On Board 16 N/S could make 6H, but realistically they needed to play in (and make) 4H or 3NT to get a good result.

North opens 1S and South responds 1NT, not being strong enough to bid 2H.  With 19 Hcp North rebids 3D, which, being a new suit bid at the three-level, is a game force.  South can now show either her Heart suit or bid 3NT.  A direct bid of 3NT is possible as certainly South has stops in both the unbid suits, although South may feel that a Club lead could be dangerous in 3NT.

If South bids 3H, then North can either bid 3NT, on the principle, “when in doubt bid 3NT”, or try 4H.  4H seems to me to be a reasonable bid.  What has South told you about her hand?  She cannot have three Spades or she would have bid 4S.  She cannot have four Diamonds or she would have raised Diamonds.  She must have either the KH or the QH in a five-card suit or otherwise at least six Hearts without an honour to justify the 3H bid.  As she couldn’t bid 2H on the first round, she is unlikely to have a double stop in Clubs.  Altogether it seems that 4H will be the safest game contract.

If South declares 3NT there will be a Club lead from West.  South will hold up the AC until the third round and then, with no way back to her hand in the event that the Heart suit can be established, lead the TS.  Suppose this is covered by the JS, QS and KS.  East will probably return a Diamond and by this point declarer will have eight tricks, four Spades (as the Spades will run), one Club, two Diamonds and one Heart.  When the AH is cashed and the KH drops, a further two Heart tricks will be established and overall 3NT will make with an overtrick.  The play will be similar if E/W play differently on the first round of Spades.

If South declares 4H then she should be able to make at least ten tricks, losing one Heart, one Diamond and one Club.  4H was the final contract twice, making ten tricks at one table and twelve at the other.  The app says that 6H can be made, but I can’t quite see how to do this.  You can set up a long Spade and the thirteenth Diamond in order to discard South’s two Club losers, but after an initial Club lead surely E/W can cash a Club trick after winning a Diamond?  If anyone is bored over Christmas, please feel free to let me know how to make twelve tricks in Hearts!  Betty McCaskie managed it, so she is my Player of the Week.

On Board 12 E/W could make all thirteen tricks with Clubs as trumps or twelve tricks with Spades as trumps.  But at all three tables East played in 4S with twelve tricks being made only once.  So it would seem that the best bidding and play were both difficult to find.

I can’t see how to reach a slam without at dome point taking a punt.  It would be nice if during the auction East could make an unusual jump in Diamonds, i.e. a Splinter, to show his shortage.  But as West will have opened 1D a Splinter in Diamonds would be likely to be misunderstood!

I my suggested bidding sequence, East’s 2H bid is Fourth Suit Forcing, partly asking if West has a Herat stopper but also just asking for more information about West’s hand.  West’s 3D bid denies a Heart stopper and shows the sixth Diamond.  East’s next bid will depend on how you play Fourth Suit Forcing.

If you play FSF as game-force, then East can simply bid 3S, showing a strong Spade suit.  West can then bid 4S, confident that his Spade holding will be adequate.  I think that East could then bid 6S.  West has shown at least six Diamonds and four Clubs.  The 4S bid suggests that he holds at least two Spades.  This leaves West with at most one Heart, suggesting that at least one of East’s Heart losers can be ruffed in dummy.  Furthermore, if West has only three cards in the major suits, then he must have quite a few high card points in the minor suits to justify his opening bid.  It is unlikely that there will be two Club losers off the top and there must be good chances to avoid too many Club losers in the play.

If you play FSF as forcing for one round only, then I think that East would have to bid a direct 4S over West’s 3D bid.  In this case it would be difficult to bid the slam.  This suggests that you should use FSF as a game force – which also means that you shouldn’t bid the fourth suit unless you are confident that you can make a game contract.

In 6S East has to dispose of at least one her Heart losers.  It follows that the best opening lead is a trump.  East wins in hand, and immediately plays the AH and another Heart, ruffing in dummy.  She can then return to hand with a Diamond ruff and draw trumps.  If the Clubs break 3-2 then 6S will make.  If anything other than a trump is led then East can make 7S by ruffing both her Heart losers in dummy. 

