Since my post about opening hands in the 18-21 range provoked such an exciting range of responses, I hesitate to mention this next subject for fear of unleashing even fiercer bridge debate.
As you know, if declarer holds A-K-Q-J of trump in one hand and makes the contract, the side gets a 100-point bonus above the line. A-K-Q-J-10 of trump, or four aces at no trump, yields a 150-point bonus. BUT: is it proper/required for declarer to announce those honors BEFORE playing the hand, or not until AFTER, or is it a matter of choice?
Announcing beforehand mitigates the advantage of the honors, which could be considered either chivalrous or arrogant. Announcing afterward feels like a weird combination of gloating ("Ha, I won, and moreover give me a bonus!") and apologizing ("Yes, I made the contract, but I did have all the top trump honors.")
Wikipedia, that fount of all knowledge both true and made-up, says "a player must claim the honors bonus, at the latest before the next deal starts," which sounds like it's up to the individual.
Bridge World implies too that it's a matter of choice, even as they ungallantly caution "don't help the opponents out by excitedly announcing your windfall during the play; wait until the play is over and they cannot make use of the information."
I guess I like the idea of announcing up front. It'd be a curious game anyway, or at least one beyond my minimal experience level, in which the fact that declarer held all those honors remained secret long enough to sway the outcome. What do you think?
(While I have your rapt attention, here are some other fascinating facts about honors bonuses. 1. They don't apply in "Chicago" bridge (or in duplicate). 2. If declarer fails to mention them before the next deal, they are forfeit (also according to Wikipedia). 3. The
ACBL says "As there is no skill in scoring for honors, players often agree to play without the honor bonuses." Aha, but if you announce them before playing, that calls for at least a little skill!)
Q 9 8 6 5 4 3 2
10 8 5
9 5
--
4 comments:
I was just the photographer, not a player on this one, so I don't remember anything about the bidding. 4S looks winnable but 5C not so much. Did someone go down doubled?
I think they might have--either that or it was made doubled. Since Caroline and I were playing, and my propensity for doubling was reinforced for good that very night by hers, I'd think it'd have been nearly impossible for that not to have happened. IIRC, she and I were partners and were also N-S. If nothing else, the bidding here probably got really fucking woolly.
Woolly indeed. Everyone has an opening bid, so who dealt ends up mattering a lot. East and South can both open 1NT, and West and North can both open preemptively with length. Any transfer bidding is going to get gummed up.
N-S has the advantage, I guess, with the major suit and with those lucky finesses. Either side could make 3NT too, looks like, especially if defenders take their high-card winners right away. E-W's diamond and club tenaces are perfect against South's leads. Pretty unlikely though that either side would wind up in such a moderate contract.
(Well, maybe West and North oughtn't to open with so few points, but I'd be tempted.)
Post a Comment
<< collapse