Don't
be a pleasant opponent - bid
Jon
Baldursson (
JON
BALDURSSON of
In
most textbooks on competitive bidding we are advised not to bid without
good reason. To bid with weak hands on bad
suits, the theory says, will cost in the long run, misleading partner when we
end up defending, and risking severe penalties otherwise.
This
sounds like sensible advice likely to produce consistently fair results in intermediate competition. But experience has taught me that exactly the opposite
is needed to do well in top-class teams tournament . It is better to bid
at the first opportunity, even if the hands or
the suits do not meet the standards the
textbooks require. Indeed, it can often
be less dangerous to bid right away than to wait and hope to get a second
chance. Contrary to what some may believe these tactics are not as
effective at Pairs, where -200 is a terrible score. Consider
this example from the Bermuda Bowl in
Dealer
West |
♠ |
6
5 |
|||
|
N/S
Vulnerable |
♥ |
A 8
4 3 2 |
|
|
|
|
♦ |
K J
10 5 4 2 |
|
|
|
|
♣ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
N |
|
|
♠ | K J 10 9 3 2 | ♠ | A 8 7 4 | ||
♥ |
K
10 9 |
|
W E |
♥ |
Q
J 7 6 5 |
♦ |
Q
8 |
|
|
♦ |
6 |
♣ |
9
7 |
|
|
♣ |
K
Q 4 |
|
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
♠ |
Q |
|
|
|
|
♥ |
- |
|
|
|
|
♦ |
A
9 7 3 |
|
|
|
|
♣ |
A
J 10 8 6 5 3 2 |
|
|
This
deal was played at sixteen tables and West usually
opened a weak Two Spades or Multi Two Diamonds. Where North overcalled Three Diamonds,
South had an easy Six Diamond bid, but
where North passed, as happened at some tables,
North-South were in trouble and some played in Five or Six Clubs which couldn't
be made.
|
|
|
|||
|
Love All |
♥ |
A
4 3 2 |
|
|
|
|
♦ |
A
Q 7 6 2 |
|
|
|
|
♣ |
A
K 4 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
N |
|
|
♠ |
K
10 9 7 5 4 |
♠ |
Q
J 8 6 3 2 |
||
♥ |
6
5 |
|
W E |
♥ |
9
8 |
♦ |
J
5 4 3 |
|
|
♦ |
- |
♣ |
9 |
|
|
♣ |
Q
10 8 6 5 |
|
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
♠ |
A |
|
|
|
|
♥ |
K
Q J 10 7 |
|
|
|
|
♦ |
K
10 9 8 |
|
|
|
|
♣ |
J
7 2 |
|
|
W |
N |
E |
S |
Zia |
Sontag |
|
Kantar |
|
|
NO |
1♥ |
NO |
5NT |
NO |
7♥ |
NO |
NO |
Double |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
East's
Double was
obviously lead-directing, showing a void
somewhere. Not unreasonably, the
great Zia Mahmood led his longest suit, a spade, so the grand slam made. If
It
is standard practice that a one-level overcall promises a good suit so
that partner knows what to lead if your side ends up defending. But if
overcalling on a bad suit can be misleading for your partner, it can also be
misleading for declarer, causing him to play the overcaller for missing honours
in the suit he bid. There can also be
negative inferences when a usually aggressive player does not overcall.
If his partner is on lead against no-trumps, he knows that it is no use trying
to find him with a suit he could have bid at the one level.
There
is also a psychological advantage in being a busy bidder. We all know that it
can be irritating when opponents are constantly entering the bidding, even if
the intervention makes no difference in the end. We often find that opponents
have been skating on thin ice, but
managed to escape unharmed. This can allow them to gain a psychological edge and
affect your concentration, maybe resulting in a losing board later in the match.
Of
course, they are right in the textbooks. You can help declarer to make contracts
with light overcalls and you sometimes go for big numbers. But I am sure that in
the long run you will gain more with this style than you lose, and when you
lose, just smile and bide your time. The Icelandic team used this approach in
the 1991 Bermuda Bowl and, to quote Eric Kokish from the World Championship book
discussing the prospects for the final, 'The Icelanders' busy competitive style
had so far brought in lots of points. Would this style prove effective against
the Poles who like to defend?'
So my BOLS tip is:
Don't
just sit and watch your opponents.
Bid at the first opportunity.