
Pass
Last Updated – 21st
July 2010
|
Date Updated |
Feature |
|
18th
September 2002 |
|
|
18th September 2002 |
|
|
5th
March 2003 |
|
|
18th
October 2004 |
|
|
13th
May 2006 |
|
One of the most important skills at bridge is knowing
when not to bid. Fittingly, two of
the best passers at Glenfield won the 2002 Buildrite Cup on 18th
September. Here they are in inaction against
the previous holders. |
|||
|
|
North ª T64 © T863 ¨ A865 § J8 |
Dealer
East Game
All |
South
opened one no
trump and both west and east, cognisant of the vulnerability, resisted
the temptation to bid. Laurence
Popple, as west, then defended well by starting
with the seven of
spades. Declarer ducked
the queen but
won the spade continuation and decided, optimistically, to play for the jack of hearts
doubleton. The king of hearts was
played but Terry Downs took the ace of hearts and
found the devastating club switch.
When the dust settled south had just four tricks and Terry and
Laurence had the fine pairs score of +300. Yes,
they could have made four spades, but it is a lucky make, needing spades 3-3,
and the club finesse
to work. It is not the sort of
contract you would want to bid at pairs and, I am proud to record, no east
west pairs did bid it. Thus the match
points went to those who passed on the west hand, a bid that was found by
Barbara Corlett & John Day, Max Green & Christine Adams and Mike
& Helen Purser, although one of these pairs spoilt their score by
allowing their opponents to make six tricks.
Top score went to Max Green and Christine Adams who held south to just
three tricks. The
other pairs competed. One west
elected to play in two diamonds. I am
unaware of the conventions that allow such contracts to be reached. Please don’t tell me. The
rest played in two spades, mostly making ten tricks although, as always, one
pair managed eleven tricks while one took just nine. |
|
West ª KJ973 © 7 ¨ QT § AQ975 |
|
East ª Q5 © AJ94 ¨ K942 § T42 |
|
|
|
South ª A82 © KQ52 ¨ J73 § K63 |
|
|
|
If Tim Glover and Peter Neville had learnt a lesson from
the previous board they singularly failed to apply it here; still in the 2002
Buildrite Cup. |
|||
|
|
North ª QJT984 © A5 ¨ QJ98 § 2 |
Dealer
East EW
Vulnerable |
After
two passes west opened one
heart. North overcalled
one spade (and I have no quarrel with that). East wisely passed and south, with a sinking feeling, tried one
no trump (pass is probably better).
West bid two diamonds. North
wanted to prevent east giving preference
to hearts and mildly pre-empted with two spades. East had no desire to give preference to either hearts or
diamonds and gratefully passed. South
now made the bid that east might have done if given the opportunity and
converted to three clubs (pass is probably better). This was not a success, even after east forgot to double
and west led a diamond, and eventually finished two down. East west are likely to concede a similar
amount, vulnerable, in any suit they care to play in. North
should probably recognise the misfit.
South has plenty of opportunity to raise spades and partnership style
is to do so freely. With 8-10 points
and spade support south would bid two hearts (an unassuming
cue bid) instead of one no trump.
There is no real hurry to bid two spades in front of partner; if east
had genuine heart support, it would have been shown on the first round. You
might call north’s hand a New Yorker.
So good they bid it twice. Perhaps
I am being a little unkind, only one north-south pair (Irene Robinson &
Renee Berrington) could resist the temptation to play the hand. They doubled two diamonds and collected a
five hundred penalty. Otherwise, all
four suits were declared by north south; four votes were cast for spades,
three for clubs and one each for hearts and diamonds. The number of tricks made varied between
six and eight; it was always at least one less than the number of tricks
declared and, in practise, two down undoubled was an above average score. Perhaps
Terry Downs and Laurence Popple should have the last bid on this hand. It was a double applied to south’s
contract of four hearts which duly went two down to give the winners a joint
top. |
|
West ª AK7 © K8764 ¨ KT543 § - |
|
East ª 6532 © J ¨ 62 § AQ9643 |
|
|
|
South ª – © QT932 ¨ A7 § KJT875 |
|
|
|
Opening light,
especially third in hand, can occasionally pay. |
|
|
ª KT65 © AK85 ¨ J84 § 74 |
Those
whose systems allowed them to open this third in hand or who opened it anyway
gained the imps in the match between Glenfield
A and County C on 5th March 2003. Of
course, if you regularly open this sort of hand, it becomes part of your
system and should be on your convention card. |
|
Tim and Peter play that a pass after opponent’s simple
overcall is forcing. |
|||
|
|
North ª 9 © AKT753 ¨ A42 § K92 |
Board
25 Dealer
East EW
Vul |
If
the overcaller’s partner passes too, the opener is obliged to reopen with a
double. This allows a wider range of
hands to be shown. Pass followed by
double is for penalties. An immediate double is for takeout. Immediate undisturbed bids (e.g. 1C-1D-1H)
are forcing, pass followed by an undisturbed bid is non-forcing. Immediate disturbed bids (e.g 1C-1S-2H)
are non-forcing, pass followed by a disturbed bid is forcing. Immediate no trump bids are natural with a
stop. Pass followed by one no trump indicates desperation. Of course, the opportunity is taken to
raise partner’s suit as quickly and as high as possible when there is a fit. The
method worked on this deal from the Two
Stars Qualifying Round on October 15th 2004. Peter
