'The most interesting questions from visitors to the Dutch sister site (Bridgevaria.nl)'. 

Dear Ed & Peter,

My partner refuses to accept that asking for kings with 5NT, after it has turned out that an ace is missing, is a bad move.
My point of view is that a player who is asking for kings is showing interest in a grand slam. And a grand slam is not possible when the partnership has only three aces between them.
Your opinion, please.

Martin Theuwen

Answer Ed Hoogenkamp (South)

Dear Martin,

I completely agree with you. Since replying to 5NT means bidding at the six level, the player asking for kings obviously isn't considering a small slam but: 'grand slam or not?'
Having said that: in a very special case, at matchpoint play, it may help to choose between six in a suit and 6NT, but this is very rare occasion indeed.
By the way: many pairs nowadays do not play 5NT as asking for kings but more as a common grand slam try. The message is: 'We have all four aces (if you play Roman Keycard Blackwood it confirms the trump king as well); please bid seven if you have got something to spare.'

Since asking for kings is a grand slam try, asking for kings is done with 6NT in Norway — I think. (Sometimes they do so if they are two aces short; the idea is to escape a penalty double. Scandinavian Bluff they call it, I've been told. But the person who told me was fairly tipsy).

Un saludo, greetings from Barcelona

Answer Peter van der Linden (North)

Dear Martin,

Many Norwegians are strong, silent types. I think I'll adapt, especially the silent part is very appropriate here. After all, what is there to say about Ed's last paragraph?

Over to your asking for kings. I agree with Ed. Come what may, you are going to play a small slam at least. A grand slam is out of the question (there is an ace missing) and back to the five level seems to be inhibited (the Laws). Then what is there left to ask...? Looks a bit futile, doesn't it?
Having said that: in Barcelona they do so after all, so I've been told (yet an answer to Ed's last paragraph!). They call it 'affirmative bidding'. This is why: if the reply to 5NT shows there is a king missing (or even two) — in addition to that ace — the 5NT bidder is able to draw the scientific conclusion: 'Knew it, we're (way) too high' (especially if the reply has bypassed six in the agreed trump suit). After which the partnership is free to choose which too high a slam it wants to play.

Ed mentions the rare exception where asking for kings with an ace missing can be useful after all: at matchpoint play, to help choosing between six in a suit and 6NT. This is only expert stuff though, don't try this at home! After all, the consequence is that the far more useful message from 5NT ('all aces are in') isn't valid anymore, so many more agreements have to be made to be able to make a grand slam try.

An addition to Ed' s remark that many pairs nowadays play 5NT as a common grand slam try. Sometimes the partner of the 5NT-bidder doesn't know whether he has something to spare: 'Is that ♣K really what partner needs for the grand or...?'
In such a case it is useful to show, as an answer to 5NT, a specific king (or specific kings). This way the 5NT-bidder can decide himself whether it's going to be the grand or not.
An example: spades are established as trumps. Over 5NT 6♣ now shows the ♣K. Or even more advanced: 6♣ shows either the ♣K or both other kings (the ♥K and the ♦K in this case). In almost all cases the 5NT-bidder can see in his hand which of the two applies.

At once I have to put this into perspective: this example is about spades as trumps. There is a lot of bidding space for the reply then: 5♣, 5♦ or 5♥. With clubs as trumps there can be no such sophisticated bidding: the reply has to be 6♣ or 7♣... (OK, 6NT as a middle way).

En hils fra Orkanger