[han]

VM1973, on 2011-July-07, 15:02, said:

6NT is a good contract. I don't see the point of introducing a 3-card suit at the four level with a bid that might be misunderstood on the off chance that you're cold for 7... but you can play as you please.

If Jillybean was happy enough to get to 6NT, presumably she would not have posted the hand. She was probably curious how better players would have bid, using agreements that are not so different from hers. (see kenrexford's flags for an example of completely useless information for B/I players)

Presumably Jillybean was not curious how beginners with agreements like "4C is always Gerber" bid this when she posted the hand. And beginners who do have this agreement and are interested enough to read this thread would be well served to know that some advanced players do not have this agreement and in fact think it is so bad that they didn't even consider the possibility.

Not only is "4C always Gerber" a terrible agreement, it also suggests that asking for aces is very important, more important than showing your hand and finding a fit. For two complete beginners it is probably quite useless to show the complete pattern of their hand, as their partners would not be able to use this information anyway. Hopefully they get stronger though, and at some point they get to the point where bids like splinters and patterning out do become useful.

[daveharty]

vuroth, on 2011-July-05, 12:48, said:

I would have chosen 4NT. Should we blast to 6 with 32 HCP and 3 aces covered?

Maybe you shouldn't blast to six, but only because you might miss a good grand, I'd be a lot more worried about that than about going down in six. I think calling the South hand "only" 17 hcp opposite a 1NT opener is selling it way short, it is a moose.