Bizarro Deal

Segment two of the final/playoffs in the Netherlands had it’s share of Bizarro hands.

Here is one of them.  Board 30

Dealer: E Vul: None	North ♠ 96 ♥ 865 ♦ K96 ♣ A10753
West ♠ AKQJ752 ♥ – ♦ AQJ2 ♣ K6		East ♠ – ♥ AKJ10943 ♦ 10874 ♣ QJ
	South ♠ 10843 ♥ Q72 ♦ 53 ♣ 9842

What should East do?  At a lot of tables East opened 4H which seems pretty reasonable.  Some East’s opened 1H which seems okay too.  Your choice.   But what should West do?   Some West’s bid 4S.  East could pass (some did) or bid 5H (some did).  In any case over bidding 4S led to East-West playing a major suit game at the four or five level.  On occasion West bid 6S.  Simons (Indonesia) in the Venice Cup made a bid that I really don’t like.  She bid 6NT hoping for a dummy entry I suppose.  I think the play and defense best be shrouded in mystery but Simons did make it.  In the other room Stockdale passed 4H which generally seems like a better action than 6NT but losts imps.

In the Bermuda Bowl final I noticed that Wooldridge for  USA 2 bid 6S while Verhees for the Netherlands passed 4S.  Let’s look at the play at Wooldridge’s table.  North WIjs led a spade, a very good lead and Wooldridge led a small club from his hand.  WIJS won the CA as Muller played the C9.  It appears that Wijs took the C9 as a count signal while Muller meant it as suit preference.  So he thought Muller had an even number of clubs.  In any case he found the only return to let Wooldridge make the hand a small diamond.  I am trying to think of why he did this.  did he think Wooldridge had Kx of clubs and that on a passive (spade) return he would have enough tricks?  The only hope was to find Muller with the DA?  I don’t quite understand the thought process.  In any case this decision was a 22 imp swing!