All News

An Unusual Bid.

You can play bridge for quite a long time and still come up with fresh bidding sequences which you and your partner have not discussed. What does partner mean by their bid and what should you bid? These are the 2 questions raised by the following sequence:

 

We are playing Pairs and neither side is vulnerable. Whether or not you play 1 initially as “could be short”, when partner’s second bid is 1, they now promise at least 5 clubs. You have shown your long suit and then your hand type and point count with 2NT. So, what’s happening and what’s next?

Nigel Kearney “4: We have a good hand for clubs in the context of the auction so far. It sounds like partner may have a diamond void and slam could be on, e.g. KQxx Kxx - AKxxxx. With a similar hand but a singleton diamond and five clubs, he would probably have signed off in 3NT.”

I would have thought a void in your first bid suit would be a deterrent. However, agreeing with Nigel’s example hand is:

Michael Ware “3NT: assuming partner had limited their hand by not bidding 2 at their second turn to speak. I do think 3 should be a fragment i.e. 4315 (or 4306) and a good hand. I would still bid 3NT as my
partner did not bid 2 instead. We cannot play 5C at match-points. If 1 is forcing (2 artificial) then this is partner's only way to show a very good hand so would try for slam (as now more likely) with 4.”

It is a good point to understand how strong 1 can be: i.e. would your partner jump to 2 with the same shape and a game-forcing hand? However, this problem is as much about evaluating our own hand. No-one would jump to 2 even if they could on the actual hand South held but it still had slam potential.

There are a few misgivings about our 1 bid:

Leon Meier “3NT: I prefer to not bid 1 on these hands unless I plan to force to game, which I would not on this hand. I believe the 3 bid in this context is showing doubt about 3NT depending on my heart quality and with 4 to the AQ, I am certainly not embarrassed and will gladly bid 3NT here.”

and about our statement that partner promises at least 5 clubs:

Stephen Blackstock “3NT: Not much of a problem at this point.  With these soft values I'm not drifting on to 4 at any form of scoring, and certainly not going past 3NT at Pairs. Of course, everything depends on the meaning of 3: for me it would be patterning out, 4315 or the like, but if it shows heart cards and concern about spades then 3NT looks dubious. Without knowing what 3H shows for this N/S pair, the best action at the table is a guess.

 

I have a number of reservations about the auction to date. I don't like 2NT. 2 would have been better, more economical and gives South a better chance to describe the hand type. Why hurry to bid no trumps as it can come later. And if we believe that South is showing 5+ clubs (I don't), then Qxx is very valuable and the value bid in no trumps is game, not an invitation.

 

I believe South can be 4-4 in the blacks because what should he do with AKxx xx xxx AJxx say, if out of his opening no trump range? Rebid 1NT with no heart stop, potentially off the whole suit? At best it may wrong-side the contract. Worse, if South is required to rebid 1NT, he may find North with 4252 shape and a minimum. Missing spades to play a silly 1NT isn't a technical triumph. There are similar problems if North is expected to show a four-card major before longer diamonds - now he finds South with 2254!

 

It is good to see some valuation of our own cards. Our diamond honours and or Q may be wasted at a high level club contract. Andy and Bruce are happy in 3NT:

 Andy Braithwaite “3NT: I can’t see an alternative.”

Bruce Anderson “3NT: I am playing partner for a 4315 shape, or possibly 4216; he/she cannot have 4 hearts as they would have bid 1 over my 1. I am playing partner’s 3 to be progressive, looking for the best game, probably with little or no strength in hearts. It is Pairs. So, 3NT it is.”

Wayne Burrows “4: There are a lot of match-points for 3NT with overtricks but there are also a lot of match-points for a making 6. My club support is as good as I could have. I have fitting cards in hearts and a singleton spade. There is play for eleven tricks opposite Axxx Kxx x AKxxx and there might only be nine tricks in no trumps. Partner will usually be better than that so I will co-operate if partner has slam ambitions by now bidding 4.”

The actual South hand is interesting because other than bid 3, it is hard to see how else they could investigate a slam and still be able to sign off in 3NT if their partner was not keen.

 

No heart fragment but indeed a rather useful holding in partner’s first bid suit, diamonds.

This time it was the Q which was not pulling any weight. North’s minor cards certainly were. Indeed, the lay of the cards could hardly have been friendlier for anyone who made it to 6. Yet, were the lay-out even a little less friendly and 6 would not be that easy to play.

However, one can imagine the post- mortem after North had made a number of overtricks in 3NT. “Perhaps you could have shown your strong hand by bidding 3 over 2NT?” It would seem to be a good use of such a bid. Without a great club holding, A and the then almost inevitable spade shortage, North would never consider slam. With all the above, 4 would start the ball rolling to get there.

The Panel, though, generally do not seem particularly convinced.

Richard Solomon

More for JIN Club players tomorrow.

 

Go Back View All News Items