All News

A strong opponent!

Beware or ignore!

Strong No Trump openings are not what they used to be. For many years, they would not contain less than 16 hcp and were a bid to be reckoned with, to be feared/respected. Now, they do not seem quite so fearful with pairs bidding over them almost at will..and maybe with cause as the phrase “a good 14 hcp” is often used to describe a 15-17 hcp. opening.

It is one thing bidding over an opposition’s 15-17 hcp opening. It can still be hard to force oneself to bid to game when an opponent started with this 1NT bid. What about here?

 

2NT=  minors   at least 10 cards in the minor suits  5-5 or more. 1NT was 15-17 (maybe a “good 14 hcp”!). The game is Pairs.

Well, our hand has a lot more interest in the major suits, though those diamond honours do allow it to offer more than that. It would seem to be a straight choice between passing 2NT and trying for the no trump game. Let’s hear from those who go for game despite West holding a lot of high-card points:

 

Leon Meier “3NT: I would play that 2NT showed a decently strong constructive hand since with a weak hand I can always wait until next time to bid 2NT when left hand transfers or uses Stayman. Therefore, I think we have the values to try 3NT with nice intermediates and cards well placed under the 2NT bidder and lots of information from the auction. I think a light game could be very biddable here.”

I agree. There are plenty of reasons why partner’s hand should be reasonable, not least the vulnerability, plus the immediate action over 1NT. I hope my partners do not use the following adjective about too many of my bids:

Bruce Anderson “3NT: to say the least, I have a good hold in the majors; we are vulnerable and partner has forced me to bid at the 3 level  with East holding undisclosed strength. So unless partner is unhinged, he/she will have a lot of playing strength; probably close to an opening hand in hcp.

 If partner is very distributional, say 6/5 with a void in a  major, they will probably bid again. But I am giving us a chance to play what is probably the only making game if partner can find a pass.”

 

“Unhinged?” What a friendly game we play! As if I would! Seriously, I really cannot see 3NT being pulled. You have made a judgement call and it would be extremely rare for one’s partner to pull to a minor now.

 

With kinder words for partner and the same outlook is:

Anthony Ker “3NT: I will trust that my partner’s vulnerable 2NT is half decent, something like x x Axxxx KQJxxx, and will bid a confident 3NT.”

 

Wanting to know a little about partner’s style is:

Wayne Burrows “ I think this depends a lot on how solid partner is. We really should know this as part of the problem - as an opponent the description “5-5 in minors” is inadequate disclosure and for a partnership it is impossible to make a good judgement if we do not know partner's range.

I am going to offer to play no trumps, either unilaterally by passing 2NT or by raising to 3NT, which partner might pull with a very distributional hand.

 

If partner is very solid I am raising to 3NT as I would do always at IMPs; if partner is moderately solid, I pass 2NT; and if partner bids on rubbish vulnerable then I get a new partner.” 

 

I feel like assigning 3NT as Wayne’s answer knowing his regular partners. His last sentence is definitely true but the immediate 2NT call does surely suggest at least a reasonable hand. However:

 

Andy Braithwaite “Pass: With no fit in either minor and those 10s in the majors, I will pass and hope to make 8 tricks to beat any 110s in a minor contract. At this vulnerability, partner should have a reasonable hand so I am hopeful of 5 tricks in diamonds to go with a trick in each other suit.”

 

Nigel Kearney “Pass: Close to bidding 3NT. It's important to compete aggressively at match-points so I cannot expect partner to have all the cards we need to make 3NT. There are likely communication problems as well. Even if we have nine tricks, we may not be able to take them all.”

 

Certainly, communication between the two hands may be a problem. It is interesting to consider the difference between an “unhinged” or “rubbish” overcall and “competing aggressively at match-points”. There is a difference but I still feel we should think our partner has a reasonable hand here, vulnerable.

 

Just when I thought we had a split vote between no-trump levels, along came:

 

Peter Newell “3: Tough problem. Given there are no more than 13ish points between partner and East and partner is bidding vulnerable over a strong 1NT, it seems likely our partner is weak or weakish and likely has 11+ cards in the minors. 

There seems to be 3 main options, pass, 3 or 3.  I'll reject 3NT as misfits with communication difficulties between the hands mean that defenders can usually lock you out of one of the hands reasonably quickly.  It is tempting to pass 2NT especially at Pairs with trying to make 8 tricks rather than 9.

 However, I think it will play better in a minor, particularly if partner has 6 cards in the one we bid. I'll pick 3 over 3.  I have a slight preference for the weaker minor as opponents often lead trumps to stop ruffs in the other anchor suit. Given my diamond cards, diamonds may not be hard to set up so help in drawing trumps would be useful. Also, with equal length, I prefer to bid the lower one usually. If doubled, this gives me the option of moving if I want to.”

 

We seem to be getting more and more pessimistic about our 3NT chances and partner’s hand. The North hand below is maximum in that it contains all 13 missing hcp though 3NT would still have been very makeable had East held K:

 

 

 

Fearing communication issues, South passed 2NT. East led a heart and the defence could not prevent declarer from reaching the South hand twice for two successful club finesses. Had West withheld the A twice, declarer will simply make enough major suit tricks to compensate. 10 tricks proved straightforward. Certainly, the early fall of J proved unexpectedly advantageous for North but they could still afford a second spade loser and make the no-trump game.

Those minor cards look like about what South should expect from a vulnerable partner in this position. Any minor suit finesse is favourite to work. Was it unduly optimistic to try for the no-trump game? I do not think so.

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items