Deadwood (at last!)
I have finally manoeuvred myself into a position to explain 'Deadwood' or optional key-card asking. To some this must seem like a box set experience but I am going to recap, a sort of 'Previously in Deadwood'.
First let's be clear about origination: I had nothing to do with the invention of this convention. I only coined the moniker, one more in a line from Blackwood though Redwood, MinorWood, Voidwood and so on. Although Blackwood is an asking bid for aces, those others count the five key-cards (aces plus king of trumps) and include some way of locating the trump queen as well.
Deadwood: when a minor has been bid strongly, four-minor is a key-card ask in that suit where the cheapest response denotes a poor hand in the light of previous bidding.
It's this step-one response, the Deadwood Stage, for a bad hand that supplies the name and (I hope) reinforces memory. The other responses can be as you normally play when the asking bid is four no-trump. So assuming '30-41', when four clubs is the Deadwood ask, the responses are.
| 4♦ | "Bad hand for slam" | |||
| 4♥ | 0/3 key-cards | |||
| 4♠ | 1/4 key-cards | |||
| 4NT | 2 key-cards, no ♣Q | |||
| 5♣ | 2 key-cards plus ♣Q | |||
After the Deadwood Stage opener can insist on key-card responses by making the cheapest bid, others, including 4NT, are suggestions to play. Thus,
| … | 4♣1 | ||
| 4♦2 | 4♥3 | ||
| 4NT4 | |||
1. Deadwood for clubs
2. "You're not going to like it"
3. "I need to know" – instead 4NT/5 would be to play
4. Step-2 so 1 or 4 key-cards (presumably the former)
What about those weasel words, "when a minor has been bid strongly"? That's a matter for partnership discussion but the safety net of the Deadwood Stage suggests a liberal adoption. Accepting the key-card ask is analogous to accepting a slam-try, say by an exchange of control-bids. For some time I have played these sequences as setting trumps and asking:
| 1♥ | 1♠ | ||
| 2♦ | 3♣* | ||
| 3NT | 4♦ | ||
After a fourth-suit three clubs, responder removes a no-trump game to four of a minor; that must surely be strong and by agreement it was a key-card ask. But opener didn't always obligingly call no-trumps which made depending on this device problematic.
| 1♥ | 1♠ | ||
| 2♦ | 3♣* | ||
| 3♥ | 4♦ | ||
What about four diamonds now? Whilst most would think it forcing (though some might not) it could be nothing stronger than a hand that was hoping for a club stop and to pass 3NT. This is undeniably murky compared the sequence above, surely much clearer sky is afforded by,
| 1♥ | 1♠ | ||
| 2♦ | 4♦ | ||
Where four diamonds is Deadwood – whip-crack-away!
Published Saturday 6.Jun.2015