The best submission for October came from Kaiping Chen. He wins a voucher of $30 funded by TBIB, toward any purchase made at the Bridge Shop or Paul Lavings Bridgegear.

Nil Vul W Dealer	♠ J 10 9 6 3 ♥ 9 3 ♦ 7 2 ♣ Q 10 8 5
♠ K 7 4 ♥ A 8 7 6 4 2 ♦ A 3 ♣ 6 3		♠ A 8 5 2 ♥ 10 ♦ K Q J 10 8 6 ♣ 7 2
	♠ Q ♥ K Q J 5 ♦ 9 5 4 ♣ A K J 9 4

 

West	North	East	South
1♥	Pass	1♠	2♣
X	3♣	3♦	Pass
3♥	Pass	4♦	Pass
4♠	All Pass

X=Support X, shows three spades

1) What went wrong here?

2) What is the definition of 3♦ by East in the context of a two over one system? What is the best bid by East after 3♣?

3) After Easts’s 3♦, West bid 3♥, and after East’s 4♦, West continued with 4♠. Can you comment on this?

Hi Kevin,

1) The wheels probably fell off when the partnership misunderstood about the nature of the 3♦ bid (is it forcing? Does it imply a fifth spade?)

2) I think the 3♦ bid by East should not promise a fifth spade, likely shows 6+ diamonds and is not forcing (but not weak by any means, it is constructive, something like 7-10 points). If East wanted to force in spades or has a good hand in general, he should double 3♣ first (which is takeout/showing values). This is one of those special cases where a new suit is not forcing by responder, as he may have a hand that wasn’t strong enough to bid 2-minor on the first round and reverse into spades later (thus had to respond 1♠ first with four spades. In an auction like this, for responder to force, he will have to double first.

3) I won’t need to talk about the rest of the auction, since the misunderstanding came from the 3♦ bid. If EW were on the same page about the 3♦ bid, then of course West would have passed 3♦ given that he has a minimum opening hand.

Hope that helps,

Andy

Click here to ask Andy a new question.

Posted in Latest News on December 6, 2018