Blackwood is for Sissies? IV


A Q J 8 3
J 6
J
K Q 9 8 4
6 5 4 2
A 10 9 7 5 8 4 3
7 5 9 8 6 4 3 2
A J 7 5 6 2
K 10 9 7
K Q 2
K
A K Q 10Vul: None

SouthWest NorthEast
1 NT 2 Pass 3
Pass 6 Pass All pass

There are several reasons for sidestepping Blackwood, of course. THe most obvious and most-promoted on this site is when fairly balanced no trump holdings are at issue, and where the figure 33 will tell you a whole lot more about your potential than Blackwood. You might skip it when it would be ambiguous or might be ambiguous to a tentative partner, especially if you have three aces and second round control of the other suit. There are of course times when you can't use Blackwood, as an adventuresome opponent slips in a 5-level sac bid. Maybe you'd hate to invite a diamond lead and would hate to hear 5 diamonds as a Blackwood response that gets doubled on your right.
Perhaps you can think of another reason. Okay. But a gratuitous skipping of Blackwood, where there is no ambiguity, no interference from the opposition, no earthly reason to sneer at, scorn this lovely convention is not warranted. It's not sophisticated brdige. It is quite the contrary when in fact you go down as the above declarer did owing to missing two aces where there are no voids.
Why? for heaven's sake. Maybe a no trump opener can be counted on for two (or more) aces 9 times out of ten. I don't know and have never taken a survey of no trump openings. But South not only has a valid no trump opener with one ace, but he happens to have a maximum for a fairly traditional 15-to-17 no trump opener, and I hardly think anyone woulds say he has a better opening bid. And it would've cost nothing. I jus' dunno.
I might interject a personal note here. For a number of reasons I'm not real strong proponent of interlacing one's bidding with a lot of conventions, which I might go into some day. But there are two that I consider indispensible and believe should be taught at the same time a novice is instructed on a bidding system, to wit: Blackwood (oh you guessed that one, did you?) and Stayman.
One of the reasons is that there's no substitute. How else do you find 4-4 fits in majors, which will usually, though not always, play better than 3 no when you have one. As for Blackwood, of course there is another aces-asking convention, namely Gerber. But this brings a suit denomination to ask for aces, along with sometimes a touch of ambiguity, such that it looks like jumping from the frying pan to the fire for anyone who has trouble handling Blackwood.
When a very adequate partner some months ago strayed to play with a woman (and made sure I knew about it), he came back and asked, Can we add [can't remember the name . . the one where your rebid tells whether your third hand opening was good or not] to our bidding, I wrote back and pointed out all his malfeasances vis-a-vis conventions, from the time he royally screwed up Brozel at a regional, leading to an hours-long dispute, to the times he forgot we were playing Texas,to the time he declined to try Stayman though he had four hearts and a doubleton diamond, (leading to a low board), to the times he opened 4-card majors 3rd hand, though he he had handed me a convention card with 5-card majors in all positions I told him that was a favorite with women and I knew where he got the idea. No more way said on that.. He just wrote back "Ouch" and never again brought up adding a new convention.
In any event, I think you'll find Blackwood very useful, and you disdain it at your cost . . . as the above pair wound up with a very miserable score.