[pescetom]

I was intrigued by this diamond-heavy variant on the The Bridge World Death Hand which appeared as board 18 on August 31st and effectively assigned the mixed title to Italy:

Italy vs China

And saw Meckstroth struggle in the seniors:

USA vs France


What are your thoughts, in particular about the merits of a 2♥ rebid and the possible alternatives?
Did anyone understand better than me the 2NT 3♥ continuation of Italy?
Was it wise or just lucky to try 6♠ knowing we lack both black kings, rather than stop in 5♠ as did France with less information?
Could China have found the clubs lead and become champions, given the auction?

[mike777]

I love the reverse into 2H.
Why?
Playing Reverse Flannery, partner will very seldom have 4H, for me when they do they will have 12+ or a poor 6-7. In other words, small risk.

I dont know the Italian auction.

I suppose in an alternative auction you might rebid 2NT AFTER ONE SPADE.

[mw64ahw]

2♥ is a safeish play as you can always return to ♠ if supported. No idea what 2N-3♥ means unless 2♥ shows 3♠ (with 2♠ the ♥ reverse) and 2N showing the fit asking for ... ?

[pescetom]

mw64ahw, on 2025-September-02, 15:59, said:

No idea what 2N-3♥ means unless 2♥ shows 3♠ (with 2!S the ♥ reverse) and 2N showing the fit asking for ... ?

Me neither. I suspect it is something like that, some higher level Italians play a "Multirever" which I never bothered to pin down.
I will try to contact the players involved and find out more.

[smerriman]

According to a PDF I found, Italy plays 2♥ as natural or 6+♦, and 2NT asks which. I guess 3♥ showed the latter.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2025-September-02, 15:01, said:

What are your thoughts, in particular about the merits of a 2♥ rebid and the possible alternatives?

I don't see making a natural reverse into 2♥ with a doubleton. smerriman says that 2♥ could be an artificial bid in which case that would be a systemic bid. In a Master Solver's panel, I don't predict more than 1 or 2 out of 30 making a 2♥ bid, and maybe nobody.

[mw64ahw]

smerriman, on 2025-September-02, 16:34, said:

According to a PDF I found, Italy plays 2♥ as natural or 6+♦, and 2NT asks which. I guess 3♥ showed the latter.

Useful in that it frees up other bids to show further shapes

[Cyberyeti]

It's not a good slam on a club lead, a natural reverse into 2♥ should make that more likely.

We would bid:

1♦-1♠-2N (GF not bal)-3♣(forced without extreme shape)-3♠(6+♦=3♠) and on from there

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2025-September-02, 16:34, said:

According to a PDF I found, Italy plays 2♥ as natural or 6+♦, and 2NT asks which. I guess 3♥ showed the latter.

Thanks!
Could you please supply a link or copy, here or in PM?

[pescetom]

 johnu, on 2025-September-02, 21:01, said:

I don't see making a natural reverse into 2♥ with a doubleton. smerriman says that 2♥ could be an artificial bid in which case that would be a systemic bid. In a Master Solver's panel, I don't predict more than 1 or 2 out of 30 making a 2♥ bid, and maybe nobody.

I remember reading somewehere on this forum that when TWB polled another 2=3=6=2 hand back in 1992, the most popular choice was 2♥ followed by 2NT and a few 3♣. That hand had very similar majors, skimpy Axxxxx diamonds and HH clubs, so it is easy to imagine that this hand would have received less votes for the latter two options. But times change and I can imagine that many people those days played 2NT over a rever without any conventional implications and that nobody would have considered opening either death hand in NT, for instance.

FWIW I polled this hand on that other forum and only 2 voted for 2♥, with the majority in 3♦ followed by 2NT. But the majority of people voting there are no better than we are, so it is hardly a guide to what should happen in the world finals. @sfi who is world class voted 2♥, maybe he could illuminate us why. @mikeh will certainly have some thoughts too.

I don't buy the argument that the fact someone conventionalizes a bid makes it completely artificial or that nobody would (still) make this bid in natural without discussion. It looks to me as if 2♥ here is one of those "natural conventions" that are more or less dictated by the limitations of the natural system and were being bid spontaneously long before they were conventionalized (to make the follow-ups more productive or to associate game force or whatever): like bidding the fourth suit as the only forcing bid remaining, or bidding 3♣ over opener's jump rebid of 2NT to find out more about his hand.

Even at my actual level I would seriously consider 2♥ over 2NT or 3♦ here, and I don't see us floundering much even though partner never heard of the death hand or saw a two card reverse. On the actual layout it would go 1♦-1♠;2♥-3♣;3♠... and then partner will hopefully explore slam in spades.

[smerriman]

 pescetom, on 2025-September-03, 08:46, said:

Thanks!
Could you please supply a link or copy, here or in PM?

