Testing the LAW at the Two-Level

by Peter Gill

Two consecutive hands from Session 3 tested the players’ part-score bidding decisions:

Board 5. Dealer North. N/S Vul.
	♠ Q 10 9 ♥ Q J 8 7 6 5 ♦ K 5 ♣ 10 3
♠ 5 ♥ 10 9 4 2 ♦ Q 10 9 3 2 ♣ Q 7 4		♠ K 8 7 2 ♥ A 3 ♦ A J 7 6 ♣ 9 8 5
	♠ A J 6 4 3 ♥ K ♦ 8 4 ♣ A K J 6 2

West	North	East	South
Handley-Pritchard	Grue	Burgess	Kranyak
Pass	2♦	Pass	2♥
Pass	Pass	Dble	Pass
2NT	All Pass

2♦ was the Multi – apparently even the Americans play it nowadays, and 2♥ was “pass or correct”. Ollie Burgess thought that 2NT was natural whereas Ben Handley-Pritchard thought it was Lebensohl, to show a weak hand. This sort of problem afflicts top players who are not regular partnerships. Perhaps the solution is that when discussing system one should say: “Lebensohl, applying after all our doubles of two level auctions and all their overcalls of our 1NT openings and overcalls” rather than just simply ‘Lebensohl’.

Anyway, Ben won the ♥Q lead with the ace and hoped for a singleton ♦K. When he played ♦A and another diamond, Grue won and switched accurately to the ♠Q, having worked out from the card play thus far that partner had only three red cards and thus lots of black cards. Down four for minus 200 was worth only 69% to N/S; their optimal contract is 4♠ by North, to protect the ♦K – I doubt many pairs found it! Not all tables managed to bid with the E/W cards:

West	North	East	South
Michielsen		de Pagter
Pass	2♦	Dble	2♥
All Pass

Yet another Multi, a Polish one this time. Marion Michielsen led her singleton spade to dummy’s nine, Vincent de Pagter playing ♠2. De Pagter correctly rose with ♥A on the first heart, but returned a club, the best return if partner had two or more spades. The Polish N/S thus scored 49% for plus 140. Two ruffs to hold 2♥ to 110 would have been 40% for N/S.

These auctions raise a number of theoretical questions. Some top experts refuse to open a major-suit pre-empt, especially vulnerable, with three to an honour or more in the other major, due to the danger of missing a 5-3 fit. The danger is greater when playing a Multi 2♦. For example on the above board, if North opens a weak 2♥ and South responds a natural 2♠, the best N/S contract in spades can be reached, but this is not possible after a Multi 2♦. And finaly, should E/W compete over 2♥? Yes, especially when not vulnerable at Pairs, bidding to 3♦ over 2♥ is worthwhile, barring bidding accidents. The next deal also featured a two-level opening, and decisions as to whether to compete for the other side.

Board 6. Dealer East. E/W Vul.
	♠ J 10 4 3 ♥ K 8 3 ♦ Q J 7 2 ♣ 7 2
♠ A Q 8 6 2 ♥ Q 10 6 ♦ K 10 3 ♣ 10 6		♠ 9 7 ♥ 7 5 2 ♦ A 8 6 5 4 ♣ A Q 3
	♠ K 5 ♥ A J 9 4 ♦ 9 ♣ K J 9 8 5 4

West	North	East	South
Handley-Pritchard	Grue	Burgess	Kranyak
		Pass	2♣
All Pass

2♣ was Precision, showing five clubs and a four card major or six plus clubs, and Grue gave some thought to responding to 2♣. Ben Handley-Pritchard led ♣6 to Ollie Burgess’s ace. When Burgess switched to ♠9, Kranyak smoothly played the king in tempo, but E/W were not lulled into thinking that ♠K was a singleton. The third spade (♠2) was ruffed with ♣Q, on which Kranyak discarded his diamond. A low diamond was ruffed, trumps drawn, and a heart conceded for +90. nicely done, but the Americans scored only 56% because many E/W pairs scored –100 or –200.

Should E/W compete over 2♣? At Teams, bidding 2♠ would be very dangerous at this vulnerability opposite a passed hand, but at Pairs, 2♠ would produce 2NT from partner (natural, this time) which would probably make eight tricks on a club lead, with declarer playing the diamonds optimally by leading low to ♦K then taking a diamond finesse. It might be even more attractive for East to balance with 2♦; as a passed hand partner won’t expect the earth. On this auction, even if South finds the lead of the ♠K declarer will surely come to eight tricks?

West	North	East	South
Michielsen		de Pagter
		Pass	2♣
Pass	2♦	Pass	2♥
All Pass

2♣ was Polish Club, showing 11-14 points with five clubs and a four card major or six plus clubs. I had been wondering what Grue was thinking about at the other table, but the Polish North showed me when he enquired with 2♦. The Dutch pair defended very neatly to 2♥. Marion Michielsen led a diamond to the ace, Vincent de Pagter switched to spades, Michaelsen took ♠A and ♠Q then played a suit preference ♠8 for a ruff and overruff. With little else to do, South played a heart to the king and led a club up, taken by de Pagter’s ace. On the diamond return declarer was running out of trumps so he discarded a club. Michielsen won ♦K and played ♠6, ruffed and overruffed. Declarer cashed the ♥A and ♣K and ruffed a club, but had to concede the last two tricks to Michielsen’s last trump and the two of spades. Two down was worth only15% for N/S. If declarer could have found a way to go one down, he would have scored 40%.