My Player of the Week is Phyll White, the only declarer to make twelve tricks.

On Board 23 E/W could make all thirteen tricks with Hearts or Diamonds as trumps.  But as East had only a doubleton in each of the red suits, perhaps it was a difficult slam to bid.  Also, looking at the E/W cards in isolation, poor breaks in either of the red suits would have made the play difficult.

Assuming that South opens 2S, what should West bid?  If he chooses to overcall, maybe planning to bid both of the red suits, then there is a danger that the best contract may be missed.  Suppose West bids 2H.  This could be passed out when 4H is cold.  Suppose he chooses to bid a direct 4H.  It might be that partner has a four-card Diamond suit and 6D is cold.  So I think West should Double 2S.  North will Pass.  East has, I think a choice between a Pass, expecting 2S to be some way off, which, as N/S are vulnerable, should give a good score, or a bid of 2NT assuming that that shows 10-12 Hcp and a Spade stop.  (Some partnerships use 2NT in a different way in this sequence.)  At the club one East chose to Pass the Double.  2S was three off which was good enough to give E/W 91%.  Consequently that East, Carol Stegmann, is one of my Players of the Week.

If East bids 2NT, West has a similar problem as on the first round of bidding.  If he bids 3H it is likely to be the final contract.  Really West would have to take the bull by the horns.  There is something to be said for a leap to 6NT, but East’s Spade stopper might only come into play on the third round of the suit and neither red suit might run.  Even so, I feel that 6NT would be a reasonable gamble on the West cards.  Otherwise West could try 6H or 6D.  Two E/W pairs managed to bid a small slam, but somehow one of these pairs went off in 6H.  So my Players of the Week can include the E/W who bid and made 6D on this hand, Robin Vicary and John Forbes.

Board 14 was Passed Out at half the tables.  My theory is that on such a hand the side that starts the bidding tends to get a poor score.  At my table this was not the case, perhaps because my defence was not good enough!

I think the hand should be Passed Out.  At my table West chose to bid 1D, having a Rule of 19 hand and being non-vulnerable.  My feeling is that a similar hand with five-card Spade suit might be worth opening, but not with a five-card Diamond suit.  Generally I will open with Rule of 20 hands but not with a Rule of 19 hand.  The trouble with opening a weak hand third-in-hand is that it is unlikely that you will be able to play at the one-level.  With this hand, if partner responds 1NT you can Pass, but if partner has a four-card major suit she will have to bid it and then you will have to rebid 2D.  This is what happened at my table.  The app says that 2D should be one off.  At one table this is what happened and N/S scored 86%.  Looking at the four hands, it seems that N/S must make one Spade, two Hearts, two Diamonds and one Club.  But at my table 2D made, giving my partner and me 14%.  Hmph.

Two E/W pair scored well playing in 1NT.  At one of these tables West was declarer, so I imagine that West opened 1NT.  If you do want to open with the West hand, I think 1NT must be better than 1D.  It has the advantage of being pre-emptive, preventing North from opening with a one-level major suit bid.  Also it gives E/W the chance of playing in 1NT rather than at the two-level.  On this hand this shouldn’t have been much of an advantage as the app says that E/W cannot make 1NT – but then what does the app know?  Presumably at the other table where East was the declarer either East (incorrectly) responded 1NT to West’s 1D opening bid or E/W were playing a strong NT system and the bidding followed the third bidding sequence in the diagram.

When Board 24 was played at my table we thought that the result at all tables should be 3H-1 played by West.  At our table West opened 3H, we all Passed and in defence we took our five tricks.  But looking at the hand afterwards I realised that other outcomes were perfectly reasonable.

West has a choice between opening 3H or 1H.  With 10 Hcp and a seven-card Heart suit 3H is justified, but with a six-loser a Rule of 20 hand maybe the hand is too strong to open at the three-level?