This was the first result googling dalpozzo porta convention card: https://files.spazio...93be45863d4.pdf

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2025-September-03, 13:50, said:

This was the first result googling dalpozzo porta convention card: https://files.spazio...93be45863d4.pdf

Thanks, I saw the card but without the notes.

So basically the cheapest rever is either natural or artificial FM with 6+ in the minor, 4th colour (or 2N if cheaper) asks.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2025-September-03, 09:25, said:

I remember reading somewehere on this forum that when TWB polled another 2=3=6=2 hand back in 1992

From a very old Bridge World Master Solvers Club, there was a hand something like this

---

But the hearts may have been better, like AQJ or something.

IIRC, the "winning" rebid was 3♣, but the comment I remember is one panelist saying that he's never had a bad result jump shifting on the lower of his singleton aces, as if that happens more than a couple of times in your bridge lifetime.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2025-September-03, 15:06, said:

From a very old Bridge World Master Solvers Club, there was a hand something like this

---

But the hearts may have been better, like AQJ or something.

IIRC, the "winning" rebid was 3♣, but the comment I remember is one panelist saying that he's never had a bad result jump shifting on the lower of his singleton aces, as if that happens more than a couple of times in your bridge lifetime.

My memory is not what it was, but I think I remember reading on this forum about a 3=2=6=2 hand something like KQx AQ Axxxxx KQ, with the vote I mentioned, polled in 1992. Maybe some TBW subscriber can help.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2025-September-03, 15:45, said:

My memory is not what it was, but I think I remember reading on this forum about a 3=2=6=2 hand something like KQx AQ Axxxxx KQ, with the vote I mentioned, polled in 1992. Maybe some TBW subscriber can help.

With that hand, wouldn't almost everybody open 2NT? Or if they opened 1♦, rebid 2NT? Who would rebid 3♦ with that poor diamond suit?

[Huibertus]

I assume 2♥ was artificial, maybe a ♠ transfer showing a strong hand with 3♠ and solid 6 card ♦ (I used to rebid 3NT with this type of hand) or some puppet.

As for the final contract one should bid, the only question is "Is East East and is West West or have they switched hands". Making the slam is decided by the ♣ lead or the lack of it only, in the absence of bidding purely a matter of luck.

[pescetom]

 Huibertus, on 2025-September-04, 02:58, said:

I assume 2♥ was artificial, maybe a ♠ transfer showing a strong hand with 3♠ and solid 6 card ♦ (I used to rebid 3NT with this type of hand) or some puppet.

As for the final contract one should bid, the only question is "Is East East and is West West or have they switched hands". Making the slam is decided by the ♣ lead or the lack of it only, in the absence of bidding purely a matter of luck.

The Italian 2♥ was semi-artificial, see the System Notes following the Systems Card: the cheapest reverse may be natural or may show a 6 card minor, the fourth suit (or 2NT if more economical) asks for details.

Yes any slam goes down on a clubs lead, but the diamonds chosen by Meckstroth are doomed in any case. Spades is clearly superior, the questions I think are finding the fit and then deciding whether to risk slam lacking both black Kings. Italy did and thus they became world champions, but I have sympathy with the French who stopped in 5.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2025-September-03, 16:35, said:

With that hand, wouldn't almost everybody open 2NT? Or if they opened 1♦, rebid 2NT? Who would rebid 3♦ with that poor diamond suit?

In those days I imagine it was unthinkable for many to bid NT with an unbalanced hand. I'm not sure that original death hand is worth 2NT with those diamonds, but I concede that a downgrade to 1NT might well be easier to bid than a 1♦ start.

I agree that 3♦ would be a poor choice, I doubt any TBW panelists chose it.
Many BW pollees did choose it for the Herning hand, I don't have much sympathy with that either.

[pescetom]

I found it
Wrong year but more or less the right hand.

Phil King wrote in 2013:

Quote

The Bridge World panel tends to recommend 2♥ as the rebid on this pattern (eg KQJ A2 A76542 AQ March 1994).

On that occasion, 2♥ finished comfortably ahead of 2NT with 3♣ a distant third. There were, more justifiably than here, many complaints over the failure to open 2NT, but that was unthinkable in the Kaplan era.

From url="https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/59719-bw-hand-of-death-comes-acallin/page__p__719775__hl__%2Bdeath+%2Bhand__fromsearch__1#entry719775"]this[/url] older discussion.

[DavidKok]

1♦-1♠; 1NT (16+ max 3♠ or 11-15 6(+)♦ max 2♠, 3♥, 3♣). Some might play 2♣ (6(+)♦, wide ranging) instead

In all seriousness, the death hand is a system gap. Either you live with the inability to show it or you fix it. Sorry if this is rude, I am not very interested in discussing how exactly to fail to describe the hand. The fact that this hand type has been a documented issue for over 30 years is all the more reason to deal with it (possibly through resigned acceptance).