Join Bridge Winners
Another mild ethical conundrum

You are playing in a "Hubert Phillips" match, a slightly archaic UK knockout competition, with total points scoring and partnerships which pivot between sets. It is therefore common for agreements to be somewhat sketchy. Your team is strong favourite, and opponents are inexperienced.

In 4th seat you pick up QJxx QJ10xx Ax xx. You play a 12-14 NT with a 5-card spade suit. The auction proceeds at game all:

P  1  X  3*

P  3  P   ?

You assessed your hand as worth driving to game, but elected to make a fit jump on the way. You had definitely intended to raise partner's 3 to 4.

However: LHO enquired the meaning of your 3. Partner stated "I'm not sure. It may be a strong jump-shift, or he may have spades as well." So you have the UI that partner is not certain you have spades, and may have extra values. What now? Which of the following is closest to your view:

Bid 4. Clear cut, UI or no UI.
Bid 4. It's what we intended. Opponents can ask for a ruling if they're unhappy.
Pass. Even though we intended it, 4 is not automatic, and is suggested by the UI.
Pass. Partner has denied interest and our initial assessment was perhaps a bit optimistic.

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
loading...
70 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top