Brian Davies
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“QPlus did lead the ace and king of hearts against me. I had no chance after that start.”
I meant to add that I had no chance because I failed to find Bernard’s squeeze!
I am a little behind on these, so just caught up on this. QPlus did lead the ace and king of hearts against me. I had no chance after that start. But I think that QPlus can still beat it, even on the line given in Bernard’s video.
At this point, North exits in hearts. East rises with the king and West plays the queen on this trick (promising the jack). East now underleads the ace of hearts to put West on lead. Bernard showed that the five of clubs at this point doesn’t work because when East plays the ten forcing, losing to the king, declarer can then finesse the nine on the second round.
The winning option for West is to play the eight of clubs at trick 10. This Surround Play will stop declarer getting home!
Interesting hand to study! Thanks Sue for highlighting it!
Thanks David. I certainly acknowledge that these issues are rare.
This was a hand from the Friday Live presentation:
The East hand would be awkward if there were no forcing bid available.
The example that Bernard gave for the “Constructive Non-forcing” hand was:
Bernard bids 1♠ with the East hand as Constructive and Non-forcing. I would be happy enough bidding 1♠ as a forcing bid – I can’t see that we would get in too much trouble. But weaken the hand to say an 8-count and I am happy enough passing with the East hand. There is a subtle problem with the “Constructive but Non-forcing” approach and Bernard did allude to it in the presentation. You really can’t make a non-forcing bid with a four-card suit. If you change the East hand slightly, you might have a problem:
♠ A876
♥ 54
♦ 852
♣ AQ87
Yes Brian, the amusing part is that declarer is void in clubs!
To be fair to declarer, it is a very difficult hand to bid. The hand is heavy for a 2D overcall, so a takeout double seems the normal bid, despite the shape. Maybe the follow-up bid should have been 3D, which must show a very strong hand with 5+ good diamonds. But with a stop in spades I can understand the 3NT. Another alternative might have been a Michaels 2S overcall – I usually hate these with 5-4 hands, but with so much extra strength it could work well.
My wife was sitting South and recognised the dangerous club holding in dummy. She decided that there was an urgent need for a switch! Declarer was amused.
As it happens, I was sitting North. We play standard leads and I would never lead the two from a doubleton. I would also not lead the two from three small cards.
It wouldn’t be my choice because I have 2H available as a two-suited opening. But this 9-count is a six loser hand, all of the points are in the two five-card suits and there is a 10 and 9 in each suit. This is really rather a strong hand and I think that one heart is certainly not a silly choice.
David can of course confirm the legality.
Colleen, you are correct. A jump to the 3-level (minors or majors) is a slam try in standard Acol and Bernard has mentioned this a number of times. It is of course a matter for partnership agreement and there are other methods.
I will look for a link and post one if I find it!
Hi Julian, does Redouble retain its standard meaning (balance of points and looking for penalties) in your transfer scheme? Or does 1H-Dbl-Rdbl show spades?
Is it possible to devise a scheme of transfers, which retains a 1NT response as natural? Would that be sensible?
There are various possibilities:
- Sometimes it is natural, saying “I heard your penalty double, but you have misjudged”. Imagine that partner has just bid 4S and you are considering bidding Blackwood when your right hand opponent doubles. This might warn you that trump’s are breaking badly or there is some other nasty surprise, but if you still expect to make your contract you might choose to redouble.
- Unless you have agreed another meaning, the sequence 1NT-Dbl-Rdbl suggests that 1NT will make. This a common situation where you might redouble. Alternatively, some play redouble as some form of rescue manoeuvre.
- If the opponent’s make a takeout double, a redouble tells partner that you don’t have a fit, but suggests that we have most of the points and we might profitably double their final contract.
- If the opponent’s double an artificial bid such as a splinter, a double is normally used as a special cue-bid showing first round control in the suit.
There are many other conventional uses of a redouble, but these are probably the most common uses.
Yes, I agree that claiming should speed the game up and I am someone who tends to claim early in face to face bridge. But I find the process a little frustrating on BBO – many defenders don’t seem to notice that you have claimed and you sit wondering what has happened. Claims where you are (say) conceding one trick and claiming the rest seem particularly difficult on BBO.
