All News

"Take it slow, Joe."

One deal and two pre-empts!

The following recent bidding problem only occurred at one of four tables in play. Perhaps it should have occurred at all four? The problem below should really not have been the problem but indirectly it highlights what one might expect from a vulnerable pre-emptive action.

 

Although it was not the action taken at the table, our Panel were unanimous in what East should do here. You might thus say it is not a great problem though the overall deal is interesting.

There is much talk of the type of hand their partner has for a take-out double.

Leon Meier “2: We can make grand slam opposite as little as
Axx  Axxx  x  Kxxxx . So, we definitely have a slam try at least. I'd bid 2 just to force the auction.”

Nigel Kearney “2: A cue bid forcing to suit agreement is obvious. If I had to guess, I would bid 6, but I can go slower and investigate. For example, after 2 from partner, 2 from me, 3 from partner, I can cue bid 4 and maybe partner will continue with 4. A hand like Axxx AQxx x xxxx would make 7 good (via a likely successful heart finesse) and the diamond shortage is something that Blackwood will not help with.”

Bruce Anderson “2: I play a cue bid in an opponent’s suit as a game force. Partner will take this as looking for a hold in no trumps but after his/her response, which is highly unlikely to show a stop, I will bid 4. That sequence should be interpreted as a hand too good to bid an immediate 4 and with first round control of diamonds.

Partner is unlikely to hold two aces after a first in hand opening bid. Even then if he/she has a doubleton diamond, the slam could well be going down on a diamond lead. And a slam is even more problematic if partner holds only one ace. So I am not bidding an immediate 4NT ace ask in response to the double. Slam can still be bid if partner has quick tricks and a singleton diamond.” 

 

Anthony Ker “ 2:  8-11 both majors or any game force. When my partner inevitably bids hearts I will bid spades at the cheapest level to show this hand type. 

It all seems to be about spades:

Lysandra Zheng “2: Some kind of artificial force -- doesn't really matter for now. I'll bid spades enough afterwards to convince partner I held a hand that was too good to just settle for game. I imagine the auction is likely to end in 6.”

But is it? Stephen does mention another scenario even though he thinks it less likely:

Stephen Blackstock “2: Setting up a forcing sequence so we can explore grand slam chances. 

It's tempting to use Blackwood and bid 7 opposite two aces, but that would not be quite enough. Even opposite a single diamond we still need another king or a heart finesse - and to have dummy hit with AJxx AKxx xx, Qxx (a very respectable T/O double) would be unpleasant. On the other hand, Axx Axxx xx KQxx is great for 7NT, so there's a lot to find out if we can manage that.

If I had slightly less, then West could be strong with long hearts and short spades, but here I don't think there's room for that.”

With opening bids quite weak these days, there indeed might just be room for that kind of hand. The actual South hand did have enough high card points for most to open. At the table, East produced a rather conservative 4 response to the double and was then confronted with:

 

East re-evaluated and raised their partner to 6. 6 was led and this is what West faced:

 

West took A, crossed to A and then back to A to play K. However, South temporarily “spoilt the party” by playing 8 to this trick. West had no choice but to overruff and lay down A:

The fall of the K was very welcome news to West who claimed 12 tricks for the loss of a diamond. The play was the same at the other three tables though the stakes were not as high as each West had overcalled 4 and had played there. There were 14 tricks in 7NT with the same heart break though that contract seems unrealistic to bid.

If you would overcall 4 with an 8 card suit as above, missing 2, and no side-suit ace, then the West hand seems suitable for some other action, maybe 1, maybe double. Had East bid 2 over the double and West then bid 4, would East have moved? The answer must be “more likely than over a direct 4.”

6 was indeed a very good contract, just needing a 3-2 spade break to be guaranteed but even with a 4-1 break could be made as long as hearts were not 3-0. K was where the opening bid indicated it should be. Anyone for laying down A at trick 2? 

East’s 4 could have been bid on a very much weaker hand, even vulnerable, a hand with long spades and little else. With a hand like East’s, starting with 2 after the double, seems sound and sometimes you will be surprised by the subsequent auction. East did well here to reassess after their “pre-emptive jump” and bid to slam.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items