All News

What’s the Question?

Well, if you knew the question, then you might be able to give the answer! What is your partner doing? Have you ever had cause to wonder about that? Just once or twenty times! So?

 

 

1 promised at least three clubs while 3 was definitely pre-emptive not constructive. We are playing match-point Pairs.

That last comment caused one of our Panellists to end the auction very quickly:

Stephen Blackstock “Pass: Clear-cut at Pairs, more questionable at IMPs. The main options are pass, 3NT and 4 (I would rather bid 4 than 4 but neither appeals). 3NT will require nine runners on a spade lead; of course, it’s not impossible that partner has the right hand but my empty clubs and lack of any diamond fit suggest that 3NT is unlikely. 4 is also a long way away: I don’t expect four hearts opposite.  With that holding he might – and arguably should – have doubled 1. East’s shortage will have suggested that the auction would probably return to him at 3 or higher. On the other hand, there are many layouts that see 3 down, and +200 will beat any who don’t bid a making game – and if we have a game, it’s not clear we will bid the right one.

 

At IMPs in a short match, I would probably try 3NT. It’s the most likely game to make, and unlike -730 it shouldn’t be catastrophic if 3NT goes down. In a long match I would still be tempted to play the percentages and take the expected plus against 3x. Bidding on and accepting -100 when I might have been +200 is expensive also. And if it’s wrong to pass the double, there will be a lot of boards to get those points back.”

 

I suppose it is a question of style. Normally, with 6+ diamonds and 4 hearts, I would bid a forcing 2 and follow up, hopefully, with a heart bid. With only 5 diamonds and 4 hearts, I would double 1. Either way, I agree with Stephen that our partner does not have four hearts.

There does seem to be some disagreement about that or at least that it is now time to show our second suit:

Nigel Kearney “4: It's ok to pass a take-out double with a balanced hand at this level. My values are quite defensive and often pass will be correct. But I prefer to take my chances in 4 in order to stay with the field and avoid a bottom, and sometimes they will try 4 over 4.”

 

Pam Livingston “4: Doubles are for take-out and partner is unlimited.”
Both parts of this comment are certainly true. Our partner has surely an opening hand and maybe more. Yet, are they really wanting us to bid 4 now? Not says:

Andy Braithwaite “4: Partner would have doubled with 4 hearts initially so I bid 4 to show 5 clubs and a poor stop for 3NT.

Bruce Anderson “4: I am taking the view that partner is making an action type double with at least three clubs.

Bidding 4 could be right if partner has diamonds and four hearts with the strength to make a responder’s reverse. But with four hearts, he/she may have made a negative double over 1.

I am not prepared to risk going overboard by bidding 4 and passing for penalties risks a bottom.”

 

However, one Panelist does show a no-trump hold:

 

Michael Cornell “ 3NT: and partner will need a good hand to make it!

Having said that AKQJxx  and K will certainly do the trick.

Unless partner is very strong/distributional, he would x 1 with 4 hearts so that is unlikely but unless he does have solid diamonds, I would expect him with the big hand to bid over 3NT and I will then bid 4.”

 

Well, Michael was going some way to answering the question which our partner raised with his “action double” though even 3NT did not answer 100%:

 

 

 

 

It was not for 3NT that East needed a spade stop but for 6! If that spade stop was QJx, then the slam was not a place to be. However, with either ace or king in the West hand and if the king, the lead protected with West declarer, then 12 tricks in clubs looked pretty likely.

Presumably, Michael Cornell’s East might have continued with 4 though it seems unclear then whether 4 by West would be natural or a cue bid. I vote for the latter. 

What is clear is that bids other than 3NT would not have answered the question which East needed answering.

This time passing 3x would/ should have beaten those in game, as 3 down would have yielded + 800 but there was 1370 to be had rather comfortably in 6 while life in the real fast lane was available for those who tried 6NT. North’s four discards to five rounds of clubs might reveal a player clinging on to four diamonds. Would you be there for a second- round diamond finesse?

 

One pair in the final of New Zealand Open Pairs bid to 6NT with the declarer, Jonathan Westoby, coming to 12 tricks in a most unusual way. The lead was North’s club. Jonathan played five rounds of clubs and K which, North, Peter Gill ducked! Could it be he held a second trick, perhaps in diamonds?

Making 6NT....

 
Jonathan Westoby

 

Peter had thrown two spades and two hearts on the run of the clubs. So, Jonathan tried three top diamonds getting the bad news. These cards remained:

He cashed K. North was known to have two more spades (for his overcall) including the ace and J. Jonathan overtook 9 with 10 and claimed 12 tricks, losing  just to J at trick 13. Not so much “life in the fast lane"…more like the express lane!

 

Four different answers from 6 Panellists. No worries that a united Panel would bid 3NT!

 

A variation on a well-played board , a story, a sad story or two tomorrow.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items