We missed a slam on this hand. So did the other two North-South pairs, but it bothered me because I could sort of see it coming.
Board #3
South dealer
East-West vulnerable
| | North
♠ A K
♥ A J 10 9 6
♦ K Q 10
♣ A K 7
| | West
♠ J 4 3
♥ Q 4
♦ A J 4 3
♣ J 8 4 2
| | East
♠ 9 7 5 2
♥ 8
♦ 8 2
♣ Q 10 9 6 5 3
| | | South
♠ Q 10 8 6
♥ K 7 5 3 2
♦ 9 7 6 5
♣ ——
| |
|
| | | | |
| South | West | North | East |
| P | 2♣ | P |
| 2♦ | P | 2N | P |
| 3♣* | P | 3♥* | P |
| 4♥ | P | P | P |
| | | |
* 3♣ is Puppet Stayman. 3♥ shows five hearts.
I sat South all night. I suspect everyone's bidding was the same. When I tabled my dummy I proclaimed to my partner: "Depending on what you have, we will probably make 6 or 3." The value of my hand depended, I thought, on how many club losers my void would forestall. I could not think of any way to gain or impart any useful information. As it happens, North does not need to ruff any clubs in order to take twelve tricks.
I do not intend to criticize the bidding by the three Norths. I probably would have done the same. I just wondered if there might be another approach that did a better job of letting both players have more information about the fit of the two hands.
Scenario 1: Suppose that North takes into account his five-card suit and the two tens to upgrade his hand to 25 points. Then instead of 2NT he bids 3NT in round 3. South would still bid Stayman (or, in our case, Puppet Stayman) in round 3. North would show his five hearts. Would the knowledge that partner had 25+ points be enough to impel South to jump to 6♥? I think that I would have. My partner claims to have game in his hand, and I have a first-round control, a second-round control, and a queen on the side. I also know that we have ten trumps, which means that even if the opposition holds the queen, we should be all right.
Scenario 2: There is a response system (called Kokish Relays) that allows the opener to show the 25+ balanced hand with a 2NT bid. This would give North-South an extra level for exploration. After North responds to Puppet Stayman with 3♥, South can make a control-showing bid in clubs. North should then bid 4♦, which shows controls in both spades (the suit skipped by South) and diamonds. At that point it should seem to South that it is unlikely that East-West can take the first two tricks. 6♥ has become a reasonable option.
Scenario 3: What if North treats his hand as unbalanced? Instead of bidding 2NT in the second round, he could bid 2♥. The most descriptive bid for South would be 4♣, an unnecessary jump that must be a splinter showing shortness in clubs and at least four hearts. North will probably bid Blackwood, in which case South will need to decide whether to show his void in clubs or just show an odd number of key cards. In the latter case North might ask for the queen of the trump suit. That card is not in South's hand, but he knows that his side has at least ten trumps. So, he should lie and answer in the affirmative. Seriously. I don't think that North will stop short of slam in either case.
This one hand doesn't prove anything, but it does provide food for thought. I realized many years ago that the 2♣ bid with the 2♦ waiting response was probably the clumsiest part of the systems most commonly played in North America. I have spent a lot of time thinking of ways to improve it.
Rock-crusher hands like North's don't come up that often. Nevertheless, I think that it is appropriate to work hard on handling them efficiently. It is very satisfying to reach a good slam, and very frustrating to miss one. If we would have bid the slam on hand #3, I would have had a much more pleasant drive back home.