All News

Should we pass: can we pass?

The two parts of the title refer to two separate bids, one which we have already made and the other to a situation we helped to create. We did not pass at the first opportunity and are faced by rather a strange couple of bids from our partner. Can we be sure what partner’s bids mean and if we know for sure, are we allowed to pass second time after our initial marginal double?

Enough riddles: let’s see the problem.

 

You made quite an aggressive take-out double but that seems reasonable with both major suits. Your partner forces you to bid (4) and then changes the suit after you choose. What are they up to and what should you do now?

The first question is whether what with a hand little better than a weak no-trump, should we double 3? Our Panel have mixed feelings:

Stephen Blackstock “Pass: no, I don’t really fancy doubling with a weak no trump (South will expect better shape with values this limited), but I can understand the worry about how much to bid later if I pass and then partner backs in. So, my verdict would be that double is inferior but may work on some layouts.”

Bruce Anderson “Pass: the hand is flat and so needs greater high card strength given I am forcing partner to bid at the three level and there is undefined strength behind me. Partner will balance unless their hand is unsuitable to so.”

Matt Brown “Double: I like the double of 3. I think the possible gain outweighs the risk.”

Peter Newell  “Double: yes, with both majors and the A rather than a lower club honour which likely would be wasted.”

Michael Cornell also agreed with the double, commenting that he was the one who had the problem at the table and did double. On the other hand, Kris Wooles regarded the double as “marginal”.

So, a mixed bag of views from happy despite the risk to not entering a live auction with a weak no-trump. However, given that we have made the double, are we now involved in an auction we cannot pass? What is our partner now doing? There are two views explained by:

Peter Newell “Pass: two scenarios. More common is that partner has spades and diamonds 4/4 or 4/5 typically. These are hands where one is not that keen on jumping to 4 on as the doubler may only have 3 spades.  Second scenario is a hand too good for an immediate 4.  I know the hand, and I don’t think I would manage a move on this hand without the benefit of hindsight…”  and

Michael Cornell “5: I think partner has one of 2 hands, either a very good hand with  and  or a very good spade hand  ( too good for an immediate 4 )

Either way, I think I am worth a move with 5 and I will bid 5 over 5 but that is all I will do. My failure to use Key Card is clearly requesting cooperation from partner and I obviously do not have a source of tricks. However, I think I have some good cards and even if partner has a small doubleton club, the opponents will often be unable to cash a club as the pre-emptor will  not have an outside entry.” except this time they did!

Bruce Anderson “Pass: Partner had RKC available with a strong hand and a heart fit. With a self- sufficient spade suit and a strong hand, partner could still have used RCK.

That they did not suggests something like AKxxxx Qxx Jxx x.  So, I am passing 4.”

Matt Brown “Pass: I think this is showing a choice of games with 4 spades and 5+ diamonds. I think getting to the right game should be first priority rather than it being a slam try solely in spades. So, I would pass since I have four spades for partner.”

Stephen Blackstock “ Pass: I expect partner is showing spades and diamonds. So, now pass. If he thought it was forcing, he is in for a shock. With something like AKxx,xx,AKxxxx,x, slam is not much worse than the spade break (not a given on this auction) but with such a powerful hand, he owed me a stronger sequence.”

Kris Wooles  “5: Partner is presumably so strong in spades he wants to set up a forcing auction. Given I made a marginal double, the temptation might be to drop the auction  in 4  but I’m bidding 5. I believe partner could have  simply jumped to game in either spades or diamonds if he wanted to. Now, we could have a grand on for all I know.”

Some variety as to which hand type partner is now showing with the majority view being that we have bid enough. Bidding on would have created a play problem as these were the actual hands:

 

That was a mighty good pre-empt, maybe too strong for many, though West was vulnerable. West did indeed have a very sure and quick outside entry but South did not have a doubleton club. However, in 6, there was also the problem of the heart loser.

Assuming West started with K, declarer can win, ruff a club, return to dummy with a heart and ruff a second club before playing a trump. West wins to return a second heart with declarer now drawing two more rounds and crossing with a diamond to the queen to play the last trump in dummy, 8.

East had already had to throw one heart and was left to find a discard from  Q and  J98 and had no good choice with AK7 still in declarer’s hand along with a losing heart. Slam thus made on a squeeze, with, no doubt, "the beer card", 7 winning trick 13 and costing Michael Cornell a round of drinks, since he was dummy!

  squeeze!

It would be interesting how high the auction would have got had North passed initially and South bid 3. North would certainly have made one attempt at slam (4) though perhaps the auction would have finished at the less dramatic 4-level.

 A Comfortable Game?

Away from the pressures of pre-empts to a nice 4 game. No squeezes, no slams, just your contract. It’s Teams…

 1NT was 12-14. North transfered to spades and bid their second suit, South jumped to the spade game. West led 6, With East following. Plan the play.

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items