All News

 

or no trumps?

Where are we heading?

Upwards… but which way? We have a wonderful six-card major and a fair hand. Partner has a few values, maybe enough to raise us to the spade game..but is that where we want to be?

 

If partner’s honours were say Q and AJ, then 10 tricks in spades might be a long off. Our textbook bid is 3 leaving partner to make the decision for us. Nagging in the back of our minds is that we might be able to come to 9 tricks in no-trumps far more easily than say 10 in spades..and unless partner has a singleton spade and maximum values, will they know that is the case? Let’s hear from the Panel:

Playing Pairs, there is a touch of conservatism, going with the field, perhaps going less tricks down if we cannot make game:

Nigel Kearney “3: Tough one as it's right between 3 and 3NT. At IMP scoring I would bid 3NT as spades has to play two tricks better to really gain. But at matchpoint scoring, spades only has to play one trick better and I prefer to choose the normal/field action unless it is clear to do otherwise, and try to gain a trick in the play.”

Andy Braithwaite “3: at Pairs- not quite enough for 4 and a singleton diamond not good for 3NT.”

Stephen Blackstock “3: At IMPs, I have a strong preference for 3NT: it might be cold, or it may have nine running tricks if the opponents guess the wrong lead.

 However, at Pairs I am more conservative. I don’t want to make a top or bottom call without more evidence that it’s the right action. My estimate is that the majority of the field will bid 3 (some 4), so I am willing to stay with them for now and hope that we get a good result when partner judges well or we outplay the field as declarer. We are not going to win very often if our declarer play is worse than that of the field! Of course, the context is important too: in a World Pairs final for example, I would be more aggressive as I expect the field there to be in game.

Bruce Anderson “3: The value bid. I am presuming the 1NT bid is natural and not forcing. There is the obvious risk we are off a red suit if I bid 3NT. Partner is still there and can convert to 3NT with better than a minimum response.     

It is Pairs, so even with 7 top tricks for NTs, I am going to let partner decide the final contract, rather than take the risk of a negative score.”

 

Meanwhile, others are prepared to give 3NT a go because we just might be in a good contract…and as Pam kind of says, “if you cannot be good, you can be lucky!”

Michael Cornell “3NT: I have the right values for 3 but partner could easily pass with 7-8 points and a singleton spade.

In any case I have 7 solid tricks + what could be useful red honours and the 10 could lead to another trick.

 

Pam Livingston “3NT: I've got seven tricks and some useful cards in every suit.  Maybe between us we can come up with two more.  Doesn't give the opening leader much to go on.”

If they concede the first five or six diamond tricks, they will have Peter as good company:

Peter Newell “3NT: While this will at times be a poor contract, I think 3NT has a pretty reasonable chance of making, and 4 considerably less likely (finding 3 tricks in partner’s hand is harder than 2 and cards like J10  will be useful in NT but much less likely to be in 4).

  I considered 3, which will help us avoid 3NT when it is wrong, as partner will need some strength in the red suits to bid 3NT.  However, 3 gives away some info, and I think I’m better off at Pairs just bashing 3NT without giving the opponents any clues.”

Here’s another who thought of alternatives:

Michael Ware “3NT: Without any system, it’s a bit of a gamble. I think with this suit 3NT is best.

With system I would do either bid 2 Gazzilli or 2NT GF so I can find out whether partner has 5+hearts or not.

I think the point about a 5-3 heart fit is a good one. It does seem to be a pity if we have a 5-3 heart and a 6-2 spade fit and yet fail in 3NT for the lack of a diamond hold.

The sun is shining and I am writing this article in one of the most beautiful NZ lake-side settings. So, in keeping with such good humour, I am delighted to be able to report that 3NT will definitely and 4 will almost certainly make. So, is it 430 v 420? Not this time as there is very unlikely to be an over-trick in the no-trump game:

 

At the table North bid 3NT. West led a small diamond, with a relieved dummy seeing North win the first trick. There could be no subtle exploration of the club suit with South restricted to 8 black suit tricks and the Q. Meanwhile, a top heart would solve most of North’s problems in 4, only “most” because had West a doubleton heart, this contract would have been a certain one down.

well, is best this time

4 is a lot harder on a neutral spade or even a diamond lead. What would North discard on the second round of diamonds if West was unkind enough to continue the suit? If you discard a heart, then you have to play clubs for no losers and if you discard a club, you will have to play hearts for just two losers.

However, today, 420 is likely to beat 400 with a high heart lead but that does not mean it was necessarily right to be in the spade game. South would almost certainly raise to 4 if our choice had been 3.  

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items