BRIDGE

North-South vulnerable. East deals.

NORTH

xQ

uA K 8

vA 7 6 5 2

wA J 4 3

WEST EAST

x9 6 5 4 2 xA K 10 8 7 3

uQ 9 4 3 uJ 10

vQ 8 vJ

w10 8 wQ 9 7 2

SOUTH

xJ

u7 6 5 2

vK 10 9 4 3

wK 6 5

The bidding:

EAST SOUTH WEST NORTH

2x Pass 2NT Dbl

3w 3v Pass 3x

Pass 4u Pass 5v

Pass Pass Pass

Opening lead: Ten of w

Some bridge players cannot resist the urge to steal from the opponents. Occasionally, they are too clever for their own good!

West’s two no trump response to his partner’s weak two-bid was an attempt to convince left-hand opponent that all those picture cards he was looking at were a mirage. It was a forcing bid, requiring partner to show a side-suit stopper if he held one, and East obliged. North-South easily brushed away the skullduggery to reach a normal game that depended only on a finesse which was doomed to fail.

Unable to accomplish anything in the bidding, West got to work on the play. Since his spade length meant that no trick could be developed in that suit, he decided that he should lead a club — the suit in which partner had shown a stopper. Declarer won in hand with the king, drew trumps in two rounds and, in case hearts were 4-2, cashed the ace and king of hearts before exiting with a spade. East, forced to win the trick, was endplayed. The choices were to continue with a spade, yielding a ruff-sluff, or to lead into the club tenace — a Hobson’s choice. Either way, the game was a certainty.

Had West simply led partner’s suit, he would have accomplished two things: First, he would have defeated the contract; secondly, partnership trust would not have been seriously eroded.

SCrt 2010 Tribune Media Services