|
Hand Analyses 3rd May , 2006
East’s 2NT showed the minors, the so-called Unusual No Trump. This bid offers to the opening side two cue-bids, in this case, 3♣ and 3♦. Most tournament players put these cue-bids to good use with well-defined meanings … please follow the link to “Unusual vs Unusual”. There are various “Unusual vs Unusual” methods out there, the N-S pair in the featured auction were using a method whereby 3♠ was purely competitive, typically showing a decent 6-card suit and about 6-9 HCPs. True, South happens to have 10 HCPs, but those minor suit holdings look pretty useless.
North understandably pushes on to 4♠, but that contract is doomed to down one on a defensive Diamond ruff. The good news for N-S is that this is a cheap save against E-W’s making 4♣ contract.
Needless to say, West’s hand is not worth an invitation, that square and empty 8-count does not qualify. As it happens, notwithstanding the combined 24 HCPs, even 1NT is difficult to make and we predict just 6 tricks for Declarer at most tables. To be sure, Declarer can organize an end-play against North, but it seems more normal to win the Spade lead, lose a Heart, win another Spade, lead towards the Q♣, making 8 tricks on a good day, and just 6 tricks on this particular day.
How do you and your Partner play that 3♣ bid by West? Modern tournament practice is to play this jump cue-bid by the Partner of an Overcaller as a so-called “Mixed Raise”, which is to say that it is somewhere in between a 4-card preemptive raise and a 4-card limit raise. West’s actual hand is very much at the top end in terms of HCPs, but that Q♣ is not worth much, so it looks like a Mixed Raise to us.
The final contract of 4♠ is no sure thing, but it makes with careful play. Please see Play Problem # 5.
E-W stumbled into 4♥ in the featured auction … perhaps East did not quite have the values to take things to the 3-level when he bid 3♥, but he wanted to show support, of course … and West, with his lovely 3-4-6-0 shape quite reasonably took a shot at game. Notwithstanding their mere combined 18 HCPs, E-W are able to score up 11 tricks and +650 when both red suits behave.
We could move on to the next board right now, and perhaps we should, but we just cannot resist a little foray into the world of the Good-Bad 2NT. Please proceed directly to Board 5 if you have no appetite for obscure bidding science. Anyone still there? OK, then put yourself in East’s position on his second bid. If North had not bid 2♠, then East would have had a 2♥ or 3♥ or 4♥ bid available with which to agree Hearts … three bids, one each for minimum support, extras, and game values. But that 2♠ bid took away one of those three options, drastically reducing Opener’s ability to describe his hand. No problem, here comes the Good-Bad 2NT to the rescue! It’s a Lebensohl type of bid … over 2♠, a bid of 2NT is a relay to 3♣, allowing Opener more scope to describe his hand … we won’t go into the details here, but we’ll publish some articles on the subject within the next few weeks.
South’s Double opposite a silent partner shows 18+ HCPs. However, West is opposite a partner who has shown some values, so his Redouble merely shows extras, enough for him to believe that his side has the majority of the points, let’s say 15+ or thereabouts.
West has a difficult choice when 2♥ comes back around to him. First, he must consider whether or not Partner’s Pass of 2♥ was a Forcing Pass. In other words, when West redoubled 1NT, was he essentially saying “This is our hand, Partner … either we play it, or they play it in a doubled contract”? You may get differing opinions on this one, but we say that this is not a forcing situation … South has shown 18+ HCPs, so we classify this as a competitive situation. As such, we think that West should be allowed to pass here, though some might disagree (if everything was clear-cut, this game would not be so fascinating!).
If we assume that West is allowed to pass, the next question is should he pass? Here are his options: (a) 3♣: On this particular hand, we might like 3♣ to be non-forcing, but clearly that is not the case … 3♣ here would show a big hand with distribution … perhaps something like: ♠ A93 ♥ -- ♦ KJ9 ♣ AQJT974. In other words, a hand which is looking for the best game (or slam). Alas, bidding 3♣, hoping to be allowed to play it there, is not on the table. (b) Dbl: As a general rule, a low-level balancing Double such as this is optional … the Double simply asks Partner to make his best guess on the hand. (c) 2NT: In the absence of agreements to the contrary, this bid is natural, and, on the actual hand, quite reasonable. (d) Pass: Now that we have established (or at least asserted) that Partner’s Pass was non-forcing, we can further say that Pass is a reasonable choice on the actual hand, though perhaps a tad feeble.
We wouldn’t argue too much with Double or 2NT or Pass, any of these bids could work. And the winner is? Not Pass, that is the route to a minus 110 as the opponents enjoy their 9-card fit at the 2-level. Bidding 2NT works a treat, and 8 tricks and +120 is the result. As for Double, Partner will now bid 2NT (the winner) for the same +120, or 3♦ which is destined for +110 or -100, either of which is preferable to -110, of course.
A complicated hand! Hope we didn’t make it even more so!
Against 2♠, West will no doubt lead the J♥, won by East’s King. Now, the best that the defense can do is organize a Club ruff or a Diamond ruff for a total of 4 tricks.
Yes, indeed, West might well have considered a rebid of 3♦ with that magnificent 14-count. However, suppose that you manage to stay low in 2♦ … North leads the Heart Two … how do you propose to make 8 tricks? Please see Play Problem # 6.
In this Jacoby Transfer sequence, 3♦ was natural and game-forcing. Over 3♦, Opener has these options: (a) Agree Spades with 3♠ or 4♠; (b) Bid 3NT; (c) Bid anything else to agree Diamonds.
So, in the featured auction, 3♥ agreed Diamonds. At this point, South has a perfect hand for Roman Key Card Blackwood, and there are various ways that this can be done, depending on partnership agreement: 4NT: We’ve seen before that using 4NT in minor suit auctions can be ineffective, there’s not always enough bidding space (though on this deal the straightforward 4NT works just fine); Redwood: Some partnerships use 4♦ as Blackwood with Clubs agreed, and 4♥ as Blackwood with Diamonds agreed; Minorwood: This is the method used in the featured auction … Diamonds are agreed, the auction is game-forcing and 4 of the agreed minor is available as Blackwood.
North’s 5♣ showed 2 Key Cards with the Q♦, so now South can reasonably bid a grand slam. But, which one, 7♦ or 7♠ or 7NT? True, 7♠ will score better than 7♦, but, as a matter of fact, 7♠ is the one grand that you should not bid … if 7♠ makes then so will 7NT. It’s possible to construct hands where 7♦ makes when 7NT does not (for example when the Spades need a ruff to set up the suit). Then again, the reverse applies, it maybe possible to make 7NT when the Diamonds do not come home. All in all, it seems pretty clear to go for the maximum and bid 7NT.
This is not the most exciting deal in the set, expect a mixture of 90’s and 120’s as the E-W pairs play 1NT.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
