DAILY BRIDGE CLUB
One of my quaint theories is that players bid too much — when the prospect of accomplishing anything is uncertain. When you enter an auction you probably won’t buy, you can disrupt the opponents’ flow of information but may help them judge the bidding or, more likely, the play.
In today’s deal, West’s two spades was a Michaels cue bid, showing hearts and a minor. North’s five spades asked South to go on unless he had two fast heart losers. South’s six hearts showed first-round control, and North went all the way. West led a trump: seven, nine, king.
Declarer counted 12 tricks: five trumps, three ruffs in dummy, two clubs, a diamond and a heart. He was sure a heart finesse with the queen would lose, nor could he expect to set up dummy’s clubs or succeed with a crossruff since the missing 10 of trumps might score.
So South drew the missing trump, cashed dummy’s ace of diamonds and A-K of clubs throwing hearts, and ruffed a club. When West threw a heart, South knew who had the diamonds: South led the queen of diamonds: king, ruff.
When East followed low, declarer came to his ace of hearts and led the nine of diamonds, ruffing West’s 10. He ruffed a heart and led the eight of diamonds, ruffing West’s jack. South then ruffed a club and won the 13th trick with the high seven of diamonds.
Do you think South would have made his grand slam if West hadn’t given him a roadmap in the auction? This deal, like many I have seen, points to a strange conclusion: Could it be that it pays to bid with good hands and pass with weak ones? South dealer
Neither side vulnerable