All News

 

My hand… and my opponent bid 1C!

That’s MY Suit you bid!

Short club- based systems have been around for a long time. Pairs have to decide how they will handle a quite common situation where after hearing an opponent open 1, they have a decent or maybe less decent club suit of their own.

Many play a direct 2 as a Michaels Cue-Bid, treating the opening bid as natural, even though it could be 2-carded. This leaves later definition of club bids as potentially awkward. Others will overcall 2 to show clubs. With the increased potential that opener may also have a decent club suit, it seems you would like to have the protection of a decent suit to call in this way…and you also lose the advantage of playing Michaels Cue Bids.

So, swings and roundabouts in both approaches. Let’s see what might happen if you pass with clubs. Added to the mix was the fact that our opponents were playing transfer responses to their 1 opening, a technique becoming more popular:

 

1 promised at least 2 clubs with 1showing 4+ hearts. The 1 response showed normally 3 hearts (any opening hcps) but could also be 4 hearts with around 13-14 hcp.

Do you agree with your double? What now? Pairs.

Well, let’s start with “those in favour” of what we have done:

Andy Braithwaite “3: invitational but lacking a diamond stopper.”

Michael Cornell “3: Yes, I do agree. We have to investigate spades. Partner could hold KQxx and nothing else and 4 is almost cold.

Anyway, he doesn’t have four spades here. So, I bid 3 which pretty well describes my hand and it’s over to partner, whose 1NT has quite a wide range (opponents will frequently have little more than 16hcp so 3NT could be an easy make our way).

More on what the opponents did not have a little later. 16 hcp? If only they had that many!

 

Bruce Anderson “3NT: It is almost certain our opponents are playing 2/1 and the opening 1 is a weak NT hand with 3 hearts.

And East’s failure to bid again suggests a minimum responding hand. With what should be 7 tricks in my hand, I am bidding game. It is unlikely we are off the diamond suit, as with four or more diamonds, West would have opened 1, not 1. I agree with North’s bidding to date; the possibility of a spade fit had to be investigated.”

However, there is the other point of view:

 

Nigel Kearney “2NT: Prefer 2 on the first round if allowed by system, otherwise 2 on the second round. A take-out double of hearts when holding a singleton diamond makes no sense at all. 

On the given auction, I bid 2NT. Partner's 1NT doesn't promise a lot so bidding 3NT myself is too much. A part score in clubs may play better than a part score in no trumps, but a 2 bid now will have partner worrying about hearts not diamonds so it will be hard for him to make the right choice.”

 

Double with a side-suit singleton might be fine if you later make an alternative bid. Over partner’s 2, you could bid 3 and over 3, 3NT. If partner chooses a higher level of diamonds, ask them to request an “undo”!

And further criticism from:

Stephen Blackstock “Pass: No, I don’t agree with either of North’s calls. Over a 2+ 1, I believe that 2 should be natural, and is therefore obvious here. Double of 1 is questionable too: all very well if South is decent enough to have a spade suit, but it could end badly if South naively thinks that North is showing support, or even tolerance, for diamonds. 2 is preferable here too, and if the auction times out well for us, there may still be a chance to show spades later.

Now we have to guess. At IMPs, 3 looks best: we may have nine running tricks in 3NT, and even 5 may be playable if South has some working cards and nothing wasted in diamonds.  The problem at Pairs is that 3 isn’t guaranteed to make, and even if it does, NT will often get a better score. So, my guess is pass hoping that if we have game, few will bid it, and that we do well on the board by playing in the highest scoring denomination. I won’t be proud putting this hand down as dummy, but winning at Pairs is not a beauty contest! This is just one more example of the observation that match-points vaguely resembles bridge.”

At the table, South contented themselves with 2 with North not imagining that their partner could have a running club-suit and more. 2 ended the bidding which was a pity. However, do we regard East here as “hero or villain?”

 

Either East did not want to play in a potentially very uncomfortable 1 contract (at one table, 1 by West did get passed out and the declarer salvaged just two tricks) or else they were throwing a little confusion into the auction. (You be the judge which.)

e.

Spreading “confusion”?

 

South needed to raise to 3 to jerk North into game action, though they would need to rely on their partner for some diamond hold. There are 9 easy tricks in no-trumps and 10 easyish tricks in clubs though scoring the 11^th (through setting up J or a third-round spade ruff) would prove much harder.

How would you and your partner have handled that North hand, with or without the awkward action taken by East?

 

 

And our best spot is?

(Pairs)

Pre-emption by an opponent is to make our life harder. Do you let partner declare or bid on?

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items