All News

     Wrong but Right.

Can you be both right but wrong? Five imps in in a Teams match sounds a fair pick-up but were you a little fortunate? Our Panel thinks so:

 

Do you agree with South’s 2 overcall? If not, what would you have bid?

What do you bid now in the above sequence?

There are mixed feelings about the initial overcall:

Bruce Anderson “Disagree: doubling and then bidding your own suit tells partner I am too good to make a minimum overcall or an intermediate jump overcall. Some will argue a double must show spades. If partner jumps to 4, problems may arise, but otherwise I show my strong hand and we move on from there if appropriate. Bidding 2 is a distortion."

Perhaps an underbid but not a distortion?

Stephen Blackstock “I can live with either 2 or double followed by diamonds to show the strong jump type. Neither is perfect; 2 gives us this problem of how to describe and catch up. Double will be awkward if partner goes to the races in spades.

With just one thought in mind..and that is 9 quick tricks is:

Nigel Kearney “3NT: It may make when 2 would have ended the auction and/or it may shut out their spade suit. If they do compete, 3NT has expressed our hand well in one bid so that partner can decide what to do next.

I am not really sure about the last comment. If partner has just been dealt 13 non-descript cards, will they really take any action? Do they know that their role in life is to produce a spade hold and one trick somewhere?

Let’s hear from the “distorters”;

Peter Newell “Agree with 2: The other options would be double or 3NT.  Clearly 2 is an underbid, but it rarely will end the auction.  Double is awkward as partner may jump in spades. I can bid  over this, but it doesn’t always work out well…3NT is a reasonable shot, but on a heart lead, you probably need partner to have an ace….”

Kris Wooles “Agree with 2: if I double, I suspect partner will leapt in ’s (on this hand) and I would have to keep bidding ’s. At least with 2 we have preserved bidding space but I have a lot of concealed strength. If partner had an ace, then 3NT would work but so might 6.

My last two experiences of such a double of 1with a spade shortage found partner with 8 then 7 spades. I learnt my lesson of bidding a 5- level minor after the first bad experience! A gamble is a great bid when it works and 3NT is a gamble at that point. If one is not prepared to take that risk, then I would prefer an ultra-strong overcall to a misleading double.

The overcall did not end the bidding. Indeed, everyone joined the party! So, whereto now with our “diamond delight”? Our Panel were almost united:

Nigel Kearney “3NT: There's a decent chance partner has an ace, and we can't do any less.”

Since Nigel bid this a round earlier, you would not be surprised by his answer now. This time, he had company:

Bruce Anderson “3NT: After an initial underbid, I now bid 3NT. Partner is bidding constructively so could well hold an ace. I am trying to show long solid diamonds and a heart stop. Given that I started with 2, it is very unlikely I have a strong semi-balanced hand.   If I now hear 4, I pass.”

Peter Newell “3NT: yes, 3 would work better if partner has the Q as we can right side 3NT, but we may miss 3NT when partner has an ace..(over 3 partner may bid 4).”

Stephen Blackstock “3NT: Now the boring 3NT looks as good as any. If the opponents’ bidding is to be believed, North has a doubleton heart (no pre-emptive raise by West, no rebid by East) – if that is so, 5 is most unlikely to be better. I would like North to be declarer (Qx?), but 3 now may take us past 3NT if North doesn’t have the magic heart holding.

While partner might produce that Q, the majority of the hearts are with those who bid them…and so are most likely the missing honours. If we went above 3NT, would that be a worry? Not to our other panellist:

Kris Wooles “4NT: Seems like partner will have shortage in hearts so we will have some ruffs. I’m not sure how 3 might be read so I’d likely bid 4NT (1430?) and bid 6 over 5 and pass a 5 (0) response. Ever the optimist but I hope (at least before I see dummy) they don’t lead a trump.

Flat board, Kris. Flat with all the other panellists. Partner did not produce an ace. So, you would have recorded the same -50 as those in 3NT did. This assumes that a heart would have been led against both contracts, though it was not necessary to beat 5 as these were the actual hands (and some good picking of the heart position by Stephen Blackstock):

 

Our partner could not produce an ace, nor anything useful in hearts. There was nothing South could do to get an extra trick in 3NT. East was not under pressure even with 7 rounds of diamonds played and the contract failed.

 

There’s still a place for conservatism

Yet, at the table, South bid just 3 and North, with nothing looking like an ace, passed…for those 5 imps in. It seems to ask a lot of North to go further than 3 if they were looking at one black ace. They were not, this time, and therefore South’s conservatism paid off. “Wrong” say the Panel but “right” on this day.

Ignorance is still Bliss

What we know about the bidding is "not enough" but will have to do. (2 showed hearts and clubs, Michaels style, though there was no agreement as to strength or what 2 would have meant from East..presumably Michaels as well!).

You doubled 2 trying to show three card support for partner though got no reaction. 3 was preference and there you were, to make a decision. 3NT had some merit. So, you tried to it and no-one doubled!

The lead is the K and armed with not a lot of information, your aim is to make 9 tricks…don’t worry at this stage about overtricks!

The good news is that there is more than one way to success, though there are a few ways to failure, too!

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items