Join Bridge Winners
BIT issue/decision

During a sectional swiss team yesterday, this problem came up:

North
753
KJ108
A6
AQ72
W
N
E
S
1
P
1NT
P
2
P
2
P
2NT
P
3NT
P
?

1: forcing (but not strong), somewhat Polish Style, opened on all balanced hands (without a 5+ card major, except for strong 2-bid hands) not in range for NT opening

1NT:  game force with at least mild slam interest opposite a weak NT (the most typical hand type for 1), any shape possible, starts relays

2:  shows 4 hearts

2:  relay

2NT:  shows exactly 4 clubs and 2-3 or 3-2 in spades/diamonds (3 suited hands are handled differently in the relay structure)

3NT:  balanced or semi-balanced hand, no 4+ fit for clubs or hearts, responder could have bid 3 or 3 natural, 5+ card suit forcing.  4NT would have been strong invite (opener should bid on unless he has trashy weak NT), this is the weaker invite, opener should move only with a good max weak NT).

HOWEVER, there was a BIT before the 3NT bid (about 25-30 seconds).  Opener passed, feeling he was compelled to do so because of the BIT.  He has a sound max weak NT (our 1NT opening bids are a decent 15 to a bad 18, we open all 12's and good 11's balanced).

Was he correct in doing this?  Opener said without the BIT he would have bid again (probably 4NT), but does the BIT make pass a logical alternative here, or should opener be ok in bidding on?  It isn't clear what else responder was thinking of bidding, but I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts about opener's ethical decision to essentially bar himself.  Responder's hand and table result will be revealed later.

88 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top