[whereagles]

FrancesHinden, on 2014-May-31, 03:13, said:

Finally I don't know where the 6C bid came from (assuming that 4C as forcing etc), what have you got that you haven't shown?

Perhaps south took 5♣ merely as "lack of spade control"?

There is a tendency to abuse control sequences (ye olde cuebidding). In their original form (i.e. no gadgets like last train or serious/frivolous 3NT) they are not slam-invitational tools. Rather, as RKCB, they are tools to check whether slam can be bid safely AFTER partnership has ascertained values to bid it are there.

[awm]

FrancesHinden, on 2014-May-31, 03:13, said:

I'm surprised at everyone saying that 4C is obviously right.
Perhaps it's a matter for discussion on what the 3S bid shows. I admit I would simply have bid 3NT on responder's hand over 2NT.
We play transfers here, but 3S (initially) shows a weak hand with long clubs. 4C is not forcing. I would bid 3NT on opener's hand over 3S to say that opposite xx Jxx Kx Jxxxxx I will be making 3NT.
If you play 3S as showing a slam try in clubs, then I think responder's hand is too soft, although obviously it could be right.

Finally I don't know where the 6C bid came from (assuming that 4C as forcing etc), what have you got that you haven't shown?

I think that this is a difference between British and American bridge. In American bridge, there are virtually no uncontested sequences which end in four of a minor (I am counting preemptive auctions like 3♣-P-4♣ as "contested" even though in literal terms they are not). This has the advantage that certain murky sequences become forcing and that certain slam tries are easier to make or cooperate with, in exchange for the obvious disadvantages on the presumably rare hands where we need to play four of a minor. In any case, despite no previous discussion on the matter, partner and I (both American experts) were definitely on the same page that 3♠ was an absolute game force and that 4♣ shows a hand that would cooperate with a slam try in clubs.

From the south side of the table, my reasoning was that partner would not necessarily cue 4♠ on a singleton (because spades are my first-bid suit and I might visualize a source of tricks) and that Axxxx was potentially a very good spade holding, as well as the fourth club and two doubletons being possible extras. For example ♠KQxxx ♥AJx ♦Qx ♣AKx is potentially a much worse hand which might bid the same way up to this point in the auction. Obviously my reasoning here might be wrong, and there is an argument that by rebidding 2nt and then cooperating with 4♣ I have perhaps already "upgraded" enough.

[Fluffy]

Axxxx is a supper holding opposite a partner who is trying for slam with no spade fit, partner is overbidding, he is off 6 top tricks, expects partner to have 5 bullets?, even then he might be off a red AQ offside

His last cuebid is not neccesary, what are we gonna do with AAAAK if he bids 5♣ over 4♣?