[Kalvan14]

4♠ should be natural. 4NT should be a general slam-try in clubs.
Overall, I'd go for 5♦. It is not the "optimum" bid, but the auction is very cramped.

[jdeegan]

Hannie, on Apr 29 2006, 10:07 PM, said:

In fact, I would expect clubs to play better than diamonds with the given hand more often than the other way around, but it is close imo. Still I chose to bid 5D. I think that slam prospects are fair, but not enough to just blast to slam. We also have no way to make a slam try (4NT followed by 5D would rather show the rounded suits than slam interest imo). I think that 5D suggests a better hand then 5C, so I expected that partner would more often raise over 5D when he has serious extras (and somewhat of a diamond fit).

As it was, partner had something like Qx Kxx A KJxxxxx, so 5C is definitely better than 5D, but the cards were friendly and both made. And bo hrothgar, I didn't post the hand because 6NT was the winning call .

Slam???? Why does anyone think we have a scientifically biddable slam? I would think we have AT LEAST one major suit loser OFF THE TOP. What in the world does looking at the spade king tell you?

If you think that, then we already have a place to play - CLUBS. Bidding diamonds has, as I see it, two strikes against it: first, there is little reason to think diamonds will play better than clubs, and two, why advertise that our side owns the minors - THE LESS THE OPPONENTS KNOW, THE BETTER.