Caution can create congenial conclusion

Alvin Toffler, a writer about modern technologies who died in June, said, "It is better to err on the side of daring than the side of caution."

At the bridge table, that is usually right, but not always. Look at the auction in today's deal. What would you have done differently? What is the par result, the contract that gives the best-possible score to each side?

The final contract of two no-trump did not go well. After West unimaginatively led fourth-highest from his longest and strongest, South cashed out for down one, taking one spade, one diamond and five clubs.

North-South can make one no-trump, and South can succeed in two clubs. (Two clubs by North fails after the spade-jack lead. East ruffs the third round of the suit with his club jack and shifts to the diamond queen.) But West can make two spades (with an overtrick if the defenders do not play trumps quickly enough to stop a club ruff in the East hand) for plus 110 (or 140). So the par contract is two no-trump doubled by North-South or three clubs doubled by South, which would be minus 100.

South should respond one no-trump. It is a slight underbid, but better than two clubs (or the weird two diamonds). Then, whatever West does, North passes. If you use two-over-one, South bids one no-trump, and, if West passes, North rebids two clubs (natural, or a three-card suit in a minimum balanced hand). After that, South can raise to three clubs to invite game. If West intervenes with two spades, which is highly likely, North passes, and South might well do likewise.