CONTRACT BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 30, 5 February 1937, Page 6

CONTRACT BRIDGE.

THAT LONG MINOR SUIT

(By ELY CUL BERT SOX.)

Mr. Donald B. Kenner. of Xew York, wrote 1110 recently requesting that I devote an article to a discussion of what to <lo with a long minor suit when partner has opened the bidding. The hand in question is one 'containing a suit eight cards in length, without support for any bid made by the opening hand. Such holdings have in them the root of disaster. because of the fact that partnership ears are not always so delicately attuned that they can get the undertone of distress in the repeated bidding of one suit, and the inference that no other final declaration is possible. The hand which gave rise to the discussion aud brought about a minor disaster was bid ae follows:

North dealer. North and South vulnerable. A—K Q9 7 3 V—A KJ 8 5 ♦—A K 4 —3 4—A .1 10 8 j = 4-5 4 2 V-Q 10 7 6 w V—9 43 2 ♦—Q JlO 9 vv „ 4—4 3 2 *—A 1 2 +— K 4 2 *-6 If —None ♦—8 7 6 5 *—Q J 10 9 8 7 <5 5 The Bidding. North East South West 1 4 Pass 1 N.T. Pass 2 V Pass 3 4 Pass 3 N.T. • Pass 4 Jf, Pass 4 N.T. Pass 5 Jf, Pass f> N.T. Pass 6 4 Dbl. Pass Pass Pass In explanation of this odd bidding, Mr: Kenner says that his partner was one of those who insist upon opening bids in the first position being powerhouses and in consequence want the bidding kept open very lightly; and that he also insists upon a no-trump response unless the hand contains a trick and one-half. This explains the peculiar bid of no trump with an eight-card minor suit and no other strength in the hand. Much better bidding on this hand would have been (figures after bids refer to numbered explanatory paragraphs) : North East South West 14(1) Pass 2 4,(2) Pass 3* (3) Pass 4* (4) Pass 4 V (5) Pass 5 4 (fi) Pass Pass (7) Pass I.—North has a reasonably close decision between opening with a bid of-one and two. His two five-card major suits present a fair argument in favour of an opening two-bid, but, after all, neither of them is very strong, and probably the more conservative course is better. 2.—Of course, South immediately begins the process of signing off. 3.—ln as much as North did not force on the opening round, his hand is so strong that lie must force now. Therefore, the bid of three Hearts is correct. 4. —Again denying anything except a string of Clubs. 5. —North again seeks to force his partner to a choice between the two major suits. 6.—Again denying even the slightest assistance for either of partner's bid suits. 7. —North must respect his partner's repeated sign-offs. As a matter of fact, five Clubs can be made unless West elects to open a Spade, as the Ace and King of Diamonds can be cashed, one Diamond ruffed in dummy, and the remaining Diamond and the Spade discarded on the Ace and King \>f Hearts. The question, however, is not one of the play of the hand, but of the bidding. It is one that frequently comes up, and that is about as often answered wrongly as rightly. Obviously, South'* hand is worthless if played at anything else but Clubs, but I do not believe that South was justified in bidding six. After all, on every misfit hand there must come a time when .one partner or the other gives up.

South dealer. North and South vulnerable. A—K 7 V—.lo 8 5 —K S :? 2 Q J 10 7 4-Q 10 0 5 3 2 .I 8 V—Xone w „ »—Q 976 43 2 ♦ —Q 7 4 « ♦— J « *—8 3 2 4,-9 5 A—A 9 4 V—A K .1 ♦—A 10 9 4k —A K <» 4 The hand will be discussed in next week's article.