[kgr]

Scoring: MP

---

P-1S
2NT-4C
4NT-5D
6S
- -
2NT=10+ and 4 card S
4C= singleton and 12-14
5D= 3 or 0 of 5
- -
You play in a weak field. Ar you happy to be in 6S because it is more then 50% to make or should North ask for ♠Q to protect against a bad score?

[gwnn]

Passed hands should not force to game/slam.

[inquiry]

6S is considerably less than 50% (assuming they take their club trick at trick one). Now you need 2-2 spades. You want to think that is GREATER than 50%?

looking at these hands, I would want to stop in 4♠...

[pclayton]

It really depends on their propensity to take their club trick, which I think is fairly high.

It's fun to bid 22 point slams, but only if they have a decent chance of making. Give North a 5th spade and it would.

[neilkaz]

Why wouldn't I ask for the Q and especially is a weak field where many won't get to slam !

EDIT: I know some don't agree, but for me when I ask for the Q, I don't guarantee all key cards (ie can be missing one) but do guarantee at least a small slam if PD holds the Q, of course.

[Mbodell]

Unless west accidentally bid the K♦ instead of a pass somewhere during the auction I wouldn't want to be in 6♠. I had a pair accidentally bid with a suit honor instead of a pass in an auction at the club a couple of weeks back that turned a ~33% slam into around a 75+% slam when I could require or forbid the card led.

[Free]

I wouldn't want to be there:
- it's way less than 50% (♠ 2-2 and no ♥ ruff in the first trick)
- in this weak field the other pairs won't bid it, so you can an easy average without a problem

Why did we open 1♠? 6♠ by North is a little bit better, because these noobs may underlead ♦K

[P_Marlowe]

I would have bid 4H instead of 4NT, this would have
sent the message across.

The main issue with 4NT is, that South does not need
to hold such a pure opening bid.
Just ask your self, if South would have bid similar with
a 5431 shape and 11 points (remember the guy was
sitting in 3rd position).

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kgr]

- Spade 2-2 is 40.7% (I thought it was around 51%). So asking for ♠Q is clear.
- My partner said he didn't want me to have the ♠Q because then I could not have ♦K.
- South showed slem interest opposite a passed partner with his 4♣ bid and North is max without pts in ♣, so maybe it isn't that bad for North to bid 4NT?

[ArtK78]

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

From North's point of view, after the key card response, the slam is AT WORST on a 2-2 spade break. It could be better. If South's spades are AKJxx it is much better.

[EDIT - Since North has no clue that South has six hearts, it is not true that the slam is at worst on a 2-2 spade break. There could be a diamond loser also].

I would not have bid 4NT on the North cards. But once he did, bidding 6♠ is not terrible.

You say you were in a weak field. How was your game to this point? That might influence the decision on whether to bid 4NT and then bid slam.

[EDIT - unless there is more to the bidding than we were shown, North's 4NT bid is an atrocity. He has no clue that South is so distributional and he has no clue where all of the tricks are going to come from].

[Fluffy]

North bidding is too agressive.

combined 23-25 HCP outside clubs, with 1 trick missing in clubs, you need 28 HCP for being there, north is lucky that the contract does even have a chance.

[gnasher]

ArtK78, on May 13 2008, 07:10 PM, said:

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

I'm surprised that you think that needs agreement. Does anyone play that a queen ask below five of the trump suit promises all the key cards?

[Free]

gnasher, on May 14 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 13 2008, 07:10 PM, said:

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

I'm surprised that you think that needs agreement. Does anyone play that a queen ask below five of the trump suit promises all the key cards?

I have never played it this way. You can find beautiful slams with a keycard outside, or stay out of slams when you miss a keycard and the Queen of trumps... I never understood why some would require all keycards for a Queen-ask.

[jtfanclub]

gwnn, on May 12 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

Passed hands should not force to game/slam.

I liked the 2NT bid.

I just think given the system it's time to quit in 4♠ after the 4♣ bid.

If I was really stubborn, I'd bid 4♦, not 4NT. But I've shown my hand with 2NT. I have nothing extra to show.

[ArtK78]

Free, on May 14 2008, 08:32 AM, said:

gnasher, on May 14 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 13 2008, 07:10 PM, said:

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

I'm surprised that you think that needs agreement. Does anyone play that a queen ask below five of the trump suit promises all the key cards?

I have never played it this way. You can find beautiful slams with a keycard outside, or stay out of slams when you miss a keycard and the Queen of trumps... I never understood why some would require all keycards for a Queen-ask.

We have had this discussion before. The position that I take - that the Queen Ask guarantees possession of all 5 key cards - is an old view that appears to be in the minority today.

But that was not my main point. Bidding 4NT on this hand is too much.

[pclayton]

ArtK78, on May 14 2008, 06:40 AM, said:

Free, on May 14 2008, 08:32 AM, said:

gnasher, on May 14 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 13 2008, 07:10 PM, said:

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

I'm surprised that you think that needs agreement. Does anyone play that a queen ask below five of the trump suit promises all the key cards?

