Is this obvious?

[lamford]

Err, it's a lot better than 50:50 in 6N, K♠ onside or hearts 3:3 or stiff J

91.3% with "perfect" play and defence, according to Bridge Analyser, and I gave no intermediates to the declarer or dummy. You have some very powerful threats for a squeeze, and 11 top tricks. And aren't you cold with hearts 4-2 if they do not lead a spade through the queen?

 

And I do not regard having a sixth diamond as being "very slightly different", as suggested by Ken.

 

And bidding 7NT over 6NT, as suggested in one of your auctions, is hopeless. 7D must be right, as you can ruff out the hearts in many layouts.

[Cyberyeti]

And bidding 7NT over 6NT, as suggested in one of your auctions, is hopeless. 7D must be right, as you can ruff out the hearts in many layouts.

 

True, 7♦ is a much better bid, but 7N is far from hopeless, particularly at MPs.

[Zelandakh]

CY's second start to the auction seems pretty obvious to me, probably to be followed by a few cue bids and GSF.

 

2♣ - 2♦;

3♦ - 3♥;

3NT - 4♦;

4♠ - 5♥;

5♠ - 5NT;

7♦

 

is the kind of auction a pick up pair could have, albeit most likely not with 100% certainty of success.

[kenrexford]

I must have missed it. But, another simple auction starts with 2NT as the heart positive. This seems fairly common, and that gets out of the way.

 

 

2C-2NT-P

3D-4D

 

After that, Opener needs a special asking bid agreement like VKCB or 5H as an asking bid.

 

Even better if Responder takes control.

[PhantomSac]

If I had the choice of bidding 3H or 2D I would always bid 2D. 3H is a hopeless bid for finding grand, does partner even have a cuebid over it? I am guessing a new suit would be natural. Obviously when partner opens 2C we are going to slam and are in possible grand slam territory, I would prefer to bid 2D and see if partner has a suit they can bid or if they bid NT transferring and going from there.

[whereagles]

Even though we are told in the OP that a minimum rebid of NT shows 21-22?

 

You're right. Better just bid 6NT then.

[helene_t]

In normal methods, 3♥ would show something more specific, for example a 1-suited hand. In that context, 4♣ could not be natural so would be either a cuebid setting hearts as trump, or a checkback. Maybe partner is on the same wavelength. If we have the general agreement that COG precedes over cuebidding when both are possible meanings, maybe we can actually bid 4♣ with this hand.

 

But with 3♥ being the normal positive with hearts, presumably we could have 5-5 in the rounded suits. It might still be better to use 4NT to show that and 4♣ to be a checkback, but it is less obvious and certainly not something to improvise without agreement.

[lamford]

True, 7♦ is a much better bid, but 7N is far from hopeless, particularly at MPs.

I didn't claim that 7N was hopeless; I claimed that bidding it was. I think "hopeful" would have been better, although an action can be hopeless and hopeful at the same time.

[gszes]

I think 6n is the right call and bidding 7d for the road is poor at best. Responder could easily

have something like KQx KQxxx xx QJx and feel 6n is right opposite a min. I sure hope there are

compensating auctions to help make up for taking all that space to show hearts that way(ouchies)

2d for me a ton easier to catch up later than make up for wasted bidding space.

[benlessard]

3H is a bid that will often endplay partner into bidding 3Nt so it should show a good suit. 3NT with all those controls and source of tricks cannot be right.

 

vs KQJxxx they need to lead clubs or a stiff D to defeat 6H.

 

Otherwise I agree with 5NT PAS.