[PhilG007]

Quote

dak654ck8]133|100 E and W pass throughout. I have:

---

North opens 1. I'm pretty excited. I have 16HCP. I'm thinking slam.
I ask for Aces.
North "thinks" for a moment and then replies:

5♠
Two or five key cards; queen
-- 3+ ♦; 11-21 HCP; ♦Q; 12
-22 total points

Seriously? I blame myself for bidding 7NT which West - holding the ♥A doubled.
LIN

Why the hurry? What's the rush? Why not respond a simple 1♠ to find out more about your partner's hand?
Over 1♠ its highly likely GIB would bid 3 ♠ NOW is the time to go slamming.The tragedy is looking at the two hands,6♠ is eminently playable.
The lesson is if you know where you're going ,go there quickly. In this case you couldn't know what the final outcome was going to be.
In these situations it's a wise player who goes forward softly softly..

[nige1]

PhilG007 suggests a better auction:
1♦ - 1♠
3♠ - 4N
5♠ - 6♠
Unless West leads ♥A, 6♠ requires good views. Suppose west leads a trump. You might try ♠AKJ, ♦QKA, ♦ ruff, ♣K, ♦6, ♠9. It seems that East must bare ♥Q eliminating a guess.

---

[Zelandakh]

nige1, on 2020-July-18, 11:30, said:

1♦ - 1♠
3♠ - 4N
5♠ - 6♠

Still rushing to bid 4NT? Would it not make sense to check whether a ♦ control is held first?

[Huibertus]

KingCovert, on 2020-July-16, 11:05, said:

I'd imagine that a standard treatment for 4NT in this situation would be quantitative.

I'd imagine that would be madness. A 1 ♦ is far too unlimited for a quantative NT repsonse. It is a 12-21 HCP opening.

Would opener be expected to accept with a non minimal hand of 14HCP or would a maximum of 21 be the requirement? How would opening hand be expected to handle the potential two or three suiters with a void holding minimal values? 4NT simply cannot be quantative, you need a tight range in strength AND shape in order for that to make sense.

[dokoko]

The 4NT bid got what it deserved.

Why on earth do you think that with 16 HCP opposite an opening slam only depends on the number of aces held?

[barmar]

Was this a "best hand" robot tournament? Then you know that partner has at most 16 HCP, and more likely has less. Without a fit or a running suit, it generally takes about 33 HCP to make a slam. So slam is not likely.

However, since you actually do have a spade fit, 6♠ from your side (to protect the ♥K from the opening lead) is not actually a bad contract. But you'll never get there by jumping directly to 4NT.

[KingCovert]

Huibertus, on 2020-July-18, 13:34, said:

I'd imagine that would be madness. A 1 ♦ is far too unlimited for a quantative NT repsonse. It is a 12-21 HCP opening.

Would opener be expected to accept with a non minimal hand of 14HCP or would a maximum of 21 be the requirement? How would opening hand be expected to handle the potential two or three suiters with a void holding minimal values? 4NT simply cannot be quantative, you need a tight range in strength AND shape in order for that to make sense.

Well, if you think that partner has anywhere near 19-21 HCP with any regularity when you might bid 4NT quantitative, then, I suppose you have a point. Keycard just seems like a dumb agreement. Perhaps that's because I play Inverted Minors and Criss-Cross when I play 2/1.

I just can't think of any serious auction where I'd ever bid 4NT here, but, if I ever felt like it would be right, it would be on some 2NT opener type hand, and I'd want it to be quantitative.