All News

Choices!

You have had one or two little problems going round the room, some tricky decisions and you did not get them all right. Why are you always in the hot seat…or so it seems? Anyway, you pick up a flat four count. It’s time for someone else to do the worrying, a relaxing board for you,surely:

 

 

You have a poor hand but your partner’s is a little better. You are playing Pairs. What do you make of the auction so far and what are you going to do now?

Yes, it’s your bid. Everyone else at the table is looking at you! Suddenly, your four count seems to take on a new dimension.

Peter Newell “Pass: Partner is offering me a choice of slams and I definitely prefer clubs.  I’m not proud of my heart support and 1 entry to my hand may not be enough in hearts (e.g., if partner has AQJxxx) to play in hearts.  Although it is Pairs, I’m not going to give preference to hearts or try 7.”

Aye, there’s the rub! Suddenly you have choices! We are playing Pairs and 1430 (6)is a much better score on the sheet than 1370(6). Yet, it could be that 1460 (7) is better than 1390 (7) and then you certainly would not want to be in 6.

Offering a slightly different hand opposite but coming to the same conclusion is:

Nigel Kearney “Pass: Partner could have cue bid 4 cheaply to learn about the K or other useful cards I might hold. Maybe he is just having a bash with a spade loser and a hand such as x AKQxx AK AQJ10x where slam will often be on a club finesse but may be better or they could be induced to take a phantom save. Making any slam at Pairs is often a good score. So, I don't want to jeopardise that in an uncertain auction.”

It is a nasty feeling when your partner manoeuvres you to the right spot and you bid one more only to see your grand slam fail at trick 1!

So, what is partner up to? Pam’s partner could have a different agenda altogether. Pam wants to know our agreements and thus gives us a “choice” of answers:

Pam Livingston “If I have agreed to play Exclusion Blackwood, I will tell partner I have no aces else I will pass this offer of an alternate contract.”

Now I would agree that passing when partner has wheeled out “Exclusion” is probably unwise. K843 opposite a void as the trump suit at the 6-level, well at any level, is not going to play too well! The fact that no-one else considers that option suggests that this rarely used convention has not suddenly appeared here. My rule about “Exclusion” is that you cannot use it unless it is plainly obvious that the bid could not be natural and that is certainly not the case here. However, our humour is good and therefore we will give Pam the luxury of two answers.

The rest are in no doubt as to what partner is doing though there is still a little doubt as to the worth of our hand:

Kris Wooles “7: I’m either going to pass or bid 7.  If partner can bid 6 (giving me a choice of slams) all by him or herself and I have the K to 4, I think it is reasonable to bid 7 and will do so. I’m hardly going to get a bottom in a bidding challenge so can be a little carefree.”

This is real life, Kris and you have a very expectant partner dying to see your dummy.

Please put your trumps down first after you raise. Remember your partner is nervous, too! Then just look at your partner’s face when the A is led. Are they smiling?

Kris is right. He does not “walk alone”.

Michael Ware “7: Will partner bid 6 hoping for 1 trick from us to make the contract?  I don't think so. Should hope for 0.5 trick at most - say a doubleton spade if partner holds AKx AKQxx - AQJxx.”

That’s a nice hand, Michael. So is this one:

Bruce Anderson “7: It seems to me partner will not have a loser outside the club suit and here I am with Kxxx. His hand is likely to be something like Ax AKQxxx – AQJ10x. I am prepared to risk vilification if I am wrong.”

Well, neither Michael nor Bruce is going down to the A at trick 1! They are looking at that card.

Michael Cornell “7: I cannot see any reason why partner should be playing me for a trick here. The most he should have is 1.5 losers and surely my K843should take care of them.”

Stephen Blackstock “7: On the auction this should always have a play, and could be lay down. It’s hard to read 6 as anything other than an alternative strain for slam.

So, what does South hold? To jump to slam missing an ace and the king of a crucial suit is unthinkable. Likewise, he won’t be off both K and K. Thus, we have first round control of all suits and both critical kings. I doubt if South is offering clubs at the six level with no better than AJxxx. So, I envisage AQJxx(x) or AJ10xxx. The only danger can be that his clubs are poor but, in this context, with hearts agreed. Offering a weak suit as an alternative would be a questionable choice.”

Is partner really going to slam missing K and more? With great hearts, they might start off with 4 hoping to find your K. They did not do that and therefore hearts may not be the place to play. So, if the heart suit is questionable, and they are missing K, they just must have everything else. They did and when you put your hand down as dummy in 7, your partner had just one word for you:

 

 

 “Choice!”

You still had to enjoy the eternity of 1.5 seconds after the A was led but partner’s card was the right shape of black! “Choices.” It seems you made the right one. If partner was looking at solid hearts, they could return to the major suit.

You knew once you picked up that North hand that you would be raising your partner to grand slam, did you not?!

A word, though, to East who chose not to bid anything with their 4-count. Look at what happened when they failed to raise their partner even one level. Had East bid 3, the difficult decision would fall to South. They should continue with 4 to which a bemused North might bid 4NT offering a choice of minor suits but identifying that K would suddenly become much harder. Indeed, small slam then would seem the realistic limit.

 

5+4+1 = ?

 

1NT is 12-14 and 2 simple Stayman. You bid ‘em up and partner is there for you. You need to repay partner’s faith. West leads A. Over to you. (Trumps do not break 4-0).

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items