Hand of the Week

09/18/19

I had a difficult time selecting a hand this week. We seemed to find ourselves in the same situation over and over. Our opponents made an unusual call and then benefited from it. On hand #22 both opponents made an unusual call, but I don't think that either affected the outcome much.

Board #22
East dealer
East-West vulnerable

	North ♠ K 10 9 7 5 ♥ 6 3 2 ♦ A J 10 7 6 ♣ ——
West ♠ Q J 8 ♥ Q 5 4 ♦ —— ♣ Q 10 9 8 6 4 2		East ♠ 6 4 ♥ 10 9 8 ♦ K 4 3 ♣ K J 7 5 3
	South ♠ A 3 2 ♥ A K J 7 ♦ Q 9 8 5 2 ♣ A


South	West	North	East
			P
1♦	3♣	3♠	P
4♣	P	4♦	P
4♥	P	5♦	P
6♦	P	P	P

I was sitting North as usual. We sit this way to make it a little easier for Ken to perform his roll as director.

South opened his five-loser powerhouse 1♦. West pondered for a minute or two before playing the 3♣ card. I am a very aggressive when it comes to preempts. However, I do not think that I would have ventured this bid when our side was vulnerable, and I held only a bunch of quacks.

My hand only contained eight points, but I loved it. I took advantage of the opportunity to show my spades before supporting diamonds. The corollary to the LAW says that East should bid 5♣ or even 6♣ if she was fairly certain that West actually had seven clubs. She passed, a call that I would not even have considered.

South cue bid his ♣A. I raised diamonds. He showed his ♥A. I bid diamonds again. He tried the slam in diamonds. If West had held the ♦K, or either opponent had held the queen-jack doubleton in spades, we would have triumphed. It was about 50-50.

Most of the time it would be folly to try for slam with only 26 points, but the opponents' club and heart honors were irrelevant.

If West had not preempted, I think that we would have had a similar auction, something like this:

South	North
1♦	1♠
2♥	3♦
3♠	4♦
5♣	5♦
6♦

2♥ is a reverse. The 3♦ bid shows support for diamonds. It is also a game force. If North wanted to show a weak hand with diamond support, he would bid 2NT[1] first.

The play would be the same, although declarer would assume that the clubs would probably split 6-6.

And what if East had bid 5♣? South might have passed, but I would certainly have bid 5♦. The only question is whether South would bid 5♠ (hooray!) or 6♦ (boo!).

[1] This is one of the many applications of the lebensohl convention. The 2NT bid asks partner to bid 3♣. The next bid, in this case 3♦, is weaker than if it had been billed directly. This is a warning to the opening bidder that (despite the reverse) their side may not have game.