BRIDGE

Both vulnerable. North deals.

NORTH

xQ J 3

uA 8 5

vA J 2

wK 8 6 5

WEST EAST

xK 8 5 4 xA 10 9 6 2

u9 7 4 3 uJ 2

v9 6 v10 8 3

w10 9 4 wQ J 7

SOUTH

x7

uK Q 10 6

vK Q 7 5 4

wA 3 2

The bidding:

NORTH EAST SOUTH WEST

1NT Pass 2w Pass

2v Pass 4NT Pass

5u Pass 6v Pass

Pass Pass

Opening lead: Ten of w

Study the bidding and play of this deal. Was the result normal, or did someone blunder? If so, who?

South was rather aggressive in the auction, but North could have had a slightly different hand that would have made the slam laydown. After checking for a heart fit with Stayman and finding out North held no four-card major, the chances of finding North with at least three diamonds were great. When Blackwood revealed North held two aces, South bounced into six diamonds.

West led the ten of clubs and declarer had a problem. There was a loser in each black suit and no obvious way to avoid it. Declarer found a devious way. He ducked the first club, East followed with the seven and West continued with another club. Declarer won, drew trumps, cashed the ace-king of clubs and, when the suit broke evenly, discarded his spade loser on the 13th club. Six diamonds bid and made!

What’s your verdict?

It is difficult to blame West. There was no way to tell which black ace declarer held. If anyone is to blame, it is East!

East should have played the jack of clubs at trick one. Now he can take the ace of spades if declarer ducks. If declarer wins, he cannot avoid the two black-suit losers.

2009 Tribune Media Services