Should you bid on ?
by Brian Senior
Our Scottish reader also queries
what went wrong on this next hand, from an Aggregate Teams competition.
At Love All, their Acol auction
was:
and a decent and making game was
missed.
East wondered whether he should
have bid on over 2
with a 3
trial bid. It is interesting how we tend to look at a bid which
would have succeeded as the alternative to the one we actually chose
at the table. 3
is tempting because of course partner has a club fit and would certainly
jump to game over it. However, were I to make a try over 2,
I would choose 2NT. My hand is completely balanced, so which directs
partner's attention to his holding in one particular side-suit?
In fact, his holdings in all four suits will be important. The other
beauty of 2NT is that it allows partner to bid out his shape if
he is three-suited as in the actual hand. After 1
- 1
- 2
- 2NT, West has an easy 3
bid, and now East could go on to game, knowing that nine of his
ten points are working. Conversely, a 3
bid by West over 2NT would discourage East, who would see that his
K
was likely to be wastepaper so would sign-off in 3.
But, though a 2NT game try would
have worked on the actual deal, I would pass 2.
Even treating AJ10 as only one loser, we have a nine-loser hand
facing a minimum opening. Losing Trick Count afficianados will tell
us that even the three-level may not be safe. There is also the
minor matter that partner may have raised with onlt three-card spade
support.
So, if East's bidding was immaculate,
it must be that West should have bid more than just 2,
right? Well, I don't think so. It is true that the West hand has
only six losers according to LTC, but it is a minimum opening in
high-card terms, lacks intermediates, and has no honour in the agreed
trump suit. It is very easy to see how a 3
raise will lead to an awful lot of games going down - or even 3
going down when partner passes, whenever partner has weak trumps
or too much wasted in diamonds.
So I would agree with every call
made by either player; it just happened that it didn't work out.
We cannot expect to get every hand right. Good bidding is about
taking the long term view and making decisions which will make a
profit in the long run. Clearly it would have worked out better
had either player been more aggressive on this particular deal,
but I would say that for either to bid more strongly would be a
long-term losing proposition.
If you have a question for Brian,
please contact anna@msoworld.com
|
