Hi Bobby,

Shouldn’t the north hand jump to four spades instead of bidding three spades? With only four points and a balanced hand, why encourage partner to look past game? I was taught that a three spade call in this type of auction promises a better hand. Wrong??

Thanks!

Hi Jane,

Thanks for presenting a relatively simple bidding problem which, in truth, provides a caveat worth remembering.

NO, it is certainly not necessarily true that 4 spades shows this hand, while 3 spades is a likely move toward slam. If the weak hand held:

s. Qxxx

h. xx

d. xxx

c. xxxx,

then a jump to 4 spades would be satisfying your description. However, with the actual hand, you MUST give partner an opportunity to bid 3NT which you should be happy to pass. Partner could hold: AKQJxx Ax, Axx, Kx or even AKQxx, Axx, AKx, Kx making 3NT, especially in rubber bridge or IMPs, markedly better.

The litmus test to determine what bids mean what is usually not passed along the grape vine, but rather the expert bridge logic involved in the determination.

Picture yourself on a desert island with no distractions, trying to formulate the better meaning of whatever bids needed to be discussed. It would immediately (or at least pretty fast) come to you that when a bid is jumped to, like 4 spades in this example, the hand should represent one that is only going to play spades, after the opening salvo of bidding, regardless of what partner conjures up. The hand with length in spades, but very weak (no outside controls) then becomes the choice but not the Aces on Bridge hand which certainly might prefer a 3NT final contract. Of course, 3 spades can also be bid on a much stronger hand, trying to elicit partner into cue bidding, rather than just bidding out a minimum strong 2 bid.

High-level bridge learning needs intense concentration and creative knowledge of the way the game itself should be played, not half-hearted street corner discussion.

“Little by little we can do great things, at least with the subject of bridge”.

Thanks for writing and opening up various bridge subjects.

The only island I would consider being deserted on, given a choice, would be Hawaii or Bermuda, and then I would prefer a nice resort. Probably too many distractions there for me to become the thinker that you describe. Isn’t it usually better to play in a known major suit fit than NT? My concern would still be how partner would read my raise to three spades, thinking I have more than I do. I agree if partner does bid three NT, I would pass and hope for the best. My partners would be thrilled to know I can support their major however. Guess we would all need to go to that island you mentioned, sit on the beach, and become better bridge students and thinkers!

Thanks for the advice. Greatly appreciated, as always!

Hi Jane,

OK, desert island or not, 3 spades by the responder is forcing to game, and could either be the hand she held or a much stronger one, interested in bidding either a small or even a grand slam.

The strong hand, holding a minimum strong 2 bid, would either bid 4 spades (normal) or 3NT with one of the example hands given, to try and reach a better game contract. Then responder, with the bare positive response of 2 diamonds would certainly pass 4 spades or either also pass 3NT or convert to 4 spades with for example, Qxxx, Kxxx, Jx, xxx or xxx, x, Kxxxx, J10xx.

However if responder had Qxxx, xx, Axxxx, Kx, she should bid 4 diamonds over 3NT or 5 diamonds over 4 spades to show a diamond control and a slam interest,

keeping in mind:

1. The strong hand has shown a minimum (although very strong) hand by her bid of either 3NT or 4 spades.

2. You, the responder has denied holding a singleton or void together with enough outside values by your 3 spade bid: With xxx, x, Kxxxx, J10xx a 3 spade raise, not a 4 heart shortness jump is called for, since this hand is just too weak to warrant such a jump. However with xxxx, x, Kxxxx, QJx then, at least in my judgment, 4 hearts should be bid in response to 2 spades.

3. And the beat goes on. If I am venturing into areas which some may think are beyond them now and, as far as they are concerned, will always be beyond them, please, forgive me, but first realize that bridge, unlike physical sports like tennis and golf, actually have no unachievable mental barriers, even for geezers (like me).

Consequently, old roosters in the chicken yard can go prancing around, knowing that all bridge learning is possible and perhaps the nearest hen might be interested in what is going on, especially if that hen is also bridge inclined.

The old saying that “no hill is too steep for a climber” was almost specially meant for the high-level game of bridge, since, though it is a very tough game to achieve super status, there are so many rewarding levels to reach, that it offers scintillating opportunities on the way, to many who merely try.

The above should serve as food for thought.