[mw64ahw]

---

Spoiler

Do I ask for shape or show shape to get to ♦

---

[Cyberyeti]

Our auction is unusual, some of it depends whether you play 2/1 GF, our auction

1♠-2♥(not GF)
2N (GF not necessarily balanced)-3♣(cheapest sensible bid, can be Hxx)
3♦-3♥(6)
3N(5143/5152 not huge extras)-4♦ (enough extras that we can afford to play 4N if partner bids it)
4♥(kickback)-5♣(2 without Q)
5♠(I have the ♠K or Q, bid 7 with the other, no ♥K)-6♦(no spade honour, no K♣/♥)

[pescetom]

This one is tricky for us because the diamonds fit emerges late and we have fairly rigid rules about fixing trumps, plus we already bid hearts twice naturally.
But a last resort meta-rule says that 4NT is RKCB if partner has repeated his suit and we have no lower forcing bid to fix trumps, so that should do the trick here if partner remembers (I wouldn't blame him much if he passes it as natural).

1♠ - 2♥ (GF 5 cards)
3♦ (extras) - 3♥
4♦ - 4NT (RKCB(♦))
5♦(03) - 6♦
p

[gszes]

my 2/1gf
1s
2h
3d 16+
3n
this unfortunate auction never learns about the 6th heart or 5th diamond but the singleton spade and icko QJx of clubs are a dia slam turn off anyway. If opener is a bit better i hope they bid 4h with something like AQxxx KQ KQJxx x then blackwood to 6h.

[LBengtsson]

I will also honest: I doubt except with specific partnership bidding and agreements (like pescetom and Cyberyeti) that I would end up in 6♦ here. That the hands do not fit that well, and with 16 points + 11 points = 27 points 3NT looks more than enough. Small slams usually require more points (including distribution). Not surprisingly the Kaplan & Rubens evaluator assesses the hands at 19.55 and 14.35 and that is good enough to be in a small slam with a fit, so if a partnership can get there that is good.

[smerriman]

Same simple auction to 3NT as gszes. Even looking at the two hands, I'm not sure I'm that unhappy to avoid 6♦, though maybe it has reasonable chances.

[LBengtsson]

smerriman, on 2022-October-20, 20:44, said:

Even looking at the two hands, I'm not sure I'm that unhappy to avoid 6♦, though maybe it has reasonable chances.

I was going to say the same. It is one for a simulation to work out whether a 6♦ slam is a good percentage contract with the cards given. Assuming a break of 3-2 (68%) and a trump lead. The hand looks a 50/50 slam, entirely depending on a finesse and the other suits breaking favorably. It is the sort of hand you would gamble on being in a small slam playing IMPs when you need you are losing a match and need to catch up quickly.

[mycroft]

I agree. I'll pay off to those who find 6♦ here; and make it back next time when the diamonds are 4-1 the other way.

Not saying it's great, or bad; but we'd find 3NT and I'm not upset about it.

For some reason I can't get my simulator to work; when I have brain cells free for fixing configuration on my non-work computer, I'll try it. [Edit: found my problem. Can't read. I'm getting similar numbers to John (780/1000, 3NT 1000/1000) with similar concerns (which black finesse to try, do I set up spades or hearts, ...)]

In case I still can't read...

Spoiler

predeal = {'W': '4 AJT864 A53 QJ9', 'E': 'AQ762 7 KQJ94 A4'}
TABLE = {'6d': 0, '3nt': 0}


def do(deal):
    TABLE['6d'] += (deal.dd_score('6DE') > 0)
    TABLE['3nt'] += (deal.dd_score('3NE') > 0)


def final(n_tries):
    print(TABLE)
    print(f"Tries: {n_tries}")

[johnu]

smerriman, on 2022-October-20, 20:44, said:

Same simple auction to 3NT as gszes. Even looking at the two hands, I'm not sure I'm that unhappy to avoid 6♦, though maybe it has reasonable chances.

I ran a quick simulation and got about 80% double dummy success which is a lot higher than I first thought. But sometimes you need to take a spade finesse or a diamond finesse and you don't get to peek.