[AceOfHeart]

I am arguing with one of my friends on whether you should see slam with this hand
as south

---

Bidding goes

N ___ S
1D __1S
2C

Here my friend sugguest I bid 3nt to show bith major stopped and more of the to play type and if my p is really interested he can go slam him self

i However bidded differently

N________ S
1D_______ 1S
2C ______ 2H(4SGF)
3D(6 card) _4D(rkcb in diamonds)
4NT(2w/o) _6D

As i have both major stopped and accounts for all my p major losers i decided to go to slam hoping that trumps break 22 and he can somehow avoid 2 club losers

Scoring: IMP

---

As it happens the first defender underlead king heart giving my p his 12th trick. Other wise given our skill level i doubt It would be made although it looks cold double dummy

But the main question is should you go for slam after partner shows you a 6-4 hand with opening points? after all we maybe just 27 points and could down quite alot when 3nt is cold.

[inquiry]

Hi,

This is the kind of hand that you need to invite your partner's participation. It is good enough to have slam interest, but not good enough to force to slam (as you did). You need to find an invintational sequence using your scheme.

Ben

[Free]

I wouldn't go for slam. There are sever reasons for that:
1. Your partner is minimal
2. You have 15HCP and a 4333 distribution, so together with partner you won't even reach the 30HCPs
3. (maybe the most important) Your partner is unbalanced in both minors, and you have almost all your HCP in the majors
4. you dont help to get rid of 'all' losers your partner has

I'd bid 2♥, to rightside a possible NT contract (if partner has Qxx, we have a double stop). If he hasnt got a stop, I'll still bid 3NT.

4333s are usually not good for slams: no length to pitch losers and no shortness to ruff losers. If you dont have 30+ combined HCP, you'd never try slam with a 4333 imo.

[the hog]

I pretty much agree with all of Free's comments on this hand. Hate 4333s.

[inquiry]

swap red queens, giving the same minimum but with ♥xx and ♦AQxxxx you will not be happy with your conservative view. Invite slam, not sign off, not force slam, is right. After all, partner doesn't have to have a minimum.

[the hog]

After all, partner doesn't have to have a minimum.

Yeah, I suppose. My partners usually do though, and I really do have a "thing" about 4333 shapes.

[EricK]

inquiry, on Feb 5 2004, 03:43 AM, said:

swap red queens, giving the same minimum but with ♥xx and ♦AQxxxx you will not be happy with your conservative view. Invite slam, not sign off, not force slam, is right. After all, partner doesn't have to have a minimum.

Shouldn't opener rebid 2NT with the original hand, but bid 3♦ with the red queens swapped?

Or do most people demand a full stop rather than a half stop for 2NT?

Also, does 3♦ really promise 6 after FSF? What would opener rebid with
♠xx ♥xx ♦AQxxx ♣AQxx or ♠x ♥xxx ♦AQxxx ♣AQxx?

I agree with bidding FSF on the original hand, but not if opener isn't going to try to right side NT with ♥Qx.

Eric

[Free]

With xx-xx-AQxxx-AQxx you cant bid anything else than 2♠ imo, maybe 3♣
With x-xxx-AQxxx-AQxx you can bid 3♥ or again maybe 3♣

So bidding 3♦ after FSF should imo be a 6 card. And with a 6 card ♦ my hand looks a bit better

[luis]

IF there's a way to invite then invite, if there isn't then just bid game, it doesn't look like the best hand to force to slam.

[AceOfHeart]

Thanks!

[Trpltrbl]

I disagree with bidding 3 NT directly, go through 4 FSF and find out what pd has.
As Hog said pd can still have more then a minimum, and I always believe Aces and Kings are good for slam, and with pd showing 6 and you play Minorwood you can always try, the only downside on this hand is the 4-3-3-3. If you haven't gone down in a slam before you don't bid them enough and believe me I have gone down before

Mike