All News

Could Be Worse.

That’s one way to describe our partner’s bidding on today’s deal. We have got two nice suits of our own and unusually, the suit in which our partner has plenty, is not our shortest. We have a fit! Onwards, for sure, but how far upwards?

 

Pairs All Vul.

A promising couple of bids from partner… but how promising? How aggressive do you want to be?

Short and sweet and not accurate in his prediction is:

Michael Ware “4: unanimous surely.”

Michael’s answer is a statement not a question! He should know you only need to ask two bridge players the same question to get four different answers! We have three different answers today though Michael does have some support:

Pam Livingston “4: 3 shows 6 and I am bidding game in the known fit.  With a better hand, I would bid 4 to show a great raise.

I agree re the lack of aces but your KJ are surely very valuable. For me, 4 sounds more like a small doubleton heart.

Kris Wooles “4: assuming I have shown an above average hand with spades and clubs and secondary heart support. Partner can bid again if he/she does then I like my hand."

 

Bruce Anderson “4: It is tempting to take control via Roman Key Card as partner is very likely to have a 6-card suit headed by AQ, and I hold such a strong spade suit. But what if partner holds a hand like xx AQ10xxx Axx xx; the response will be 5 playing 1430 and the slam will have no play on a club lead.

After my showing heart support partner and a strong hand, partner should move over 4 with a hand that includes two aces and the K; either using RKC or cue bidding 5. To the latter bid, I can cue bid 5 and the slam reached opposite say; Ax AQ10xxx xxxx Kx.”

 

Certainly, 4 need not end the auction. However, others have more ambition.

 

Andy Braithwaite “4NT: key card- partner must have a good hand to bid 3 rather than 4 over a game forcing 3.”

4 would probably be a weaker (10/11 hcp) hand with 7 or maybe 6 good hearts. 3 is not necessarily stronger as we know our partner’s heart suit is not solid. Agreeing and with my feelings about 4 is:

Nigel Kearney “4: Cue bid agreeing hearts. I want to do something more encouraging than just bidding 4 which I might do with a small doubleton or even a singleton. I'm assuming this is Acol where partner could have as little asxx AQxxxx Kxx xx.”

Stephen Blackstock “4: Slam interest in hearts. South should have a good suit in this sequence, say AQ109xx would be typical, so KJ is good support. A raise to 4 would be inadequate. Of course, a seven-card suit might be less solid, so ironically more trumps may mean more excitement!

Key card isn’t good enough here, the placement of South’s outside values is critical. Ax AQ109xxxxx xx is virtually a laydown slam, xx,AQ109xx,Axx,xx needs a misdefence. A singleton spade ace opposite complicates communications too, and only South can know whether that problem exists. Tell South that North is interested, and see what he can offer. “

 

Peter Newell “4: I am a bit torn between this and the more aggressive 4NT. What does 3 show, a better hand than 4 but may not have good enough hearts for 4, and there may be uncertainty about strain (and better hearts than a 3 bid would show) – still quite a few different types of hands.

 I have quite a good hand for hearts, excellent heart support, useful shape, and a spade suit that should provide pitches for diamonds and possibly club(s).  Leaving aside the club suit for now, I really want to know how many key cards partner has and whether they have the Q.  However, it is likely that the opposition will lead a diamond or a club. A club lead could easily be fatal if partner has 2 or 3 small clubs and no A and good hearts – bidding 4 does tip them off into being more likely to lead a club, than a diamond, but probably increases the chance of a trump lead.

As partner can have quite a range of hand, I’ll start with 4 which must be a cue bid. I cannot be introducing a 4^th suit at the 4 level.  4NT looks like it is an overbid given partner may not be that strong.”

 

Interestingly, the aggressive bid taken by the Panel is 4. Presumably, they would regard 4 as natural rather than a cue in this auction.

 

At the table, North did try a 4 cue-bid and East either missed their opportunity or hoped partner would find the right lead.

 

 

 

Had East doubled 4, South could pass (slam interest but no second-round club control) and North-South should never reach slam. As it was, South’s response to Key Card (2 with the Q) and the average slam was reached. Average became quite good when West led a diamond and it was East who held the A.

 

East exited a second spade with declarer able to play three rounds of trumps, overtaking and discarding three minor losers on the long spades.

 

Had East returned a diamond, declarer has to ruff in dummy, play their other high heart and then play two rounds of spades, ruffing/ over-ruffing depending on whether East ruffs. Declarer now only needs two discards and the slam will still be made.

 

Some interesting questions thrown up around the bidding. The only fact that is certain is that there was no “unanimous Panel”.

 

“Great Dummy: Thanks, Partner”

 

 

“Shame about my own hand!”

 

That might be what South said and thought when faced with the challenge of making 4 here. West started with three rounds of hearts (AK then small heart, East showing an even number of hearts.) You ruff the third round. What next on Jan’s Day?

 

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items