September 2019 - 63

Special Contributors

Dear Billy
BY BILLY MILLER

Dear Billy,
North (Partner)
♠AJ53
♥AJ82
♦K764
♣6
South (Me)
♠ K 10 9 6
♥ Q 10 9 5
♦AQJ
♣92
The bidding was very weird on
this hand. With only our side vulnerable (matchpoints), partner (North)
opened 1♦, and my right-hand
opponent overcalled 2♣. I made a
routine negative double showing
both majors, and LHO bumped his
partner to 3♣. My partner cuebid
4♣, and having already showed both
majors, I decided to give partner
some support in diamonds by bidding 4♦ which ended the auction.
That's right: 4♦, swish!
Partner walked away from the table saying he thought I had 6 points
and five diamonds. He ardently
defended his pass of 4♦. Clearly we
are not on the same page. Playing in
4♦ was downright embarrassing. Is
it reasonable to get to either slam?
Harsh Reality
Dear Keep It Real,
Slam? How about getting to game?
Partner could be correct in saying that

dearbilly@aol.com

you might have had five diamonds
and 6 points, but after your negative
double, it is certain that you still have
an eight-card (or longer) major-suit fit.
Because he forced to game with 4♣,
a very aggressive bid, partner should
have continued the auction and insisted on a major game by bidding 4♥ over
4♦ and let you choose the major. The
range of your initial negative double
started at 7-8 HCP at the two level and
is unlimited in value. Partner bid 4♣
knowing that you could be at the lower
end of the spectrum. 4♣ promises the
auction will not end until you are in
game. That is a promise a good partner
will not break. There's no justification
for passing 4♦.
Why is slam in the conversation with
13 HCP opposite 12? Was the ♥K onside and you guessed the ♠Q after you
lost a club trick? It's a good idea not to
play results when having a productive
postmortem.
Dear Billy,
At a recent regional, my partner
and I had a misunderstanding regarding forcing bids in a new minor
forcing (NMF) sequence. Here is the
auction:
Me
1♣
1NT
2♥
Pass

Partner
1♠
2♦
3♣

Partner intended 3♣ as forcing,
but I passed, thinking it was invitational (and I had a bare minimum).
Is this simply a partnership agreement issue or is there consensus as
to whether this is forcing?
Hesitant Hillary
Dear Hesi Hilly,
One question you should ask is this:
Is a jump to 3♣ over 1NT forcing,
invitational or weak? If you say it's
invitational, then the sequence you and
your partner had can't be invitational,
too: There is no need for two bids to
say the same thing. The auction that
gets to 3♣ through NMF should be
forcing, but risks losing the 5-3 spade
fit when opener has a minimum. What
this demonstrates is how so many basic auctions can be confusing and the
flaws of playing simple NMF.
The true answer is that you must
consider switching to two-way NMF
which almost all experts play. All
invitational auctions start with 2♣
over the 1NT rebid, and all game-forces
start with 2♦ (with some exceptions)
regardless of which minor is opened.
This tool forever clears up the question
of whether an auction is forcing or not.
To begin playing it, do a little research
about which version of two-way to
play. Ask your local experts for advice.
Good luck playing the superior system,
and put your old shrugs to bed.
◾

September 2019 Bridge Bulletin

63
September 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of September 2019
