All News

But which one?

Slamming at Pairs.

Today’s deal raises a number of interesting points in the bidding. We posed a couple of them to the Panel.

 

The first is whether they agreed with our 3 bid. Then, we asked where we progress from here. 1 promised at least a 5-card suit.

Were we playing Teams, we would not mind too much if we bid to slam in our diamond suit or in spades. Yet, in Pairs, we would really like to play in spades if possible. Of course, this presumes we can make a slam.

Generally, the Panel were happy with 3.

Anthony Ker “ Agree with 3 bid.”

Nigel Kearney “ 3 is fine. I dislike concealing primary support for partner's major so I would be tempted to start with 3, but our spades are weak and we have two other suits that could easily play better so I agree with 3. Definitely not double with this much shape.”

Stephen Blackstock “ 3 looks normal. Double would usually have less shape than this, as 3 is GF and the best way to start when North may want to show genuine length in both minors. Immediate spade agreement is premature.”

But:

Bruce Anderson “ I don't agree with 3 as it seems to me this is a hand where spades need to be set as trumps so RKC can be used.. So I am making a splinter of 4. The problem with 3 is that if I then hear 3NT from partner,  what would 4NT in response mean?

Over 4 in response to my 4 I bid 4NT RKC, which will allow me to find out how many key cards partner holds. If three key cards were shown I could then look for the Q. Or if partner shows two key cards and the trump queen, the small slam could then be bid. There is the slight risk partner holds the A but it is much more likely his side suit ace is the A. Alternatively, if partner is strong (solid spades and A) he/she can  use RKC.” 

3 is often played as showing spade support rather than looking for a hold. It is true that partner is going to need reasonable spades for a making slam, even if that slam is diamonds. If game is the limit, then we certainly want to be in the major suit.

On then but not necessarily upwards:

Andy Braithwaite “ 4: East’s pass is a surprise given your void in the suit so it looks as if partner has at most a singleton club which is bad for my hand.

So I content myself with 4 anticipating a bad break in spades and a club loser- better to make 10 in spades than 11 in diamonds.”

We will be looking at East’s lack of bidding shortly. Others have more ambition.

Nigel Kearney “4: Slam seems quite likely and since it's matchpoints we want to be in the highest scoring slam. That will depend on the quality of partner's spades. AQ10xx xxx Qxx Ax is probably fine in 6 but Axxxx Qx Qxxx Ax is better in diamonds. 4 by us is much too little so I will just cue bid my control. Maybe later on I can bid 5NT to offer a choice of slam.”

Stephen Blackstock “4: Let's see what cue bids South can offer. It is barely possible we are off two spade tricks when South has 5+ diamonds, but in principle I expect a good opening bid opposite and likely Qxxx support. With a minimum South will be reluctant to go past 3NT so fast, given the Pairs context.

Slam is very likely (I will be reluctant to stop short), possibly a grand. The hardest part may be finding whether 6 is playable rather than 6, for a better score. Not an issue at IMPs of course. Exclusion Blackwood where available might help - opposite two black aces, 7 will usually have a play if perhaps not underwritten by Lloyds.”

I am not sure why South need to have good diamonds, playing Pairs. Wait for the actual hand.

Bruce Anderson “4NT: After bidding 3 and hearing 4 in response, I would bid 4NT RKC and after a response showing two aces and queen of trumps would ask for kings. But I will have no way finding out the strength of partner's spades; he/she could hold K and not the SK, meaning the grand would go light. Some might argue that specific king responses to 5NT would deal with that issue, but if partner holds both K and K, what then?

It sounds like the problem of using Key Card with a void. In reality, surely 6 would give a reasonable score given the uncertainty of which honours South holds. If Key Card turns up with 2 key cards with Q, I would be happy to sign off in small slam. 

And not worried about playing in a minor is:

Anthony Ker “ After 4 cue bid 4.  If partner cues in the black suit, I would bid 6.  There are some hands where you make 6 but not 6.”

Less than half the field made it to 6, 4 being the popular contract. Some words need to be said about East’s inaction and South’s choice of 4 on the actual deal.

 

What then of East’s pass of 3? They claimed that a jump to 4 would only aid their opponents in finding a slam. Since, North bid only 4 over 4, they may have a point. The counter-argument of using up one’s opponents bidding space by jumping to game might have encouraged North to go higher though 5 from South after North’s 3 bid may not be found. It is hard to see South move if North bids just 4.

There were rumblings from the Panel that South should have had better support to raise diamonds. If splintering with 3 spades to an honour and a void heart seems a little aggressive, then the same might be said of splintering 4 with 3 diamonds and a singleton heart.

South’s only remaining choices would be 4, 3 or 5. Is the latter stronger than 4? Does 4 show a stronger hand?  Indeed, is 3 forcing to game or just to 3? Maybe these questions should have been raised with the Panel.

Either minor suit slam will make though as we can see the top match-points are there for those in 6. Not just that but as long as East does not hold  more than 3 spades headed by QT, there will be no need to take the diamond finesse, which is needed to make a slam in either minor. So, 6 wins the day, just, for being the best and is certainly the highest scoring slam.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items