All News

A Problem 21-count.

21 high card points in your hand is usually something we look forward to having, a slam possibly, surely a game or maybe taking a penalty off your opponents who are making life as awkward for you as they can. Here, though, there does not seem much chance of slam. The opportunity of exacting a penalty has passed and therefore you are left with the job of playing game. Your partner has made a free contribution. The question is: which game?

 

You are playing Teams and only North-South are vulnerable. 3 is a weak jump, long diamonds, few high-card points. Wishing you could have penalised 3 (not today!) will not help you now. Where to from here?

Leon Meier “3: As much as I love Michael Ware's "Qx is always a stopper" belief, I don't think this case calls for that, and I want it played by partner's side. So 3 is the bid for me.”

Leon is certainly correct if South could produce Kxx. As to Michael’s beliefs, we will hear from him later. There’s more support for the “help me out, partner, 3 bid.”

Nigel Kearney “3: Probably partner is weak with long hearts but I'm happy with whatever he bids next. A cue bid should be looking for the best game, not a slam try. I might also cue bid with a big hand and heart support but then the onus would be on me to clarify later.”

Nigel hits on the doubt about 3. It need not be a slam try agreeing hearts. Your partner should not take it as such but more of a “let’s find the right game” bid.

Peter Newell “3: The only other option I would consider is 3NT.   It is unclear whether we belong in hearts, no trumps or clubs, and 3 may help elicit some more info from partner. 3 should in this auction be an attempt to find the best contract.

 If I had a good heart raise, I would bid 4 or 4NT.  I expect partner to consider 3NT with a spade stopper even with diamond shortage, but I would expect partner to rebid a 6 card heart suit (and at times a good 5 card suit) and to show a club suit that was 5+ or a club suit that was 4+ without a 6 card heart suit or a reasonable spade stopper.  A downside is that partner may have something like J9xx  and be a little reluctant to bid 3NT with diamond shortage.  3 is more flexible than 3NT which partner will often pass and may play poorly. Even with a spade stopper 3NT may not play that well when partner does not have a useful card like the Q and reasonable hearts.”

I am not sure I would do as the next Panellist suggests.

Bruce Anderson “Pass: partner should have length in hearts but very few points given that West seems to have an opening bid. Also, partner must be short in diamonds and did not make a negative double, so he/she should not have both hearts and clubs.

I don’t trust this hand: unless East has bid on total garbage my diamond suit is going nowhere. Although I have a lot of points, game in hearts is unlikely unless partner has either a very good 6 card suit or a 7 card suit, and with the latter hand I may well have heard 4 over 3. Therefore, pass it is.

I do not think partner would bid 4 with five hearts and not too many high card points. If partner does not have at least five hearts, we would seem to be passing them out in a rather poor part-score. Surely, it is better to go down trying for game rather than a part-score?

So, how many hearts does partner have?

Kris Wooles “4: I’m assuming East has 7/8 diamonds based on my holding but there is no accounting for opponents’ bidding. (They held 7, a fair …and annoying… bid!) This means partner and West will have very few if any diamonds. Given too that West has not rebid spades nor been supported by East, partner will have around 3/4 spades.

While I could bid 3 to test out 3NT, I think I would rather play in the heart game  given the probable lack of entries to the South hand and the expectation that South will have a long heart suit and not much else. After all I have 21 HCP and some very pointy cards.”

Kris therefore expects more than four hearts. Agreeing is:

Andy Braithwaite “4: partner has few points based on the bidding so far so must have considerable length to offer a bid here.”

 

Stephen Blackstock “4: I don't expect South can have as few as four hearts here, even without agreement. He would then have alternatives to be preferred to the danger of advancing in a suit that short.

 

Actually, I don't hate 3NT as much as perhaps I should: the auction shows that South has some spade length so there is a hope of help there. 9xxx or even 8xxx might block the suit. The worry is that West likely has very strong spades such as AKJ9x to make enough values for an opening bid. 

 

In any event, it's unlikely we can make 3NT without a number of heart tricks, and in that instance 4 should have play. However, 3NT might be down even when hearts are solid.”

I agreed with the above comments were it not that South had rather a different view of the auction and a different reason for bidding 3. We will look at South’s reason shortly.

 

Here, though, we hear from Michael Ware whose comment was anticipated by Leon:

Michael Ware “3NT: Qx is always a stopper! Seriously though, East's diamond bid and a likely 4-way misfit makes the 5 level undesirable and spade stopped more likely.

Certainly, East’s failure to support spades and West’s pass of 3 (they might bid again with a 7-card suit) does increase the chance of our partner having length in spades.

Wayne Burrows “3NT: Partner has some values and some hearts. I think the values should be around 6-9 with four or more hearts. Perhaps a little less with five or more hearts. Together we have enough for game. So, we are obligated to bid game or make a forcing bid to get us there. 

Could partner have four hearts? Yes of course, we made a take-out double which would encourage a bid of 3 here with only four hearts. I think that rules out raising hearts as a 4-2 heart fit would be silly. That leaves 3NT or 3. The problem with 3 is that partner might be forced to rebid a four-card heart suit with nowhere else to go, probably four bad spades and four hearts." (Surely then they would have at least 4 clubs as we know they can have almost no diamonds?)" On the other hand, a holding as weak as 10xx (on the lead of the J) or 9xxx might furnish a stopper. 

 

Overall, I think 3NT will make more often than 4 and if I bid 3NT partner will be able to pull to 4 (or even clubs) some of the time when that is right. And if all goes well, there is the Stephen Burgess strategy. I kibitzed him at an IP championships where he bid 3NT with no stopper and the opponents cashed the first six tricks in their suit and he said simply "bad experiment".”

 

And finally, barely believing all had their bids (they did!)

Michael Cornell “3: Hard not to smell a rat ( especially at these colours ) but I suppose there is just room for everyone to have most of their bids.

Have to start with 3 but the problem will come on the next round. I will pass 3NT or 4 and bid 4 over 4. If the opponents have not psyched, 9 of my 21hcp are in their suits so the hand is nowhere near as good as it looked originally.

I would expect partner to bid 3 with K10xxxx and a diamond shortage and 4 is not cold with that?

 

Partner, of course, did have a diamond shortage but they were bidding 3 just to play opposite the four-card heart suit they presumed their partner held.

 

 

Would South have bid 3NT over 3? That, other than a direct 3NT Michael Ware-style, was the only winning action. Alas, North believed their partner would have more than 4 hearts and the impossible 4-2 fit in 4 was reached.

3NT was easy while 5 was just too hard. At one table against 5, West cashed two high spades, though East ruffed the second one to give their partner a diamond ruff. However, South would have to play A before drawing trumps and would not be happy with the outcome after losing the first two tricks.

So, 26 hcp between the hands and only a minor fit. It sounds like 3NT which proved easier to make than to bid.

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items