Another that Works (After a Fashion)


Q J 7 3
10 7 4 2
A K
6 5 2
A 2 K 10 9 8
A K J 9 8 3 Q 5
8 7 6 4 9 5 2
9 K Q 7 4
6 5 4Vul: N-S
6Opening lead: A of hearts
Q J 10 3
A J 10 8 3

SouthWestNorthEast
Pass 1 Pass 1
Pass 2 Pass Pass
Dbl Pass 2 NT Dbl
3 Pass Pass Dbl
Allpass

This is from Alan Truscott's column, and for all the column-writing going on, it's a rare balancing bid that is central, at least from my observation. This one is a little flawed in two ways. First, it is evident that E-W could make 3 hearts here also (as in example 11). One might argue that pushing the opponents up to the 3 level represents some value in itself, because if you do it often enough, you're bound to push them into negative territory sometimes. Well, yes, but that wasn't to be here, where they neither bid three hearts nor could have been defeated in it. But a more serious flaw here is simply that the contract could have been beat, which would have meant down 200 at that vulnerability and thus a considerably worse board at matchpoints than letting the opponents have their danged heart bid.
West cashed the A of hearts, then the A of spades and led low to the K of spades. Had East returned a spade to give his partner a ruff, that would have been the fourth trick for the defense, with a certain trick coming from the K Q of trump. It wasn't to be, and after taking his K of spades, East shifted and the contract was made for a very good result from the balancing bid. Yet, it was flawed, when the good result depended on an opponent's error. I mean, if the opponents could have boxed your ears for a very poor result from balancing but didn't find the best defense, that doesn't strike me as the best advertisement for balancing. It's still near impossible to find an unqualified good coming from the balancing bid. Even the near misses, such as this one (not vul it would have been a reasonable bid), just don't ring the bell.