For Poor Bridge of the Week, might I suggest a hand from last night's Kempson Cup match (the North-East teams-of-four Championship). I held:
![]() | 6 |
---|---|
![]() | K Q 4 |
![]() | A K 10 7 3 |
![]() | J 9 7 2 |
All non-vulnerable. Partner is dealer and opens 1
. RHO overcalls 2
. I'm not entirely aware of partnership understandings,
but on the principle that 2NT is never natural in a contested auction, I decide to bid that to show a sound raise.
Partner, unfortunately is more awake/aware and decides (correctly) that 2NT is a useful natural bid when the partnership
doesn't have a major and raises to 3NT. A small club is led and dummy hits with:


![]() | A K Q 3 |
---|---|
![]() | A J 8 |
![]() | J 9 8 5 2 |
![]() | 6 |
The first reaction is oh bollocks - 6
is obviously frigid and 3NT doesn't have a prayer. Fortunately for the
forces of injustice, the clubs are breaking 6-3, so when RHO takes the
K and returns a small one, LHO can
either go up with the
Q and return one, establishing my
J, or block the suit, which is what he chooses. So
far so good +430 is still going to be ~ -9 IMPs compared with the 920 at the other table. Now it transpires
that the forces of injustice are really working overtime, because when I lead a diamond from dummy, RHO shows
out. The diamonds are breaking 3-0 with the Q offside, so 6
is one off after all.





To make matters worse, at the other table, a sensible auction leads to the 'routine' bid of 6
, but now teammate
holding the cards my RHO had notes his diamond void and decides to make a lightner double, neglecting the fact that:

a) diamonds are trumps, and
b) he is on lead anyway - doh!
b) he is on lead anyway - doh!
Net result +400 at one table (stupid contract, flukily safe), +100 at the other (sensible contract idiotically
doubled, murdered by a highly unlikely trump distribution) - a swing of 11 IMPs to us precisely because we are
rubbish at bridge at both tables. Final margin of victory was 7 IMPs, so our opponents have every right to feel
a bit cheesed off!