Copyright © 1999 Marty Bergen

Slam Bidding Made Easier

Do you believe that the most effective way to get to slam is to race to bid Blackwood? No way!

One key to effective slam bidding is to know when to use Blackwood and what to do when it is not appropriate. As Easley Blackwood was the first to admit, Blackwood is not the answer to all slam decisions.

The sole function of Blackwood is to discover partner’s number of aces. On many hands, though, quantity is not the answer; what we seek is location, location, location.

The two best reasons to forego Blackwood are: you have a void or a worthless suit. Let us take these one at a time. If you are void in a suit and partner’s ace is in that suit, his ace is “wasted.” In other words, you already had the suit under control. You would rather partner had his ace in another suit where you did have a loser.

A worthless suit, one with no ace or king, for instance, needs help. If your Blackwood inquiry reveals that you are missing an ace, you still will not know if partner can help your weak suit. If he cannot, you will be down in your slam before you know it.

Now take a look at some slam hands. Although Roman Keycard Blackwood (RKC) is all the rage, and does have certain advantages, we will use old-fashioned Blackwood. To refresh your memory (especially for RKC advocates), responses to 4NT are: zero or four aces, bid 5§; one ace, 5¨; two aces 5©, three aces 5ª.

	West	East
ª AQ54	1©	1ª	ª KJ8732
© AQJ75	3ª	4§	© K2
¨ 4	4¨	4NT	¨ 985
§ Q95	5©	6ª	§ A3

The first three bids were routine. East was interested in slam after 3ª, but avoided 4NT because of his diamond weakness. If opener held the major-suit aces, East would still be at the mercy of partner’s diamond holding.

East’s 4§ cuebid showed a club control, promising a holding that prevented the opponents from taking the first two tricks in that suit. West now reciprocated in diamonds. Just what the doctor ordered. It was now child’s play for East to Blackwood into slam. Notice that we were able to cuebid and Blackwood on the same hand. Very nice, we really got our money’s worth.

Now for an easy one.

	West	East
ª KQ2	1¨	1©	ª 5
© A9	3¨	4NT	© KQ854
¨ AQJ852	5©	6¨	¨ K643
§ 83	P		§ A74

I never said that perfect Blackwood hands had become extinct. With controls in every suit, East was interested only in opener’s aces. The 6¨ contract was as easy to make as it was to bid.

	West	East
ª AQ2	1©	2ª	ª KJ1076
© AKJ7543	3©	4©	© Q106
¨ —	4ª	5§	¨ KJ
§ 865	7©	P	§ AK3

I like East’s jump shift to 2ª. When he then raises to 4©, he gives a good description of a hand with five or six nice spades and interest in a heart slam. West has a beautiful hand, but knows that bidding Blackwood with a void is a no-no. He cuebids 4ª and hopes for the best. This bid promises first-round control of spades because it is made beyond the level of game. East’s 5§ cuebid also promises the ace of that suit. This is all West needs. Knowing that spades will run, he confidently bids the grand.

	West	East
ª 9	1©	4¨*	ª AQ3
© AK10653	4NT	5©	© Q987
¨ 9754	6©	P	¨ 6
§ KQ			§ A7532

The key here was East’s 4¨ splinter bid. When playing this convention, East’s majestic double jump promised an opening bid with four-card heart support and a void or singleton in diamonds. Knowing that diamonds were under control, West needed no further encouragement.

	West	East
ª KQ2	1NT	4NT	ª A103
© K76	5¨	6¨	© A7
¨ K10953	P		¨ A874
§ A2			§ K1093

After West’s obvious 1NT opening, East evaluated well by up-grading his 15 HCP. He loved his prime cards and two tens and correctly invited slam with 4NT. The bridge term for this bid is “quantitative.”

Some players sitting West would have declined the invitation with only 15 HCP, but this West was made of sterner stuff. He appreciated that his nice five-card suit increased the value of this hand. A second look at his prime cards encouraged him to bid on.

However, West did not just close his eyes and accept the invitation by bidding 6NT. He bid 5¨ to show his suit (note that 5¨ was not meant to show his one ace) and awaited developments.

The rest was easy. With his nice diamond support, East was delighted to raise to 6¨. Although a trump trick had to be lost, 6¨ made easily by ruffing a heart. 6NT was a reasonable contract, but it was doomed. Three spades, two hearts, four diamonds and two club tricks just do not add to 12.

Why was 6¨ laydown with two balanced hands and only 30 HCP? A Bergenism applies here which can prove to be a nice evaluating tool, especially for slam. “It is uncanny how well hands work out when they have very few (if any) jacks.” I am not saying that I would rather have a two than a jack, but because jacks are the most overrated of honors, it bothers me to count them as a full point.

	West	East
ª KQ7432	1ª	2§	ª AJ10
© KJ106	2©	3ª	© AQ5
¨ Q6	4§	4©	¨ 93
§ A	4ª	P	§ KJ854

The first three bids are quite logical, West applying the “six-four-six” principle. East’s jump to 3ª promised at least an opening bid with spade support. (If playing two-over-one game forcing, the jump shows extra values).

West was very interested in slam, but concerned about his diamonds. He cuebid 4§, hoping to hear a 4¨ bid from East. East’s 4© bid said a mouthful. Because controls are cuebid up the line, East’s 4© bid not only promised a heart control, but it denied a diamond control.

West was disappointed, but nothing plus nothing equals nothing. No diamond control, no slam. Notice that by embarking on a cuebidding sequence, both players were involved in the decision-making process.

I hope that you were not too frustrated by this comparatively tame hand. After five beautifully-bid laydown slams, I thought a dose of reality was in order. Slam on every hand is just too much.