All News

should you?

Stay put or move: that is the question?

Well, there are actually two questions included with today’s problem. We have a situation where the opposition have doubled us for penalties at the two-level but where we have an alternative place to play, albeit one level higher. Should we go there or pass? The latter option may be appealing in one sense, since our partner is the one who will be declarer!

 

 

1NT is 12-14. We decided to transfer to hearts and probably let matters rest there. However, East’s first double showed diamonds and their second double was for take-out. By bidding 2, South showed at least 3 hearts since they would pass with a doubleton. We are playing Pairs.

Despite North-South’s known 5-3 heart fit (has South really got 4…seems unlikely), West converts East’s second double into a penalty situation.

Do you agree with North’s transfer to hearts?

Do we pass now or show our second suit?

I really did not think the first question was an issue. Why pass up the possibility of a 5-3 or 5-4 major fit by transferring or bidding clubs? However, at the table, South said they would have shown a long club suit had they sat North and they were supported by:

Michael Cornell “ I disagree with the first bid. I would have got out to clubs, presumably with a 2 transfer?”

Stephen Blackstock “  2 isn't clearly wrong. If I could bid 2NT to show clubs, or 3 to play, I might choose that for the pre-emptive value, but 2 as a transfer to clubs may be met with a double to show that suit and help the opponents that way.”

Certainly, the auction is unlikely to end at 2 with the opponents having more than half of the hcps. It may therefore be slightly harder for them to enter the auction after we transfer to clubs. Stephen’s point about avoiding a spade bid is a good one though some use 2NT as the weak transfer bid to a long minor. Along those lines is:

Bruce Anderson “ I don’t agree with my first bid. I would have bid 2NT, a transfer to 3, to make it as difficult as possible for E/W to find what is at least a 4/4 spade fit. That bid risks us missing a 5/4 heart fit but I am intent on making it as difficult as possible for the opponents to find their spade fit.

However, the rest of our Panel seemed happy with the transfer to hearts. So, let’s see whether they would have stayed in 2x.

Stephen Blackstock “Pass: The only apparent alternative is to move to 3, but that would have to play two tricks better than 2 to be any improvement. That seems unlikely: partner has at least four spades (perhaps five?) or the opponents' choice to defend with a nine card fit is peculiar. Similarly, partner has some length in diamonds to go with his 3+ hearts, so has no room for any great club length. It would be no surprise if clubs break badly too, so venturing higher is asking for trouble. And of course, I wonder if the opponents disagree on the meaning of the second double, with only specific layouts of all the suits make the present auction reasonable.”

A misunderstanding is possible but not this time! If West chose to pass, they must have some decent hearts.

Leon Meier “Pass: given I think there is a pretty good chance we actually make this contract and if not it can easily be a good sacrifice against 4, I will pass and not bid 3, which could easily go just as many down and may make them realize where they should be.”

There is considerable discussion about the opponents missing their spade fit. I would think West could easily have bid 2 had they wanted to. Yet, they chose to pass. It is becoming quite common for an opening 1NT to contain a 5 card major in a 5332 pattern. Missing a spade fit is therefore by no means guaranteed. However:

Wayne Burrows “ Pass: East seems likely to be 4=0=5=4 or 4=0=6=3. It may depend a little on whether or not partner can have five spades. If not, then they definitely have a spade fit, probably 4=4 and West chose to play for penalties. That makes West a favourite to have five good trumps, I think something like KQT98 is likely since they have chosen not to play safer 2 or 3. So, partner is likely to be 4=3=4=2 or maybe 4=3=3=3. Running to 3 is one-level higher and maybe not significantly better than 2x. So I pass. I haven't even gone down yet.”

As stated, Wayne, it is your partner who would go down in 2x.Nevertheless,point taken!

The immediate question is can we make 2x? We are vulnerable and -200 is not a good result unless the opponents can make game.

Nigel Kearney “Pass: I don't know if it will make but I would bet it is a favourite as I have more shape than they will expect. There is no guarantee clubs is better and I would need to take a trick more.”

Michael Cornell “Pass: We are in a 5-3 so how much better could clubs be even if we have a fit?”

Bruce Anderson “Pass: obviously we could be in trouble as West must have a heart stack but we are in a 5/3 fit and only at the two level. And this contract could play well given my distribution. I am not bidding 3, which is also likely to run into a bad break, and is a level higher.

Our heart suit and West’s pass certainly indicate that trumps could be a problem if we pass. Not all were prepared to pass and hope:

Andy Braithwaite “3: Opponents seem to have caught us here so with a poor heart suit I will risk a 3 bid in the hope of finding a nine card fit with better cards than I appear to hold in hearts. Original doubler could have a 4153 or even 4162 shape for their bid, in which case 3 will be a much better spot than 2. Being vulnerable, I am even keener to try 3.”

and just checking who is opponents are is:

Peter Newell “3: A tough choice of pass or bid 3. While I have a good looking hand and we likely to have an 8 card heart fit, I don't think it will play well with West having 4 or 5 hearts. Dummy is likely to get tapped before the clubs are set up and I think it quite likely that partner has a doubleton club and that clubs are breaking. Given my 2 singletons, it's clear the opponents have an 8+ card fit in spades and probably one in diamonds  so for them to go after us suggests a pretty nasty heart distribution. Partner has length in spades and diamonds so maybe 4432 shape. So I am going to run but I would look at my opponents first, and decide whether I wanted to shoot for a top board by choosing to pass and hoping to make...”

We may get some criticism as to why East below did not bid 2 over 2 although the take-double seems fine, too. If West wants to run, and they held 3 spades, they may well choose a 4-3 spade fit and not be so unhappy when their partner has a bonus one. It’s time to see all 4 hands:

 

Despite some decent hearts in the West hand, 2x is makeable, especially on the lead of Q, but also on a diamond lead. South can afford to lose 4 trump tricks along with A and once declarer has ruffed a club in hand (with a higher heart than 4), then that should be the case.

Running to 3 would be wrong not just because 2x can be made. 3 would be easier to make (unless East ducks 9 lead and declarer misguesses to play J: no discard on K). However, West’s liking for defending doubled contracts may not extend to 3. With a known diamond fit, that part-score contract should be an easy make at the 3-level.
Neither bidding decision above is easy: nor indeed is West’s pass of 2x. At least playing Pairs, 2x will only be a bottom on one board…but for which side?

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items