A couple of weeks ago I played in the regional finals of the National Pairs, with my long-standing partner. It was a disappointing outing: we weren't close to qualifying for the national final. Here are three hands we lost in the auction:
1NT12-14
Pass
2stayman
2NT
In our system invitational hands with five hearts go through Stayman. South's 2NT wasn't alerted: our opponents showed no sign of knowing what they were doing and neither of us felt inclined to pursue a legal remedy. Jonathan doubled North's 3
to show values, and guessed to double 4
too. There was nothing in the play - minus 710.
Perhaps you hate the system, so imagine East started with a transfer to hearts, and West bid 3
over South's 2NT. When East comes to decide what to do about South's 4
, he might consult the so-called Law of Total Tricks: each side is known to have a nine-card fit. If the Law holds, then if there are ten tricks in clubs East should pass, if there are nine tricks East should double, and if there are eight tricks East should bid. Knowing the extent of the fit doesn't seem to help. (As it happens the Law is very nearly right: with West as declarer there are eight tricks in hearts on a diamond lead, but if East manages to bid the suit first he can make nine by end-playing South).
2
by East would have been conventional, and he didn't want to pass, so he bid clubs at the lowest level. West, expecting a respectable hand opposite, bid 3NT. Jonathan doubled this - he could pass, but double at least invites my opinion if East removes 3NT, as seems likely. When I had expressed no view about 4
, Jonathan guessed to double anyway. That seems reasonable to me - perhaps the field is defending 1NT making eight tricks on the wrong lead, but it scored another -710.
I opened light in third hand, and was surprised when 2
came back to me. It seems obvious to bid 2
, but looking at it again, partner, who has passed with some values, has at most two spades and at most three hearts. With most of his cards in the minors, most of his values are likely to be there too, and they may be of little use in a heart contract. Meanwhile, opponents may well score better in 2NT than in 2
. So I passed. I was completely wrong: we can make 2
, and 2
is their last making contract.
Incidentally, I would have doubled 1
with the North cards, and bid 1NT as South. Also completely wrong, it's two off.
Defending 2
I took the ace of spades at trick one and switched to a diamond. Declarer won in dummy and led a club. I rose with the ace and played a spade, consistent with my bidding but inconsistent with the lie of the cards. I should have played a heart, holding declarer to eight tricks: on reflection this is fairly obvious.
I welcome comments explaining how and why we should have got any of these auctions right.
