All News

A Strange Choice?

How can a decision seem both obvious and yet very strange? Such are the mysteries conjured up by bridge bidding. On one hand, the bid I chose (yes, I own up before anyone else is tainted with the decision!) seemed obvious and on the other ridiculous. Take a look:

 

Your opponents were playing 5 card majors with 3 being a limit raise, i.e. around 10 or 11 hcp. What action, if any, would you take? You are playing Pairs.

Let the case for the “obvious inaction” be made.

Nigel Kearney “Pass: Surely nobody would consider bidding here? Our hand is all defence and no offence. Partner has short hearts and with any encouragement, he'll be in 4 doubled looking at possibly the most disappointing dummy he has ever seen.”

My only defence, Nigel, if you are correct, is that my partners have seen such “disappointing dummies” before and even lived! I cannot argue against your statement were the only aim be to make one’s contract. Nigel has others to support his view:

Bruce Anderson “Pass:  If opener now bid 4, I am still going to pass, notwithstanding the favourable vulnerability.

We have good defensive prospects, and why should they ‘take the push’ when neither opponent will have a strong trump suit. 4, going two or three down doubled, could well be a phantom sacrifice.”

Indeed, it could…and I would certainly not be bidding 4 after passing 3. However, Stephen is more concerned about the merits of 3 versus 4:

 

Peter Newell “Pass: although I don’t like not raising with 4 card support. In my experience if I bid 3, South often bids 4 and partner then bids 4, and often will get doubled when they are not making 4.  My hand will be rather a disappointment as the KQ are not much better than waste paper, and there is no quick entry dummy and nothing useful in the minors. “

Again, I agree. I do not like the raise to 3, though it did get votes.

Stephen Blackstock: “3: I’m not optimistic about beating 3. Doubled down two would often be a save against 4, so the odds favour bidding I think. I’m not saving in 4 now or later: 4 may not make, and if a heart game isn’t being bid at many tables, a profitable save will be a pyrrhic victory.

Kris Wooles “3: I assume 3 is invitational.  I fully expect South will now bid 4 and partner will likely bid 4 having very few hearts. This may or may not be a good thing given my heart holding will be irritating for South to handle and 4 may not make. However, if I pass 3, we may never find a not vulnerable sacrifice against a vulnerable game.”

Indeed not, though you know rather more about the heart situation than your partner. Unless South’s hearts lack a high honour, your hearts will be a nuisance though not an insurmountable one in making their vulnerable game. In that case, why not give them the last guess rather than hearing your partner bid the inevitable 4 which is much more likely to be doubled?

So, you are now prepared for the actual bidding at the table:

 (only 9 hcp for North but 9 and a half!)

Fortunately, Nigel Kearney did not have to say “thank you” as he was not my partner, propelled into 4 by the East hand. With five certain losers, 4x needed care and a little good fortune to escape with only one trump loser, though after the heart lead, the pressure was on the defence to take their club tricks before West could finally enter dummy. South best switches to a low club at trick 2 and insert 10 on the second round of the suit as West ducks initially, to retain the lead after the third round of clubs is played.

Assuming that happens, West will still escape for down 3, -500. Meanwhile, as expected, after a pass from East, South would raise to game. Even if West does not lead a spade, this contract can be made though there is a danger of declarer suffering a diamond ruff if they use the wrong entries to get to dummy for further trump leads.

However, on a likely spade lead, South can even afford two trump losers to make their contract. I am not saying 4 is an obvious or correct bid from East though there are a number of up-sides, playing Pairs, maybe what happened, maybe even hearing a 5 bid..and you know what to do to that.

the normal action

Were we playing Teams, I would not dream of bidding over 3 and would agree with the Panel’s mainstream comments. The difference between -500 and -620 at Teams is not significant. I would hope to record a +100 on some days, too. Somehow, though, despite seeming logic, such hands (I have held more than my share of enemy trumps before when it has been correct to sacrifice.) can be right for sacrificing. Remember, this time, West had only minimum length and modest spades. Had they a 6-card spade suit, the need to sacrifice would be greater.

Or am I just trying to justify my action when partner recorded -800? At Pairs, it is only one bottom. You be the judge.

Maybe a little more mainstream for tomorrow’s play problem.

 

2was a standard Weak 2, 6-10 hcp and 6 hearts. 3 asked about your majors with 3NT denying either 4 or 5 cards in a major, here realistically in spades.

West led the K on which East dropped J. If you duck, West continues with 3 on which East plays 2. Over to you?

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items