Developments after a 1NT opening – ACT II
North-South have reached a very poor contract. As so often, each of the two players considers that his partner is responsible for the accident.
And you, what do you think?
This month we will be looking at:
Developments after a 1NT opening. ACT II.
Problem 1
N/S Vul.
| W | N | E | S |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1NT | Pass | 2♣ | |
| Pass | 2♠ | Pass | 4SA |
The facts
The fatal mistake: mixing up RKCB and a quantitative 4NT, with the result of stopping in a game contract when everybody else plays the small slam, the experts even the grand slam in Spades. Whose fault is it?
Arguments
North: “I took your bid of 4NT as quantitative, as we had not agreed on a trump suit, neither by a raise nor implicitly. I have 16HCP with no intermediate cards, so I pass.”
South: “Well for me the Spade fit is implied with the 4NT bid. And I think that your hand is rather the maximum of a 1NT opening and that in case of doubt you should have bid on. We have twelve tricks in No-Trump.”
This article is reserved for BRIDGERAMA+ subscribers.
Subscribe to access all our articles
