Posted 2008-June-29, 14:01
The auction was decent up through 5♦.
My guess is that North was afraid 5♥ would be passed with three (apparently playing 1430). If North asks for the heart Queen, South bids 6♥.
North now must do his homework. south is known to have something like:
♠Ax(x) ♥A10xx ♦x(x...) ♣A(x...)
A 12-count ain't enough for a 4♥ call. Opener cannot have anything more than the Aces in the majors, it seems. He must have extra club length. As north can count five tricks outside of hearts and clubs, there are no outside losers.
A mere fifth club take away one of the heart losers, and a sixth club takes away a second heart loser. So, 6NT seems vastly superior to 6♥.
But, North should think even harder. If Opener has solid clubs, sixth, then 7NT should make. North can count seven tricks in the majors and diamonds, so the grand turns on the quality and length of the clubs.
If South had something like ♠Axx ♥Axxx ♦x ♣AQxxx, he might be kind of boxed into a 4♥ call. With one fewer spade and one more club, that's a solid 4♥ call but still not enough for the grand.
So, North needs something like the actual hand for the grand, which is a fairly strong hand, but very plausible.
So, let's suppose North pushes this to 6NT but takes a stab at the grand by cuebidding 6♠, kind of a LTTC grand try.
With the actual hand, South would have no problem with what to do. The question for North would be whether South would move with solid but one fewer club or six clubs but not solid. Well, both should be on somewhat the same page. North seems to have an agenda that involve ditching slow heart losers. That obviously is in the form of the AKQ of diamonds. With grand interest, North needs the heart King as well. If North also holds the club King and the spade King, that's a huge hand. So, South should be somewhat conservative in accepting such a move.
This, of course, all boils down to partnership trust and understanding, but I think some would get to the grand after the auction up through 5♦, a queen ask, a 6♥ call, and a clever 6♠ call on route to the clear notrump conversion.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.