All News

or even:

No Double Spells Trouble!

The first 56 boards at the Gold Coast Congress produced relatively few excursions to the slam zone. The following one produced mixed outcomes for the slam bidders.

Our problem today is for those on lead at trick 1. Here is one sequence to the common slam which left West on lead:

 

1 was 16+ Precision style after which the bidding was natural with 5 showing 2 key cards without the Q.

So, because this is a problem, the obvious cannot be right or can it? Is there anything better than doing the obvious? There is a fistful of clubs on your left making your K rather vulnerable and lots of high cards on your right, mainly in the majors. There might be a day when a trump lead might work but ultimately there does not seem anything better than trying a diamond. Your partner’s lack of interest in your suit might just work out well. Was this to be that day?

 

It was such a small red card that partner produced at trick 1 that as West, I barely noticed it was heart-shaped. Before I had that warm glow of a successful lead, partner had scored the A and the slam had been beaten. No recriminations about the lack of under-lead to get a second ruff. That would have been madness even if my really low diamond had suggested a club return could be a good idea.

At another table, diamonds had not been bid. A diamond was led at trick 1 and on seeing dummy, a confident declarer spread his cards, claiming 12 tricks as long as the diamond break was not 7-0. A wise and sad proviso!

I believe, where West had not bid,  a Lightner Double of 6 was absolutely mandatory. East has the perfect requirements, a void, a side-suit ace and, naturally, at least one trump! West would surely guess to lead a diamond. What, though, when West had bid diamonds? Should East now double the slam?

My concept of a Lightner Double was that it asked for an unusual lead, often dummy’s first bid suit and certainly not the apparently normal lead of a suit either defender had bid. So, no double when you want that suit led…and that is what happened at our table. I did, though, have an alternative view suggested that the double just suggested a shortage and that the player on lead had to work out where that shortage was. I did not have time to canvass the Panel as to whether that second view had merit.

When a Lightner Double does occur, one option for the declaring side is to run from the imminent ruff to 6NT. That does not seem to be an option here though had any South done so, it would surely have worked. It would be a very inspired West to find the lead of either of their clubs as otherwise, the J would provide a safe 12^th trick for any declarer.

So, maybe there is more than one concept of a Lightner Double. I will stick to mine and was very happy to record a 70% board for +50.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items