[apollo1201]

MPs, last table of the session (8 tables c 3 boards) where we already bid and made 6D, 6S and 7NT (all without needing a single finesse or friendly breaks, the latter I counted at least 13 tricks and indeed had 14 when partner tabled her hand after the lead)

My partner and I gently argue over who chickened out on this last slam but each one blames themselves and not the other. No I should have gone for it.

These are the hands and the bidding (all green, N dealer, opps silent throughout)

N
AQxxx
xx
Axxx
Qx

S
Kxxx
AKQx
Jx
Axx

1S - 2C (not GF with this partner, nat unless strong and fit but usually 3+, no Jacoby available)
2D - 3S (SI)
4S (min, not interested, hand not suitable for slam) - pass (can bid on with a powerhouse, here we know all rounded suit losers of partner can be disposed of on AKQ and A)

Other choices than 4S:
- start cueing controls (4D then) if OK for slam
- 3NT undiscussed with this partner but is usually played here as mildly enthousiastic about slam, usually a hand with adequate strength or structure but with a critical issue that is often bad trumps

So, who should have done more?

With S splitting 2-2, it was an easy route to 12 tricks and around 50% nationwide.

[jillybean]

I think North gave up too soon, it's a full opening hand. 4♦/3♠ can't hurt.
(fix your system)

[mike777]

70% North, 2 keys and QS and QC, great hand when pard makes slam try

30% South for playing this poor system and knowing partner is this conservative with a slam hand, smile.

[WasWinM]

No blame anywhere. Is it really all that great of slam? The expected 3-1 trump break means you can't draw trumps and ruff two diamonds, plus the hearts better not be 6-1.
I've been in worse; I wouldn't be in this one.

[DavidKok]

Having to jump with strong hands is awkward. The 3♠ bid consumes a lot of valuable space, and leaves little room for describing strength.
North could have made a different bid over 3♠, but I understand the reluctance. You don't know South's shape, you don't know South's strength, you don't know degree of fit, you hold minimum HCP and partner might take you too seriously. Some gadget like (Non)Serious 3NT might have helped, but if you're going to adjust the agreements I'd focus on saving a full level of bidding space on the previous round.

[apollo1201]

 DavidKok, on 2026-June-05, 10:28, said:

Having to jump with strong hands is awkward. The 3♠ bid consumes a lot of valuable space, and leaves little room for describing strength.

I'd focus on saving a full level of bidding space on the previous round.

Yeah need to switch to 2/1 GF but this new part is old school, for sure 2S would be ideal if forcing but here it would show something like

Jx
xxx
Kxx
AKxxx

Obliged to take pref to 2S with no stopper in the last suit and insufficient strength to force to game…it is not always passed but here clearly would be!

What do you think of Jacoby that seems quite popular in NA? The auction would have been somehow worse, 1S 2NT 4S now what. I understand some use 3C to save space for all minimums, so we would also be at 3S, as S still does not give up yet over 3C. Now N could more easily move with 4D?

[DavidKok]

I do not play Jacoby 2NT, and prefer Maas. But this is not nearly as popular.

On a J2NT 1♠-2NT auction, North has a non-minimum. There is room to debate hand evaluation, but I would never jump to 4♠. Additionally, again, I think having to jump on strong auctions is terrible and I would strongly prefer a version of J2NT where that jump is either exceedingly rare or left undefined. Anything to keep partner from excessive jumping on my game forcing auction.

I am happy bidding 1♠-1NT with that 2=3=3=5 example hand.

[pescetom]

Jillybean needs to lay out the cards, I need a hand diagram

MP

---

If this is an ATB then I assign it firmly to the methods.

[mike777]

apollo1201, on 2026-June-05, 11:18, said:

Yeah need to switch to 2/1 GF but this new part is old school, for sure 2S would be ideal if forcing but here it would show something like

Jx
xxx
Kxx
AKxxx

Obliged to take pref to 2S with no stopper in the last suit and insufficient strength to force to game…it is not always passed but here clearly would be!

What do you think of Jacoby that seems quite popular in NA? The auction would have been somehow worse, 1S 2NT 4S now what. I understand some use 3C to save space for all minimums, so we would also be at 3S, as S still does not give up yet over 3C. Now N could more easily move with 4D?

Playing modern Jacoby 2nt, I think Larry Cohen has a write up, free online, north can show a minimum 5422 promising 4diamonds
enough encouragement given south has an adjusted 5.5 losing trick count hand, that now south will risk RKC


If you evaluate this north hand as a nonminimum, then south will always drive it to slam.

[P_Marlowe]

North should find another bid than 4S, 4D.

This does not mean, that over 4D you will end up in 6S, but 4S basically say:
"Sry, I opened".
4D would deny the King of clubs, South can bid 4H (whatever), 4S by North,
and this may be the end of the auction.

If you had this seq., same score, my comment would be: Next board.

Now seeing both hands, the following thinking is maybe not Double Dummy,
but easier, when you see both hands:

Assuming 2D showes 54, AKQ in hearts and the Ace of clubs cover the 4 outside
loosers, the diamond Cue should mean, that you have at most one l quick looser in
diamonds, and it is hitting the shortage, the cue may be based on the King of
diamond.

If you count tricks: 5S, 1 ... 2 diamond ruffs, 3H, 1C, 1 ... 2D
... maybe giving up after North showed the diamond control is too pessimistic.

