| Return to: Solvers Rules and Instructions | Return to: District 6 Home Page |
July/Aug 1998
| Moderator: Steve Robinson | Due: September 17, 1998 |
| Problem 1 | IMPs | Vul: NS |
|   South Holds    -QJ65 
  -QT98765 
  -A2 
  -Void 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| What is your bid? |
Which suit to bid is easy. Level is the problem. In order to
decide the level, we have to know the meaning of partner's one notrump call. If West had passed, partner bids one notrump with
five or six point hands to keep the auction alive on hands that
could produce a game, xxx/xx/QJxx/Kxxx for instance. Partner also
bids one notrump to improve the contract, xxx/x/QJxxx/Kxxx for
instance. In competition, partner doesn't have to bid one notrump
with five or six HCPs to keep the auction alive or to improve the
contract. The opponents could have 23 HCPs between them and they
could apply the ax. If we have a powerhouse, we will get another
chance to bid and 1heart is not going to end the auction.
Therefore one notrump is a constructive bid. One notrump shows a
very good seven to a bad ten. You don't bid one notrump on a
misfit or on garbage. If you're 4144, isn't it better to let
the opponents play the hand? Since one notrump is constructive,
usually with two hearts, I like 3
. If game is cold opposite
K10/Jx/Kxxx/Jxxxx, how can you not invite game. Partner with good
points will bid game. Partner with garbage points will pass.
One expert agrees with me. They pay bonuses for vulnerable games.
Hopkins: "3
---Partly constructive and partly obstructive.
I expect partner to hold a spade card and a likely heart doubleton
for his one notrump call. Partner will evaluate his hand to play
in hearts. Partner should move with a heart card and primes.
Kxx/Kx/K10xx/J10xx would be optimal but most hands holding a spade
and heart honor will offer some play for game. Also, if the
opponents have a big club fit and a possible sacrifice or make,
this will make it harder to find."
Parker: "2
---My worry is that partner will start doubling
them if they compete at the three level. Then do I pull to
3
?"
Schwartz: "2
---The takeout double, holding four spades
and East's pass scares me. East refusal to bid two of a minor with
a probable decent hand implies heart values. If the opponents now
compete, I might reevaluate. Second choice is 4
since
partner won't be able to evaluate holdings like the K9x of spades."
Granovetter: "2
---Is this a joke? I would have opened
2
. Now that's scary to some of you, I suppose, but no less
scary than opening this 1
and trying to find a suitable
rebid. In any case, partner's hand probably doesn't match well,
and if it does, we may hear another call."
You're right, that is scary. Game is cold opposite AKx/Jx/xxxx/xxxx and you're opening a weak two.
Rawley: "2
---Natural and obvious; any other bid would
cause partner to overestimate the strength of my hand."
Lublin: "2
---Hand devalues over the double."
Two experts try game with their five loser hand. Partner
needs two winners which he should have, but does he have the right
two winners. However, this makes more sense than the wimpy 2
call.
Adams: "4
---Who knows what we can make or they can make?
Even if 4
goes down, EW might be stampeded into a foolish
sacrifice."
King: "4
---I am torn between bidding two and bidding
four. With the right cards in partner's hand (10xx/KJ/Kxxx/xxxx)
we could make 4
and they could be shut out of a making
5
. With the wrong cards xxx/x/Q10xx/KJ10xx we could go for
800 against a part score. I will choose the aggressive action."
If you're torn between two and four, what about three?
One should be aggressive when partner makes a free bid of one notrump.
| Problem 2 | IMPs | Vul: None |
|   South Holds    -J54 
  -AQ 
  -AQJT 
  -A987 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| What is your bid? |
A strong notrump without a spade stopper. How do the experts
handle that? One notrump, pass and 2
are legal bids.
Double, holding a doubleton heart, is an illegal bid. One does not
make a takeout double with shortness in the other major. Holding
a maximum notrump with East a third seat opener are good reasons to
overcall one notrump without a stopper. In third seat, East
sometimes has only four spades. You are strong enough that if you
pass, you could miss a cold game. If you are going to enter the
auction, its better to enter now when you can describe your hand.
It will be impossible to describe this hand if you pass.
Seven experts overcall one notrump.
Hopkins: "1NT---Right on HCPs and distribution. I can only hope partner has Qx or better in spades if we get to three notrump."
Parker: "1NT---Get it off your chest. If you pass then you will never know what is right. Besides I hate being end played five times on the same hand. I would rather play the hand and have my fate in my own hands."
Adams: "1NT---Pass and Double are out of the question.
