Going for the Max...

[OliverC]

This was an interesting hand which Easter bid very intelligently, I feel, in a game today.

EW Game, Dealer South

North
  AQ5
  -
  A9752
  K9832

South
  J764
  QJ6
  K83
  A106

Bidding
South      West      North      East
1NT(1)      No          2NT(2)     No
3 (3)     No           No           3
No           4           5          No
5          X              All Pass

I think Eszter bid this one very well. She's not worth a game forcing 4 over 3 opposite a 10-12 1NT that didn't super-accept Diamonds (I nearly did, as it happened, but I was too flat and "quacky", with insufficient "quick" tricks outside Diamonds that a super-accept would make the difference if Eszter almost had a single-suited hand worth an invitation). Over 4 , though, it looked fairly certain from her viewpoint that I had a doubleton Spade and so only 1 Spade loser, so now pushing with 5 seemed worthwhile. (She wasn't to know that West had quixotically raise to 4 on the stiff King of Spades).

West led the aforementioned stiff King of Spades against 5 !DX.

It was obvious to me that it probably was a singleton as I didn't think East would have bid 3 on 109xx (1098xx was foolish enough). I also calculated that I probably couldn't make this contract if the Diamonds were 4-1, which the double of 5 suggested might be the case I'd lose 2 Diamonds and a Club, at least), so I decided to go for broke:

At trick 2 I played a small Diamond to my King and a Diamond back to Dummy's Ace, West contributing the Jack and East the 10 (big sigh of relief in the South camp at this point LOL). Now a small Club from Dummy brought the Queen from East, so I won and ran the 10 on the next round, which held, East discarding a small Heart. The rest of the hand was easy: I just played out winners in Spades and Diamonds and the only trick the defence could take was East's Queen of Diamonds.

I can't really play this hand any differently even if the Diamonds do turn out to be 4-1 (I just lose 2 Diamond tricks rather than only 1). The hand still makes because of the favourable 4-1 split in Clubs, but I wasn't to know that).

Who knows what was going through West's head when he bid 4 and doubled 5 . It just goes to show that you should double on the basis of what you have in your hand, not what you're assuming Partner might have in their's. The overtrick in 5 !DX gave us a nice 9½ IMPs.

[Jimmy]

Oliver,  couple of comments:

The play of the hand is also a good example of "restricted choice" with the Clubs.    Also,  why would North not double 4 ?

[OliverC]

You'll have to Ask Eszter, Possibly because she was anticipating me having exactly two small Spades, given the bidding. Finding me with Jxxx and West with the singleton King on that bidding would have been totally unexpected.


Yes, the Principle of Restricted choice does apply here, but also, I don't mind losing to the stiff QJ with East, because now I KNOW the Clubs are splitting 3-2 and I can only lose 1 and 1 . The overtrick was a complete bonus.

[Eszter5]

Yes, I thought Oliver had xx and East KJ(10)xxx or something like this. I was thinking about double too. I knew Oliver had maximum 4 so had to have minors and opps had fit as well. I knew they didn't have to much minors. So that was the reason why I decided to bid 5 and not doubled.

[lute57]

Good to hear from you Eszter. I have been admiring your play.

From what I see, I suspect Jeremy is now riding on your coat tails when you both play together.

For those who might not know Jeremy Williams, he was my original teacher [Oliver took the year off] and I hold him in high regard. He is an excellent teacher.