[jillybean]

---

Playing 12-14nt, 2♦ is gf, 3♣ is a limit raise.
Are we making this too complicated, do you settle for 3♣?

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2022-November-13, 20:49, said:

---

Playing 12-14nt, 2♦ is gf, 3♣ is a limit raise.
Are we making this too complicated, do you settle for 3♣?

I think you need to change the post. You have west with this hand, sitting over a 1D opening by south. I think you meant that the problem hand has to respond to an opening by partner.

If so, this is a limit raise. Just because one is playing a weak 1N doesn’t mean partner has a strong hand. He may have an unbalanced minimum and 3D will be high enough.

And if he does have the strong notrump hand, you should reach 3N.

[jillybean]

OP fixed

[jillybean]

---

[AL78]

jillybean, on 2022-November-13, 23:29, said:

---

Looks like a good auction to me. You showed a limit raise and partner placed the contract based on that information. Partner probably has a strong NT hand.

[jillybean]

---

6nt 6♣ 6♦

Such a routine hand, no one bid a slam.

Most opened 1nt - 3nt, I was hoping that playing weak nt and opening 1♦ may have helped us.
I hate missing 26 point slams.

[DavidKok]

If we look at this single dummy, I count 2 spades, 2 hearts and excellent chances for exactly 3 clubs (and note that, against for example KQ offside, or K8xx onside, we will not even be able to take three tricks in clubs). That means we will need 5 diamonds to make any slam - i.e. the king onside. Slams that require a finesse and then some are against the odds, I would be happy to stay out of this one.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2022-November-14, 10:02, said:

---

6nt 6♣ 6♦

Such a routine hand, no one bid a slam.

Most opened 1nt - 3nt, I was hoping that playing weak nt and opening 1♦ may have helped us.
I hate missing 26 point slams.

We see the game differently. You hate missing terrible slams that happen to make. I hate bidding terrible slams even when they make. Why? Because most of the time bad contracts go down. In the long run bidding ‘slams’ like this assures one of losing to better bidders.

Sure, I’d take the imps. Several years ago my team won a KO match when my wife and her partner bid and add a slam that I estimated was about a 5% contract😀

But analyzing one’s bidding by how well a hand plays on the lie of the cards is being a result merchant’ which is not watt become a good player.

Consider: flip the E-W hands and how good is this ‘slam’? Have west hold off from a club lead, and 5D fails!

For slam to make you need the diamonds to come home and to avoid two club losers. Now, if the diamonds do come home, you may argue that you can strip the hands and duck a club to west, who is endplayed. No, he’s not. He can give you a ruff and a sluff and you still have to hope for a club finesse.

IOW, slam is roughly. 37.5% likely to make. We’ve all been in and sometimes made worse slams, but one should never be upset at missing such bad contracts.

[jillybean]

I didn't add to "I hate missing 26 point slams' , I should have made that clear!

[ali quarg]

So did you make the 6NT available?

[jillybean]

ali quarg, on 2022-November-14, 10:47, said:

So did you make the 6NT available?

6nt 12 tricks in nt was was made 6 times 490. (edited)

[LBengtsson]

jillybean, on 2022-November-14, 11:11, said:

6nt was made 6 times 990 (amended)

Wow! But in the long run the 'poker' players will lose in the end. Suppose your partner is playing standard 2/1 with a strong NT and opens 1NT with the South hand. What would you be thinking of as a contract as North? 6NT? I doubt it. I cannot believe so many partnerships were in 6NT with those cards? Maybe one, two tops. But six? Twenty-six-point slams just do not happen with two balanced hands opposite each other except with a massive dose of good fortune.

[jillybean]

LBengtsson, on 2022-November-14, 12:08, said:

Wow! But in the long run the 'poker' players will lose in the end. Suppose your partner is playing standard 2/1 with a strong NT and opens 1NT with the South hand. What would you be thinking of as a contract as North? 6NT? I doubt it. I cannot believe so many partnerships were in 6NT with those cards? Maybe one, two tops. But six? Twenty-six-point slams just do not happen with two balanced hands opposite each other except with a massive dose of good fortune.

NO, the scores were correct 12 tricks were taken in 3nt, I was asked if we made the 6nt available. 6nt made, not bid.

AND if you actually read my post above you will see.....

jillybean, on 2022-November-14, 10:02, said:

6nt 6♣ 6♦

Such a routine hand, no one bid a slam.

Most opened 1nt - 3nt, I was hoping that playing weak nt and opening 1♦ may have helped us.
I hate missing 26 point slams.

So back off.

[LBengtsson]

jillybean, on 2022-November-14, 12:15, said:

NO, the scores were correct 12 tricks were taken in 3nt, I was asked if we made the 6nt available. 6nt made, not bid.

AND if you actually read my post above you will see.....

So back off.

Apologies! Backing off quickly Though I still think even contemplating a small slam on the cards a bad call. Change the North hand slightly to ♠xx ♥Ax ♦A10xxx ♣QJ10x and I would be a bit p***** at missing a slam. Only a queen makes a difference, and then it is only a 28-point 6NT slam.

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2022-November-14, 10:02, said:

---

6nt 6♣ 6♦

Such a routine hand, no one bid a slam.

Most opened 1nt - 3nt, I was hoping that playing weak nt and opening 1♦ may have helped us.
I hate missing 26 point slams.

Would opener also have bid 3NT with KJxx in diamonds? How about KQxx?

Forgive me for bringing in ancient history, but here is how Kaplan-Sheinwold handled the forcing single raise in a weak notrump context.

There, the single raise's minimum was "possible game opposite strong notrump."
.
Opener's 3NT rebid showed 18+ and guaranteed a 3-card opening. Their 2NT rebid showed balanced 15-17 and *denied* a good 4+ holding in the suit opened.

The rebid of the suit opened denied 15+ hcp.

All other bids promised 15+ and a hand suitable for a high contract in the minor opened, including a not-bad trump suit.

Why this digression? Because your 3-club limit raise removes opener's ability to distinguish good hands with bad trumps from those with good trumps.

Is it worth it to reserve the single raise to hands worth game opposite any unbalanced 12-count?

[jillybean]

LBengtsson, on 2022-November-14, 22:59, said:

Apologies! Backing off quickly Though I still think even contemplating a small slam on the cards a bad call. Change the North hand slightly to ♠xx ♥Ax ♦A10xxx ♣QJ10x and I would be a bit p***** at missing a slam. Only a queen makes a difference, and then it is only a 28-point 6NT slam.

Agree

bluenikki, on 2022-November-15, 09:09, said:

Would opener also have bid 3NT with KJxx in diamonds? How about KQxx?

Forgive me for bringing in ancient history, but here is how Kaplan-Sheinwold handled the forcing single raise in a weak notrump context.

There, the single raise's minimum was "possible game opposite strong notrump."
.
Opener's 3NT rebid showed 18+ and guaranteed a 3-card opening. Their 2NT rebid showed balanced 15-17 and *denied* a good 4+ holding in the suit opened.

The rebid of the suit opened denied 15+ hcp.

All other bids promised 15+ and a hand suitable for a high contract in the minor opened, including a not-bad trump suit.

Why this digression? Because your 3-club limit raise removes opener's ability to distinguish good hands with bad trumps from those with good trumps.

Is it worth it to reserve the single raise to hands worth game opposite any unbalanced 12-count?

Yes, I think single raise to explore game+ makes a lot of sense but we are stealing bidding space from one auction to give to this.
So the auction here would have started 1♦:2♦ 3♥
and a gf minor raise goes via criss cross? 1♦:3♣