[gnasher]

Phil, on 2013-March-15, 07:51, said:

We discussed that although had a disagreement over:

1♦ 1♠
2N 3♣*
3♦ 3N

* transfer

He said it was a mild slam try. I thought it was a choice of games. Even with my interpretation we migh get there after I cue 4♣ although he has no idea how valuable his Q♣] is.

I think responder is too strong to bid a non-forcing 3NT, mild slam try or not.

[EricK]

Free, on 2013-March-15, 07:59, said:

I'd just bid 2NT showing 18-19 balanced.

If this is considered a problem hand, then opener should've foreseen this and opened 1♣ (so he can reverse and stay low).

If they'd have thought even further ahead, they could have agreed to play transfer Walsh in response to 1♣ and had a 1-level rebid on this sort of hand without distorting their minor suit lengths

[FrancesHinden]

Phil, on 2013-March-14, 14:18, said:

Yeah JT isn't a poster child for 2♣ but it was the first board and I felt like experimenting.

It actually helped us get to a good slam across from Axxx Ax QTxxx Qx.

My partner was funny after we had a 71%. He played a number of years ago with a popular DC player. After they scored a 230 he was asked, "if you had played perfect what would you have scored?"

190

Partner has 5-card support for your first bid suit and knows of at least a combined 30-count after your 2NT rebid. How hard can it be to get to slam? (If you can't think of anything better, bidding 6D would work, it's the most likely final contract).