Most bridge players can probably recall times when the ‘correct’ game contract was doomed to go off and the underbid contract won the day. This is particularly relevant (and irritating) in the pairs game where your -50 scores few match points against the +140s scored by the underbidders.

So much for the opinion that bridge is purely a game of skill!

In the 2nd round of the NICKO and against excellent quality opposition, and in the South seat you pick up.....

Where would you place the contract after you hear partner open 1D and rebid 3NT over your response of 1S?

The answer of course is 6D.


Now to North.....

How confident do you feel when you view this dummy after the opening lead is made, and you hold:

Doesn’t look too difficult! Just need to ruff a club and a heart in dummy. The problem suit is spades which needs to be played for only one loser. Problem solved if West holds the King of spades - small from table towards the Queen. Or a first round finnesse of the Ten catering for the Jack in East’s hand.

In fact, the contract is doomed to fail. West does indeed hold the King of Spades and East the Jack but..... East also holds all 4 missing diamonds (J,10, 9, 3).
They cannot all be picked up except (double dummy) by playing the 8 if East plays the 3 on the first round of the suit.

However, on the day, we languished in 3NT, making 11 after the lead of the Jack of diamonds. The diamond has to be won in hand with the King and now all the diamonds are picked up by finnessing the 8 at trick 2.

Our underbidding scored +660. The opponents, who bid the reasonable slam in diamonds scored -100 for a 13 imp swing to us on the board.

Who says underbidding doesn’t pay!


David Beresford




Footnote: I have included another little ‘underbidding’ sequel which occurred during a ‘C’ Team Yorkshire League match. See the commentary for ‘C’ Team Versus Leeds ‘B’ here
(Dave Butler)