Could 6NT demonstrably have been suggested

[Cyberyeti]

The only reason why odds for slam increase by the 4♥ bid is that there seems to be a fit. (Or an other way of looking at it: The difference between contracting for 12 tricks and 9 = 3. The difference between contracting for 12 tricks and 10 = 2. 2 < 3. So if we can play 4♥ we are closer to slam than if we can play 3NT.)

 

Nevertheless, the odds for slam (without a BIT) should be poor. Partner has seen your bids, you have described your hand (Balanced, 25-27) and partner signs off in 4♥. Partner knows that she needs very little to try for slam. She doesn't try for slam, therefore she shouldn't have that very little.

 

When I bid 6♥ with that West hand, my partner will turn out to have the hand that the 4♥ bid actually shows:

♠Jxx

♥xxxxxx

♦xx

♣xx

 

Then I have turned a good (but not cold) 4♥ contract into a no play 6♥ contract.

 

So, East is the one who should suggest slam. Her bid didn't, but her BIT did.

 

Rik

 

And this is why I said several times that I would not BID the slam, I would invite it and play 5 opposite what you suggest (not ideal, but better than 6). I might not bid 4♥ on that hand however, I would not expect partner to be 6322 very often holding the big hand, I would expect some shape. It's embarrassing when partner has AKQx, Kx, AKQJ, Axx and you lose 4 trump tricks in 4♥ with 3N cold. I'm also used to partner jumping to 3N when somewhat offshape to show his values and be looking at a stiff ace of hearts.

[blackshoe]

In the presence of UI that suggests a slam might be there, even inviting slam is taking advantage of UI.

[Cyberyeti]

In the presence of UI that suggests a slam might be there, even inviting slam is taking advantage of UI.

 

AI also suggests a slam may be there, this is what the question's about, 4♥ needn't suggest any points, but the 6 hearts it does imply means you may well have enough tricks.

[lamford]

AI also suggests a slam may be there, this is what the question's about, 4♥ needn't suggest any points, but the 6 hearts it does imply means you may well have enough tricks.

And I don't think a slow 4H demonstrably suggests anything different to that which a quick 4H would suggest. That is the comparison.

[pescetom]

What anyone here might or might not do, is totally irrelevant. The real question is whether there is a logical alternative as defined in Law 16B1(b): “A logical alternative is an action that a significant proportion of the class of players in question, using the methods of the partnership, would seriously consider, and some might select.” To me it seems that that’s the case, since 42 out of 130 pairs ended in 4♥. But here a poll would have been necessary and I’m surprised that this wasn’t done in a tournament of this size.

The 130 results for the hand were at national level: locally only 7. But a poll would still have been feasible.