If West opens 3H then probably it should be passed out.  Either North or South might Double, but with both having Weak NT opening bids there is no guarantee that N/S can make a four-level contract, which would be the probable outcome of a take-out Double.  If North were to Double then South might venture 3NT, hoping that her Heart holding would prove adequate, but it is easy to imagine this proving a disaster.

If West opens 1H then North should certainly Double.  East would Pass, and then I think that South might jump to 3NT, not expecting West to have a seven-card Heart suit.

3NT makes, but at the club the two Souths who made nine tricks in NT played in only 2NT.  The one South who played in 3NT went one off.  On a Heart lead there are nine tricks, one Heart, four Spades and four Clubs.  You must clearly start the Clubs by playing dummy’s honours and once West shows out it is easy to finesse the TC.  On a Diamond lead declarer will make one Diamond and eight black suit tricks as above.  A black suit lead makes it harder for South to make nine tricks.  But if she cashes eight black suit tricks and then leads the TH from dummy than the ninth tricks will materialise.  West will win the Heart trick and then have to either give declarer a trick with the KH or open the Diamonds.  Obviously it considerably helps declarer that East is void in Hearts.

Board 25 illustrated the point that sometimes it is best to let the opponents declare when it may be tempting to bid on.

North has a Rule of 19 opening bid, which, first in hand, I wouldn’t open at the one-level.  But with a six-card Heart suit it is certainly suitable for a 2H Weak Two opening bid.  This might be passed out, but let us assume that West chooses to Double.  In that case East has to decide what to do.

The obvious bid is, I suppose, 3C.  In this case E/W should play in a Club part-score which should make comfortably enough.  There are two losers in Diamonds and one in Spades.  If declarer can avoid losing to the QC then 4C makes.  At the club the three declarers in 4C presumably failed to do so as they were all one off.  One of the declarers in 3C somehow managed to be one off too, leaving the other two declarers in 3C with good scores.  Overall the average score for the E/W pairs who played in a Club part-score was 55%.  The two pairs who made 3C each scored 95%.

A brave East might choose to bid 3NT.  This is a contract that can be made.  E/W have a double stop in both of the major suits.  If East plays for the QC to be with South then there are eight tricks readily available, with one Spade, two Hearts (assuming the Heart finesse works) and five Clubs.  The ninth trick will come from Spades.  But if N/S fail to play Spades then declarer is likely to try to make the ninth trick from Diamonds and as the cards lie, assuming a Heart opening lead, this is likely to allow N/S to defeat the contract by making the long Hearts.  As the cards lie East can make 3NT by leading the 5S towards dummy.  South splits her honours and then declarer can win the AS and play a low Spade to set up the TS.  The difficulty is that in practice making 3NT is a matter of luck unless you happen to know where the opposing cards lie.  The one E/W pairs who played in 3NT were unsuccessful.

The preceding analysis shows that E/W could get a good score by declaring but that it was challenging to do so.  So maybe East should just Pass 2HX?  She knows that she has two Heart tricks.  There is likely to be a Club trick too and of course partner must have opening values to justify the Double.  2H will probably not make ...  At the club four Norths played in 2H, one making on the lead of the JC.  I would guess that West rose with the AC, and that eventually dummy’s QC was declarer’s eighth trick.  The other three went off by one or two tricks and the app says that North can make seven tricks with Hearts as trumps.  My Players of the Week are the two Easts who Passed 2HX, Yasemin Brett and Anne Ruff.  They showed that Pass is sometimes to best call.

On Board 10 my partner and I scored +1700 which unsurprisingly gave us 100%.  This result clearly demonstrated that, if you play a Weak NT system, you need to have a way of extricating yourselves from 1NTX.

After West opens 1NT and North Doubles, East must bid something!  INTX will be at least five off, scoring N/S at best -1400.  If East says something, then in practice N/S will probably end up declaring.  They might reach a game contract, but even if they do they will score much less than the penalty that E/W will suffer in 1NTX.