The way to check, that spades will run is RKCB, it will also tel you if p has the
Ace of diamonds or the King.

But all this starts with the diamond control bid, after that if South counts
the tricks it may well be worth a shot.

So blaming this on methods is the easy way out.

[pescetom]

apollo1201, on 2026-June-05, 08:46, said:

4S (min, not interested, hand not suitable for slam) - pass (can bid on with a powerhouse, here we know all rounded suit losers of partner can be disposed of on AKQ and A)

Other choices than 4S:
- start cueing controls (4D then) if OK for slam
- 3NT undiscussed with this partner but is usually played here as mildly enthousiastic about slam, usually a hand with adequate strength or structure but with a critical issue that is

P_Marlowe, on 2026-June-05, 14:42, said:

North should find another bid than 4S, 4D.

This does not mean, that over 4D you will end up in 6S, but 4S basically say:
"Sry, I opened".
4D would deny the King of clubs, South can bid 4H (whatever), 4S by North,
and this may be the end of the auction.

If you had this seq., same score, my comment would be: Next board.

Now seeing both hands, the following thinking is maybe not Double Dummy,
but easier, when you see both hands:

Assuming 2D showes 54, AKQ in hearts and the Ace of clubs cover the 4 outside
loosers, the diamond Cue should mean, that you have at most one l quick looser in
diamonds, and it is hitting the shortage, the cue may be based on the King of
diamond.

If you count tricks: 5S, 1 ... 2 diamond ruffs, 3H, 1C, 1 ... 2D
... maybe giving up after North showed the diamond control is too pessimistic.

The way to check, that spades will run is RKCB, it will also tel you if p has the
Ace of diamonds or the King.

But all this starts with the diamond control bid, after that if South counts
the tricks it may well be worth a shot.

So blaming this on methods is the easy way out.

He clarified above that the methods say that 4S is "minimum, not interested" and that 4D is "OK for slam" and that 3NT might be "mildly enthusiastic about slam" (that you are already enthusiastic about).
If those are the methods they are already clearly inadequate.
But the root cause is that Responder cannot force to game with first bid, whether or not showing fit.
I blame it on the methods, give them better ones and then we can see how they go wrong

[mikeh]

I play a modern style of J2N.

We permit a jump to 4S only with a balanced hand that was stretching to open and absolutely could never…ever…have 2 aces.

So while, unlike David, I consider the north hand to be minimum, it’s far too good to jump to 4S.

So our auction

1S 2N 3C…any minimum other than a horrible hand that could well have not opened….

Now 3D asks for shortness. 3C denied any void…we reveal holding a void via 3S over 2N

So

1S 2N 3C 3D, no stiff.

3H cue

Having limited the hand already north needn’t worry about being played for more than he holds. Responder has suggested some interest in slam opposite a minimum so opener is easily worth 4D.

Responder can now bid 4H which not only delivers both the AK of hearts, or an unlikely stiff Ace, but also promises a club control. The 4D cue denied first or second round club control so responder would not continue to cue bid without a club control.

So far this is easy and I am certain that my partnership would get to 4H.

Cue bidding below game never promises a huge hand…merely ‘some interest’ in the context of the auction to date. Given that opener is known to be balanced or semi balanced…in our methods known to be some 5332 or 5422, since our 2S shows 10-13, and we’d not bid 3C with a 14 count 6322, opener has a decent hand in context.

But I’m not at all sure that it’s quite strong enough to go by 4S. I can’t be objective, since I’ve seen the hands. Indeed, since I don’t know what north could usefully bid over 4H, I’m inclined to think he’d bid 4S. But at the table I’d be worried that I may have dithered over my decision and that a slow 4S would effectively bar partner so I might create something to negate or at least greatly reduce the ethical problem that a slow 4S creates.

I think it clear that if north does anything other than 4S, we reach slam. I gather it made at the table but, as others have noted, this wouldn’t be one I’d be upset about if we missed it.


Btw, it doesn’t necessarily need 2-2 spades, though that would make life easier. If they’re 3-1, we need the hand with 3 to hold 4 diamonds. Not likely but not extremely unlikely.

Given that I don’t play the OP methods, and that slam is only so-so, I’d not allocate any unequal responsibility. Had 2C promised clubs, then I’d blame north for not giving weight to his club holding, but it’s apparent that 2C didn’t say much about the suit

[P_Marlowe]

pescetom, on 2026-June-05, 16:26, said:

He clarified above that the methods say that 4S is "minimum, not interested" and that 4D is "OK for slam" and that 3NT might be "mildly enthusiastic about slam" (that you are already enthusiastic about).
If those are the methods they are already clearly inadequate.
But the root cause is that Responder cannot force to game with first bid, whether or not showing fit.
I blame it on the methods, give them better ones and then we can see how they go wrong

Sure, but I have 2KC (even 2 Aces) and the Queen of trumps.

This is a suitable min. Otherwise they should show me a hand, they consider a suitable min.

The only question that the partnership may discuss in depth is, if 2D really showes 4+,
or if it still could be based on a 3 carder, i.e. a 5332 shape with hearts weakness.

If 5332 is an option, the 5422 would make it even more suitable.

My take / assumption is, that they would open the hand without the Q in clubs, it still would
be suitable.