October 2017 - 63

Special Contributors

Dear Billy
BY BILLY MILLER

Dear Billy,
At a recent regional, I held the
following hand as South in a Swiss
Teams competition:
♠8 ♥Q 9 7 4 ♦K Q J 4 3 ♣K Q 9.
West dealt and bid 3♠. My partner
doubled. East passed. This was the
first time I had played with this partner, so I did not know his style at this
level, but I thought, "Partner must
have a very good hand, since we are
forced to the four level. I have support for all the other suits and a good
hand. I can probably safely force to
the five level." So I bid 4♠. Unfortunately, while partner had all four
aces and the ♥K, his longest suit
was spades! (He was 4=3=3=3 with
19 HCP.) He bid 5♣, and I passed.
Down three. 6♦ or 6NT both make.
We lost that match by 1 IMP. Should
he have bid 3NT? Or should he have
bid 4NT over my 4♠? Or should I
have initially bid 5♦? Or should I
have corrected 5♣ to 5♦? Any other
bid either of us should have made?
Frustrated
Dear Frusty,
You raise many interesting points.
With a balanced 19-count, 3NT is
undoubtedly the correct bid over 3♠,
not double.
You did well to see the possibility of a
slam after the actual double. 4♠ was a
very good choice. Since partner had no
preference, he should have passed the
decision back to you with 4NT. (This

dearbilly@aol.com

would not be key card Blackwood, as
no suit has been established, but it asks
you instead to pick a suit.) When you
next bid 5♦, he should boost to 6♦
given that he had extra values for his
double.
Over his actual 5♣ bid, I would have
corrected to 5♦ because you had two
suits. This would imply that you also
held hearts.
Here is a proposed auction:
(3♠)-3NT-(Pass)-5NT [pick a slam];
(Pass)-6♣-(Pass)-6♦.
Over his initial double, here is a proposed auction: (3♠)-Dbl-(Pass)-4♠;
(Pass)-4NT-(Pass)-6♦.
Both players could have done better!
P.S. One of the best and most common responses to a 4NT quantitative
bid is 5NT (pick-a-slam). This bid is
almost universally understood by the
expert community as pick-a-slam, not
grand slam force. It is used to accept
the quantitative invite with the intent
of trying to find a good fit at the six
level, often when no suits have yet been
bid. Grand slam force should only apply directly after a suit bid with a leap
to 5NT, asking the suit bidder to go to
seven with two of the top three honors
in that suit. That rarely comes up!
Hi Billy,
We had a hand at a recent club
game that resulted in three different opening bids. Here is the hand in
question:

The opening bids people made
were: 1♠, 2♣ and 2NT. What are
your opinions of each? I am guilty of
the 2NT opener. I would have chosen
2♣ with other partners, with whom
I play control-showing responses,
but with this partner, I play 2♦
waiting.
Chastised Again
Dear Charles in Charge,
I most like 2♣ followed by 2♠. This
hand is clearly not a game force. After
2♣ followed by 2♠, if partner should
bid 3♣ as a second negative, we can
rebid 3♠ which is non-forcing. With
scattered values, partner is still able
to try 3NT which might make without much. If partner held the ♦Q, for
example, it would be a valuable card if
3NT is declared from the weak hand.
2NT does not appeal to me at all.
With two weak red suits and a huge
source of tricks, we could easily end up
in the wrong contract. This hand is too
good for 2NT.
2♣ followed by 2NT is more representative of the value of this hand,
normally showing 22-23 HCP. This
hand is certainly worth the upgrade if
that is your style.
1♠ does not feel right. Whatever you
do next will not quite show this strong
of a hand. I'd rate 1♠ ahead of 2NT, but
2♣ followed by 2NT (or 2♠) ahead of
1♠.
◾

♠A K Q J 9 5 ♥K Q ♦A 4 ♣Q 10 2.

October 2017 Bridge Bulletin

63
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2017
