On the Other Hand


A J 10 5
K Q 9 3
A 9 4
A 9
K 8 4 9 7
J 10 7 6 8 5 2
K 7 6 2 J 10 8 3
7 4 J 10 8 6
Q 6 3 2
A 4
Q 5
K Q 5 3 2

WestNorthEastSouth
1 Pass 1
Pass 4 Pass 4 NT
Pass 5 * Pass 6
All pass* RKC, showing zero or 3 aces
With any given principle in bridge, you're going to have people embracing it so fervently -- or is that so blindly? -- that they apply it where it doesn't belong, becoming more Catholic than the Pope, as it were. Such is the case with no trump slams. Having spent a few days touting the advantage of no trump slams, I came across this spade slam and felt it behooved me to offer some counter to becoming too enamoured of no trump slams.
I was South above and it didn't even occur to me to consider a no trump slam during the bidding. It wasn't until I got to thinking about the hand afterwards that it occurred to me there would be some acolytes of a no trump slam here, for there almost always is when primary controls are all there by way of high cards. Why didn't I think of a no trump slam?
Well, for starters, because my partner announced a spade fit while no one ventured a suggestion that no trump may be our bag. Looking a little more deeply, we see it isn't really a no trump type hand, not at the slam level. No suit looks particularly solid, not very far down, anyway. I'm looking at two doubletons, and one might easily be ruffed in one hand or the other, giving us, on a 4-4 fit, a fifth spade winner we wouldn't have in no trump (or a fourth if the spade hook is off).
What would have led me to think of no trump? Well, I suppose the king of diamonds, not in exchange for the queen, but in exchange for the 5, might have done it. Now the side suits are looking a little more solid, I would have had 16 hcp's, not 13 opposite what must surely be at least 18. After all, you don't always get an extra trick out of a 4-4 fit. You don't when your other suits are solid -- any ruffing potential is of a winning card anyway -- and you don't when you have a mirror distribution (though a strip-and-endplay might work there).
In any event, there really wasn't a lot to think about. I have a minimum hand for my bid, we have a spade fit, I can't see that our side suits are all that solid, so spades looked like the place to be. And what happened in no trump? Was 6 no a less productive contract? Well, yes, it certainly was. For starters, a few people bid it from the other hand, and now on the jack of diamonds opening lead, they couldn't make 6 no.
[years later: Damn! T'ain't so. Declarer covers the J of diamonds, West covers with the K, declarer ducks and wins the next lead, whatever it is. He now gets down to this four-card ending: 9 of hearts, 9 of diamonds and A 9 of clubs opposite four clubs headed by the K Q. Is the 9 of hearts high? No. Is the 9 of diamonds high? Might be. If not, run your clubs. It may be that they were 3-3 from the beginning, and it may be that a defender defending one of those 9's started with 4 clubs and now cannot have clubs guarded if he's guarding one of those red 9's.]
And if that wasn't enough, a few people even without that lead didn't get around to developing their 12th winner, for down one. Without a diamond lead, the way to make 6 no is to lose the fourth round of clubs, establishing the 5th, for four spades, four clubs, 3 hearts and a diamond.
On top of that, with the spade hook being on -- and if it was off, that too would have made 6 no impossible -- the spade bidders had an overtrick, which the 6 no bidders couldn't have (with proper defense). To be sure, this was an IMP event, so the overtrick didn't offer any great advantage, unlike a previous matchpoint event where there was a significant premium for an overtrick in a six bid. But then, maybe the next time you have a similar situation, you'll be in a matchpoint event and be doubly rewarded.
The bottom line, I'd say, is Do you have reason to believe you've got the tricks in no trump, either on a highly descriptive no trump bid somewhere indicating 33 hcp's or better in the partnership, or a long running suit with knowledge of controls by way of an aces-asking bid? If so, then no trump's probably the better slam. I'd also be more inclined to a suit slam on a balanced fit, if in any doubt, as that will often, not always give an extra trick.

A few footnotes: One pair was in six clubs, making, yes, but like in six no, without possibility of an overtrick (which wouldn't have meant anything here anyway). That shouldn't be. You want the majors and without a major suit fit, you want to give consideration to no trump. With no ruffing potential in the short club hand, this would be played in clubs pretty much as you'd play no trump, with the qualificaiton that clubs would be your first suit to attack.
Five people didn't make an overtrick in spades. I looked to see why. Two simply declined the finesse and that'll do it when the finesse is on. Of course if they pick up a stiff king in either hand, they'll come out smelling like a rose, but that's not sufficient reason, being too improbable, to decline to take a natural finesse.
The other three all took the spade hook the wrong way. What's the wrong way? Well, on an opening club or heart lead, they led to the 10 of spades. When that held, they returned to the closed hand in the other suit (i.e., with a club on an opening heart lead, with a heart on an opening club lead) and do you see how they queered their chances of a 13th trick right there?
They now led to the jack of spades and then dropped the king of spades and yikes! They now have only one entry to the closed hand. They unblock the ace of clubs, and now on two more heart leads, they discard a diamond, cash the ace of diamonds and ruff a diamond. But clubs don't split 3-3 (which they wouldn't have needed if they hadn't eaten up a re-entry unnecessarily) and so declarer can now ruff the fourth round of clubs, establishing the 5th club, but he has no entry to it.
Lead the queen of spades for that finesse, and you'll have just enough entries to pick up five spade winners, four clubs, 3 hearts and a diamond.