Join Bridge Winners
Where did East-West go wrong on this hand?

The subtitle for this article is how should East-West proceed after South interferes with a 3 bid in a 2/1 auction (1/ 2) including how to find a 4-4 fit if one exists?  

We were playing 2/1 GF, 15-15 1NT +/-, 5-card majors, open 1 = 2+ s, open 1 = 4+ s, 2/1 is GF (3/1 is invite), not playing mafia style.

I previously posted both the East and West hands as bidding polls, hoping the polls would address the question of how to find a 4-4 fit if it existed.  Implicit in the polls (or so I had hoped) was the question of what doubles meant in each case.  When are doubles penalty, takeout, punts, other conventional, etc.

The following is the whole hand.  I can reconstruct the E/W hands from my polls.

   I can't find my notes showing the north-south hands but I recall the 3 bidder as having something like KTxxxx, KTx, x, Axx  and north having 5 s to the AJ: something like xx, AJxxx, Jxxx, xx.  I don't know how many of you would have made this 3 bid, it seems rather risky to me after 1/2, but that's what happened at the table.  Maybe it's a good bid?  IDK

The result of the 2 initial polls were 86% bid 3N with the East hand while 11% doubled.  (3NT would have been quite challenging as in -2 if the opponents found the switch after getting in with the A of s, more so had they led a to start with).  It would have been successful if the switch was not found.

At the table, East doubled 3, intending it to be 100% penalty after a 2/1 start of the bidding.  I, sitting West, wasn't sure how we played this: it had never come up in the 8+ years we've been playing together, and he was in front of the 3 bidder.  (Did I mention that I am far from being an expert?)  So I treated the double as showing a hand unable to bid 3NT or some other bid, and I pulled the double to 4, not at all sure about what we were doing (what I was doing) on this bidding.  We wound up in 5, not sure why.  However the hand really bothered me because I didn't know what various bids/ doubles meant over 3 especially in terms of how either hand could show possession of a 4-card suit, permitting a 4-4 fit to be found (other than bidding 4 outright over 3).

One of you asked what a double of 3 by the Jx, Qxxx, AQTxx, Kx hand would have meant?,  I would like to ask you all the same question?  

Out of curiosity, I then created a fictitious hand for East of 9, AJ93, K9, AJT876 and polled to see what people would do over 3 with such a hand (which made a 4 bid by East a possible if not more than just possible option).  Even here, the vote was 74% for Double and 24 % for 4.  Had East actually held this fictitious hand of one with similar distribution (short , 4 s), then n/s would have had a 10-card fit, so I'm not sure how well we would have done defending 3x.   74% said that they would pass a double of 3 by East with the West hand, 24% said they'd bid 4.  A few who would pass the X also voted for 4 with the fictitious hand, so there was some consistency there.

So, in asking where did East-West go wrong on this hand, I acknowledge the responsibility of not having agreements on what doubles and other bids meant after the 3 bid.  But I am curious about how you all play bids at this point after interference over a 2/1 auction, especially after a 3 bid?  What doubles if any are penalty, what might be takeout, could double by East be some sort of punt, extra values given the 2 response, shortness, not shortness etc, etc?  How could a 4-4 fit have been revealed if it existed after the 3 interference.

You responses are greatly appreciated and I thank you all in advance (including for merely taking the time to read the above).  I know that I don't write very concisely, never did...writing clearly has never been a strength.



Getting Comments... loading...

Bottom Home Top