The Impossible Spade Advance

What was partner thinking? Continue reading

In a pairs game the deal is on your left. Only the opponents are vulnerable. Dealer opens 1, partner passes, and RHO bids 1. No thought is required for you to bid 2 with the following hand:

6 5    8 4    A Q 10 4 3 2   A 9 4
LHO raises to 2, partner comes alive with a bid of 2, and RHO passes. The first two rounds of the auction are therefore:

LHO Partner RHO> You
1 Pass 1 2
2 2 Pass ?

You are playing non-forcing constructive advances, so partner’s spade bid is not forcing. Should you rebid your diamonds or pass? Maybe a word should be inserted as to what “non-forcing constructive” means. My understanding is that it reflects a willingness for the auction to continue. In practical terms that means that partner either has tolerance for overcaller’s suit or that he/she has a self-sufficient suit.

Well, what do the opponents have? LHO probably has 12-15 points and four hearts. RHO probably has only four hearts, and he cannot find another bid after partner’s overcall.

And what about partner? Let us immediately discard the thought that partner might have six spades. This person has often inserted jump overcalls with no honors at all. Furthermore he loves to bid spades. If he had been dealt five spades that were in any sense self-sufficient and as many as eight points, he almost certainly would have reached for the top of the box on the first round. Furthermore, partner was “off the hook.” He could have passed 2. He must have a pretty good hand, and his spades cannot be that special, or he would have mentioned them the first time.

So, I can picture three possible explanations for his bid: (1) When he combined his two spade fragments together he realized that he had a spade suit that was worth bidding. (2) He realized that one or two of his clubs were really spades. (3) He could tolerate diamonds, but he thought that 2 or 2NT might be a better contract.

It was nearly 10:30 at night, and partner (who was, in fact me) had in the past exhibited both of the first two behaviors even at much earlier hours. This time, however, he held this assortment:

A K 10 3    9 5    J 8 7   K Q 8 5
W.C. Fields would have called the opponents’ bidding the “Ethiopan in the fuel supply.” The opener had a flat 12-pointer, and responder made due with a king and two jacks. The latter also refrained from rebidding 3 even though he did, in fact have five hearts. So, it was difficult for the overcaller to imagine that advancer had such a good hand. At first I thought that she, with whom I had not played in a year or so, was just not used to my style, but two of my long-time partners agreed with her. Maybe I do not understand what “non-forcing constructive” means or maybe the concept changes when partner has passed.

Leave a Reply