2
is as flawed as one notrump. One notrump promises a
stopper, so when partner bids three notrump without one, this will
be my fault, but most other possible outcomes are good."
Rawley: "1NT---This hand is perfect for the bid except for the lack of a spade stopper. Any other call has more than one flaw."
Lublin: "1NT---Shows the strength and partner usually has stopper."
The following is an illegal bid. One cannot double one major
without support for the other major. What are you going to bid
when partner responds 2
?
King: "Double---All bids have problems, but partners don't always respond in hearts and AQ is not awful support. I don't like to bid one notrump without a stopper, but that is my only other choice."
Overcalling one notrump makes this hand easy to bid. If you do anything else, you will have problems every time its your turn. For no other reason, that's why one notrump is best.
| Problem 3 | IMPs | Vul: NS |
|   South Holds    -KQJ2 
  -K54 
  -65 
  -AQT7 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| What is your bid? |
I thought this was a simple problem. Partner has opened a vulnerable weak two. We have a good hand but we don't have a good fit. How do we handle that? Since partner could easily have AKJ10xx or AQJ10xx of diamonds we have to think about three notrump. However, partner could have KQJ10xx or QJ108765 where we have to play in a partscore. How do we find out which hand partner has? Simple! Invite.
One expert agrees with me. Two notrump has to be natural and forcing for one round.
Rawley: "2NT---Invitational; we belong in three notrump if partner has a maximum."
Two experts bash three notrump.
Hopkins: "3NT---Hope partner is serious about his vulnerable weak©two. If LHO has long hearts, I may be able to shut him out and if RHO has them, they might not be led."
Adams: "3NT---If I invite, I give the defense information on strength and the best lead. Therefore I sacrifice science to improve chance of making game. How will partner know which hand produces game? x/Qxx/KQJxxx/xxx has little play, T/xxx/KQJxxx/J9x has a good shot, and x/xxx/AKTxxx/xxx is excellent on a spade lead."
Schwartz: "Double---Partner should be allowed to pull at this vulnerability with close to running diamonds."
King: "Double---This problem depends on how sound partner's weak©two's are at this vulnerability. I have almost five tricks in my own hand and a clear lead. Even if partner has good enough diamonds to make three notrump, we could collect at least 500."
Two experts pass.
Parker: "Pass---At matchpoints I would double without thinking
twice. Here I will go for plus 50-100 and be happy. Since not
everyone bids 2
weak, the opponents have been put in a
situation not everyone will face, so I will take advantage of the
swing by not being overly aggressive."
Granovetter: "Pass---Chicken. But you never know. West is still there."
What is this? In problem one, you said that you would open
the 4©7 hand 2
. On this hand, you don't even see if partner
has the top diamonds.
One expert tries to get a number.
Lublin: "3
---Want to get them up."
If you had to make the final call, three notrump would be a good try. However, you can test the waters. At the table, South jumped to three notrump, got doubled and went for 500.
| Problem 4 | IMPs | Vul: None |
|   South Holds    -6 
  -AKQ87 
  -K7654 
  -65 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| What is your bid? |
Is two notrump forcing? 2
is not game forcing in
competition. You have to have some way to show a ten©point hand
with clubs. Since partner could have forced with 2
, two
notrump is not forcing. Do we want to be in game? Not one expert
forced to game which answers that question. If I thought this hand
was worth a game bid, I would bid 3
. AKQxx plays like a sixªcard suit and with partner's spade stopper preventing us from
getting tapped, we could very easily make 4
. For this to
happen, partner would have to have a diamond fit. Partner bid
clubs and then notrump, so most of his strength will be in the
black suits which doesn't do us much good. Therefore which
partscore? Two notrump, 3
and 3
are the choices.
One expert agrees with me and supports partner. This puts the
singleton spade to use. 3
is the cheapest call. If partner
doesn't want to play in 3
opposite delayed support, he can
always try 3
or 3
.
Parker: "3
---My first reaction was to bid an automatic
3
but partner is probably 4-1-2-6 or 4-2-2-5, so we should
play in clubs so he can ruff spades in dummy and pitch on my
hearts."
Hopkins: "3
---I do not believe we are in a forcing
auction so I am suggesting this as the final contract. I expect
some support since partner would likely have rebid 3
with a
six card suit."
Schwartz: "3
---Allows a preference to 3
(or
3
choice of games) if partner is inclined. If partner is
minimum, should be safe spot. Would probably force with 3
if
vulnerable."
One expert thinks 3
is forcing.
Adams: "3
---Let partner know my extra distribution so
an intelligent game can be reached. 3
is forcing."
