|
'The most interesting questions of visitors from the Dutch sister site (Bridgevaria.nl)'.
Dear Ed and Peter. Partner and I had a bidding misunderstanding.
We open five-card majors and play Walsh* — as described by Ed Hoogenkamp!
I had 17 HCP in a 1♠-4♥-3♦-5♣ shape.
Partner had 17 HCP as well, six diamonds and no four-card major.
The bidding went as follows: | West | North | East | South |
|---|
| | partner | | I
| | — | — | — | 1♣ | | pass | 2♦ | pass | 2♥ | pass
| 3NT | pass | pass | pass
| | | |
Thirteen easy tricks: we missed 7NT!!
2♦ was game forcing. I decided to show my four card heart suit (reverse) so partner would understand I had 15+ HCP and an unbalanced hand.
Partner thought I was asking for a heart guard for 3NT.
My thoughts were now, that partner had understood I held 15+ HCP, so he obviously wasn't strong enough to bid 4NT (quantitatively: 'If you have extra strength, please bid a slam').
What went wrong? Should I perhaps have bid 3♥? Best regards,
Bep Dohmen
* To start with: though the convention plays a part neither in your question nor in our answers, we (Ed & Peter) will explain 'Walsh' briefly for visitors who are unfamiliar with this very popular and useful convention.
Walsh is a convention in which, after partner's 1♣ opening, responder prioritises bidding his major suit over bidding 1♦, even if the diamond suit is longer. Responder does so if he has 6-11(12) HCP. If he is stronger he can respond 1♦, since now he can bid his major suit in the next round as a reverse.
An important consequence is that after receiving a 1♦ response, the 1♣ opener will rebid 1NT on a balanced 12-14 count, even with a four-card major suit. After all, his partner has either denied a four-card major suit (if he has 6-11) or will bid it by a reverse (if he has 12+) over opener's 1NT rebid.
This way the opponents know less of opener's hand, often resulting in an unlucky lead in opener's four-card major suit.
Another advantage of Walsh: | West | North | East | South |
|---|
| — | 1♣ | pass | 1♦ | pass
| 1♥ | pass
| ?? |
In classical bidding North can have either a balanced 12-14 count (possibly 3-4-3-3!) or an unbalanced hand with 12-18. Rather silly: North has bid twice already and still South has no idea about North's point count, number of clubs (three is still possible, seven too) and distribution.
Using Walsh, opener will rebid 1NT on a 3-4-3-3 or any other balanced hand with 12-14 HCP, meaning that in the given sequence he shows an unbalanced hand with 5-4 in clubs and hearts (unless perhaps 4-4-1-4).
Now to your question proper: Reply Ed Hoogenkamp (South) Dear Bep,
I must disagree with you: in your auction 2♥ is not a reverse bid that shows extra strength. After your partner's strong (game-forcing) jump response, emphasis is on showing distribution rather than showing extra strength.
Bidding 3♥ instead of 2♥ wouldn't have solved the matter, since that looks like Splinter (singleton in hearts, good diamond fit) to me. After all, 3♥ constitutes a jump in an already game-forcing situation.
That brings me to: what should you have bid over 2♦? You haven't given us your exact hand (to all who submit a question: whenever possible give us the entire bidding and all, exact hands) but it strikes me that 3♠ (Splinter, as mentioned!) would have been an option. You show extra strength, the diamond fit and the singleton spade at the same time. This way partner will be in a very comfortable situation to take the right decision, I think.
If you haven't agreed upon Splinter, I prefer 3♦ above 2♥. The fit is usually what partner needs to know and that brings me to: how 'serious' is 2♦? Is a 12 HCP hand with any six card suit in diamonds possible or does the jump bid show a hand with serious slam potential?
I myself are not that quick to jump to 2♦ (usually I prefer 1♦: for instance if the six-card diamond suit lacks solidness or if the rest of the hand is rather balanced). So if I do and partner turns out to have a fit and extra strength, we are certainly going to bid a slam. I hope this is helpful,
un saludo desde Barcelona PS: If not, then please email the precise hands.
Reply Peter van der Linden (North)
Dear Bep, Being a cool Scandinavian I have to point out the real flaw in your reasoning (Ed is too friendly to do so: 'he is from Barcelona you know'): You have never informed your partner about your diamond fit!
Whether you inform him by way of a simple 3♦ bid or a more sophisticated 3♠ bid — if Splinter is agreed upon — over 2♦ is less important (3♠ is the best option, I agree with Ed here). I agree with Ed about 2♥ not promising extra strength as well — adding that the bid does not deny extra strength either. Furthermore: 2♥ in principle denies a diamond fit. After partner's jump shift (game forcing jump response in a new suit) the first thing you have to do is to show whether partner's suit should be trumps (as far as you are concerned). Your partner has to take some of the blame too: 2♥ does not ask for a heart guard. As mentioned before: the bid is natural and in principle denies a diamond fit.
I think the real meaning of partner's 3NT bid should be: minimum hand (in view of the earlier 2♦ jump shift) and a double spade guard (the unbid suit). North conveys the message: 'I've heard enough: we do not (!) have a fit, so 3NT is the best contract. I am not strong enough to make a slam try if you have a minimum hand.'
A consequence: as you had extra strength not yet mentioned to partner (remember: your 2♥ bid did not deny extra strength) you should have proceeded towards a slam after all.
So, having wrongly bid 2♥ as you did, things might still have turned out well if you had bid 4♦ over 3NT: 'Partner I have a diamond fit and extra strength after all.' I am not certain you would have bid the grand (partner was under the false impression you asked for a heart guard...) but a small slam was certainly within reach.
To conclude: whatever misunderstandings may have been the case, having 17 HCP and a diamond fit, you should have tried for a slam come what may, after partner's 2♦ jump shift. En hils fra Orkanger |