Interested in slam?

[fromageGB]

I think the system is the problem here. It seems that you have to bid 3♣ to discover what sort of hand opener has, and then if you bid clubs you are already over 3NT, which is likely the common contract. This means that after 3♠ you would need to decide whether to go for slam or not, so it is simply a question of probability.

 

While you could construct slam hands, I would construct more non-slam hands. Having thought that through, I make the decision right now, at 2NT, and simply bid 3NT. Let them think opener may be a singleton and make a club lead! Whatever, give them no more free info.

 

System-wise, my view is that there is too much being crammed into the 1♣ open, but that's by the by. Another problem seems to be that there is no way to suggest clubs as a slam contract or even ace ask in clubs once partner has bid 3♠. At this point, opener doesn't know you have a club suit, and you are only one bid beneath 3NT.

[kenberg]

As noted above, the system creates some issues. Here are my (somewhat) revised thoughts:

 

After 2NT I bid 3C. If partner then says 3S I give up and bid 3NT.

 

Contrast this with a simple system. 1C-1H-2NT-3C. Now partner, holding four spades and two hearts, will still bid 3S. The difference is that unless he is being cute, his shape is 4=2=3=4. With 2=2=4=3 he would have opened 1D. With this hand, it's important. Ordinarilt a strong 9 card fit is plenty, but here I plan on ruffing two hearts in dummy. If the dummy has AKx of clubs this might work, but it very well may not.

 

I am definitely not making a case against the general system. Every system has features good and bad. But here, if I cannot tell whether opener has four clubs or four diamonds, I think I let caution be my guide. Holding six clubs and one diamond, and playing in a manner that partner would bid this way holding 4-3 in the minors either direction, I place my bet with him holding four diamonds and three clubs, and then give it up.