Board 1
Neither vulnerable
Neither vulnerable
| ♠ Q 7 5 4 ♥ K 8 6 4 2 ♦ K J ♣ 9 8 |
One diamond by partner; one heart on my right. A fairly common agreement here is that one spade shows five spades and a negative double shows four (and carries no information about responder's minors). I'm of the opinion, however, that a negative double is a take-out double, not merely a substitute for bidding the unbid major. This hand, lacking support for either minor, is not a negative double in my book.
One spade is a possibility (I don't agree that it promises five), but I think the best action is to pass. If I pass and later show up with four spades and values to have responded, partner will infer that I have primary hearts (i.e., longer hearts than spades). He should not assume that I intended to sit for his reopening double. Indeed, with this hand, I would pull a reopening double to two spades. The purpose of the pass is not to try to collect a penalty; it is to describe my hand. Partner will be better placed to make a decision if he knows I have hearts and spades and not, for example, the same hand with hearts and clubs reversed.
I pass. LHO bids two clubs, and partner bids two spades.
Since I may have to show a preference to diamonds at the three level with a doubleton, partner should try to avoid this sequence without at least four-six in his suits. With a 4-1-5-3 pattern, for example, he should double. (This should be take-out of hearts, not of clubs. It needs to promise some club length so I can pass with a misfit.)
Before I make up my mind how high to raise, RHO doubles. I am surprised to discover that the opponents play this as a penalty double. I'm fairly sure LHO is going to pull to three clubs, so I redouble to advise partner that I fully expect to make two spades. Partner should have a fair picture of my hand: Spade support, primary hearts, and moderate values. Unfortunately, I don't think partner can assume I have four spades. I might, for example, be 3-5-1-4 and expect that the opponents are in serious trouble whether they choose to defend or not.
LHO bids three clubs as expected--pass--pass to me.
Since partner couldn't double, it sounds as if they've found a club fit. It's likely that partner is 4-1-6-2 and LHO has seven clubs. I don't think we are in a forcing auction, but I can't see selling out to three clubs. The opponents appear to have a nine-card fit and, even though we don't, we do have a double fit. So it is not a Law violation to compete. Besides, it's still possible we have a game.
It's tempting to bid three spades in defiance of RHO's double in order to confirm the fourth spade. But I like three diamonds better for two reasons: (1) Assuming RHO has four goods spades for his double, it's easy to construct hands where three diamonds makes and three spades doesn't. (2) If we have a game, it is more likely to be in notrump than in spades, and three diamonds might be just what partner needs to hear to bid it. If he has, say,
| ♠ A x x x ♥ x ♦ A Q 10 x x x ♣ A x |
he can envision nine tricks in notrump after I bid three diamonds. (Assuming that his LHO would not double two spades with three-card club support, so that one holdup in clubs will be sufficient.)
Over three diamonds, partner bids three hearts. This should be natural, aiming toward a possible game in hearts. (One of the advantages of the trap pass is that it gives you a way to declare in your opponent's suit. It always delights the kibitzers when that happens.) But I suspect partner intends this as a cue-bid, so I will treat it as such.
Given what partner already knows about my hand, is three spades or three notrump more descriptive? My hearts are no better than partner has a right to expect, I have no help in clubs, and the fourth spade may be exactly what partner is fishing for. So three spades looks right. If a single heart stopper is all partner needs, he can bid three notrump himself over three spades. Since he has already expressed doubt with his supposed cue-bid, I would certainly pull with no heart stopper at all.
But I don't trust Jack to be that delicate. RHO thought he could beat two spades. How likely is it that we can make four? Three notrump is probably where we belong, so perhaps, opposite this partner, I should just be practical and bid it. If RHO doubles, I may change my mind. But, at 50 points an undertrick, I'll take a shot.
I bid three notrump, everyone passes, and LHO leads the jack of clubs (showing the ten or ace-queen-jack).
| NORTH
Jack ♠ A J 8 6 ♥ 5 ♦ A Q 9 8 5 ♣ K 10 5 |
||
| SOUTH
Phillip ♠ Q 7 5 4 ♥ K 8 6 4 2 ♦ K J ♣ 9 8 |
| West | North | East | South |
| Thomas | Jack | Adrian | Phillip |
| 1 ♦ | 1 ♥ | Pass | |
| 2 ♣ | 2 ♠ | Double1 | Redouble |
| 3 ♣ | Pass | Pass | 3 ♦ |
| Pass | 3 ♥ | Pass | 3 NT |
| (All pass) | |||
| 1Penalty double | |||
As I said earlier, I would double two clubs with that pattern rather than bid two spades. I certainly would have doubled three clubs. That seems like an easier way to collect our game bonus.
Partner has one fewer diamond than I expected. So I will have to establish a spade trick. That means I can't afford to duck a club. It will be easy for West, with an entryless hand, to find a heart shift. I have to hope clubs are seven-one. If they are, I'll make this. If not, I'm down three.
I play the king; East plays the four. I play a low spade from dummy--deuce--queen--three. Yay! East surely would have hopped and played a club if he had one. So I must be making this. I cash the jack of diamonds--deuce--five--seven, then the king of diamonds--three--eight--ten. If I'd known the ten was dropping, I would have overtaken. I would then be able to make an overtrick on a strip squeeze.
I lead a spade to the ace as West pitches the deuce of clubs, then run diamonds. East pitches three, seven, nine of hearts. I pitch deuce, four of hearts and the club nine. West pitches the club three on the last diamond. Assuming the heart ace is onside, we are down to this position:
| NORTH
Jack ♠ J 8 ♥ 5 ♦ -- ♣ 10 5 |
||
| WEST
Thomas ♠ -- ♥ ? ♦ -- ♣ A Q 7 6 |
EAST
Adrian ♠ K 10 ♥ A ? ? ♦ -- ♣ -- | |
| SOUTH
Phillip ♠ 7 5 ♥ K 8 6 ♦ -- ♣ -- |
| NORTH
Jack ♠ A J 8 6 ♥ 5 ♦ A Q 9 8 5 ♣ K 10 5 |
||
| WEST
Thomas ♠ 3 ♥ 10 ♦ 6 4 3 2 ♣ A Q J 7 6 3 2 |
EAST
Adrian ♠ K 10 9 2 ♥ A Q J 9 7 3 ♦ 10 7 ♣ 4 | |
| SOUTH
Phillip ♠ Q 7 5 4 ♥ K 8 6 4 2 ♦ K J ♣ 9 8 |
| NORTH
Jack ♠ A J 8 ♥ 5 ♦ -- ♣ 10 5 |
||
| WEST
Thomas ♠ -- ♥ 10 ♦ -- ♣ A Q 7 6 3 |
EAST
Adrian ♠ K 10 9 ♥ A Q J ♦ -- ♣ -- | |
| SOUTH
Phillip ♠ 7 5 4 ♥ K 8 6 ♦ -- ♣ -- |
As much as I'd like to pat myself on the back for this result, I think East deserves most of the credit for his premature penalty double. He would have had a chance to double four spades if he hadn't doubled two. West helped, too, with his opening lead. A heart lead would beat this, but only because my hearts were worse than they should have been for my auction. Even if my hearts were only slightly better, a heart lead would not work. (Switch the eight and nine of hearts for example. If East doesn't overtake the ten, I duck it, and there is no winning defense.) So perhaps West's best chance was to find his partner with a doubleton club.
Our teammates defended four spades (undoubled) down one, so we start the match off with a 10-imp lead.
Table 1: +400
Table 2: +50
Result on Board 1: +10 imps
Total: +10 imps
No comments:
Post a Comment