The Aces on Bridge: Thursday, March 24th, 2016
Rudeness is the weak man’s imitation of strength.
Eric Hoffer
| S | North |
|---|---|
| Both | ♠ Q 10 ♥ 9 7 4 ♦ A K Q 9 3 ♣ 10 9 8 |
| West | East |
|---|---|
| ♠ 9 7 6 4 2 ♥ A Q 6 ♦ 7 5 2 ♣ J 4 |
♠ K J 5 ♥ 8 5 3 2 ♦ J 10 6 4 ♣ Q 6 |
| South |
|---|
| ♠ A 8 3 ♥ K J 10 ♦ 8 ♣ A K 7 5 3 2 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 ♣ | Pass | 1 ♦ | Pass |
| 3 ♣ | Pass | 3 ♦ | Pass |
| 3 NT | All pass |
♠4
North qualifies as a true member of the Dyspeptics Club, being one of the more naturally sarcastic and cynical players one would ever have the displeasure to meet at the table. He claims not to need an excuse, saying that until he met South, his regular partner, butter would not have melted in his mouth. But these days he has run out of sympathy for his partner, especially when South gets careless as declarer – yet again.
Today was just such an example. South had got his side to three no-trump, against which West led a fourth-highest spade. (With such good hearts, leading the seven, second highest from a weak suit, would also have made sense.)
South put in dummy’s 10, covered by the jack, and he ducked. He also ducked the spade king but won the third spade, pitching a heart from dummy. Then he played three rounds of clubs, cashed the diamond ace-kingqueen in case something nice happened, and led a heart. At that point West claimed the balance, for down two.
As North seethed, but remained silent, waiting for an opening, South unwisely provided him with one when he commented on how unfavorably the opponents’ cards had lain. What did North respond to this salvo?
All South had needed to do was to pitch a blocking club from dummy on the third spade. Now when clubs break, he has 10 winners, not seven. This line of play even succeeds if the defenders shift to hearts after two rounds of spades.
Your third-in-hand opener was correct on tactical grounds, but when partner produces the wrong response it is not easy to decide whether to improve the final contract – and if so, how. I vote for passing one spade, on the grounds that this will stop partner from shooting for the moon, and your hand rates to be approximately as playable in spades as diamonds – especially if facing five trump.
BID WITH THE ACES
| ♠ Q 10 ♥ 9 7 4 ♦ A K Q 9 3 ♣ 10 9 8 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pass | Pass | ||
| 1 ♦ | Pass | 1 ♠ | Pass |
| ? |
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Dear Mr Wolff,
in BWTA why did I open one diamond? To me, the choice was between pass and a weak two diamond opening if available. I opt for the latter.
At any rate, having opened one diamond why not rebid 1NT? You seem to be ruling it out. Your thoughts?
(I have a feeling that this is one of those trap deals where the side that buys the contract goes down…)
Hi Michael,
No doubt a weak 2 diamond opening is preferable to opening 1 diamond. Both the values and the emphasis improve, with only the 6th diamond, usually held for that bid, is lacking (furthermore that suit looks like a 6 card one to me).
However, between the choice of 1 diamond or pass (when a weak 2 diamond bid is not according to system), I’ll opt (in 3rd seat) for the positive bid, simply because this hand cries out for a diamond lead from partner should 4th chair open 1 of a major or NT and wind up as declarer.
And please do not tell faint spirits that if NV and in third chair after 2 passes, while not playing weak 2 diamond openings, I prefer to open 3 diamonds rather than pass. Just between you and me, but to be truthful, I really need (I think) to get that diamond lead and am willing to take a risk to get it, rather than after not getting it, bemoaning our result.
Thanks for your question and the mention of “one of those trap deals” which is another way of saying “last bidder gets the zero”.
However, in order not to violate the order of soundness expected, especially from a former bridge teacher, I, of course, would not recommend that treatment for timid souls.
Hi Dear Mr Wolff
Unless this is a pairs event, Perhaps the hand should be played in Five Clubs which is a sitter on any lead. Perhaps North should extend support in clubs after South rebid clubs
Regards
AVRR
Hi AVRR,
How sure are you that 5 clubs is a better IMP (or rubber bridge) contract than is 3NT?
My guess is that 3NT would be a more likely make than 5 clubs because the spade led against 3NT may be either guessed or another less dangerous suit (hearts) led allowing 3NT to possibly be safety played while 5 clubs seems to face greater dangers. Another consideration is that defenders are less conscious of giving away a trick on opening lead against NT than they are while defending a suit game because of long suit tricks often available later rather than sooner, while defending NT.
That concept of having to give to eventually get is constantly present while playing our great game, and consequently should be factored into our bidding judgment.
What say you?
Also and trying to be realistic, 3NT (because of 2 less tricks needed) more often than not, and for random reasons (here the club blockage looms while playing NT) often just happens to fall into place.
No particular wisdom to convey (since infinite possibilities usually exist) just speaking from experience.
FWIW, I’ve gotten bad results when trying to mastermind 5C/5D when 3NT is available. If I know 3NT is hopeless then yes (and quite a lot of people seem unwilling to bid it) but otherwise 3NT gives you more leeway for things to go wrong. The worst feeling (relatively speaking!) is to score up 5C-1 (off three top tricks) when you have 3NT off the top.
Hi Slar,
Anyway one analyses bridge bidding, whether it is eschewing 5 of a minor for a shot at 9 tricks at NT or vice versa, it always presents a challenge, many times right siding whatever game is chosen, or relying on the opponents to not always get off to the right opening lead.
Good partnerships need to be formed, which in addition to bridge maturity often need a heavy dose of practical application. Other caveats to seek are full concentration, no results playing, and as much partnership understanding as is humanly possible.
When a partnership begins to endure world class competition it is often the beginning of success, since the experience then gleaned will set them apart from other very talented players who have not yet tasted the competition necessary to move consistently
forward.
Discussion is important but high level competition is really the only winning path available to truly aspiring players.
Kiedy naprawdę włączyć kran podczas kuchni, jeśli
woda wychodzi wygląda sprawiedliwe i ładnie pachnie, to jesteś zadowolony .
Porównanie zakupy online mogą wymagać jeszcze kilka punktów, kliknięć
i wpisując ale Pozwoli to zaoszczędzić czas, wysiłek, stopień zużycia pojazdu, a pieniądze
w gazie . Artykuł Źródło: Hoover jest autorem tego artykułu na zwiastuny filmowe
.