BRIDGE HAND
Courtesy of Ian Payn
London Teams of Four Championship
Semi-Final - March 2003
Bidding Problem
| South | West | North | East |
| 1§ | Dble | 1© | Pass |
| 2© | 3© * | Dble | Pass |
| Pass | ?? |
|
West |
North South |
West |
| An 'expert panel' decided, post facto, that
the best bid now is Four Hearts. This must show a massive two-suiter with Spades and a minor, which is what you've got. The upshot of this would be that you would reach Five Diamonds, and opponents will have to decide whether to bid Five Hearts (flattening the board when you save in Six Diamonds - they won't bid any more after that. Trust me.) or let you play (in which case you will gain 9 imps). Partner's hand is a 1-4-4-4 "Nought Count". The action found at the table was, over Three Hearts doubled, to bid Four Spades. Now, one might crime the partner of the Four Spade bidder for being on the unimaginative side and passing, and passing again when the contract is doubled (what, after all, was Three Hearts supposed to mean?). In his defence, it could be pointed out that when one member of a partnership decides to grab the steering wheel so emphatically, it's ill-considered (as well as ill-mannered) to try and grab it back again. The defence started with a Heart. This was ruffed, and a Spade played. South played a rather banal Diamond through, and all declarer did now was play off Diamonds, so the defenders could ruff in in turn, and force him. -1400. In the other room, E/W played in Six Diamonds doubled and lost 200 points. Moral: If you have a choice of places to play, and offer partner that choice instead of just bidding something at random, your results might improve. Which is all one can hope for. |