The panel came up with a range of different auctions which propelled most of them to 6♠. As with a number of these hands this is a slam I don’t think I would find my way to and in this case I’ve not given an auction ending in 6♠.

In the auction I have given 2♠ is game forcing. As we are in a game forcing auction 3♠ is stronger than 4♠. If this seems strange or counterintuitive the idea is that if you want room to explore a slam then you want as much room as possible. Once you are in a game forcing auction you don’t have to rush. 4♣, 4♦ and 4♥ are all cue bids (first or second round controls). East doesn’t go past 4♠ as she is worried about the trump suit. I’m probably being too cautious but as West I’ve got to find something to do with the Clubs and Hearts.

One of the areas of bidding which has on a number of hands in this feature has been when do you make up on a jump shift. It’s a part of any system which I don’t use anything like enough.

Not everyone made up a jump shift but I think for any pair not really confident of their methods this would be a very good time to use it. As 2♠  is game forcing it takes the pressure of the rest of the auction and you don’t have to do anything to catch up later in the auction.

Not everybody bid the grand slam (either in NT or ♠) and I have great sympathy for those who didn’t. The auction I have given is typical of what I was sent and one panellist admitted that it was a bit of a punt by East as its the possession of a red suit queen (in this case West has both) which produces the thirteenth trick and we don’t know that West has either.

This hand is from the County match versus Norfolk. The panel did much better than the County players  with 50% of the panel bidding the slam (versus once out of twelve in the actual match). I have included one of the slam auctions which looks the most reasonable to me. I’m pretty sure I would not have been in a slam and would have been playing a more pedestrian 4♠ .

I’m with the auction up to 4♠ . I think it is very close as to whether its worth a move over 4♠ . I was bought up on being very aggressive to the game level and to be more cautious in the slam zone. This caution in the slam zone may talk me into passing 4♠ . 

For anyone who is not sure about jumping to 4♠  with only three card support - 1♠  promises at least a five card suit.

As it was me and partner (Peter Sutcliffe) who were the only one’s to be defending the good slam you might think I included it to illustrate how unfair the scoring is when we’re obviously going to be on the wrong end of a slam swing through no fault of ours. However, as they say, the play is the thing … As a hand to play I think it illustrates quite a lot so if anyone wants to know what happened next email me and I’ll share the story and what I think it teaches us.

There were two areas of discussion on this hand. Is the hand worth an opening bid and should you play in NT or Hearts?

My students would have no problem with this hand - they would open the West hand (rule of 20) and they would play in 4♥ once the eight card (at least) Heart fit had been established. Easy game. Its their auction I have given which looks fine to me.

Another slam - probably too many in this set.

The auction I have given has some gadgetry that is worth having a think about for the pairs who want to improve their slam bidding.

After 1♥  -2♦  East suddenly has a very good hand. 3♠  is a splinter and now West gets excited about the slam prospects. 

Using straightforward Blackwood, West can find out that East has one Ace and two Kings. The problem is which two Kings?  

The first universal panel we have had! The setter (me) made a mistake (doh!) by having West as Dealer rather than East and the hand may appear in a future edition with East as Dealer as I think the hand is tough (and more interesting) to bid if East gets to open 1NT