20th March – Board 6: East/West Game.
Dealer East.
North thought he had a
‘no-risk bid’ on the hand shown below but in fact a more bullish approach might
well have brought in a better score.
|
North:
S 9
H K J 9
D A K Q 10 8 6 2
C 6 5
|
|
West:
S A 8 5 4
H 8 2
D 5 4 3
C Q 7 3 2
|
|
East:
S K Q 10 6 2
H A Q
D J 9 7
C A K 4
|
|
South:
S J 7 3
H 10 7 6 5
4 3
D none
C J 10 9 8
|
|
West
|
North
|
East
|
South
|
|
|
2C
|
No
|
2D
|
Dbl
|
2NT
|
No
|
3C
|
No
|
3S
|
No
|
4S
|
End
|
|
|
I
give the bidding as it occurred at the table. 2C was either an Acol two in an
unspecified suit or a balanced 19/20 points and 2D was a relay asking for
greater clarification. Now it might look right to double 2D with that North
hand but by doing so it allowed East/West to proceed as per normal and the 5-4
spade fit came to light. Now imagine that North bids 3D, or better still 4D,
putting pressure on the opposing pair. If East bids spades then surely partner
will think that opener has an Acol two in that suit and the safer bet might
seem to be to double. North can make eight tricks with no trouble at all and
even a 300 penalty would be great compensation for the vulnerable game the
opposition could have scored.
The bidding sequence you suggest in the text has west doubling east's bid of spades!?
ReplyDeleteNo, I meant that East might double 3D - or 4D - in case his partner thought he had an Acol 2 in spades. Sorry for the confusion.
ReplyDelete