9 7 3 K J 10 9 7 4 5 J 10 7

South dealer, E-W vul.

SOUTH	WEST	NORTH	EAST
Lebel	Wolff	Mari	Hamman
pass	1NT	2(1)	2NT(2)
4	pass	pass	5
?

(1) Major two-suiter (2) Game force, asks opener for further description

Pass, double, or bid 5? Should you elect to defend, what do you lead?

Scroll down to see what was the decision of the French star

Michel Lebel chose to defend and led a spade. His lead was excellent, but not his bidding decision. This was the full deal:

	NORTH A Q J 10 4 A 8 6 5 2 3 5 4
WEST K 6 Q 3 A Q J A 9 8 6 3 2		EAST 8 5 2 - - - K 10 9 8 7 6 4 2 K Q
	SOUTH 9 7 3 K J 10 9 7 4 5 J 10 7

As you see, 5 is cold. Without a spade lead, declarer will make all 13 tricks, drawing trump and discarding spades on the clubs. This happened in the other semifinal match, when Manoppo scored 1150 for Indonesia at 5 doubled, after the king of hearts lead by the Italian defender. The spade lead only served to restrict the losses to 750 (Mari had doubled 5, and who can blame him).

Note that the West hand is a bit off-center for a notrump opening bid, and also note the cunning 2NT bid by Hamman, who masked his extreme distribution. Still, Lebel should had bid 5. Partner having promised a major two-suiter, the double fit (EW minors, NS majors) has come to light. The South hand is defenceless, but it is very promising in offence. Moreover, 5 rates to be a cheap sacrifice.

As the cards lie, 5 will go one down. Not only that: it is very likely that EW will bid on to 6. This is what happened in the other room, when Boulenger, East for France, bid 6 over 5. North doubled and South, Eddie Kantar, led an unerring spade to beat the contract by one trick and gain 14 IMPs (200 plus 750) for the USA. Incidentally, the final margin was just 12 IMPs for the US team...

Special thanks to Yvan Calame for the HTML conversion!

Nikos Sarantakos,
Luxembourg, June 1998

Return to Main Bridge Page

Return to Real-Life Problems page