Contract Bridge

South has a problem to solve

One of the chief purposes of a pre-emptive bid is to deprive the opponents of the ability to exchange information at a low level. It is therefore not surprising that a partnership often will fail to arrive at its best contract after a pre-emptive bid by the opposition.

Take this case where North-South would have been much better off at three notrump than the inferior contract of five clubs they reached after West’s opening three-heart bid.

Declarer had a lot of work to do to make five clubs. He took the opening heart lead in dummy and returned the club ten, winning the finesse. Another trump finesse disclosed that East had started with three to the king, which in turn meant that South’s third heart could not be safely ruffed in dummy. Two diamond losers also appeared certain, since West was very likely to have the ace for his vulnerable three-bid.

The outlook was bleak, but declarer found the answer. After drawing East’s last trump, he cashed the A-K of spades and ruffed a spade. He then played his last two trumps, reducing himself to the K-x of both red suits. On the last trump, West had to choose a discard from the J-10-9 of hearts and A-10 of diamonds.

If West discarded a heart, South would then play the king and another heart, compelling West to lead a diamond. And if West discarded the ten of diamonds instead, a low diamond play would convert declarer’s king into a trick. Either way, the jig was up.

South certainly gets full credit for his excellent play, but West has to get an assist for having made it possible to test declarer’s mettle.