[rhm]

TylerE, on 2014-October-08, 15:11, said:

Because it gets you to way more making thin 3NT contracts than bad slams obv.

That was my point.
I doubt that there are many "good" 14, which will get you to a thin 3NT making, say opposite a balanced ten count, but will not offer you good play for 6NT here.
There might be a few, but certainly not many.
There is little justification in upgrading quacky 14 counts.

If you upgrade

♠xxx ♥Kx ♦AQJTx Axx

go ahead

Rainer Herrmann

[gszes]

mikeh, on 2014-October-08, 16:15, said:

It is a good rule of thumb to try to always use clubs as the fake bid, if at all possible. Sometimes it isn't, as in when partner bids or shows clubs, because you never fake primary support (you can fake preferences in some cases, but never primary support)

The reason is to allow opener to know that your diamond bids, when clubs could be fake, are real. In addition, when you always use clubs for the fake bid, it becomes ok for partner to cater to this as a matter of bridge logic without causing UI issues. Despite what Ken implied earlier about people coming around to his way of thinking, the notion that one can fake a club bid has been around since well before even I started playing, and that was more than 40 years ago. Faking a bid in order to get by this round has a very long, honourable ancestry to the point that no experienced player could claim to be surprised by it.

I never want p to assume my bids are fake so I limit my use of them to times where it is safe (like the example hand).
I would have much greater heartache with someone always using clubs as fake (surprise or no) since long standing
partnerships would undoubtedly cater their bidding to this relatively frequent use. I may misuse a convention when it is
convenient/safe for ex p opens 1s and I hold AKxxxxx void AKQ AQJ I have in the past bid 4c splinter with such hands knowing
p will sign off in 4s only if they have the club K and have the bidding proceed 4s 4n (checking for 7n and YES with a void)
5c (0 or 3) 7s x xx with a very upset lho thinking they had a cashing heart ace. UI is when p is using information they are
not entitled to not the fact that the bid itself is not what it is normally is used for. My fake 3d bid has a purpose to be
revealed later in the bidding whereas a fake 3c bid here would serve no actual useful purpose by my way of thinking and
I would like to see what follow ups are used after the fake 3c bid to allow one to land somewhere safely where my use of
the 3c bid would allow for the same effectiveness as the 3d bid would in fact in this sequence one can use a fake 3h bid
in the same way because we do not care about the heart fit per se.

[aguahombre]

Proposed Meta-rule for Bergen people: never fake it with a hand which always intended to go to game.

Murphy's Law will come into play...for instance, a BIT by Opener where you break even with the TD if lucky.

[Antrax]

Isn't 4♦ the Goldman slam try? Also, doesn't it show 5-3-3-2?

I think 2♥ and then 4♠ is the way to go. Hopefully partner will realize I could raise to 5♠ if I was worried about the quality of his spades.

[Cascade]

mikeh, on 2014-October-07, 19:47, said:

In particular, he definitely won't move if he is off the heart AK or if he holds only 1 Ace.

Not sure about this. He can have 17 and be off the ♥AK. Sure its a bad 17 but he may feel obliged to bid.

I also think there is too much chance that 15 will be enough. My initial double dummy analysis, which I just use to get a ball park figure, showed that slam was 76% when partner was restricted to 15. I think this hand is more like I want to drive to slam unless I get some really bad news on the way. Hopefully I have methods to set trumps and cue and Blackwood (rkcb).

[PhilG007]

FrancesHinden, on 2014-October-12, 04:06, said:

It's not "ludicrous" to bid a slam without checking on aces. In fact I suspect that the odds favour responding 6NT rather than asking for aces first. It's quite easy to construct hands where you will make it, even having to knock out one of the missing aces. Suppose partner has something like xx KQx QJ10xx AKx . If they lead a spade or a diamond and the aces are split you've got a good chance of making.

Its also possible to construct hands where 6NT will NOT make. And bidding a slam without checking whether
the necessary controls are held is nothing short of folly. The partnership has a combined total of
31-33 pts leaving open the possibility of an AK combination in an opponents hand. Bidding a slam willy nilly
is suicidal.

[Jinksy]

PhilG007, on 2014-October-13, 00:55, said:

Its also possible to construct hands where 6NT will NOT make.

'Possible' and 'easy' are different words, so I'm not sure where this 'also' comes from. And you're still discounting the - fairly high - possibility of making a beatable slam on the lead.

[rhm]

PhilG007, on 2014-October-13, 00:55, said:

Its also possible to construct hands where 6NT will NOT make. And bidding a slam without checking whether
the necessary controls are held is nothing short of folly. The partnership has a combined total of
31-33 pts leaving open the possibility of an AK combination in an opponents hand. Bidding a slam willy nilly
is suicidal.

I think this is not so simple.
If correct and detailed bidding would lead you always to impregnable contracts you could be right.
This is not the case and checking on aces is not cost free.
When you hold between 31 and 33 HCP chances that you are missing 2 aces is not very high.
In fact my simulation shows that excluding the possibility of missing 2 aces increase your chances of success for 6NT only by a little bit more than 1% and your chances of success is already around 80%.
Double dummy it does not matter what you do in the bidding.
Single dummy you give a lot of lead information to opponents.
They can double or refuse to double your artificial bids and help opening leader what to lead.
For example give West ♣KJ and East a red suit ace and a club lead may be the only chance to beat 6NT.
If you bid 1NT-6NT most will lead passiv. A spade lead is not unlikely.

Rainer Herrmann

[FrancesHinden]

PhilG007, on 2014-October-13, 00:55, said:

Its also possible to construct hands where 6NT will NOT make. And bidding a slam without checking whether
the necessary controls are held is nothing short of folly. The partnership has a combined total of
31-33 pts leaving open the possibility of an AK combination in an opponents hand. Bidding a slam willy nilly
is suicidal.

I'm more worried about being off two aces than being off an AK.
If we are off an AK we are virtually certain to have twelve tricks if the suit isn't led, which I would say is roughly 75% i.e. any time the opening leader doesn't have both.
How many people think it's right to make an aggressive lead into a strong NT opening on the auction 1N-6N?*

*Possibly there are more now...

[wanoff]

rhm, on 2014-October-12, 06:52, said:

That was my point.
I doubt that there are many "good" 14, which will get you to a thin 3NT making, say opposite a balanced ten count, but will not offer you good play for 6NT here.
There might be a few, but certainly not many.
There is little justification in upgrading quacky 14 counts.

If you upgrade

♠xxx ♥Kx ♦AQJTx Axx

go ahead

Rainer Herrmann

And my point was that if you are upgrading the more frequent 5cd minor holdings such as ♦AQ10xx or ♣AK10xx then a suit contract may provide for more flexibility in the play.