This deal intrigued me because of the remarkable successes of the Kranyak team.
If you analyze their results, part of their strategy seems to stem from the fact, that they are less afraid than their counterparts of doubling their opponents in part-score contracts.
For example when Kranyak played the Nickell team for the right to represent the US in Bali, Rodwell as North bid 3
♠ and lost 300 on the deal below
In the closed room Kranyak passed with the North hand and took 3
♦ four down for 800(!). Total swing 1100 points.
So do not tell me that pass is a committal action while bidding on is not. This is plain nonsense.
While non vulnerable preempts have got weaker over the years you would expect taking the money would also get more common.
But it seems to me the reluctance to leave doubles in if anything has grown, making wild preempts even more profitable.
For example in Bali there was a deal where Kranyak preempted against Italy at favorable vulnerability 3
♣ raised to 4
♣ by Wolpert.
This could have been been down 6 for 1400 by normal defense, but Bocchi left them off the hook and bid 4
♥ (6
♦ made 7 in the other room)
Last weekend the actual deal was:
The deal was played in 25 matches (50 teams) at 50 tables for 50 results.
We can assume that all East players opened 3
♣ and at almost all tables the bidding started as shown.
Result:
9 times East played 3
♣ doubled, 5 times down 4 for 800, 3 times down 3 for 500 and 1 time down 2 for 300
29 times South played 3
♦, 11 times making, 18 times one or two down
2 times South played 4
♦, once 2 down and once 4 down.
8 times North played 3NT (never from the South side), 4 times making and 4 times going down
2 times North played 3
♠ making and once with an overtrick
The datum score was 100 for North South!
At my table I was sitting North and doubled. My partner, to whom pass would probably never occur, bid 3
♦. I thought if 3
♦ makes, 3NT might also make. So I bid 3NT.
For once the deal proved me right and after the lead of the
♣J, I eventually managed 9 tricks.
(Of course the lead helps, but the contract can be made on any lead but a diamond, which is unlikely on the bidding. A diamond lead occurred once, probably after North bid 3NT directly).
Of course a single deal proves nothing.
Note that East, being white, had a fairly strong preempt by today's standard.
It is possible that 3
♣ can not be beaten and it is possible that there is a grand slam.
But how likely are these outcomes from South perspective?
Rainer Herrmann