[Lord Molyb]

---

3NT N +2

ATB for missing 6♦
X was t/o
1NT was balanced 6-9 or a bad 10 with a spade stopper
in 6♦ declarer ruffs the second spade high, plays ♥AK ♣AK, and, assuming neither player has ruffed, then crossruffs the rest. With worse diamond spots declarer can take the marked heart and club finesses (east is almost sure to have all 12 missing HCP using trumps as entries to dummy

[aguahombre]

100% blame to the shuffling machine for giving North two nice doubletons, two big primes, and nothing wasted in the spade suit. We can't find out about that stuff, North's 1NT advance was just fine, and so we go on to the next board.

[billw55]

I think defending 1♠x also outscores 3NT. It seems declarer should lose two or three spades and all his nonspades, for -1100 or so. Anyone for passing with the north cards?

[rmnka447]

It's just an unlucky hand. Swap the ♣ A in advancer's hand for the ♠ K in opener's hand and 6 ♦ never makes. 3 NT then is the premier spot.

Dbler can't know advancer has the magic hand to make 6 with 28-29 total points. Advancer could just have the 6 point hand and slam never makes.

Bidding isn't a perfect art where you can bid slam on every hand that makes 6 or stay out of slam on every hand that doesn't.

[cherdano]

aguahombre, on 2013-October-18, 09:23, said:

100% blame to the shuffling machine for giving North two nice doubletons, two big primes, and nothing wasted in the spade suit. We can't find out about that stuff, North's 1NT advance was just fine, and so we go on to the next board.

I think you get the price for the most self-contradictory post of the year.

North has two nice doubletons, nothing wasted in spade opposite partner's shortness, great trump support for diamonds and prime cards. He should bid 3♦ not 1NT.

[mikeh]

I don't think there is much blame here.

S seems completely blameless: he knows we have 27-29 hcp, more or less, and no great source of tricks, so while making an overtrick or two isn't bizarre, having a slam is.

Thus any blame has to fall on North, but I just don't see 1N as a big error.

I do think it has a little matchpointitis about it, but 3♦ isn't a compelling beautiful bid either. We have only a 4 card suit, altho it is chunky, and would any of us be surprised to buy Qxx or Axx in dummy?

I'd say that N was guilty of a minor misdemeanour (pun coincidental), but that such a misdemeanour left him wholly responsible for the result.

Once again, as is so often the case, these sorts of problems are more prone to attract reliable answers if only one hand is posted. Nobody in their right mind could blame S here, so it might have been better to see how the votes broke down for N's suggested advance of the double, without showing the world that 3♦ is the winning call on this actual hand.

[MrAce]

To me % 100 S

He has an easy 3♠ bid over 1NT imho. N could have started differently but that did not cause the damage.

S has a hand which is very easy to describe. S does not have a hand to make decision vs 1 NT bid which may even have a 5 card minor 5332 hand with a spade stopper anywhere between (5) 6- 9 hcp. Very easy to miss slam, with all these spots, hooks behind opener. South was just lazy.

AJx
xxx
xx
Qxxxx

JTxx
xx
Jxx
Axxx