All News

three choices.

Double, Pass or Bid.

Such choices at the high levels of bidding are often difficult and today’s falls into that category. There do seem reasons for all three actions and we must choose the best of them.

 

1 promised 5+ spades and your partner’s 2 showed 5+ hearts and 5+ of a minor suit. The agreed strength for this bid was 9+ hcp though as only East-West were vulnerable, it was possible South had a point or two less. Your choice is?

For the bidders:

Leon Meier “4NT: to ask partners minor, at favourable it's probably a good sac and may even make if partner’s good enough.”

Andy Braithwaite “ 4NT: E/W have bid 4 vulnerable so I tend to believe them.

So double is not an option.

At this vulnerability and with a possible spade void opposite, I bid 4NT- surely not going for more than 500 even if partner has clubs and a poor hand. So a good save if our opponents are making 4. And we may drive them to 5!

We don’t know if this is Teams or Pairs though not much difference in the decision process really.”

The fate of 4 may well depend on which opponent holds the J (assuming the top honours are split) as Kris indicates:

Kris Wooles “4NT: it’s always tempting at this vulnerability with a known 9- card minor fit at least but I’m aware we may have enough defence to set 4. They have bid confidently to 4 vulnerable but my bid could be a phantom. If left and if West has J,  they will  certainly know how to play the spade suit.”

Also considering defensive possibilities is:

Bruce Anderson “4NT: Partner, please bid your minor (regardless of whether we are playing Teams or Pairs).

It could be right to defend if partner has clubs and a singleton diamond but E/W could well be making 4 and 5 of a minor should be a cheap save . And it is also possible E/W will bid on when it is wrong to do so. Another reason for bidding rather than passing.”

Which minor does our partner have? Our own minor length suggests clubs. That means the opponents have lots of both red suits. That tends to cast doubt on whether they really are making their game.

It’s time to welcome to the Panel Lysandra Zheng who will become one of our newest Open internationals at this year’s APBF Championships in China. Along with Michael Cornell, she has knowledge of the deal and leans towards passing:

Lysandra Zheng “Pass: I had a milder auction at the table (with West only bidding to the 3-level) and passed over that, but I think the decision's much harder over 4. I'll pass for similar reasons. 

 I cannot see my hand being an incredible fit for partner's unless they have another action. If 4 is making, 5 of a minor is probably an all right sacrifice (-500?), but I'm not certain enough the former is true. 5 especially looks like it will be quite ugly on a trump lead or two, and when we're holding controls in both suits, defending 4 looks like a good option. The hand might even be a relative misfit with the opponents being unable to take tricks in either red suit, and 4 being off a trick or two. I don't have the confidence in either direction to act, and I'll rely on partner with extra strength or distribution to tell me first.”

 

Peter Newell “ Pass:  It’s tricky as it makes a big difference which minor partner has. If partner has diamonds, I certainly want to bid to the 5 level as we have a good chance of making 5 and the opponents 4.  However, if partner has clubs which is slightly more likely given I have less of them, the opponents are unlikely to make 4 and we rather unlikely to make 5.  So given its more likely partner has clubs, I'll pass."

Michael Cornell “Pass: wait for partner’s reopening double  if he has a big hand or his 4NT if he doesn’t have great defence but great offence. In both of these cases I bid 5.

Unfortunately I know the hand and RHO did not have his bid. He is not even worth 3 . Normal action on that hand would be a value showing X.

There is no right answer here- we don’t even know partner’s minor- if it happened to be  diamonds and partner has a short spade( that the bidding suggests- we do not know RHO has psyched ! ) we are close to making.

It is cold opposite x Axxxx Kxxxxx x , the big 7 count !!

Steph Jacob “Pass: A good problem! I think we have a good chance of defeating 4, it would be handy to know what partners minor is,  if it happened to be diamonds, we would want to bid on, but here I think there is too much potential to get into trouble when 4 is going off so I pass, hoping for a singleton diamond lead :)”

However, the majority of the Panel are for bidding on. There is also the question of which bid is best to make in heading for the 5-level:

Nigel Kearney “5: Possibly nobody is making anything, but it is usually right to bid in these situations. 5 pass or correct is preferable to 4NT for two reasons. I should declare since partner's hand is more well known, and 4NT would give LHO extra options as they get a second chance to call.”

Possibly nobody is making anything, but it is usually right to bid in these situations. 5 pass or correct is preferable to 4NT for two reasons: I should declare since partner's hand is more well known, and 4NT would give LHO extra options as they get a second chance to call.”

5 is fine as long as it agreed to be "pass or correct" rather than natural. 

Anthony Ker “5: pass or correct. The problem is that I do not know whether my partner has diamonds, in which case I definitely want to keep bidding, or clubs, when I’m not so sure. Our defensive prospects are better but are they enough to beat 4? Bidding is right if 4 makes, or they go to 5, or if we can make 5 of a minor, so I will hope one of these three things comes to pass.”

Assuming this problem arises at the other table (yes, it was Teams) then it looks like bidding on will be safe as at worst, we will be getting a tied board even if the action is wrong. Let’s see all four hands and see that bidding on was indeed wrong this time:

 

The J was not in the West hand but it turned up in the least expected place:

Michael Cornell “ If I had partner’s J, I would have been able to double for about 800 or 1100. I can only assume RHO was looking for a swing if we saved.”

If we assume our partner has clubs, then we do have defence to 4. While we would normally “save” at this vulnerability, there have to be exceptions and this situation might provide one. But for the 10 in the West hand, the sacrifice, albeit a phantom, would only have been -100. It would have been preferable to be recording +200 from 4 undoubled.

At least, we were able to limit the option as doubling which, of course, this time was the winning action, being not anyone’s choice. Only therefore a choice of two…passing or bidding on. Perhaps, this is one of those deals where the popular action is not the winning one. We cannot always be right.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items