| ♠ K J 4 3
♥ Q 8 5 4
♦ 9 3
♣ 10 7 5 |
Partners opens one spade--pass to me. I got a good result last time passing partner's opening bid with a minimum response. Let's try that again. I pass. LHO doubles--pass--two diamonds. I bid two spades, and LHO doubles again. Partner passes, and RHO bids three hearts.
Didn't we just have this auction? The last time RHO bid two suits over his partner's take-out double, he bid hearts, then spades, with four-four. Surely he wouldn't bid up-the-line with hearts and diamonds. Since the major-suit fit is more important, he should bid hearts first with equal length. In fact, he should bid hearts first even with longer diamonds. (It is perfectly safe to bid his suits out of order. Since the doubler is known to have at least three hearts, advancer wouldn't bother to introduce the minor if he were willing to play hearts opposite three-card support. So the doubler shouldn't take a preference without four hearts.)
What should it mean, then, when advancer does bid diamonds first? I'm not entirely sure. I doubt I would ever produce this auction. I'm happy my opponents did, however. Defending three hearts seems like a fine spot. If I really wanted to go for the throat, I might double. If we don't beat it, I have a built-in excuse, since I could blame partner for not pulling. "I passed one spade! You knew I didn't have anything!" But I don't see much of an upside to doubling. If they go down, I suspect I'll be quite happy with my result.
I pass, and three hearts ends the auction. This rates to be a four-four fit. Dummy will be short in spades, and declarer will be short in clubs. So it looks right to lead a trump. I lead the heart four.
| NORTH
♠ 9 ♥ A J 7 6 ♦ A K 8 6 ♣ K 8 6 4 |
||
| WEST
♠ K J 4 3 ♥ Q 8 5 4 ♦ 9 3 ♣ 10 7 5 |
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| 1 ♠ |
Pass |
||
| Pass |
Double |
Pass |
2 ♦ |
| 2 ♠ |
Double |
Pass |
3 ♥ |
| (All pass) |
Declarer plays low from dummy, partner wins with the king, and declarer plays the deuce. Partner returns the three of hearts, and declarer plays the nine. I see. Declarer is three-four in the red suits. Perhaps I should have thought of that. If I did, I would have led a spade for the tap.
I play low. I'm not sure it's going to matter, but keeping a high trump over declarer's ten just seems like a good idea on principle. Declarer leads the jack of clubs from his hand--five--four--ace. Partner shifts to the ace of spades--deuce--four--nine and continues with the seven--queen--king--ruff.
Declarer plays a diamond to his queen. Partner plays the four, and I play the nine. Declarer plays a trump to the ace, as partner discards the five of spades. Declarer is now out of trumps. As soon as my minor-suit losers are gone, I can ruff in and take the rest. Declarer plays a club to his queen, a diamond back to dummy, and cashes the king of clubs, pitching the five of diamonds. Weird. He has five diamonds. He bid this way with 3-3-5-2. I claim the rest. Declarer is down two.
| NORTH
♠ 9 ♥ A J 7 6 ♦ A K 8 6 ♣ K 8 6 4 |
||
| WEST
♠ K J 4 3 ♥ Q 8 5 4 ♦ 9 3 ♣ 10 7 5 |
EAST
♠ A 10 7 6 5 ♥ K 3 ♦ J 4 ♣ A 9 3 2 | |
| SOUTH
♠ Q 8 2 ♥ 10 9 2 ♦ Q 10 7 5 2 ♣ Q J |
Maybe I should have doubled. Plus 500 would have been a pretty good result. No. If I double, declarer will know trumps aren't breaking. He won't draw the third round of trumps and will go down one for the same 200. That's one of the problems with close doubles. It's not uncommon that, even when they're right, they merely break even.
At the other table, West raises one spade to two spades. North doubles, and East bids three spades. Jack is too aggressive with these re-raises. Better to pass and let West compete if he has a fourth trump. Three spades is passed around to North, who sells out. I think I might have doubled again, but it doesn't matter. Four diamonds making or three spades down one are essentially the same score.
Against three spades, South leads the queen of clubs, East ducks, and South continues clubs. East wins and sensibly guesses the spades to go down only one.
All this passing isn't my usual style. I'm more of a bid-'em-up kind of guy. But it's working well. Don't jam the opponents' auction. Just stay out of their way and let them get into trouble all by themselves. Against the right opponents, perhaps that's not such a bad strategy.
Me: +200
Jack: -100
Score on Board 77: +7 IMPs
Total: -128 IMPs
"Better to pass and let West compete if he has a fourth trump."
ReplyDeleteAh, the nub of the matter. I have never understood the theory behind Bergen raises - surely this is instead the right strategy. Now your pair has a full complement of game tries, and if the opponents enter the auction, either partner may
(a) double with extra high cards and the minimum number of expected trumps.
(b) bid with extra trumps (or lots of shape).
(c) pass with neither, or a stack in their suit.
Allowing the opponents to tell you about their hands when your side is going to declare is a very underrated and winning tactic. Sure, sometimes you are going to take a wrong view, but the odds are much in your favor. And sometimes, they don't realize your side has a 9th trump and misread their own offensive potential.
Bidding high on every hand is a lot of fun, but I am not sure it is winning bridge. I much prefer the opposite strategy - get in early, don't get high enough to get hurt, get out unless you have a fit and values, let the opponents play contracts reached by unfamiliar routes.