A simple system is for East to Pass if she thinks that 1NT might make or at least be not too far off, i.e. when East has a few Hcp.  With both sides vulnerable, as here, 1NTX-2 would give E/W a score of -500, which would be better than if N/S bid and make a game.  If N/S can only make a part-score, then E/W would need to make 1NTX to come out with a good result.

Otherwise East can bid a five-card suit, intending to play there if necessary.  With at least a 5-2 fit in trumps, the result is likely to be better than playing in INTX.

Without a five-card suit, as here, East can Redouble as an SOS, asking partner to bid her lowest four-card suit.  Here West would bid 2D.  2D would clearly be a better contract for E/W than 1NT.

Of course once E/W show that they aren’t going to play in 1NTX, then N/S will compete further.  On this hand they should reach either 3NT or 4H, both of which make comfortably.

At the club the best results achieved by E/W pairs were when North played in 2H.  Maybe at those tables West opened 1NT and North overcalled 2H, ending the auction?  If that is what happened, I would say that North’s 2H bid was an underbid.  With 18 Hcp surely it is best to Double and then see what transpires.

On Board 25 E/W could make all thirteen tricks in Diamonds, Hearts or No Trumps, but only two pairs managed to bid a slam.

If E/W bid to 4H as shown in the diagram, then surely West can bid 4NT as a 1430 RKCB enquiry?  You shouldn’t use RKCB unless you can cope with any possible reply by partner.  Here West can do so.

If East bids 5H showing two key cards without the QH then West can either Pass in case there are two quick losers in Spades or alternatively gamble that 6NT will make with West as declarer.  If East bids 5S showing two key cards with the QH then West would have to bid 6NT, hoping that there will be enough Heart and Diamond tricks to make the slam.  5S is the most difficult response from West’s point of view, but there must be a good chance that twelve tricks will be available.  If you look at the actual hand and imagine that East doesn’t have the AS, then there are still twelve tricks as long as West is declarer to protect the KS from the lead.  If East bids 5C showing one key card then West can sign off in 5H.  (East cannot hold four key cards of course, as West has two.)   If East bids 5D showing one or three key cards then West can sign off in 5H in case East has only one key card.  Then, if East actually has three key cards (as here) then he can bid 6H.  In this case I feel that West, with a probable source of tricks in Diamonds, should bid 6NT as 6NT= will outscore 6H=.

My Players of the Week are the two pairs who bid and made 6H or 7H, Robin Vicary & John Forbes and Sam Oestreicher & Ben Thomas.

On Board 20 1NT was the contract at seven tables.  At six tables West was declarer, making between five and eight tricks.  At the seventh table South was declarer, making eight tricks.

If E/W are playing Acol then West will open 1NT.  This is quite likely to be the final contract and the app says that the contract can be defeated, as happened at five out of the six tables at which West played in 1NT.

East’s hand is suitable for using “Stayman with weakness” however, where you bid 2C intending to Pass partner’s reply.  With a weak hand it is possible to use this ploy if you are short in Clubs and are happy to play with any other suit as trumps.  Here West will bid 2H allowing E/W to play in their 4-4 major fit.  As three Wests played as declarer with Hearts as trumps I presume that their three partners bid 2C in response to a 1NT opening bid.

My third bidding sequence is my attempt to imagine how South ended up playing 1NT.  Maybe E/W were playing “Strong and five” in which case West would open 1C.  After East’s 1D response maybe South thought that 1NT was worth a try as she had good cover in both of the minor suits.  I suppose another possibility is that West failed to open the bidding in which case, after three Passes, South might have opened a Weak NT?

My Players of the Week are the E/W pairs who successfully bid and made 2H, Linda Fitzgerald-Moore & Susan Read and Giles Ridger & Vic Washtell.

At several tables Board 12 showed the effectiveness of a Weak Two opening bid.

