All News

Not for the faint-hearted.

If you are newish to the game of bridge or indeed if you are a purist whose bids vaguely resemble what they were supposed to be when you first learnt to play, then today’s article is not for you. Bidding can be a hurly-burly and there is nothing like favourable vulnerability to give creative minds (for now, we will use such a polite term) a chance to express their “creativity”.

You have been warned! Please, though, do read on.

 

 

You are playing Teams and your partner has made a normal take-out double of the opposition’s first in hand pre-empt. Two questions for you.

1.    What did you mean by the double of 3?

2.    What now?

How we treat the double of 3 may well influence our subsequent action. Most of our Panel are united on the meaning of our double:

Pam Livingston “Penalties: My partner doubled for take-out and now we have exposed the psyche by North.”

Stephen Blackstock “Penalties: Playing normal bridge, East’s double is 100% penalty. Anything else is an open invitation to the opponents to steal. Now we can still play spades if North is fooling around.”

Michael Cornell “Penalties: but I know RHO is pulling my leg and I would have made the bid of 4 that I would have always done.”

Agreeing spades?

Andy Braithwaite “Penalties: trying to catch a psychic 3 from North.

This would be a classic time and vulnerability for North to try to muddy the waters.”

Kris Wooles and Michael Ware agreed as did:

 

Peter Newell “Penalties: it is fairly unusual to play anything else. It’s a fairly common mini psych to bid a suit you haven’t got when you have good support for partner’s suit and a weak hand.”

 

However:

Bruce Anderson “Negative: Those who use modern methods advocate a double always being for take-out and there is merit in that approach. It argued that is it better to be able to make a negative double in response to partner’s initial bid, even if the if the auction rapidly advances to a high level. Partner is still there and can protect by doubling when it seems likely there has been a penalty pass over the opponents’ competitive bidding.

 On this hand the double showed values and must show 4 hearts.”

 

While we have a large number of negative doubles around these days, and rightly so, there are times when double really should show the suit bid …and in the long run, surely that is the best approach here? Our partner has a minimum three card spade suit most of the time. We have 4 good ones and the opposition bid the suit. Expose that psychic bid and try to create a sensible auction after your opponent runs back to clubs.

Aye, there’s the rub. We must be more than cold for game and the real question is whether we can make slam and indeed how high. Remember, partner made a take-out double of 3.

 

There’s the one bid approach:

Bruce Anderson “6: I can see no way to get my hand across, so I am bidding what I think we can make.

I must admit I am not sure what partner is doing as with 4 hearts they might well have bid game in hearts over my double of 3. And with a 5350 hand partner might have bid 3 over 3, rather than doubling. Possibly partner’s shape is 4351, with QJ10x. Anyway, I am not bidding a speculative grand, so 6 it is.”

 

Or the forcing pass one. Yes, Pass just must be forcing!

 

Michael Ware “Pass: forcing - no need to take our room away yet. If partner bids 4, we will bid 6/7. If 4 then I bid 5.”

Our next Panellists highlight our problem:

Pam Livingston “5: to show a good hand.  My partner knows I have spades.”

Kris Wooles “5: I’m not entirely comfortable in light of this smoke screen but will bid 5. My other choice would be 4 showing both majors (after my double of 3) but I think I am just too strong for that bid.”

Nigel Kearney “Double: This is a responsive double. Partner can pass it with a balanced hand but will bid with short clubs. I've shown spades with my previous double but 4 now could be a lot weaker than this. I'd like to establish what trumps are before inviting slam.”

4 from us would confirm the trump suit but would possibly be passable. We are just too strong for that. Similarly, a natural 4 might also be passed. While both partners are aware that 3 was likely a psyche, there always lingers the doubt that North does have a 5-card spade suit.

Heading towards slam are:

Stephen Blackstock “5: I have excellent cards for slam, possibly a grand although that may be hard to reach with confidence now. I will probably bid 6 next and leave the rest to partner. Perhaps I should do that now to ensure South is on lead and a heart contract doesn’t suffer a spade ruff at trick one. However, if I don’t show the club control, the small chance partner can raise diminishes even further.”

Andy Braithwaite “5: So, what has partner got? At least 12 points and a singleton club at most, with at least 1 major. I therefore bid 5 to show slam interest in the majors, and will bid 6 over partner’s major response. If 5 is the response, I will bid 6 to ask again.”

Michael Cornell “5: and now with the certainty of no club loser will press on to a major slam. Over 5 I will bid 6 and over 5 will still look for grand with 6.”

Peter Newell “5: very difficult to find a descriptive bid.  This hand looks very good in many ways. Partner will usually have a singleton or possibly void in clubs, and if singleton means we have no wasted honours in clubs.

Partner has made a take-out double and we have majors and lots of controls, so slam looks very likely, but in what suit? Hearts looks most likely, but spades is also possible but only if partner has 4+ and North didn’t have spades for their 3 bid, which at this vulnerability looks quite possible. We could collect about 800 off 4 doubled, by leading trumps that would leave the opponents to make 5-6 club tricks and probably 1 more from a ruff or a side suit. It Is close between double and 5 for me and it would partly depend on whether I felt North really had a spade suit which makes bidding less appealing.

I lean slightly towards 5 as I think we are likely to make slam in a major. Double is quite appealing as while suggesting defending, partner may choose to bid again particularly given that they know I have spades from having doubled.  While slam is quite likely, partner with shapes like 4351 (occasionally partner will have a doubleton club too).

5 certainly heads us towards slam though pass or double seems to keep the bidding lower and might enable one partner to use Roman Key Card, especially West who saw their partner make a penalty double of 3.

However, before looking at the hands below, please rest assured that the North-South hands are correct as neither really conforms to the bids the players made:

 

 

Either pass or double from East would have left West well-placed. They could have taken the money. K lead (and why not!) would have left South with just 3 tricks (-2,000) a reasonable result though still 5 imps short of the grand-slam score. (At the other table, South “woodenly” passed… I shall apologize in writing to this South player for this comment.. and the grand was reached.)

West’s other alternative after double or pass would be 4NT Key Card in spades. The three key-card response would have enabled West to have bid the grand slam. Unfortunately, it was East who did the asking and small slam was the end result.

“Crime does pay”

Not your ideal pre-empt? Quite right. However, South chose their moment well and was in the winning team at the end of the day. I do have a good insurance policy and can at least say that Brad and Sam bid aggressively on this board and of course their teammates, David Skipper and Glenn Coutts, played their part too.

 

 

 

Go Back View All News Items