[mikl_plkcc]

We have just a hand where we got a poor result because we ended up 3NT where everyone else bid slam.

---

The bidding went 2♣ - 2♥ (7-9 HCP) - 3NT.

The scoring was IMP. I was seriously thinking if I should bid 5♣ over 3NT but didn't do so, and we ended up 3NT+3, while everyone else bid a slam (although one table gone 7♣-1).

If I bid 5♣ the opener would have gone 6.

If the opener first rebid was 2NT I would have gone 3NT because our system doesn't have a mechanism to show a long minor after a 2NT opening.

How would you have bid slam on this hand?

[smerriman]

I don't like the idea of showing a specific number of points to a 2♣ opening at all; shape and where your values actually lie is far more important information.

2♣ - 3♣ positive - 4♣ seems the simplest, after which you can settle in slam once you've discovered you're missing the ace.

[steve2005]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-January-10, 18:22, said:

2♥ (7-9 HCP)

Showing hcp ranges rarely gives you useful information. Only when both hands are flat does it help.
If you must show points you should show control points.
So 2♦=0-1, 2♥=2 controls etc

So if responder bids 2♥ showing 2 controls you know either 2 black Kings or A♦

[mw64ahw]

Classically 2♣-3♣
but I play
2♣-2♦
2N 22-23-3♠ puppet to 3N
3N-4♣ SI ♣

[bluenikki]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-January-10, 18:22, said:

We have just a hand where we got a poor result because we ended up 3NT where everyone else bid slam.

---

The bidding went 2♣ - 2♥ (7-9 HCP) - 3NT.

The scoring was IMP. I was seriously thinking if I should bid 5♣ over 3NT but didn't do so, and we ended up 3NT+3, while everyone else bid a slam (although one table gone 7♣-1).

If I bid 5♣ the opener would have gone 6.

If the opener first rebid was 2NT I would have gone 3NT because our system doesn't have a mechanism to show a long minor after a 2NT opening.

How would you have bid slam on this hand?

Like other commenters, I dislike the pointcount responses to 2♣, but that is not relevant to the hand. And I don't understand opener's 3NT bid; if that was intended as fast arrival, get rid of it.

But the real problem was that responder's hand screams slam. If you lack the mechanisms to express that, get some.

[bluenikki]

steve2005, on 2025-January-10, 21:02, said:

Showing hcp ranges rarely gives you useful information. Only when both hands are flat does it help.

So if you are emotionally attached to hcp responses, maybe you should restrict them to hands with no 6-card suit or 5-5. Find some way to show such hands above the point where your hcp steps leave off.

[pescetom]

I dislike the point count response and the clubs suit doesn't meet our requirements for responder to "interfere" with a minor (2 of top 3 honours), although I have an open mind about that agreement.
So opener would get to bid 2NT, over which responder bids 3S about minors, which opener initially declines with 3NT but responder insists with clubs and we discover the missing Ace.

[mike777]

Unfortunately reading these comments shows just how complicated bidding is without partnership detailed agreements even in the natural bidding forum.

I feel your frustration...

[jdiana]

It also shows why I hate minor suits.

[mw64ahw]

bluenikki, on 2025-January-11, 09:27, said:

Like other commenters, I dislike the pointcount responses to 2♣, but that is not relevant to the hand. And I don't understand opener's 3NT bid; if that was intended as fast arrival, get rid of it.

But the real problem was that responder's hand screams slam. If you lack the mechanisms to express that, get some.

Presumably ♥ are shown via 2N so you have to bid 3N to show the balanced hand?

[jillybean]

Good problem and I don’t have a good follow up for responder holding clubs.

2C 2D (A or K+)
2N 3C
3H 4C?

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2025-January-11, 15:03, said:

Good problem and I don’t have a good follow up for responder holding clubs.

2C 2D (A or K+)
2N 3C
3H 4C?

Agree, pretty straight forward.

[bluenikki]

mw64ahw, on 2025-January-11, 14:37, said:

Presumably ♥ are shown via 2N so you have to bid 3N to show the balanced hand?

As I said, get rid of it.

Easy way (but maybe not natural enough): with a long suit in an unbalanced hand, opener bids 2 under at the 3-level. With tolerance, responder bids 1 under.

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2025-January-11, 15:13, said:

Agree, pretty straight forward.

If you think that showing a 4 card major at 3 level when you could have 5 and are not sure if partner has 4 is a good idea, then yes.

[bluenikki]

mike777, on 2025-January-11, 11:50, said:

Unfortunately reading these comments shows just how complicated bidding is without partnership detailed agreements even in the natural bidding forum.

I feel your frustration...

But aren't you forced into complications by step responses of any kind?

[mike777]

 pescetom, on 2025-January-11, 15:24, said:

If you think that showing a 4 card major at 3 level when you could have 5 and are not sure if partner has 4 is a good idea, then yes.

Don't play puppet, never care
This auction is almost always slam try in clubs.
However on this auction over 4C
4D-rkc for clubs
4h- natural 5h,can't remember this ever happened
4S- natural 4s
4nt- natural to play.

[mike777]

 bluenikki, on 2025-January-11, 15:29, said:

But aren't you forced into complications by step responses of any kind?

What?