Join Bridge Winners
A theoretical disagreement

One of the endlessly fascinating things about bridge is that there are so many possible auctions that it's impossible to have agreements to cover all of them. Of course, one of the endlessly annoying things about bridge is that there are so many possible auctions that it's impossible to have agreements to cover all of them. Hence:

W
N
E
S
1
1
2
P
3
P
3
P
3
X
XX
P
4
P
4
P
5
P
?

 

2 showed a heart raise, limit+; 3 and 3 were ostensibly natural; redouble showed first-round control of spades. 

Responder took the view that opener's bypassing 4 denied a club control, and thus that 5 asked for a club control for slam.

Opener took the view that, by bidding 3, he showed that he'd been slamming all along; thus, that he'd already shown a control with 3 and was now looking for good trumps for slam.

I could make this a poll, but I'm less interested in numbers than in the reasoning behind them. Is either player's logic more convincing? Is there a general principle at work here? As always, any thoughtful responses are greatly appreciated. 

30 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top