Saturday, July 30, 2005 11:25 AM

Q Bids Vrs Exclusion Blackwood

 

PITBULLS:

 

            Exclusion Blackwood is a new tool for us. Whenever you are thinking about Q bidding a void , think Exclusion Blackwood instead. The trouble with Q bidding a void is that partner thinks it is a king or an Ace so he does not discount terrible duplication of value and continues to make encouraging noises. BJ held this hand

Void Q10987x Jxx AK10x    and I opened 1NT. BJ transferred to hearts and then bid 3♣. I bid 3 confirming hearts as the trump suit. If I have nothing in spades , a grand slam in hearts is possible xxxx AKx AK Qxxx . If I have horrible duplication of value in spades , 6 would be very iffy. A void showing bid is exclusion Blackwood so 4 asks for Aces. Partner with AKQx Kxx Axxx xx shows two outside the spade suit (5) so you sign off in 5. With the other hand you give a 5 response and 6 is a baby bid.

 

          BJ had a hand that “exclusion” would have kept us out of a bad slam. He held AQ10xx void Axxx AJxx and opened 1 getting a 1NT response from me. BJ bid a quiet 2♣ ( what else ?) and I showed a limit raise in spades by bidding 3  Given the parameter of the forcing NT where my maximum is in the 11 HCP range we are in the 26 HCP range. Having said that , if there is no duplication of value in hearts, a grand slam is possible !

Kxx xxxx Kx KQxx  are the magical cards where 13 tricks are a possibility. Anyway BJ decided to Q bid 4♣ to test the waters and I replied 4 which obviously says I like my hand on the auction. What next ? 5 exclusion by BJ is a two way bid. It asks me to show controls omitting the heart Ace but it obviously tells me that he is void in hearts. I held the wrong hand for him as I held the heart Ace instead of the spade king making slam a bad contract. I respond no Aces and BJ now realizes that we are in the 26 HCP range with possible duplication so he passes my 5 response ( zero aces ) . My hand was Jxx Axxx Kx K10xx but what if my hand was Jxx xxxx KQx KQxx . In light of his non forcing 2♣ bid and his slam aspirations I would just bid 6♠ ! . There is no hand that he could hold that he bids 2♣ with a void in hearts that slam can not make . He needs around 16 HCP outside the heart suit so “filling in the blanks” 6♠ must be cold ! Exclusion Blackwood is a two way bid on some auctions !!

 

          2/1 auctions when there is a void in the majors is exclusion Blackwood so do not Q bid the void. You hold void xx Axxx AQJ10xx and partner opens a heart. You bid 2♣ and partner raises to 3♣ . Do not even think of Q bidding your spade void. Jump to 4 which is exclusion Blackwood for clubs ! . With minors agreed , you can get away with Exclusion Blackwood at the 4 level in the major. Here is another auction . I held AKxxxx void Axxx Kxx and partner opens 1. I respond a spade and partner bids 2. 4 to play is an impossible bid as you have a million other bids to show spades and hearts. 4is exclusion KCB with diamonds as the agreed suit.

 

          Opening 2♣ is where exclusion Blackwood could be a very frequent bid. If you have found a minor fit early jump to 4 of a major is exclusion Blackwood. 2♣-P-3♣-P   4 is not splintering to the weak hand. Clubs are agreed and we have a void in diamonds and exclusion KCB . With a major fit after two clubs , a jump to the 5 level is an obvious Exclusion Blackwood bid. 2♣-P-2-P    2♠-P-3♠-P  5♣-P-?

 

          OK what about the strong distribution 6-5 hands ? X AKJxx AQJ10xx x  you open 1 and partner bid 1. Do not be a kangaroo and jump to 4 . That is exclusion Blackwood with spade support !! Bid 2 as a quiet reverse or 3 as a jump shift reverse if you are weaker. What about the strong two suiters with the spade suit. Here is where I think exclusion Blackwood is silly. Exclusion Blackwood forcing the auction to the 5 level when there is a threat of serious duplication of value is bad Bridge. A leap to the 4 level in spades is natural and not Exclusion Blackwood. AKQxx x x AKxxxx      1♣-P-1-P   4♠ as Exclusion Blackwood is too risky and will put the heart contract in jeopardy if severe duplication of value in spades. Comments ?