This nothingburger of a hand produced four different results. After I saw the dummy, I assumed that we would be getting a zero, but one pair did worse than we did.
Board #23
South dealer
Both sides vulnerable
| | North
♠ Q 10 7
♥ A Q 9 4
♦ 8
♣ Q 9 7 3 2
| | West
♠ A 8 5 3 2
♥ 7 5 3
♦ J 3 2
♣ A 8
| | East
♠ K J 4
♥ K J 8
♦ K 10 9 6
♣ J 10 6
| | | South
♠ 9 6
♥ 10 6 2
♦ A Q 7 5 4
♣ K 5 4
| |
|
| | | | |
| South | West | North | East |
| P | P | 1♥ | Dbl |
| 2♥ | 2♠ | P | P |
| 3♥ | P | P | P |
I sat North. I admit it; I opened a four-card suit. I have never done this before when we were vulnerable. If I ever do it again, it will be when I am rock-sold certain that my partner is on the same page.
Here is my thinking: I absolutely will not bid 1♣ in this situation. If partner responded 1♦, I could not pass. On the other hand, if I took a second bid, our agreement is that I must have a full opener. After my second bid I would have no way of applying the brakes.
If we were not vulnerable, I would strongly consider bidding 3♣. Yes, 3♣. It is extremely disruptive, and there is almost no chance that partner will bid. However, it seems excessively risky when one is vulnerable.
So that left pass and 1♥. I felt that I just could not let East have a clean slate, and so I opened 1♥, which East doubled. South had an easy raise to 2♥.
West bid 2♠. This bid is somewhat ambiguous. West's spades must be good enough to mention, and she must have some values. The odds probably favor five spades, but there is no guarantee.
My best bid at this point, 2♥, is, unfortunately, totally illegal; I have actually asked about it. When the 2♥ card landed, I would, of course, be told that it was insufficient. If I made any call besides the "equivalent" 3♥, my partner would be banned from the auction. I would then squirm for a minute or so before passing. Of course, banning my partner is exactly what I wanted.
Years ago I had a partner who could have handled this situation by simply snapping down the Pass card so hard that the table would shake. I, however, took the ethical route, and gingerly lay the green card before me. South raised to three. I hoped that East would take the bait and bid 3♠, but he did not. At least he did not double.
I gathered in the seven tricks that I deserved, and the opponents scored 200 points. The scores at the other tables were 100 (NS down 1), 110 (EW making), and 300 (presumably NS down 3).
I think that there should be a universal partnership agreement that if partner opens in the third seat, and partner passes in the second round or bids minimally after Drury or a negative double, one is not allowed to take two bids. I faced a similar situation last week in Mansfield and received a -500 for my efforts.
What if I had passed in the first place? East presumably would have bid 1♦. West would respond 1♠. I would double. This would be a perfect occasion for a support redouble, which would probably land them in 2♠. Without that agreement, West must bid 1NT, and East must decide between passing, bidding 2♠, and using New Minor Forcing.
In fact, no one played in 1NT.