More circumspection needed
Playing with a new partner, an experienced player, we, not surprisingly, engaged in an auction that required agreements we had not discussed. Board 22 of February 13 morning pairs, part of the Common Game.
In second seat, I opened 1♥ and heard partner not only respond but respond a game forcing 2♦.
“Standard” responses to the queen ask, I believed, are for answerer to bid 5♥ without the ♥Q, to bid 6♥ with the ♥Q and no non-heart kings, and to bid the suit of the cheapest king with the ♥Q and a side suit king.
Partner responded 6♥. Hmm, if we are on the same wavelength, partner must have just about all the QJ combinations in the non-trump suit, perhaps something like QJx, KQx, QJTxx, QJ. That gives me twelve top tricks with multiple chances for a thirteenth. Rightly or wrongly, I chose to bid 7♥ . (Before passing 7♥, East thought this would be a good time to ask what means my 5♦ call. More on this later.) West led the ♠Q.
Dummy was a bit of surprise, and, in the club suit, a bit of a disappointment.
My first thought was that if I were lucky enough to find an opponent with QTx of diamonds, I could, with only one ruff, establish the suit for three club pitches. Accordingly, I won the ♠A in hand, followed by the ♥A and the ♦A. When I played a heart to dummy, East discarded a spade. I drew another trump and then played ♦K, seeing only small cards. Thinking that squeeze chances could be enhanced if I were to lead a third round of diamonds, I led a small diamond from dummy, ruffing with the ♥T in hand as West failed to follow suit. I drew the last trump.
After 4 hearts, 2 diamonds and a diamond ruff, and 1 spade, everyone is down to five cards.
I need to run the club suit, and so hope for the ♣Q with East. Because East is known to hold the ♦Q, matters are ripe for a squeeze even if East were dealt the ♣Q with length of four cards or more.
I led to the ♠K and advanced the ♣J. When I won that trick, the lucky grand slam came home.
Postscripts.
- I think it would have been wise for me to have been more circumspect about partner and I being on the same wavelength with the responses to 5♦. By the way, if we were on the same wavelength, would a 5NT response by partner show the ♥Q and more than one side suit king?
- I should have cashed the ♣A (possibly unblocking the ♣8) before leading to the ♠K. Not sure why I missed that extra chance.
- Back to the exchange before East passed out 7♥.
- East: What does 5♦ bid mean?
- Me: I will be pleased to explain the whole auction before your partner makes the opening lead.
- East: It is my turn to bid and I want to know about the 5♦ bid.
- Me: Unless you intend to bid, you are better off not asking. (Yes, I should have called the director either now, or when the question about 5♦ was made. Tablemate rulings are generally a bad idea, even if not ill-intentioned.)
- East: Glaring at me.
- West, perhaps being less inclined to continue the argument, made the opening lead face down and I explained all the calls that are footnoted.
The East player is not a regular contender, even in a club game. But she is no club game or tournament novice, either; in fact she frequently plays in tournaments in the area, even though I did not, at the time, match the face with a name.
What to make out of all this?
Well, I think two things: (1) I should not have tried to correct matters, especially after my offer to explain the auction had been resisted, and particularly because I do not know her personally. I hope I have learned that lesson and to call the director; and (2) for someone to have played so long and to not have known to ask such a question (would the question have been asked if she did not own QT87x of diamonds? No way!) is probably a condemnation of directors who rarely educate players about the need for players to avoid giving Unauthorized Information to their partners.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
In this auction, I play 5NT by responder shows trump Q & denies side K, but shows side Q(s) allowing asker to inquire (in case that info is needed – note: info on more than 1 side K can usually be discovered without use of 5NT). If responder instead bids 5S showing trump Q & spade K, then 5NT by asker inquires for cheapest side Q (not interested in other side Ks).
The exchange at the end is, unfortunately, all too common. As you pointed out, your correct action when asked about your 5D bid, is to call the Director and explain that you know East has the legal right to ask, but this is clearly a UI situation… (can you imagine the atomic explosion if her partner led a diamond and she ruffed it?). Most of time, when someone asks like this, they have length in the suit (which you pointed out, East does in fact have). East’s insistence could, I suppose, be stubborness; however, the damage (UI) was done as soon as she asked.
I’ve had a similar discussions — I sometimes run games, teach and direct. I cannot count the number of times I’ve suggested to players that they not ask questions during the auction unless they are truly thinking of doubling or bidding… just wait until the auction is over and then inquire (opening leader before leading, his partner before the lead is faced).
When I make a ruling, I usually explain to the players why a particular rule exists — that sometimes includes advice such as the above (don’t ask until…).
““Standard” responses to the queen ask, I believed, are for answerer to bid 5♥ without the ♥Q, to bid 6♥ with the ♥Q and no non-heart kings, and to bid the suit of the cheapest king with the ♥Q and a side suit king.”
Absolutely agree with this. Don’t agree with the 7H bid when you know the wheels have come off