Lublin: "3
---Shows weakness but may have game."
If two notrump is not forcing, then corrective bids of 3
and 3
are also not forcing. To force, you reverse or
cuebid.
Three experts pass two notrump. I don't see why two notrump is going to play well. Your heart strength is opposite partner's doubleton at best and your diamond suit is very weak. Since partner might have only one spade stopper, this hand will not play well.
King: "Pass---I can see good arguments for 3
or 3
also. If partner is 4-2-2-5, this contract seems best. If he is
3-1-3-6, then a minor suit contract is better. However, given the
failure of East to raise spades it is more likely that partner has
four."
East probably doesn't have any strength so how can he raise.
Granovetter: "Pass---Could bid 3
, if he understands it
as not forcing. 3
shows a good 5-5. But I doubt he will
understand and I doubt we make anything anyway."
Rawley: "Pass---Partner rates to be 5-5 in the black suits since East didn't raise spades. This is a misfit so I should stop bidding."
| Problem 5 | IMPs | Vul: None |
|   South Holds    -J854 
  -AT76 
  -6 
  -KJ54 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| What is your bid? |
There are two conflicting arguments about what to bid.
Partner's double, which shows four spades, is asking you to bid
spades, which you have, so that says bid. The Law of Total Tricks
says pass. You assume partner is 4-1-4-4 for total trick
computation. We have eight spades and eight clubs between us and
they have eight hearts and eight diamonds between them. Sixteen
total tricks. If we can take ten tricks in spades, they should be
able to take six tricks in hearts. However, we have a double fit
in clubs and they have a double fit in diamonds. This leads to an
increase in the number of total tricks. If we can make four
spades, which is a big if, we should get at least 300 against
3
doubled. Passing will be a big bonanza if we can't make
game. If they make 3
doubled for 530, the Law says that
4
doubled will go for 500.
Four experts agree with me and make a penalty pass. This
loses only if we can make 4
but get 3
doubled one
trick.
Parker: "Pass---I have a singleton to lead, two or three defensive tricks and it sounds that suits are breaking badly. There is no sure game in sight so go for the biggest plus."
Schwartz: "Pass---The Law makes this clear, if we have game, should beat this enough to compensate. Also would have to guess what game to bid."
Granovetter: "Pass---Easy, since I just finished Larry Cohen's course on competitive bidding at Bridge Today University [BridgeToday.com] -- thanks for the plug."
If you're not going for the throat, then what? Two experts
cuebid. This cuebid is a choice of games cuebid. Partner with
four spades bids 4
. With fewer than four spades, partner
bids four notrump, choice of minors. This is the way you avoid
playing a 4-3 spade fit.
Hopkins: "4
---I hope partner bids something I can pass
such as 4
or 5
. If partner bids four notrump, I hope it
means pick my better minor because that is what I will do. My only
worry is that partner may get too ambitious."
Adams: "4
---This hand is worth a 4
bid, but I might
as well protect against partner not having a four-card major.
Without one we will reach 5
(or 6
if partner has a good
hand). Pass could be the right bid given the Heart ten."
Remember the Law assumes perfect defense. It could be right
to lead your stiff diamond to try to get ruffs or it could be right
to lead a club or spade in order to tap declarer. If you're a bad
opening leader, 4
is a good bid.
One expert is wimpy. Not only does he not go for the throat, he's willing to play a partscore. He is not going to hang partner.
King: "3
---Very wimpy, but partner is only balancing and
should expect me to hold about this much. Three notrump, 4
and pass all have arguments for them, but could not only be wrong
on this hand, but also discourage partner from re-opening in the
future."
One expert bids what he thinks he can make.
Lublin: "4
---Should be automatic."
Following the Law gets points in my column and gets points at the table. This problem is no exception.
| Expert / Problem | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Score | Steve Robinson | 3 |
1NT | 2NT | 3 |
Pass | 490 |
| Robbie Hopkins | 3 |
1NT | 3NT | 3 |
4 |
420 |
| Alan Schwartz | 2 |
1NT | Double | 3 |
Pass | 420 |
| Steve Parker | 2 |
1NT | Pass | 3 |
Pass | 410 |
| Lloyd Rawley | 2 |
1NT | 2NT | Pass | Pass | 390 |
| Glenn Lublin | 2 |
1NT | 3 |
3 |
4 |
370 |
| Matt Granovetter | 2 |
Double | Pass | Pass | Pass | 330 |
| Fred King | 2 |
Double | Double | Pass | 3 |
270 |
Don Berman, Web Master.