[Mbodell]

I think it depends to a reasonable amount on the field strength, the field consistency, and your place in the field. In a lot of mixed/weak fields a good player will be looking at 65+% just for collecting 12 tricks in 3nt so bidding 6 to score 90+% needs good odds when it risks <10% when it goes down. But in a better, more consistent field, I think you expect more players to take their tricks and more players to bid it, so the odds needed to make goes down.

[gnasher]

mike777, on 2011-December-22, 16:10, said:

Interesting thread thanks for posting.

As a nonexpert I always thought at MP one should not bid slams without solid reasons that it should be almost cold or at least the odds are heavily in your favor.

I wonder just how good should the odds be to bid slams at MP? How do we calculate that on this deal?

On this one people are blasting or girding their loins and in some sense hoping.

In any event they were right, slam makes.

Suppose that we're trying to decide between 6♣ and 3NT, and we think 6NT is probably a poor contract.

If we think that the entire field is in 3NT or 6♣, and will play the cards as well as we do, we should bid 6♣ is we think it's over 50%.

Some reasons for being more cautious than that are:
- We think some of the field will be in partscore or the wrong game.
- We think some of the field will go down in 6NT.
- We think our card play is above average.
Any of these means that bidding slam has more to lose and less to gain.

[Phil]

FWIW, this event is one of the strongest pairs events in Southern California.

The 4 session pairs or the Calcutta at the LA regional might be better, but not by much.

Not sure if that factors into your decision making.

[jillybean]

I sent this hand to my partner and our auction was;

1♣:2N
3♥:4♣
4♦*:4♥*
4♠*:5♦*
6♣

4♦ kickback, 4♥ 1 or 4
4♠ queen ask, 5♦ yes, and the ♦K

[mike777]

jillybean, on 2011-December-24, 13:25, said:

I sent this hand to my partner and our auction was;

1♣:2N
3♥:4♣
4♦*:4♥*
4♠*:5♦*
6♣

4♦ kickback, 4♥ 1 or 4
4♠ queen ask, 5♦ yes, and the ♦K

Ijust did with a pard also.....pard bid 2c inverted......hated the 2nt chosen at the table.

if forced to bid 2nt he also bid 3nt he noted this hand is really perfect cards.

[Zelandakh]

AQ AJT Ax K9xxxx
Jxx Qxx Kxx AQxx

A little rushed at the moment so without much thought (but I think it gets the job done)

1C = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any
... - 1S = no 4 card major, GF
1N = relay
... - 2H = balanced
2S = relay
... - 3H = 3334
3S = relay
... - 4D = extras, 3 controls
4H = relay
... - 4N = club control, no spade control
6N

[jmcw]

MrAce, on 2011-December-21, 10:38, said:

How nice, if i were to go slam i would seriously consider a ♣ slam since 6 NT is probably wrongsided.

Pass is out of question
3♣ also since it will be passed out
.
<snip>------------------

Does anyone think 3♣ should be forcing?

[aguahombre]

jmcw, on 2011-December-29, 11:31, said:

Does anyone think 3♣ should be forcing?

Maybe someone does. But responder has only invited game, and having to pass 2NT with long clubs and a known 3+ (probably 4)fit instead of play 3C seems wrong.

[Phil]

Suggesting 3♣ as forcing is crazy. You might as well make 2N as GF (which isn't a bad idea btw).

[aguahombre]

Phil, on 2011-December-29, 12:28, said:

Suggesting 3♣ as forcing is crazy. You might as well make 2N as GF (which isn't a bad idea btw).

Yes, of course. 2NT forcing is a good idea; it just doesn't happen to be what the OP gave us to work with.