All News

in

Major Danger.

There is danger around the bidding of today’s feature hand. Before we discuss the dangers and what is the best path to overcome them, take a look at the following sequence.

 

You are playing Pairs. South starts with a “one way” Multi 2, that is it has to be a weak 2 in either major: no other alternative. You must draw your own inferences from North’s initial pass. South did when after your take-out double, they raised to 3.

That provoked a natural 4 bid from your partner. Over to you?

Conscious of our bidding to date and the strength of our hand:

Nigel Kearney “4: though I don't want to punish partner for competing, this hand is a lot better than it might be for a balancing double so I feel it is worth another bid. My sequence suggests something like this. A strong hand with just hearts should start with 3 or 4.”

Agreeing and seemingly creating even more problems in subsequent bidding is:

Stephen Blackstock “4: Hard to be sure, as we don't know how this EW pair plays the balancing double. Take-out of diamonds? Any strong hand? Also we don't know if West's 4 is forcing, invitational, or just to play. It could be any one of those if East has shown a strong hand. 

Making the assumption that West has fair values, then we belong in game at least. At Pairs especially, I must try to play the higher scoring strain. There is no risk of playing a silly contract as with long, self-sufficient hearts, I would have bid the suit immediately. I don't expect West to pass 4H with less than the equivalent of xxx in trumps.

 

If West moves to 5C I have a real problem. It looks as if 3NT will often have good play, so can I afford to moulder in 5 and not try 6? I am worried about a spade ruff against a club contract, and West's failure to bid 3 over 2 makes slam appear dubious. Perhaps West can help out with 4 or 4NT (surely not Blackwood here) over 4, assuming there is any agreement what those bids will mean. Problems for another day!” (this day, actually, as you will discover).

 

West did make a free bid and could still have a near opening, even opening hand for their initial pass of 2. However, not everyone is enamoured with game prospects let alone slam.

Michael Ware “Pass: At Teams I would probably bid game (4 or 5), but at Pairs +130 could be a top, or indeed -50/100 a good score versus their +110.

If 5 is making, we might still be losing to the people in 4 so 5 is a very narrow target compared to where we are now.”

 

Wayne Burrows “Pass: North is likely to have extreme shortage in a major to pass 2. I think the defence could start with a spade lead through my king and then there might be a club loser or a third spade could promote a winner. I am going to pass and hope we cannot make 4. The fact that South bid 3 suggests that they will be short in hearts and clubs. So there could easily be a bad club break as well. I pass and hope we can make 4.”

Recognition of North’s initial pass and South’s willingness to compete in diamonds. It seems more likely from our hand that South has 6 spades rather than 6 hearts although that is not guaranteed unless the North-South system card promises a weak 2 contains 2 of the top 3 honours, which most these days do not.

We have both majors with longer and better hearts. We can either show hearts by bidding the suit or seek partner’s preference by bidding 4, if that is what this bid means:

Andy Braithwaite “4: Partner has volunteered 4 so must have competitive values. I have more than I might have had for my balancing double and so can commit to some game either in hearts or clubs. So, I bid 4 just in case partner can offer 4 instead of 5.”

Peter Newell “4: it's a hard one as 4, 4 and 5 all seem possibilities with problems with each of them.  I would not expect partner to have a 4 card major on this auction as a double of 3 should be take-out, and partner should strain to bid a 4 card major at the 3 level rather than clubs at the 4 level. 

4 would normally be a cue bid agreeing clubs, but can be used as pick a game. However, given this is at best  ambiguous, and partner will not know your hearts are pretty good.

 

5 seems reasonable except that we lose the opportunity to play in hearts at Pairs. Further even if partner has 3 hearts which means the multi almost certainly has spades, and likely we will be getting a spade lead through the king and likely ruff/over ruff. So that leaves 4 which of course could easily be the multi bidder’s suit, and even if not partner may not have many hearts. A further drawback to 4 is that in this auction it will often show a strong hand with hearts that was too good to bid hearts on the first round. So, partner will not know to correct 4 to 5. However, 4 is the best of a bad lot for me.”

 

Leon Meier “4: I am considering 2 bids here, 5 and 4. I think slam is too far off so that isn't in the picture. Therefore, I just want to find the best game. I don't want to bid 4 as partner will expect more than 5 hearts in my hand. I think 4 here would either be a slammish hand in clubs or a hand like this which isn't sure of 4 of a major or 5, and for me if a bid can either be doubt as to strain or a slam try it is the former. Hence I will bid 4.”

 

It certainly seems right to sort out the trump suit before one thinks of slam…and the opposition have forced us to explore fits at the 4-level. Were we not playing Pairs, then I think there would be less doubt and more support for:

 

Bruce Anderson “5: it is tempting to show slam interest by bidding 4, but partner did not bid over 2 so will not be as good as solid clubs and the A. And even if he/she held that card and, say, KQJxx or KQxxxx, a bad break in trumps is likely. Also there is the risk of partner holding long clubs headed by QJ10 and A, meaning the slam will be off AK of trumps. And we are playing Pairs; a slam going down is sure to be a terrible result.”

I agree with Bruce’s comments regarding slam though there is surely the hope that 4 is a playable 5-3 fit…and we are playing Pairs.

At the table, East bid 4 and West offered 4. Maybe if East really wanted to offer both majors, they would have bid 4 not 4. East thought their partner did have four spades while West, probably correctly, thought they had denied a 4-card major by bidding 4. The end result of 4 passed out pleased only South.

 

No double from South and an inglorious down 3. There was no making game this time though 5 was certainly a better bet than either major suit. The real winners were those who passed 4 on a deal where there was severe “major danger”.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items