[Phil]

AQJxxxx xx Ax Jx

Opps silent

1♣ - 1♠
2♠ - 2N*
4♥** - ?

* - Asking
** - Max 2♠(max = soft 14) with four trump and short hearts

[ggwhiz]

Surely after RKC and missing only 1 we have a play and opposite ♠K ♦KQ ♣A it's cold.

When I can come up with a sub minimum like that quickly I have to give it a try. If pard is the sort to splinter on stiff Kings we'll have a little chat about that after I go down.

[Lord Molyb]

Surely you were always going to be in at least 4♠ after partner raised? Opposite a partner who has shown everything you could have possibly hoped for, you should make a slam try.

Also what ggwhiz said.

[whereagles]

ol'black

[gszes]

Slam has to be a really good shot and the 5 level has to
be almost bullet proof so time to break out RKC and if p
can show 2 go for slam. If p likes to show singleton aces/kings
this may not work but you can iron that out later do the right
thing now.

[WesleyC]

Clearly you should move towards slam now. Opposite short hearts, slam will be on a finesse (or better).

If not for the possibility of a 4H response, why did you bid 2NT?

[Jinksy]

The most likely hand for P to have to make a robust slam must be something like Kxxx x (QJx)xx AK(QJx)xx - ie with one or two of the minor suit quacks to make up his points.

A cue of 5♦ would probably get me into slam most of the time it's right, and keep me out when P has Kxxx x KJx AQxxx. Whether I choose that or RKCB seems like a state of the match thing - do I want to generate swings, or stay out of 50% slams?

It's hard to imagine passing, though.

[Phil]

WesleyC, on 2014-December-06, 08:54, said:

Clearly you should move towards slam now. Opposite short hearts, slam will be on a finesse (or better).

If not for the possibility of a 4H response, why did you bid 2NT?

I think you answered your own question.

[Phil]

Jinksy, on 2014-December-08, 06:36, said:

The most likely hand for P to have to make a robust slam must be something like Kxxx x (QJx)xx AK(QJx)xx - ie with one or two of the minor suit quacks to make up his points.

A cue of 5♦ would probably get me into slam most of the time it's right, and keep me out when P has Kxxx x KJx AQxxx. Whether I choose that or RKCB seems like a state of the match thing - do I want to generate swings, or stay out of 50% slams?

It's hard to imagine passing, though.

I think this answer is best. 5♦ consults partner and gets him to look at his honor structure/placement and weigh in.

I lazily bid 4N, and got to slam across from Kxxx A QT9xx Kxx.

[jogs]

Phil, on 2014-December-08, 13:01, said:

I think this answer is best. 5♦ consults partner and gets him to look at his honor structure/placement and weigh in.

I lazily bid 4N, and got to slam across from Kxxx A QT9xx Kxx.

Why did pd open 1♣ and not 1♦?
You should explain the system on your original post.

[Phil]

jogs, on 2014-December-08, 13:49, said:

Why did pd open 1♣ and not 1♦?
You should explain the system on your original post.

Sorry, realized later he opened 1♦. If it changes things, let me know.

[mikeh]

jogs, on 2014-December-08, 13:49, said:

Why did pd open 1♣ and not 1♦?
You should explain the system on your original post.

I think your partner seriously mis-evaluated his hand.

When you asked for shortness, implicit in that is the notion that you are looking to see if his values, which will usually be outside of the shortness, are working.

It is important to understand that splinter bids don't just say: I can control this suit via ruffs. They also imply information about the likely location of the hcp that we are known to hold, whether shown by the splinter or earlier.

It is that factor, that for me, makes splintering with an Ace so bad. I don't mind it if the hand is unlimited, since then no inferences can be drawn about high cards, but few if any play unlimited splinters in any auctions, and your partnership expressly didn't here.

I don't know what other options were available to him, but he should NOT have shown both a splinter and a maximum. What happened next was completely predictable even if one accepts that a 5♦ cue, guaranteeing a club lead, was technically better.

Bear in mind that a strong player on your left might well table a low club from the Ace should your partner have held, say, Kxxx A Kxxxx Kxx, and bid the slam over 5♦, so you are going to have to guess well and/or hope to get lucky, whereas keycard from you will stop any underlead, if only because he'll expect you to have a club control Thus a diamond cue, against a listening opp, may lead to a failed slam that would have cruised home on a less descriptive auction.

[Jinksy]

mikeh, on 2014-December-08, 17:28, said:

Bear in mind that a strong player on your left might well table a low club from the Ace should your partner have held, say, Kxxx A Kxxxx Kxx, and bid the slam over 5♦, so you are going to have to guess well and/or hope to get lucky, whereas keycard from you will stop any underlead, if only because he'll expect you to have a club control Thus a diamond cue, against a listening opp, may lead to a failed slam that would have cruised home on a less descriptive auction.

If partner bid slam over 5♦ with that, I don't think he's been listening to the auction. Why not cue/Last Train 5♥, confirming something in ♣s, and possibly showing the a stiff A or ♥ void depending on partnership agreements and leave the final decision to me?

We've already had a revealing enough auction that I doubt the opps are going to find the wrong lead.

[jogs]

Phil, on 2014-December-08, 15:08, said:

Sorry, realized later he opened 1♦. If it changes things, let me know.

I would rebid 3♦, not 2NT. I favor bids telling pd, rather than taking control. In other words, I don't like asking bids.