether to show my spade control or to make a regressive move.

AJx Kxx void AKQxxxx is a 4♦ call to me. On that hand, I am forcing to slam and would readily cue 4♠ over 4♥.

Don't know if that makes a lot of sense, and I can see other uses for the two calls.

[PhilKing]

It's a pretty close decision whether to go for science or subterfuge.

But if you are going to punt slam, it is mandatory to bid FIVE HEARTS.

I would go for science, since we might well not make slam even if we stop the lead.

[eagles123]

thanks folks i just blasted 6C - 1

a bit unlucky maybe



both other tables in 3N

---