South
should not bid over partner’s 4Clubs because that bid should be preemptive.
Here, North is too good to preempt. North should start with 2Clubs, not 4.
Over
2Clubs, South can try 2Spades. North will bid 3Clubs. That will probably end
the auction, though an enterprising South might chance 3NT.
The purpose of the bidding is to make a JOINTLY educated
guess about the outcome of the play. That's why I always analyze the play in
some of the plausible contracts that were reached at this table or might have
been reached at other tables where they had a chance to bid and play the same
hand. A couple of bidding mistakes were made by both sides with the final
result favoring E-W based on the actual distribution of cards.
The first 2 passes (by S then W) are fine. Assuming
N-S play weak 2s, North's pass is a mistake. That hand is tailor made for a
weak 2 heart bid. Not only the suit, but the vulnerability and bidding
position. Last week we discussed preemptive judgment. In 3rd position (Partner
and RHO have passed and LHO's strength is unknown) you want to bend over
backwards to preempt, especially when not vulnerable. In this case, a 2 heart
opening creates a headache for East (That's what you hope to do with a
preempt), who should bid 3 diamonds over 2hearts. South then raises to 3
hearts. W should keep passing, so 3 hearts comes back to E who has enough
strength to bid 4 clubs, S passing happily, W corrects to 4 diamonds back
around to South who will pass or bid 4 hearts as a sacrifice or as an attempt
to push E-W higher.
Back to the actual auction, I don't quite agree with
W bidding 1 spade with that weak a hand when vulnerable. Even if partner can
supply a spade fit, E would be likely to fly past the makeable level. You
should pass for now and partner will not get excited if you get a chance to
mention spades at the 1 level.
East has a really good hand even though it is
concentrated in the minors and the long suit lacks the high honors. There are
18 high card points (HCP), though you downgrade for the singleton heart Q.
bidding only 2 diamonds over partner's 1 spade response is a mistake in that it
risks missing a game (which would be a real risk if W actually had the strength
for the 1 spade response. E should have bid 2 clubs at that point, which is
forcing and descriptive.
To summarize the end- point: The HCP are evenly
divided between the sides. E-W make 4 diamonds with any plausible play and
defense. N-S make 3 hearts with any plausible play and defense. Both sides
should bid accordingly because of their strength and distribution. E-W might
bow out early because of worry over the vulnerability. N-S might (should) bid 4
hearts if necessary because they are not vulnerable and -100 for 4 hearts
doubled is still cheaper than -130.
Answer: This hand does not
deserve to make slam. So I guess it follows that it does not deserve to be
bid/played in slam.
Ain't bridge a great game?
The goal of a preemptive bid is, while giving up some
constructive accuracy, to deprive the opponents of constructive accuracy. The
first question is whose hand is it more likely to be? There's a big difference
what your order is in the auction. If you are dealer, you know nothing but your
13 cards. What's favorable about preempting with the North hand (if they were
dealer) is that spades takes up lots of bidding room. When both opponents'
hands are potentially strong you like the odds of getting in their way,
compared with your partner being strong.
When you are in 2nd position, as in this case, you
know that your RHO has passed. LHO and partner are equally likely to have a
strong hand and by preempting you could block your side as likely as the other
side. It's a roll of the dice, but I tend to be least enthusiastic about
preempting in 2nd position. A secondary consideration in deciding on a preempt
is when your suit is a major but you also have sort of a nice holding in the
other major. Still, the powerful honor holding in spades makes a preempt more
attractive.
If I were dealer, I would preempt that hand. The
question is whether to open 3 or 4. In 3rd position I would absolutely preempt.
In 2nd or 4th position it's a close decision, but I'd be inclined to preempt.
It wouldn't surprise me if some excellent players would disagree with me about
2nd and 4th seat. I'm confident 1st and 3rd would be close to unanimous.
As the cards lie, 3 spades is the perfect contract.
If played and defended competently, it will make exactly 9 tricks, so who's to
argue with that? No better contract is available. Even though there's an 8 card
fit in both majors, spades is easier to play with these cards.
In addition to showing a strong hand, a jump shift to another suit describes a two-suited hand. The North hand is not two-suited. It is balanced. North should not "want" to jump shift to anything other than NT.
The Pass by South showed less than 6 HCPs. The 2C bid by West was apparently Michael's, promising the two majors (5 - 5). Subsequent to those two bids, North should not "want" to bid anything. What they should want to do is Pass.
The flawed 2S bid by North is a "Reverse" which does promise a strong hand (19+). But like a jump shift, a Reverse promises a two-suited hand (clubs longer than spades in this case).
I am not sure if West
intended their DBL to be for takeout (choose the major) or penalty. But East
did well to Pass, leaving the DBL in for penalty. Turns out EW deserve to take
8 tricks in spades. That would put North down three (doubled), giving EW a nice
tidy 500 point score for a board on which they could not make more than a part
score contract.
Ain't bridge a great game?
I
would open 1NT with the West hand. Yes, there are negative features:
“only” 15hcp and a fair amount in queens and jacks. But there are significant
positives as well: some 10s and 9s, and most especially a very strong 5-card
suit. That suit adds significantly to the hand’s trick-taking potential to the
point that I would value the hand at 16, not 15.
With
five spades and four hearts East can transfer to spades and then bid hearts.
That should lead to a contract of Four Spades by West, a fine contract.
