Who is to blame?

[richie]

Yesterday my partner and I had to solve a very difficult puzzle. Unfortunately we did not manage it. Here is the full board:

 

North

KQ2

AKQ109

KJ973

---

 

 

South

A1053

J

A

AQ109764

 

 

East started with a weak 2♦ (from 0 points and at least a 5 card suit). South 3♣. North 3♥. South 3♠. North 4NT (quantitative) and South interpreted it like that. NS do not have agreements after a quantitative 4NT. South 5♦. North 6♥. South 7♣.

 

I have three questions:

1. What should be the meaning of 5D?

2. What do you think of 6H and 7C?

3. Who is to blame? You can share the blame between North and South.

[Hanoi5]

1. I show Aces over a quantitative when my response is at the 5 level.0-4 (5♣), 1, 2 and 3 (5♠). I've heard people show 5/4 card suits at the 6 level (in case partner prefers to play in such a suit), but I don't think that would apply over such a sequence, though South might try 6♣ to try to show a really long suit.

 

2. 6♥ seems to play, and I guess 7♣ was a misunderstanding of 6♥. These bids (especially 7♣) are not good, but I think the problem started before)

 

3. North 60%, South 40%. South tried to show his hand naturally (though maybe 3♠ is not correct) and then North proposes NT with a void in South's main suit? I think 4♦ would have been a better bid then and there. However, after 6♥ why did South went on to 7♣, did he think 6♥ showed club support? Yeah, he's got 7 of them but he's missing the King and the Jack... I think 6NT would have been better then and there (in fact isn't this the contract North is inviting to with 4NT?)

[mikeh]

And people wonder why some players still use the weak 2♦ opening! These hands would be difficult to bid to a good spot (just what is the optimum contract here?) without having to start at the 3-level.

 

As it is, I have a world of sympathy for N's 4N, tho perhaps he should have considered that partner is probably 4=6 blacks, and that the combined hands mesh extraordinarily badly. I mean finding Axxx xx x AKJxxx wouldn't be a tremendous surprise, and where are we going? Admittedly, opening leader is endplayed to some degree but assume a helpful diamond lead. Any more than 10 tricks is going to be a struggle most times, and we may not even make 4N: imagine a neutral black suit lead with things splitting less than perfectly.

 

Over 4N, again, I have some sympathy, tho not a lot, for South. I think 5♦ is just a bit too much with those moth-eaten suits and the stiff heart. I prefer 5♣: not Ace showing. While I don't mind ace showing in most quantitative auctions, I prefer that to apply only when we know our strain. Here, we are still looking for strain: 4N suggested notrump but S has to be allowed to decline.

 

Over 5♣, N has a terrible problem. I'd pass and hope that partner's minors play for only 2 losers....the spectre of 2 rounds of diamonds leading to 3 such losers haunts me, but where else am I going?

 

Returning to the actual sequence, I think S has to pass 6♥ or bid 6N. 7♣ is really out there: when did partner promise the club K? Let's give him the club K, and allow the clubs to come home. Maybe 7♣ makes, but given the sound of the auction to this point, colour me delighted if I reach a making 6N. I'll leave it to far better players than I to reach the magic grands on these hands.

[Codo]

I am glad to hear that the partners knew how 4 NT was meant, I hadn't been on the same wavelength....

5 ♦ shows 3 KCs- playing 4130 I guess? 6 Heart was to play.

South could stop here and just pass.

7 ♣ was silly. South never showed the slightest encouragement for hearts but many black cards, so partner will surely have a good suit to play opposite a singleton. And partner heard me bid clubs and spades and he did not raise my clubs, so 7 club is simply silly- 100 % blame for south.

[helene_t]

I don't like the 5♦ bid. I think South should bid either 5♣ or 6♣.

 

Over 5♦, I think 5♥ is enough. South will presumably still bid 6♣. If South bids 6♣ directly, I think North should pass. If South bid 6♣ via 5♦ I think North should bid 6NT.

 

Anyway, this is a very difficult hand, and cudos for agreeing on the meaning of 4NT.

 

I think I would prefer to be in 6♥.

[PhilKing]

4NT was an overbid. 6NT rates to have almost no play a lot of opposite a lot of hands that would accept. North counted points and ignored all the warning signs. I would just have bid 3NT immediately over 3♣. As South I would jump to 6♣ over 4NT - I have a huge hand for a simple overcall - and we would end in a playable 6NT.

 

Anyway, back to the actual questions:

 

1. Since 5♣ over 4NT has to be natural, 5♦ can't be ace showing. I think 5♦ is just a force, but maybe it should show a diamond void. That sounds best on reflection.

 

2. I'm not keen on 6♥ (I would bid five just to keep options open), but I guess North assumed South had a void diamond and was 4207, in which case it is fine, though rather bold and somewhat presumptious. But it's by no means irrational and 6♥ would probably have made. I don't understand 7♣ - it just says "partner, you don't know what you are doing."

 

3. North set the ball rolling by going above 3NT on an obvious misfit, though South made by far the worst bid with his knife-in-the-heart 7♣ bid. North 60%, South 40% and a £100 fine for not trusting partner.