Team games today and Sunday, so no hand records.
Sitting South, vulnerable against not, you pick up 9x Jxxxxx Qxxx J on board 2 in a 7 board Swiss Team match. East opens 1C, alerted and described as artifical and forcing, 16+ (Precision). You pass and West bids 2C, alrted and described as a transfer to diamonds, with game-forcing values (8+.) Partner bids 3C, which East doubles. Must be Michaels! With a huge heart fit, 4H might make or go down less than the value of their game -- but the bidding proceeds pass, pass, double, pass, pass, 4S by partner, a bid which would make no sense if partner had both majors. When the smoke clears, partner is down 5 doubled for a massive 1400 point penalty. His hand? xxxxx x Kx AQ109x .
A common mistake after learning a new gadget, such as Michaels' cue-bid, is to misapply it to inappropriate auctions. Michaels is a direct (not balancing!) cue-bid of a suit your right-hand opponent has bid naturally. It would make little sense to want to play in hearts, for example, if RHO opens 1H, showing 5 hearts and an opening hand. Eli Culbertson defined such a bid as showing a massive hand with first-round control of the enemy suit; but such hands occur rarely and experts began looking for alternative uses. The modern Michaels bid shows a 5-5 hand with the unbid major and a minor, or both majors (sometimes 5-4) over a minor suit.
Now go back to the auction -- what suit have the opponents shown? Only diamonds -- and if partner had bid 2D, would you think he wanted to play there? Of course not, and that bid could reasonably be used to show both majors, though it might be safer to simply bid 2S and discuss the "Michaels" possibility later. The essential point is that it is more important that partner have a way to show clubs, and there is no reason why 3C should not do so. (Double would also suggest clubs if you have not agreed on some other meaning, but 3C takes up more bidding room.) Of course 3C was a poor bid and, in fact, -800 would hardly have been less disastrous. But perhaps West would've bid over that double.
Along the same lines I don't know how many times I've seen confusion over the "Unusual Notrump." Just today West opened 1S, North overcalled 2H, and East bid 2NT, thinking that bid showed the minors. Nonsense! In competition, ALL notrump bids are natural except in specifically agreed sequences. After an opponent opens a suit, a direct jump to 2NT could be perfectly natural, but fascination with the Unusual Notrump lead experts to reason that they could show a strong balanced hand by double, then 2NT, so it was decided that 2NT would show the minors (or two lower unbid suits.) I think it would've been better to reserve the Unusual meaning for passed-hand 2NT bids, where an offer to play 2NT clearly makes no sense.
******************************************************************************************
Trying to keep your equilibrium after that -1400 disaster, you pick up a promising hand on board 4:
Ax AK109 AQJxx xx . Partner deals and opens 1S. You respond 2D, and partner rebids 3C, a "high reverse" promising at least 15 hcp or so. (New suits at the three level crowd the bidding and must be clearly defined in strength; with a more limited hand opener would simply rebid 2S as a "default" bid.)
Looks like slam! You bid 4NT (simple Blackwood) and partner shwos one Ace. Over 5NT, partner shows three Kings. Wow! You can count 11 tricks (assuming no opponent has 5 diamonds) but let's see -- one ace and three Kings is only 13 hcp, so partner should have another card or two for that 3C bid. 6NT would be safe, but with no first or second round loser and various long suits, you decide to gamble 7NT.
The opening lead is the Queen of hearts, and dummy appears with KQxxx xx Kx AKxx. Perhaps the spades will split 3-3, or maybe West lead from QJ doubleton:
KQxxx
xx
Kx
AKxx
Ax
AK109
AQJxx
xx
If neither spades nor hearts provides an "instant" trick 13, you can always resort to a squeeze. Let's check the conditions:
(1) You've got enough winners for all but one trick. Check -- 12 winners, need 13.
(2) You have threats in two or more suits. Check -- spades, hearts and clubs all have extra non-winners.
(3) One opponent has to guard at least two suits -- seems likely, the two of them must guard three suits.
(4) You have a long card to squeeze with -- diamonds, of course.
(5) You have an entry in a suit with a threat in the hand opposite the squeeze card -- clubs should work.
One more item will help -- try to keep threats in each hand, then you can squeeze either defender. If all threats are in the same hand, say North, you can only squeeeze one defender (West.)
Win the heart lead. Play AKQ of spades, pitching the Ten of hearts from South. Let's say West shows out on the third spade. Cash one high club, the King of diamonds, the second high heart, and then three more diamonds, pitching a club and a spade from North. Watch the discards only for the QJ of hearts, and whether East pitches a spade. If East keeps his spades and you do not see the QJ of hearts played or discarded, play the last diamond and pitch the last spade from dummy. If the nine of hearts still isn't good, cross to the high club and play the last club. It either wins or it doesn't.
The three card ending:
x
--
--
Ax
-- J
?? ?
-- --
?? ??
--
9
x
x
East may be able to keep a spade and two clubs, and pitch after dummy on the last diamond, or guard spades and hearts, but if only West can guard hearts and clubs or if East must guard all three suits the squeeze works -- or a defender may make a mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment