The Aces on Bridge: Friday, March 4th, 2016
Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.
Nils Bohr
| W | North |
|---|---|
| N-S | ♠ J 9 8 7 ♥ J 4 3 ♦ K J 6 3 ♣ A Q |
| West | East |
|---|---|
| ♠ K 6 5 4 3 ♥ 10 ♦ A 8 4 ♣ J 10 9 2 |
♠ 10 ♥ K Q 9 6 2 ♦ Q 9 7 ♣ 7 6 5 3 |
| South |
|---|
| ♠ A Q 2 ♥ A 8 7 5 ♦ 10 5 2 ♣ K 8 4 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pass | 1 ♦ | Pass | |
| 1 ♥ | 1 ♠ | Dbl.* | Pass |
| 3 NT | All pass |
*Three-card heart support
♣J
Had North or South been able to reach three no-trump without bidding a major, they would probably have received a favorable lead. But today West was warned off the spade lead, so selected the club jack for his opening salvo. What would you expect the fate of the game to be?
The club lead was won in dummy with the queen, as East followed with the seven, and the spade seven led to the 10 and ace. Declarer then took the losing diamond finesse. The low club return was won in dummy and a diamond played to the 10. When West ducked this, declarer seemed to be very short of tricks. But he cashed the club king and now stripped off West’s heart by leading out the ace, then played a third diamond. West had no choice but to win. Although he could cash his club winner, he then had to lead a spade, giving declarer both a cheap spade trick and also an entry to dummy’s stranded diamond king.
The key to the defense was East’s signal at trick one. When East followed with the club seven he was giving count in a position where it was clear what his attitude was (since he could not beat the queen). So West should have unblocked both the club nine and 10 on the second and third rounds of the suit, leaving himself an entry to his partner’s hand if declarer tried to endplay him.
As a defender, consider giving count (or even occasionally suit preference) if your attitude is already defined by bridge logic.
Your partner is not cuebidding for spades. He has a rock-crusher with clubs. Your hand is very suitable for higher things, so you must not pass now. I’m not sure if it best to cuebid five hearts, raise to six clubs, or whether you can risk five diamonds as an unequivocal cuebid for clubs. I’d choose between five hearts and six clubs based on my estimate of partner’s declarer play skill and his natural optimism.
BID WITH THE ACES
| ♠ K 6 5 4 3 ♥ 10 ♦ A 8 4 ♣ J 10 4 2 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pass | 3 ♥ | Dbl. | Pass |
| 4 ♠ | Pass | 5 ♣ | Pass |
| ? |
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
On BWTA my concern with 5 hearts would be that partner would read this as a first round control. Going to 6 clubs would then show the second round control but deny first round.
On a totally different bidding question, if
1D 1H 2D Dbl is responsive,
what should be the meaning of this?
1D 1H 2H Dbl
Since you are almost certainly outgunned and opponents may be heading to 3NT, should this still be responsive, suggest a safe heart lead (you have a top 3 honor), or something else? Would vulnerability matter?
Go luck at the Nationals
Hi Ted,
You bring up an interesting point, especially directed to what and how to bid, when slam is in the offing, but there is little bidding spade left available.
Simply, both partners need to know, because of the lack of bidding space, some make do
demands its presence. There are four plus features to your hand, the king of spades, not the queen jack, the 2nd round heart control, assuming that partner must have the ace, the monumental ace of diamonds, and of course, the surprisingly good club fit (length).
Yes, the player bidding doesn’t always have perfect bidding options, specifically and at these levels almost never, so he should send a clear message (interest in a grand slam) by cuebidding the opponents suit at the five level in a suit higher than partner’s going to be the trump suit.
Yes, sometimes this type of assumption involves some risk, but how could partner first take the trouble to make a TO double without the usual requirement of good support for the other major and not have first round control of the opponents suit while missing the other features which I hold (above).
This type of reasoning is ever present in high-level bridge, without which that partnership will have a ceiling on what level they can achieve. No guarantees, but only making valid assumptions (hopefully) based on experience and fortitude.
Your second query is also worth more discussion. Yes when the bidding goes 1D-1H-2D-Dbl it is responsive and may typically hold:
s. QJxxx, h. Jx, d. x, c. AQ10xx, but when the bidding instead goes 1D-1H-2H-Dbl, the doubler is more likely to hold s. Jxx, h. Kxx, d. xxx, c. Axxx where he both wants to show support but bidding 3 hearts is too much, and also will prefer a heart lead. While holding instead: s. Jxxx, h. xxxx, d. x, c. Axxx I would prefer the slight overbid of 3 hearts rather than double for the obvious reasons: 1. I need to show my support, 2. Not as specifically lead directing, 3. Fewer hcps but slightly more trick taking potential 4. Its a bidders game.
Do not forget the stronger auction of 1D, 1H, 2H, 3D, which might show, s. Jxxxx, H. KQx, d. x c. AJxx. With even a stronger hand a two way jump to 4 hearts may be preemptive but also may expect to have no trouble making it.
That effort is designed to keep the opponents from just assuming that your bid is basically preemptive which you would also make with s. xxxxx, h. Jxxxx, d. void c. KQJ. Yes, the vulnerability and who the opponents are, might make a small difference, but in order to raise your partnership’s effectiveness it is necessary to not be totally predictable to them, otherwise they will hardly ever make a mistake against you, signifying much trouble for your results.
Thanks for your good luck wish with the current Nationals, but Judy and I didn’t even go to Reno, only signifying a certain age. BTW in contrast, I attended 44 straight summer nationals from 1959-2003 (playing in every Spingold) before finally missing one, but father time finds a way to be heard, at least he did with me.