[Mbodell]

Playing in a good MP field ATB on this hand:

Making 7 for 1.5/25 MP

---

[Free]

South 25% because he's stronger than quantitative imo.
North 75% because he didn't try to find 6NT at MP.

[whereagles]

I guess you're playing weak NT, no? Anyway, I guess North could try 5C over 4NT, to see if 6NT (or even 7D) was on, but that's easier dbl dummy

[kenrexford]

When slam auctions feature two leaps, this is often a problem.

Structure might need to be reconsidered, but that is not the issue, IMO. As others have suggested, North should be thinking MP and should therefore accept the quantitative call with some sort of notrump probe. I would expect 5♣ to be a reasonable start.

[Fluffy]

The system has the most fault as 1♣-1♦-1NT-3♦ (or something equivalent) would put you much better placed.

North's 3334 shouldn't jump to 6♦ I think, but I don´t know what is the way to explore 6NT, perhaps 5NT pick a slam?

[mcphee]

Difficult to respond here as we are not sure of the NT range. However it must be mostly Norths fault for agreeing to play with south.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

4-suit transfers also will get you "better placed" since Opener can accept or not at the 3-level.
Then Opener can eventually show the needed ♣ cue, then Minorwood-RKC , etc.

[ArtK78]

From the explanations of the bids (click on the bids) it seems that South actually described his hand pretty well given the methods available to him.

Unfortunately, this left North with a guess as to the best final contract, and at a level where he had very few options available to him. Perhaps North should just shoot out 6NT, or he could bid 5NT if that would be interpreted as "pick a slam." Since it was not a question of which hand was going to play the final contract (North was endplayed into being declarer in all events) perhaps he should just decide to bid 6NT.

By the way, this leads to an entirely different discussion which has appeared on occasion on these Fora - whether it makes sense to use transfers over a weak NT opening. When responder is strong, using transfers risks wrongsiding the final contract. For example, give South a slightly different hand, such as Kx AQx AKxxxx Qx. You would much rather declare 6♦* from the South hand. But I digress.

*(or 6NT, but that is impossible after the opening)

[gnasher]

I think South has an obvious slam-drive. The main concerns are whether to investigate controls so as to play in diamonds opposite something like Qxx xxxx xx AKQx, and whether to investigate a grand slam, catering for a hand like Qxx xxx Qxx AKQx or Qxx Kxx Qxx AKxx.

Given the form of scoring, I wouldn't bother with either - I'd just uninformatively raise 1NT to 6NT.

[han]

gnasher, on 2011-November-26, 11:23, said:

I think South has an obvious slam-drive.

I agree.

[Zelandakh]

Any system that does not allow you to show a 6m322 slam-oriented hand below 4NT has to be to blame! This is not a difficult hand for a weak NT, eg

1NT = 12-14
... - 3D = natural, slammy
3S = heart control, no spade control
... - 4C = serious slam interest, asks for club control
4H = club control, would accept a slam try, 1 key card
... - 4S = DQ?
5C = yes, and CK but no SK
... - 5H = HK?
5S = yes, but no queen to mention
... - 6NT

So I blame mostly the methods being used. Within the methods you can give some blame for North for not choosing 6NT given that the hand is quite likely to make the same number of tricks in either denomination. But really, how much simpler is it if we can just set diamonds at the 3 level and key card? And this is not an uncommon hand type...

[Mbodell]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-27, 07:46, said:

So I blame mostly the methods being used. Within the methods you can give some blame for North for not choosing 6NT given that the hand is quite likely to make the same number of tricks in either denomination. But really, how much simpler is it if we can just set diamonds at the 3 level and key card? And this is not an uncommon hand type...

The methods do allow keycard, alhough not without getting high as well. That would be 1nt-3♣-3♦-4♥(KC for diamonds).

[Zelandakh]

Mbodell, on 2011-November-27, 14:27, said:

The methods do allow keycard, alhough not without getting high as well. That would be 1nt-3♣-3♦-4♥(KC for diamonds).

You can't just use key card here, you need to find out about a club control first. It is probably better than just bidding 4NT though.

[Fluffy]

gnasher, on 2011-November-26, 11:23, said:

I think South has an obvious slam-drive. The main concerns are whether to investigate controls so as to play in diamonds opposite something like Qxx xxxx xx AKQx, and whether to investigate a grand slam, catering for a hand like Qxx xxx Qxx AKQx or Qxx Kxx Qxx AKxx.

Given the form of scoring, I wouldn't bother with either - I'd just uninformatively raise 1NT to 6NT.

Being off ♣AKQ would be something to worry also