West has a seven-loser hand but not does have the high-card strength to justify an opening bid.  North has a six-card Spade suit and with 9 Hcp is strong enough to justify a vulnerable 2S opening bid.  (Notice that North also has a seven-loser hand, which is typical for a Weak Two bid.)  East and South should Pass, so it is up to West whether or not to keep the bidding open.  As 2S was the final contract at six out of nine tables, clearly most Wests decided to Pass.  But at favourable vulnerability with a chunky Heart suit and a seven-loser hand, surely it is worth competing?  The main disadvantage of bidding 3H is that you might push N/S into a making 4S contract, but that is not the case on this hand.  Indeed, E/W can make 4H, so surely it must be worthwhile to try 3H?  With good Heart support and two outside aces, East may decide to raise to 4H, or maybe with an eight-loser hand East will decide to Pass.  At the club nether decision worked out so well, as at the two tables where the final contract was 3H ten tricks were made, but at the one table where the final contract was 4H only nine tricks were made.  Unlucky!  (Curiously at the two 3H tables the contract was played by East, so it would seem that my idea of how the bidding might develop was not universally followed.)

How can West make 4H?  Suppose North leads a trump and South takes the AH and plays a second round of trumps.  The AD is favourably placed and West can ruff two Diamonds in dummy, and that gives E/W nine tricks with one Spade, four Hearts, two ruffs in dummy, one Diamond and one Club.  The tenth trick comes from the Spade suit as once the AS fells South’s QS, E/W’s Spade holding is good enough to establish the 8S as a trick.  I haven’t taken the trouble to work out the order in which West need to play the cards in order to take advantage of this opportunity, but certainly North can only be allowed to win one Spade trick, as in addition N/S must win the AH and the AD.  Maybe someone can work out exactly how to make 4H?

At the tables were the final contract was 2S, E/W could defeat the contract by taking a Club ruff to go along with one trick in each of the four suits.  But at three tables 2S was successful, showing how successful a Weak Two opening bid can be.

No pair bid the slam on Board 8 this week.  In the post-mortem at our table, we thought we could see how it could have been bid.

The first bidding sequence occurred at my table (I was sitting North).  South’s Double showed a four card Heart suit (or a longer Heart suit with insufficient strength to bid at the two-level).  After West’s 2S bid I bid a direct 4H and duly made twelve tricks.  How could we have bid the slam?  Suppose I had bid 4C instead of 4H.  3C (a new suit at the three-level) would have been a game force, so a 4C bid would have been an unnecessary jump bid, and therefore would have been a Splinter showing a singleton or void in Clubs and, by inference, agreeing Hearts as trumps.  Such a bid would constitute a slam try as North could have bid 4H.  With a weak hand South then would have bid 4H, so a 4D bid would be an agreement to investigate a slam and would have shown a Diamond control.  As 4D is below the game-level, this could have shown first or second-round control, i.e. a void or singleton, the AD or the KD.  North would then happily bid 4NT, RKCB, and South would bid 5D (playing 1430), showing three or zero key cards.  North would then bid 5H in case South had no key cards.  South would then correct this to 6H, knowing he had three key cards.  This bidding sequence is, I suppose, a bit sophisticated and open to partnership misunderstanding, as the trump suit is not mentioned until the five-level, but perhaps the individual bids make sense!

But wait!  West could thwart N/S’s smooth path to the slam by bidding 3S instead of 2S.  East’s 1S overcall shows at least five Spades and West, with four-card support, might decide to bid to the level of fit.  West might think that his hand is very weak, but this is why a jump to 3S would be wise, as it would cause maximum disruption by denying N/S bidding space.  And look what happens.  Now, if North bids 4C it will show a strong hand, certainly, but it will surely be taken as showing a Club suit and deny support for Hearts.  Over 3S I can’t see any alternative for North other than the obvious 4H bid, in which case 4H is likely to be the final contract, as it was at every table at the club.  If you have a weak hand but know you have a fit with partner, it pays to bid as high as you can to make things difficult for the opponents.

Four pairs bid a slam on Board 21, and two were successful – but one of these pairs was very fortunate!