edNZ

Yes, I think you have the answer..... Firstly, they MUST ruff the 3rd ♠ (else you can just pitch your last ♦ loser and you are home. So, they ruff (I think it irrelevant which trump they use), and you must overruff. Then, cross to A♣ and play that 4th spade. Again, they must ruff otherwise you are home, but when they do ruff, you pitch your ♦. Now you can trump any continuation, and draw RHO's remaining trump. Well done, and thanks !

[hv=d=e&n=saqt98hakt92dajca&w=s7654h854dkqt98c8&e=sj2hqj763d63cqt94&s=sk3hd7542ckj76532]399|300|[/hv] I didn't beat myself up for not finding a winning line for 6C at the table, but I still can't find it now ! Our auction was an inelegant 3C - 6C and Deep Finesse says 6 is makeable from either side of the table. I received a KD lead. Seems you eventually need to pitch a D on a S, because it seems tricky even double dummy to shorten your trumps sufficiently in preparation for a possible coup. A C loser is inevitable perforce. So, can anyone unravel the necessary timing to show me how to make this slam ? Cheers, Ed

Thanks for all your replies and comments. It seems that there is little in the way of absolute reason for 'direct denies' being employed. I did, however, come to a vague conclusion that (when playing a weak NT) the bid of 3NT prevents LHO from bidding 3 of their major which, in turn, may help their partner save in 4M once in a blue moon. It also prevents LHO from bidding a new suit at the 3 level which would need to be a decent suit, and effectively lead directional. Seems joshs also believes this is a possible reason also :-) i.e. 1NT - (2H) - 3NT cuts out the ability for LHO to bid 3H (or even to mention 3C or 3D which would have to be a decent suit, and lead directional). I already use a version of Lebensohl if partner has reversed and I have a poor hand, although in reality it comes up extremely rarely. I am also open to using it after a weak 2 opening by opps, although I am a little less convinced that 2NT is not useful as a natural bid in this instance. All in good time....

My understanding is that if a 2-suited overcall includes the suit being bid, then Leb can be used. e.g. 2H showing Hearts and a Minor is deemed a 'Natural' overcall. However, 2D showing both Majors is NOT natural, as neither major is specifically bid. Bidding after an artificial overcall seems to be a related, but separate topic. Good question on the'number of stoppers'. I assume one is sufficient. In an ideal world a 'decent' stopper would be preferable, but, equally, 1NT may be able to provide further assistance in the suit in any case.

Am currently adding this to my system, and it seems a fairly universal treatment that a direct bid of 3NT denies a stopper in the overcalled suit, whilst a 1NT - (2X) - 2NT - 3C - 3X - 3NT sequence confirms a stopper is held by responder. Am interested to hear if there is a good/logical reason for this please. Its just that it seems vaguely counter-intuitive and so I would like to know why the system has evolved in this fashion. If it is of any relevance, I play a 12-14 NT - and this is one of the reasons I am anxious to include it - as, by implication, interference is more likely over this range, than a stronger range. Any comments on the overall usefulness of this convention also welcomed. If it is worthwhile then I am happy to use it (and it seems that way). But if it doesnt 'add much value' then its probably not a good idea to include something which is reasonably complicated :) Thanks.