[neilkaz]

It's IMPs so any making slam is good and the difference between making and not making may swing the match. Lacking much in the way of agreements I'd just bid 6♣. Right siding doesn't seem to be much of an issue with my hand although if it comes down to a squeeze running ♣ I'd prefer PD's hand be hidden. Anyhow..give the OP constraints..6♣

.. neilkaz ..

[Zelandakh]

dcohio, on 2012-February-08, 11:30, said:

This is what I use with my partner and we love it. 2N-3N shows a 5S4H hand with game values, it is then openers choice to pass or correct to a major.

2NT-3S forces opener to rebid 3NT. Responder either passes or bids the following:

4C: slam try in clubs, opener can bid 4N/5c to sign-off otherwise answers RKC for clubs
4D: slam try in diamonds, as above
4H: 5/5+ minors, shortness in hearts. Opener can bid 4N/5m to sign off, otherwise answers 6-keycard blackwood for both minors
4S: 5/5+ minors, shortness in spades, as above

Slightly better still (imho) is to handle the 5♠4♥ hand through 3♣ and the single suited diamond hand with 4♣. That leaves 3♠ promising slam interest and 5 or more clubs so Opener can show support directly. Otherwise, Opener bids 3NT and then:-

4♣ = slam try in clubs
4♦ = both minors without void
4M = both minors with void in suit bid

I think the benefits from 3♠ promising clubs more than makes up for the (admittedly crippling) loss of Gerber!

[gnasher]

Why do you care whether we've got two fast heart losers? If we get to slam on an uninformative auction, the chances of them cashing them are well under 50%.

Missing two aces is a bigger problem. Suppose that they never lead a ckub, 3rd hand can read the opening lead, and otherwise their suit choices are random.
1/4 of the time the player on lead will have both aces.
1/4 x 2/3 of the time the other player will have both but one of the ace-suits will be led.
1/2 x 1/2 of the time the aces will be divided but they'll manage to cash them.

Hence, if I can, I'll check for aces and put partner in 6♣ (6NT at matchpoints). If we can't play clubs from partner's side, I'll put him in 6NT. If I can't check for aces, I'll bid slam anyway.

In most partnerships, I wouldn't be able to ask for aces directly, and my method to show clubs would be 4♥. That has the downside of allowing a lead-directing double. Even if I played some other suit as a transfer to clubs, they'd still have inferences about the failure to double it.

So, a good hand for Gerber.

[han]

A good hand for 2NT - 4H optional RKC for clubs. Hey, that's what I play!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

neilkaz, on 2012-February-08, 11:49, said:

Is it slightly better to switch the meanings of 4m to right side the contract?

Yes, I believe Fred Hamilton suggested that.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zelandakh, on 2012-February-09, 01:38, said:

Slightly better still (imho) is to handle the 5♠4♥ hand through 3♣ and the single suited diamond hand with 4♣. That leaves 3♠ promising slam interest and 5 or more clubs so Opener can show support directly. Otherwise, Opener bids 3NT and then:-

4♣ = slam try in clubs
4♦ = both minors without void
4M = both minors with void in suit bid

I think the benefits from 3♠ promising clubs [insert: or both minors ] more than makes up for the (admittedly crippling) loss of Gerber!

Say it ain't so .... I have to give up GERBER ? lol

But seriously, your two posts ( # 15 and # 22 ) show a profound improvement for Responder describing slammish hands with one or both minors ( for 2NT auctions ).

[jdeegan]

Yes there is a scientific method applicable to this hand. It is called probability theory. The combined probability that you have two quick ♥ losers, AND that the opponents will cash out on opening lead is very close to zero. You might consider blasting on this hand since it will make it harder on the defenders.

[Statto]

You just walked into my check-raise. This is bridge, not poker

[JLOGIC]

Pretty easy gerber, whats the problem?