BRIDG E

Game in every deal? That does seem to be an omnipresent philosophy in expert team competitions like the one today’s exhibit comes from.

In the diagram’s auction, North’s artificial response showed clubs with at least game-invitational values. South picked clubs and, ever mindful that game might be made, North accepted his own invitation.

And quickly discovered he had been overly optimistic as West first cashed a high spade and shifted to a heart with East winning and playing back the spade Jack for the defenders to take the first three tricks.

And one more later when declarer didn’t locate the diamond Queen meant down two: a significant loss for the overbidders’ team?

No, a small gain as the other team’s North raised directly to the notrump game.

Before seeing the gory denouement in that contract: check out the South hand as both pairs had made the devaluation of opening one notrump requirements to 1416 high-card points without necessarily adjusting what responder might need to insist on game.

In three notrump, West also led a top spade and shifted to the heart Jack. The serious difference here was that, without the protection of a trump suit, South had to sit and suffer while the defenders sorted out ten tricks in the majors for down “only” six and -300!

But there was a makeable game, two actually, on the cards as dealt just not by North-south.

Four hearts (easy to make) and four spades (also makeable but requiring a bit more play) were both available to East-west who had been unable to find a way into the bidding!

So there is game in every deal?