Science or Blast

[eagles123]

MP

 

Akqxxx

x

-

Kxxxxx

 

(if the x's are wrong sorry - it's 6106)

 

vul vs not pd 1st seat 1n (15-17) p

 

if it makes a difference 80% of the field play acol weak nt

[MrAce]

I rarely, if ever, comment on freak hands but if this came to me, I would xfer/texas whichever is my method to spades followed by exclusion on ♦. If pd has rounded aces, then I would bid 7♣ and let pd decide which black suit to play.

 

EDIT: Just noticed the MP part, I would just bid 7♠ if he has the aces I need. My goal with that kind of hands at MP is to get over it with as few damage as I can, so we can turn back to playing bridge again with normal hands.

[helene_t]

Do we have exclusion? Or can we set spades as trump and ask p to cue first round controls?

 

Hopefully not blast.

[el mister]

Blasting slam in a suit contract over a 1NT opening sounds wrong / lazy for a reg partnership, when it's prob the tightest defined opening and follow ups of your system.

 

I think of blasting when an invite is going to be wishy-washy, or there's critical information leakage, or there are no tools available in a casual partnership, that sort of thing.

[ahydra]

Like the others I don't see any reason to blast this. Transfer to spades, exclusion in diamonds followed up by a CQ ask if available.

 

ahydra

[ggwhiz]

I'm with the others in that I would use science if it's at all possible in my agreements.

 

If I have none and partner is a "player" surely I can transfer to spades and then bid 3♣ forcing and blast 6♠ next if I don't get anything useful out of them but I'm never stopping short of that.

[Phil]

There are two pieces of information I am interested in:

 

1. Does partner have the hA?

2. What is partner have in clubs?

 

Im always bidding 6S. After transferring to clubs and either asking for keys or maybe cuebidding.