All News

for the right game!

Searching for the Making Game.

When one partner has a decent 7 card major and the other partner, with normally at least 6 cards in the other, offers that suit as a playing option, you would normally think that one of those would end up as the trump suit.

You would be right, too. The best contract was indeed one of those major suits. Which one?

 

 

You are playing Pairs and both sides are vulnerable. You created the problem by starting with a heart pre-empt. Certainly, a fair one, too. Some might even start at the 1-level. Our problem, though, is our second bid.

When you start with a pre-empt in a minor suit and your partner bids 3, it is normal for the pre-emptor to bid 3NT, keeping that as an option when they do not like their partner’s suit. Is that the case, too, when you start with a heart pre-empt? Many players who have pre-empted find bidding 3NT a little nerve-wracking when they cannot support partner’s suit.

It seems though that is what we should do:

Stephen Blackstock “3NT: Very straightforward. 3 is 100% forcing; in principle North is expected to either raise spades, bid 4 with a strong suit or perhaps extra shape (7-4?), or otherwise bid 3NT. North can’t be expected to have a pre-empt that contains a decent suit and stoppers in both minors, so it will be up to South to decide whether his minors suggest sitting for 3NT or converting to 4/.

Thanks, Stephen, for clarifying we cannot pass 3. More than 100% forcing, really but we will settle for that figure! Indeed, our role here seems well defined.

Michael Ware “3NT: Let's not encourage people to pass forcing bids! Maximum and happy.”

Nigel Kearney  “3NT: Partner is primarily asking me to choose between spades and NT. With an unusual hand I might do something else but this is just a normal maximum 3 bid.”

Andy Braithwaite “3NT: must trust partner so as 3 is forcing I bid 3NT.”  

Michael Cornell “3NT: I would regard pass as a total double cross and in any case, I have nothing to be ashamed of. I have a normal all vul 1^st in hand  3 opener.

I have a reasonable but not a semi solid suit so no logic in bidding 4 ( why cannot partner have a void in a big hand ?)

 

Why not, indeed and I have seen partners raise to game in preemptor's suit with a void? For me, therefore, South must have 6 spades, at least.  I was curious whether we were allowed to make the following bid:

Bruce Anderson “4: Passing is out of the question; partner's bid of a new suit over a 3 level pre-empt is a game force, at least. Partner must be able to cope with a rebid of 4; if he/she cannot and we are now overboard, I will start looking for another partner!”

It may seem obvious but I wonder why partner bid 3. It would seem they are perhaps sniffing out a slam, maybe in hearts, or else are looking for the best game. Our role here seems not to wonder why but to bid out our hand. If 3NT and 4 both show a dislike of spades, then maybe 3NT is a little more descriptive when you have a hold in at least one of the minors.

We could make a case for 4 if all our honours were in hearts or if we had a freaky shape. Indeed, Peter does not regard 3NT as automatic:

Peter Newell “3NT: As 3 is 100% forcing, it comes down to what to bid, and there are only 2 options that I would consider, 4 and 3NT. 

I certainly don’t always have a 7-card suit to open 3 vul so there is a temptation to rebid 4, but although a 7 card suit, it is not that strong a one, and it is also potentially useful for other contracts like 3NT (ie have the ace, quick entry, Q for a finesse if needed or if partner fits better chance of setting them up).

 In addition, we have the K which may be a very helpful card for NT. We also have a 9 count, considerably more than usual for a 3 level pre-empt, and the hand may play well in NT. What we are saying to partner is:

·        we don’t have spade support,

·        we have hand that might be suitable for NT,

·        our hearts are not that solid.

This gives partner some options and gives us a chance to reach 3NT.  When in doubt re game contracts particularly at Pairs, try 3NT.This doesn’t exclude partner for trying something else… and partner knows I have pre-empted so not likely to have a NT shape.”

Back, though, to those who see there is just one place to play for now:

Pam Livingston “ 3NT: Depends entirely on what your agreements are.  I like to play that 3 is forcing.  3NT just says I'm not interested in spades and provides flexibility to allow partner to choose the contract.”

Julie Atkinson “3NT: 0 to 1 spade. I play 3 unconditionally forcing unless partner is a passed hand.”

Pass then at your peril! Bid 3NT and await developments. I have a feeling with their shortage in hearts that South would have bid on to 4. It would probably have been wise for them to do so:

 

Two of the possible games are interesting, the heart game much less so. 3NT’s outcome is largely dependent on East’s choice of opening lead, surely a minor suit. A club lead against 3NT should lead to at least 9 tricks though J will beat this contract, as long as West ducks the opening lead. They cannot see the 9 but they cannot run 6 diamond tricks quickly. So, ducking the opening lead would be wise.

They must hope East regains the lead to play a second diamond and that will indeed happen when in with K.

Meanwhile, 4 should make even after the start of 3 rounds of diamonds. South must discard from dummy on the third round, preserving that trump for a finesse later, with East ruffing. East’s best exit may be a trump, leaving declarer to find the Q. In the unlikely event that East switches to a heart, declarer may be lured into cashing a second heart before playing dummy's trump to discard two clubs.

What a neat “sucker- play” that would be by East, with their partner’s ruff beating the otherwise cold game.

So, we know our place. Bid 3NT and let partner decide and hopefully decide well.

 

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items