This hand, which we played in the very first round, demonstrates how important it is to have agreements in effect for competitive bidding situations.
Board #6
East dealer
East-West vulnerable
| | North
♠ 9 8 3
♥ Q J 10 8 5
♦ Q J
♣ Q 9 3
| | West
♠ 4
♥ 3
♦ A 10 7 5 3
♣ K 10 8 7 6 5
| | East
♠ A Q J 5
♥ A 4 2
♦ K 8 6 4 2
♣ 2
| | | South
♠ K 10 7 6 2
♥ K 9 7 6
♦ 9
♣ A J 4
| |
|
| | | | |
| South | West | North | East |
| | | 1♦ |
| 1♠ | 3♦ | P | P |
| P | | | |
Holding North's cards I was not much of a factor on this hand.
East opened with the five-card diamond suit. South's spades were rather motley, but his hand had too much playing strength to ignore. Doubling for takeout was a possibility, but it would probably lose a 5-3 spade fit. He opted to overcall 1♠.
The East-West team was a first-time partnership. West had great diamond support, but only seven points. She elected to bid 3♦. East was uncertain whether that response was weak and decided to pass.
I have played with 121 different partners in sanctioned games, and in (very) many cases we had only sketchy agreements when we playing at the first table. So, I have a great deal of sympathy for the uncomfortable position that our opponents were in.
How should West evaluate this 1=1=5=6 hand? To begin with, West should assume that East likely has at least four diamonds. The only hand that opens with three diamonds is 4=4=3=2, which accounts for only 5 percent of the diamond openers. So, West should conclude that they probably have a good diamond fit.
West also should deduce that both major suits are out, and notrump is very unlikely. So, the only question is whether their side has a partial, game, or slam. Knowing this when the auction is at the one level is a precious advantage that one almost never gets in a competitive auction.
The aforementioned figure of seven high-card points greatly undervalues the West hand's playing potential. West, expecting to be dummy, can use "dummy points" or "support points" (same thing) to compute a more realistic value. The two singletons are worth three points each, and the extra length in clubs and diamonds add another few points. This hand certainly has the potential of helping to produce a lot of tricks if diamonds are the trump suit.
Another way to evaluate it is using "Losing Trick Count*." This hand has six losers: one each in the majors and two in each minor. Hands that open usually have at most seven losers. So, West knows that the total losers for his side is probably thirteen or fewer. This confirms the point-count evaluation of this hand as worth a game in diamonds.
So, West should try to convey two messages to East: acceptance of the trump suit and an unwillingness to stop short of game. Can one bid accomplish all of that?
West faced a difficult decision, but it is a common one in competitive auctions. The overriding factor in such a situation – especially in a new partnership – is to make a bid that partner cannot pass. The only alternative is just to bid 5♦ yourself, but that precludes the search for a slam, one of bridge's greatest pleasures.
So, ironically, West can bid anything but diamonds. Bidding clubs would be forcing, but it would make it difficult to convince partner later that diamonds was going to be the trump suit. That leaves the following alternatives:
• 2♠, a cue bid showing invitational values and diamond support. This bid has the advantage of keeping the auction low to facilitate the exchange of information.
• 3♠, hoping that partner would understand that this was a splinter showing at least four diamonds, game-going values and shortness in spades. The key to using this bid is the understanding that any unnecessary jump is a splinter. If you have not discussed this with partner, you should probably avoid this bid. If you have this understanding, however, the splinter bid perfectly describes the hand. Of course, you could instead splinter in hearts, but that allows North to show support in spades. Why would you want that?
• 4NT, whatever flavor of Blackwood you play. The best hands for Blackwood are ones with singletons and kings. In those cases you are concerned only about the number of aces, not the identity. This hand definitely qualifies, but there are too many missing key cards to use it in a minor suit. If East shows only two key cards, you will be past five diamonds with two almost certain losers. Even if East shows three, you will not know about the ♦Q.
Assuming that West bid 2♠, East should also reevaluate using LTC. East has one loser in clubs and spades and two in each red suit, a total of only six. So, this hand is worth more than most openers. Furthermore, East can make a control-showing cue bid in any suit. Because any diamond bid can be passed, the one thing that East must avoid is bidding diamonds short of game.
The splinter situation is a little different because both sides are already committed to game. The fact that East has five diamonds is very important because with ten trumps it is no longer necessary to have the queen. So, bidding diamonds at the four-level after the splinter provides crucial information without showing weakness.
Most experts would probably find the 6♦ contract on this hand. Every established partnership should at least get to 5♦.
One last thing: If North-South tries to take advantage of the favorable vulnerability to steal the bid, East has the perfect hand (strength and trump tricks) for doubling. Get out the axe and watch them squirm!
* If you are unfamiliar with the concept of Losing Trick Count (LTC), you can read about it here