[cherdano]

(3S)-4H-(P)-5N

[EricK]

I don't know about "expert standard", but how can this be pick a slam? What denominations are we being asked to choose between? What criteria are we meant to use to decide?

[FrancesHinden]

I have no idea what 'expert standard' is (and neither does 99.9% of the rest of the world) because I don't think there is one.

I know what I play it as, namely grand slam force. If I played with an expert for the first time, I'd expect it to be grand slam force.

But that's two difference questions.

[Apollo81]

I would take this as GSF playing with a random expert.

I prefer the pick-a-slam treatment here, however.

-Noble

[helene_t]

GSF. If pick-a-slam exists it would be 5♠ (please don't tell me that 5♠ is a splinter or exclusion blackwood or such).

[pclayton]

I have no idea what's standard among experts that don't have strong agreements, but in my partnership that has a strong understanding about such matters, this is pick-a-slam, because we have the opportunity to set trump.

If you had to choose, which would you rather have? I'll bet all of us have collectively had GSF come up a total of maybe 10 times in our lifetimes, but pick-a-slam comes up a lot more often.

Can you come up with a hand that needs to GSF instead of KC? Its possible I suppose; void, Qxxx, Ax, AKxxxxx. However in this case, responder can cue 4♠ to agree hearts before embarking on GSF.

On the other hand, there's a lot of hands where I want to pick a slam: x, Qx, AQJxx, AQxxx.

[cherdano]

helene_t, on Oct 30 2006, 04:24 PM, said:

GSF. If pick-a-slam exists it would be 5♠ (please don't tell me that 5♠ is a splinter or exclusion blackwood or such).

Ouch. I admit I woudn't know whether 5S is exclusion or splinter, but I would have thought it must surely be one of them...

Arend

[Echognome]

I'm also in the pick-a-slam camp. I personally feel that RKCB has made GSF completely outdated. I can imagine there are hands with voids that would want to effectively use GSF as exclusion, but think pick-a-slam is much more frequently useful.

[awm]

Pick a slam.

Suppose this bid is GSF. What do I do with a strong hand holding both minors, or one long minor and a marginal heart fit? I can't bid 4♠ because that agrees hearts. I can't bid 4NT because it's RKC. I can't bid 5-minor because it's non-forcing (and doesn't really describe my full hand). Bidding 5♥ agrees hearts, bidding 5♠ could be construed as pick a suit but most people will not interpret it that way. Basically I have no sensible call.

On the other hand, suppose this bid is pick-a-slam. How do I bid GSF? Most likely I start with 4♠ and then bid 5NT over partner's next call.

This is also a matter of priorities. In general strain takes priority over level (and here we haven't actually picked a strain) and finding the best slam takes priority over looking for a grand slam. I think it's a good general agreement that if we have not agreed a suit, and there exists a forcing non-jump which agrees partner's last-bid suit, then a jump to 4NT cannot be keycard, and a jump to 5NT cannot be grand slam force.

[FrancesHinden]

Echognome, on Oct 30 2006, 05:58 PM, said:

I'm also in the pick-a-slam camp.  I personally feel that RKCB has made GSF completely outdated.  I can imagine there are hands with voids that would want to effectively use GSF as exclusion, but think pick-a-slam is much more frequently useful.

I basically never play 5NT as pick-a-slam (what never? no never. What never? well, hardly ever).

I don't dispute it can be useful if you have thorough agreements. But I don't miss it. I use 5NT as GSF reasonably often (in the context of relevant hands). That's because I'm a great fan of cue-bidding and patterning out, and am often over the level of 4NT by the time I've got round to looking at solid trumps for grand purposes.

Tom Townsend likes to use 5NT as 'judgement' grand slam force: bid a grand if you trumps are much better than you've shown so far. I refused to play that with him on the grounds I have insufficient judgement.

[Echognome]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 30 2006, 05:43 PM, said:

Echognome, on Oct 30 2006, 05:58 PM, said:

I'm also in the pick-a-slam camp.  I personally feel that RKCB has made GSF completely outdated.  I can imagine there are hands with voids that would want to effectively use GSF as exclusion, but think pick-a-slam is much more frequently useful.

I basically never play 5NT as pick-a-slam (what never? no never. What never? well, hardly ever).

I don't dispute it can be useful if you have thorough agreements. But I don't miss it. I use 5NT as GSF reasonably often (in the context of relevant hands). That's because I'm a great fan of cue-bidding and patterning out, and am often over the level of 4NT by the time I've got round to looking at solid trumps for grand purposes.

Tom Townsend likes to use 5NT as 'judgement' grand slam force: bid a grand if you trumps are much better than you've shown so far. I refused to play that with him on the grounds I have insufficient judgement.

Why not just play Turbo then?

I can imagine that 5NT is fine in this context, but of course patterning out, cuebidding, etc when there is cramped room due to interference puts a sort of scupper on that. In that case, I prefer 5NT as pick-a-slam and 4NT to ask for trump quality. I also do not believe one always has to keycard if one wants to invite slam. I just feel that pick-a-slam seems a better use of 5NT.

[cherdano]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 30 2006, 07:43 PM, said:

I don't dispute it can be useful if you have thorough agreements. But I don't miss it. I use 5NT as GSF reasonably often (in the context of relevant hands). That's because I'm a great fan of cue-bidding and patterning out, and am often over the level of 4NT by the time I've got round to looking at solid trumps for grand purposes.

I think I am easily convinced that 5N=GSF is quite useful in cue-bidding auctions, but it seems unrelated to the question whether jumps to 5N should be GSF.

[keylime]

Pick-a-slam, because you have a 4S cue available to show interest in a heart slam. You have a way to get to GSF through the 4S - rebid - 5NT route.

[whereagles]

With the appearance of RKCB, 5NT as GSF is losing its appeal. Pick-a-slam is more useful, and in this case it's offering a choice of minors.

[han]

Okay, I voted just for you Arend. Pick a slam of course.

(although with a random expert I would try to avoid the bid)

[cherdano]

EricK, on Oct 30 2006, 09:38 AM, said:

I don't know about "expert standard", but how can this be pick a slam? What denominations are we being asked to choose between? What criteria are we meant to use to decide?

Well, similarly how (4S)-5N or (4S)-X-(P)-5N can be pick-a-slam. Partner bids pass/correct on the assumption that 5N bidder has two places to play.

FrancesHinden, on Oct 30 2006, 04:05 PM, said:

I have no idea what 'expert standard' is (and neither does 99.9% of the rest of the world) because I don't think there is one.

I know what I play it as, namely grand slam force.  If I played with an expert for the first time, I'd expect it to be grand slam force.

But that's two difference questions.

I think your second answer should be the definition of 'expert standard'.

Anyway, I had thought it has become standard that in cramped auction with no space for strain exploration, pick-a-slam always has preference over GSF. But seems I am wrong. (FWIW, in BWS 5N is GSF whenever that is a logical interpretation.)

Of course when it came up, me and partner both belonged to the 99.9% who thought they knew what standard is.