Dear Steve,

At first thought I agreed with you in all four situations. Normally, as Peter never gets tired of pointing out, that would be enough to go back to my favourite terrace and order a nice sangria in the sun.
But... the hand kept nagging me. I tried to construct a decent hand for partner to bid the way he did. I found it hard, very hard to come up with a South hand where 7♠ makes and 7NT doesn't. At first I thought of something like six clubs to the ♣AQ, meaning a club ruff might be necessary. But then I realised that, with such a hand, partner could have bid 6♣ over 5NT as a grand slam try, asking for club support.
So the fact that he just bids the grand suggests a hand where he thinks he will make 13 tricks on the basis of the values you promised earlier in the bidding.

(Actually, he is light for his bidding. On seeing his hand only, the contract might depend on a finesse.)
So on second thoughts I do not agree with you in all four situations. My conclusion is: if partner has the hand he should have, bidding 7NT is always correct.

The only reasons I can think of, for not correcting are:

- Partner usually bids too high.
- Partner may be pushing on this occasion since we are trailing.
- Peter would become declarer.

I would agree with you in all four situations if this were your hand:

Or this:

In both cases there seems to be a considerable chance that a club ruff is needed for the 13th trick.

Un saludo desde Barcelona 

 

Dear Steve,

I think your 4♦ bid is sound, you maybe even have a little extra.
Partner's 7♠ bid is reasonable, but no more than that. He cannot be 100% sure the grand makes, but I think with eight or nine out of ten possible North hands the grand is on ice* and in the one or two other cases it will depend on a finesse.
(* the fact that Ed had to think hard to construct a North hand, his second example, opposite which the grand is not on ice, is irrelevant. After all, Ed has to think hard to construct any hand! Just consider the fact he has to find thirteen cards...).

 

Now about your question. I would normally not consider correcting to 7NT. The reason is that partner is at the controls in this bidding. You know whether you are in either situation 3 (MP-scoring, high level match) or 4 (Board-A-Match) — these are the situations in which bidding 7NT instead of 7♠ may be of the greatest importance — well, so does partner! Why didn't he make a try for 7NT then? Usually that is enough for me to pass. After all, he knows more about your hand (which is limited) than you know about his. So if 7NT is to be considered, he should do it.

 

Having said that, of course I will still try to picture his hand. You have both minor suit kings. One of the minor suits must be his second suit (he cannot have a one suited hand, he would have opened 2♣). You might have lacked one of these. So you might have lacked the vital king (in Ed's second example it is the ♦K). So obviously partner cannot be certain that the grand is on. This does not mean 7♠ is a bad bid however (I have pointed this out in my first paragraph).
Does the fact that you have both minor kings mean that 7NT must be on? Inconsistent as I may seem (I have just said that partner should do the considering!) I say yes! So I will always bid 7NT, like Ed.
The question remains: should partner have made a try for 7NT? Difficult: Ed and I agree on him being somewhat light for his bidding... How then can he aim even higher?
Ok, here's my answer: if your bidding system makes it possible for him to find out whether you have both minor kings (or the ♥A and that vital ♦K, but that will be hard to find out after having used Exclusion Blackwood...), he should have done so. Maybe a simple enquiry after kings can do the trick, you showing two kings, the ♥K excluded like the ♥A before.

My somewhat inconsistent conclusions: partner should have tried for 7NT. He did not, so normally you would respect his judgement and pass. But on thinking closer you do not: you will still bid 7NT!

 

Note that I do not think the decisive fact is that you possess the ♥A, since that is only one extra trick (apart from the fact that is needed as a stopper in 7NT of course). More important is, that partner's second suit must be solid. The fact that you have both minor suit kings makes it pretty sure it is! (I am proven right by the fact that partner in 7NT does not need your ♥A as a trick, he has 13 tricks without it. So he only needs it as a guard — but maybe this is what you meant all along).

 

En hils fra Orkanger

 

PS In his second example of the North hand, Ed states that North will pass 7♠, since it looks feasible that a club ruff is necessary. What irony, that opposite the actual South hand, this North hand provides 14 top tricks in notrump. The cause is that unexpectedly diamonds is South's second suit.