opened
one heart in fourth position, East overcalled
and I passed
for penalties. West would have done
best to pass this, let Peter double
and then redouble
for take out. Instead they
elected to call two no trumps. This
came round to me and I doubled. Peter
led the seven of
hearts. Dummy’s nine won and the two of spades was
led. I ducked
and West won the jack
and continued with a spade to the ace and a third
round of spades from dummy. I took
the king and led
the five of diamonds. We took four diamond tricks and I exited
with a club to Peter’s nine and dummy’s queen. Declarer could cash the ace of clubs but
Peter then took the last three tricks with the king of clubs and
the ace and king of hearts for
three down. |
|
West ª QJ75 © QJ8642 ¨ J76 § - |
|
East ª A42 © 9 ¨ T93 § AQ6543 |
|
|
|
South ª KT863 © ¨ KQ85 § JT87 |
|
|
|
Tim’s Statistics Imps |
Partner |
Passed Out |
IMPs |
Imps/Bd |
Forcing Pass |
Imps |
Imps/Bd |
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
-3 |
-3 |
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
|
|
|
2 |
11 |
5.50 |
|
|
Harry Gordon |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (3) |
-3 (0) |
(0) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2006 |
|
4 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
8 |
2.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (4) |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (5) |
-2 (-2) |
-2 (-0.40) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
2 (7) |
-1 (-3) |
-0.50 (-0.43) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (8) |
0 (-3) |
0 (-0.38) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
|
|
|
1 |
-3 |
-3.00 |
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (9) |
0 (-3) |
0 (-0.33) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (10) |
0 (-3) |
0 (-0.30) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (11) |
1 (-2) |
1 (-0.18) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
|
|
|
1 |
11 |
11.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2007 |
|
9 |
-2 |
-0.22 |
2 |
8 |
4.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (12) |
0 (-2) |
0 (-0.17) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (13) |
2 (0) |
2 (0.00) |
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Northage |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (14) |
-2 (-2) |
-2 (-0.14) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (15) |
0 (-2) |
0 (-0.13) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
2 (17) |
13 (11) |
6.5 (0.65) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2008 |
|
7 |
13 |
1.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (18) |
-3 (8) |
-3.00 (0.44) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (19) |
0 (8) |
0.00 (0.42) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (20) |
1 (9) |
1.00 (0.45) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (21) |
4 (13) |
4.00 (0.62) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (22) |
-4 (9) |
-4.00 (0.41) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2009 |
|
5 |
-2 |
-0.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
27 |
7 |
0.26 |
5 |
16 |
3.20 |
|
Tim’s Statistics mps |
Partner |
Passed Out |
MPs |
% |
Forcing Pass |
Imps |
Imps/Bd |
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
18 |
81.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
2 |
25.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2007 |
|
2 |
20 |
66.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
5.8 |
36.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
15 |
62.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2008 |
|
2 |
20.8 |
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
2 |
4 |
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
43 |
89.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2009 |
|
3 |
47 |
63.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
7 |
87.8 |
60.99 |
|
|
|
|
Site Map Last Updated 4th Feb 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Home
Page |
|
||||||
|
2. Newsletters, Photos and Correspondence |
|
|
|||||
|
3. Competitions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.1 Bidding |
|
|
|||||
|
6.1.1 Hand Evaluation |
|
||||||
|
6.1.2 Opening Bids |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
6.1.3 Responding to an Opening Bid |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
6.1.3.1 Responding to 1NT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.1.3.2 Responding to 2NT |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
6.1.4 Conventions |
|
|
|
||||
|
6.1.4.1 Conventional Opening Bids |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
6.1.4.2 Competitive Conventions |
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
6.1.4.3 Slam Conventions |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
6.1.5 Doubles |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
6.1.6 The Protective Position |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2 Declarer Play |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.1 General Technique |
|||||||
|
6.2.2 Trump Management |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.3 Defence |
|
|
|
||||
|
6.3.1 Defensive Tactics |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
6.3.2 Opening
Leads |
|
|
|
||||
|
6.3.3 Plays in Third Hand |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
6.3.4 Entry Management |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.4 Probability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|