Players can use two approaches in bidding slams. One involves slow and careful investigation, perhaps by cue-bidding
controls: aces, kings, void suits. Much can be said in its favor since a losing slam means the painful loss of a game bonus.
In the other approach — “blasting” — you bid slam as soon as you judge that the values are there. You give the opponents a minimum of help with the opening lead and defense. I believe that today’s experts have wrongly discounted the value of “blasting” auctions.
In today’s deal, South’s blast into six hearts might not be a success if North’s minor-suit holdings were reversed and East-west had two diamonds to cash, but South is willing to take that risk. After South ruffs West’s jack of diamonds, how should he play to justify his bidding?
If both spades and hearts break 3-2, South will easily take 13 tricks. If either suit breaks 3-2, he will take 12. What if both suits break 4-1?
South can lead a spade to dummy’s ace at Trick Two and return a spade. If East ruffs, South can ruff the diamond return, draw trumps and take the rest. If instead East discards, South wins and ruffs a low spade in dummy. East can overruff for the defenders’ only trick.
If East followed to the second spade, and West ruffed South’s king and led a diamond, South would ruff and lead a low spade, intending to ruff it in dummy. He would succeed unless West ruffed in with the 10 or jack of trumps, having held J-x or 10-x as well as a singleton spade.