I have never played it this way. You can find beautiful slams with a keycard outside, or stay out of slams when you miss a keycard and the Queen of trumps... I never understood why some would require all keycards for a Queen-ask.

We have had this discussion before. The position that I take - that the Queen Ask guarantees possession of all 5 key cards - is an old view that appears to be in the minority today.

But that was not my main point. Bidding 4NT on this hand is too much.

Art - I'm one of the old schoolers here too, but I've never heard of this either. What pray tell do you do with a hand that is missing one key but only needs the trump Q after a 5♣ / 5♦ call?

If we have all the keys and are only missing the trump Queen, we can figure out seven later as kings are automatically shown with the trump Q.

[ArtK78]

I am sure that someone can dredge up a link to the thread in which this issue involving the Q ask and possession or non-possession of all of the key cards was discussed.

Quite frankly, I have never had any real issue with the idea of bidding a small slam missing one key card. The trump queen is hardly ever an issue - the fact that you are missing a key card means that the values that you do have to explore for slam probably include the trump Q, or, at worst, you have to find it to make your slam.

The other issue is if you need the trump Q to bid a slam when you know that you are missing a key card, perhaps RKCB wasn't the best slam exploratory tool to use to get to that point in the auction.

In the prior thread, I did find one site - The Bridge Guys - whose presentation of RKCB included the fact that the use of the Q ask guaranteed possession of all 5 key cards. Others weighed in to dispute that - notably Fred.

Both methods are playable. The main point is that you have an agreement with your partner.

[OleBerg]

gwnn, on May 12 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

Passed hands should not force to game/slam.

Go to intermidiate forum immidiately.

Unless South bids 4♣ only to practice biddng minors, it also carries the message: "Slam is possible, facing a passed hand."

And North can hardly have a better hand! (Some players could have a fifth spade, I couldn't.)

4♦ or 4♥ might be a better bid by North, but only for exploration of a grand. When South shows off, North, who has every reason to expect all his values are working, obviously has to make another try. When North finds out that they're off a likely cashing trick, and the thrumph queen, he should sign off in 5♠.

This might go down on a 4-0 split, or a heart ruff, but if you are never down, with such unlucky splits, you miss to many slams.

So no blame to a North, that takes the partnership to the five-level. Taking it to the six-level is, of course, a bad move.

Best Regards

Ole Berg

[kgr]

OleBerg, on May 14 2008, 06:10 PM, said:

gwnn, on May 12 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

Passed hands should not force to game/slam.

Go to intermidiate forum immidiately.

Unless South bids 4♣ only to practice biddng minors, it also carries the message: "Slam is possible, facing a passed hand."

And North can hardly have a better hand! (Some players could have a fifth spade, I couldn't.)

4♦ or 4♥ might be a better bid by North, but only for exploration of a grand. When South shows off, North, who has every reason to expect all his values are working, obviously has to make another try. When North finds out that they're off a likely cashing trick, and the thrumph queen, he should sign off in 5♠.

This might go down on a 4-0 split, or a heart ruff, but if you are never down, with such unlucky splits, you miss to many slams.

So no blame to a North, that takes the partnership to the five-level. Taking it to the six-level is, of course, a bad move.

Best Regards

Ole Berg

I agree with this.
Note that North passed first. In our system 2NT is balanced with 4+♠ (We have other bids to show same HCP range and 4+♠ with a singleton or void).
North has no pts in ♣, so the 4♣ bid by South makes his hand in fact maximum for what he showed. South's 4♣ bid asked in fact if North has no lost pts in ♣ and so North can not sign off in 4♠ with his hand. The least he has to do is bid 4♦.

[skjaeran]

pclayton, on May 14 2008, 04:56 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 14 2008, 06:40 AM, said:

Free, on May 14 2008, 08:32 AM, said:

gnasher, on May 14 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 13 2008, 07:10 PM, said:

Asking for the ♠Q is wonderful, as long as you have an agreement that it doesn't promise all of the key cards.

I'm surprised that you think that needs agreement. Does anyone play that a queen ask below five of the trump suit promises all the key cards?

I have never played it this way. You can find beautiful slams with a keycard outside, or stay out of slams when you miss a keycard and the Queen of trumps... I never understood why some would require all keycards for a Queen-ask.

We have had this discussion before. The position that I take - that the Queen Ask guarantees possession of all 5 key cards - is an old view that appears to be in the minority today.

But that was not my main point. Bidding 4NT on this hand is too much.

Art - I'm one of the old schoolers here too, but I've never heard of this either. What pray tell do you do with a hand that is missing one key but only needs the trump Q after a 5♣ / 5♦ call?

If we have all the keys and are only missing the trump Queen, we can figure out seven later as kings are automatically shown with the trump Q.

Having played RKCB for I don't know how long, I've not ever come across anyone playing or suggesting that the queen ask promises all 5 keycards.

And I can't envisage playing that. Asking about the trump queen to decide whether to stop at the 5-level or bid slam obviously is far more frequent than the grand slam hands. Besides, there's not a single problem playing it not promising all 5 keys...