All News

 

“I heard you, partner….but!”

For Less Experienced Players..and Others

When only 1 out of 8 pairs reached the right game on the following deal in a “not so new” player session, it seemed worth investigating why.

 

What to bid? Are you going to play the board or get the coffees?

A 6-2 heart fit seemed good enough for most as they raised to the heart game which proved a little awkward to make. Only one pair played in the comparative safety of the spade game. Our Panel voted unanimously for spades, the only variation being the meaning of 3 and 4 from North in the above auction. Why 4 and why spades rather than hearts?

Matt Brown “4: Even if partner has 0-1 spades, our hand will play fine, and it will surely play much better than 4 where we potentially have no entries to our spade suit and no other real help for partner.”

Michael Ware “4: Playable opposite a void, hand potentially worth zero tricks in hearts due to no entry.”

Peter Newell “4: My hand will often play better in spades than hearts as my spades are unlikely to be much use in a heart contract and I don’t look to have much in the way of entries. So, by bidding 4, I’m showing a limited hand (but not terrible) with a self-sufficient suit.

Michael Cornell “4: simple. Most of the time, we have 5 spade tricks plus the Q. With partner’s decent hand, we will normally have 10 and hopefully without 4 losers first. If partner has a short spade, our hand is almost worthless unless we play in spades. Even I want to, I don’t / cannot play 3 as that is a forcing bid.”

That’s the way I like it, too. You just cannot stop in 3 as that should be a stronger hand, or one where you cannot be sure of the final contract (less strong spades and no heart support). So fast arrival here applies, though not for all:

Nigel Kearney “3: I definitely want to play in spades because I will be able to use partner's heart winners and he will probably not be able to use my spades if playing in hearts. Also, there could be an extra loser in hearts if his suit is less than solid. 

The trickier question is whether this hand should jump to 4 now, or bid 3 then 4. My general principle about fast arrival is that it applies only when the lower bid would be forcing and sets trumps. Otherwise, a jump shows extra values. Here, 3 is forcing but does not set trumps. That means 4 would show slam interest in a spade contract and 3 then 4 is the signoff.”

 

while still keeping hearts in the picture are

Bruce Anderson “3: must be forcing and offers the choice of major suit games; the spade suit must be semi-solid at least. Admittedly, if partner has a singleton spade, 4 could be precarious. But in the event opener has a golden maximum for their bid, with a partial fit in spades  i.e. Ax AKQxxx Axxx  x, a slam might be bid.”

Stephen Blackstock “3: Looks normal for now, but both 4 (weaker than 3) and 4 are also sensible. 4 may not be so great if partner has seven hearts and a spade void.

I’m pleased you didn’t ask what I will do if South continues with 3NT. Very close now what is best. I would tend towards 4 to ensure my hand has some value, but perhaps the lead coming around to South is worth something.

 

We will save that tough question for another day. For several of our panel, it would not have arisen as they would have reached 4 a round earlier. While partner’s 7 card heart suit and void spade makes me just a little nervous about my 4 choice, there would still be the question of what to do with partner’s losing cards in 4as they would have virtually no access to my hand.

So, let’s look what happened to 4:

 

 

West led their singleton against 4 even without East bidding (bidding looks like offering oneself for a huge minus on many days). South played low from dummy and won their ace to play their spade. West won their ace and knew declarer wanted to discard losers on the high spades in dummy but would get a rude shock as long as East could ruff. So, they exited 8 (2^nd highest from 4 small) and waited.

Sure enough, out came AK and a ruff to be followed by K and a look of severe disappointment from South as East ruffed. South overruffed and played a high trump. West won to play a 4^th club leaving declarer trapped in hand with two certain diamond losers…down one.

Meanwhile, the Q was a standard lead against 4. (This contract would have made more easily had East led a low diamond.) North could win and play a spade to the king and then a second high spade taken by West's ace. West led their diamond. North covered and won in dummy (10 Q K A) and played K won by West who now played a second club. Declarer played a third round of hearts discarding a diamond and then another heart which West ruffed. North did very well to throw their remaining diamond loser in this position:

 

 

Had they overruffed, they would have had a spade and a diamond loser and would have been one down having already lost to both major aces.

“

  of games,” South was heard to say!

The play of the hand was tricky because of the bad spade break. Had the spade break been more even, both contracts would have made though playing in spades would very rarely have been worse than playing in hearts. The less spades South had, the truer that last comment is.

What is important.. and of this the Panel all agreed:

• ·        3 would be 100% forcing.

• ·        It is usually better to choose as trumps the suit in the hand with few or no outside entries. (observe the play in 4).

• ·        For some, 4 was a fast arrival action. Others took a slower way of reaching this spot. All the Panel played 4 on this deal. Did you? 

 

Happy East?

Look at the following bidding sequence and the East-West hands. The final contract was defeated by four tricks, doubled -800 but East was soon very happy. Why?

 

 

2 promised both majors and the redouble showed a good hand in the context of the bidding. The doubles of 4 and 4 were NOT for take-out!

 

Do not beat your head in too much to find the answer but do tune in tomorrow.

 

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items