All News

Which Level? Which Suit?

I do hate two-part episodes on television. The second part is always on a bridge night! (please do not tell me I could record it. You could!) However, I know you will be doing nothing special on Saturday morning. So, here is part one!

Our two problem hands came from the same Teams match and featured different problems. In one case, should we bid “grand”..or even bid at all?!. In the other, which 7 level contract should we bid?

 

This was the sequence to which one North was confronted. On a bad day, there might be two heart losers and a diamond loser. On a good one, there might be 13 top tricks. Which kind of day was this one?

Before we reached the decision of what to bid next, I asked the Panel whether they approved of North’s take-out double. In descending order from the most critical of the double:

Michael Cornell “Absolutely not- would bid 2 in my sleep. However, I am better placed now!”

Kris Wooles “I would have bid 2. I like to describe the hand as efficiently as possible and while I do have 2 suits, the quality of the spade suit is too compelling for me to disguise with a double.”

Nigel Kearney: “I prefer 2 instead of double. If they are going to jump to 4 or 5 and it's passed back to me, 2 seems a better description than double and then presumably double again.” 

Nick Jacob: “Don't hate double but slightly prefer 2. If the auction gets competitive, it can help to start getting our relative suit lengths across.”

Matt Brown also preferred 2 while only new Christchurch panellist, Bruce Anderson, had much sympathy for double. Welcome, Bruce:

Bruce Anderson " I agree with double as 2 over 2 shows more high-card strength. That said, 2 can be defended given the strength of the suit.

It did get very competitive very quickly.  Our partner would not normally head for 5 without 4 card support even if we had bid 2. Certainly, you are much happier to have announced 5 spades than a possible liking for hearts. Imagine if the two major suits had been reversed. That is an even harder problem though we can leave that for another day. On this one, the “oppos” bid up to the 5 level quickly but partner was not silenced.

The irony of the above answers is that, suddenly, you are better placed from an original take-out double than from the recommended 2 call. Look at this answer:

 

Kris Wooles: “5: cue implying club control as well and suggesting grand slam interest. So, if partner has solid diamonds and A, then 7 should be pretty good. Obviously, I’m banking on partner having at least the A or K which is not a given of course but highly likely.”

I bet you are glad you made a negative double now, Kris. Here’s another:

Matt Brown “5: Having doubled originally, now I would bid 5. 6 could be down but give partner the K/A or singleton and we make 6 or the A and we make 7 very easily. 5 must be in support of  and not my own suit because I didn't bid spades earlier.

Michael Cornell “6:  I do not mind risking a heart lead.   7 is pretty cold opposite xx  Ax AKJxxxx  xx”

Not a bad estimation of the actual hand. A little more cautious were:

Nigel Kearney “6: On the given auction, we could be making 11, 12, or 13 tricks but I would probably just bid six.”

Bruce Anderson “6: I expect at least a strong six card suit and a top honour in hearts; if it only the king, the lead is coming up to his hand.

And even more pessimistic, anticipating QJx / even Qxx opposite:

Nick Jacob “Pass: If partner has short clubs also, our hand might not be very helpful. Partner could still have 2-3 heart losers.”

If South had any of Kris Wooles, Matt Brown or Michael Cornell as their partner, we can only hope that holding just what their partner had wanted, they would have 7 as their next bid as these were the four hands:

 

A great grand to bid if you could. That off-beat 2 overcall paid off at the table with East’s leap to game silencing North. The auction at the other table favoured North rather more:

West              North            East                South

                                                                       1 (5+ diamonds)

3                   x                    4                  4

Pass                4NT                Pass                5 (0 or 3 key cards)

Pass                7                All Pass

 Slightly fortunate that the K was not the A but a decent enough punt, which the raise only to 4 afforded North. Fortune favoured the brave, as did the spade break!

What does seem apparent is that while the panel were not in favour of the initial negative double, the 5 cue- bid would not have been available had North started with 2. Certainly, North could still bid 6, a void showing try for grand slam. Solid trumps and the A could only be viewed as great cards…and South would still be entitled to go for grand, albeit with that slightly nervous wait for either opponent to reach for a red card. None would come and 13 tricks would soon be achieved.

Tomorrow, we will look at the other problem you were given yesterday. Just to remind you, here is the hand:

 2 is an Acol style Game Force, well anyone's game force. Partner bids their suit and you use KeyCard Blackwood. 5 shows 1 or 4 with diamonds as trumps. 5 asks for the Q, with the response showing that card along with the K though the K is missing. Your turn to choose the final contract.

Tune in, tomorrow. There is no need to record!

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items