Join Bridge Winners
Michaels for the Majors Maybe???

West
AK32
73
K1084
982
North
7
AQ952
5
AKQ764
East
QJ1064
6
AQJ9
J105
South
985
KJ1084
7632
3
W
N
E
S
P
1
2
P
2
3
3
P
P
4
P
5
P
P
P
D
5 North
NS: 0 EW: 0

 

Before I (North) bid 4C, I asked West how they played the 2C bid by East. West said majors. 

East led the Spade queen and continued Spades. I made five. Before scoring the hand I called the director and said that I thought we had been misinformed. West said that their agreement was majors but the hand could be 4-5 or 5-4 with the anchor suit (????) being longer. The director said that's their agreement and I don't want to hear anymore. I think she thought I was asking an improper question. I was just trying to understand why East chose to bid 2C on this hand. The partnership has played many times together. West is a mentor to EAST and is also known for having his partners use bids that are out of the mainstream of average bidding, such as using 3NT as keycard after the sequence 1M-3M (This is actually occurred on the hand prior to this and when East didn't alert and bid 4S, presumably showing 2 KEYCARDS AND THE QUEEN, West passed). What I was trying to find out what would East have done had West held 4 Hearts to the AK  and bid 2 Hearts, passed to East. Presumably East would now bid 2 Spades to show 5 Spades and 4 Hearts.  West would now bid 3 Hearts expecting 4 Hearts in the East hand. What does East do now? Bid 4 Dias??? Giving East the benefit of the doubt, I think East was confused by the instructions regarding Michaels bids given by West. Nevertheless we got a cold zero on the hand. So be it. I guess the question is should the director have asked East for a further explanation? 

37 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top