DavidKok, on 2024-October-18, 06:35, said:
I was planning on staying out of this thread, telling myself that preemptive styles differ, it is robot bridge, and also I've been commenting too much lately anyway. But stating that "surely you have to think chance of slam" is like waving a red flag. I'll bite.
You need a near-perfect maximum opposite to make slam odds-on. Good trumps and some help in the minors, with little room left for wastage in hearts. You can find out about some of this with a slow route - whether 2NT is Ogust, asks for a feature or a shortage, all are useful. This then gives you room for a slam auction where partner can evaluate their hand. At any rate I would expect to park this deal in 4♠, but if partner unexpectedly keeps cooperating we may find a slam. Certainly I am not pushing past 4♠ myself.
Rather than thinking of the hand you want partner to have, think of the range they have limited their hand to. Which fraction are you playing partner for? Can you find out more information before any crucial decision points? If partner has the hand you need, would they cooperate?
I did check that it was a maximum and my partner often preempts on very strong hands... but AQ trumps would have worked!
I have done some analyses on weak twos too, although not very sophisticated - using things like loser counts
But surely with a hand like that you think "chance of slam" - and I did chicken out - the feature doesn't have to be much -AQ of trumps and possibly a useless feature in hearts
I accept that stopping in 5 suggests unnecessary risk - and I knew I didn't have the methods to check
And also my meaningless sims give my hoped-for hand only round 70% channce
I do bow to the expert judgement above
I often open one with strong weak two hands - not that one - 10 points perhaps