Washington Bridge League Solver's Club  -  Jan/Feb 2006

Moderator: Steve Robinson    

Congratulations to Ellen Cherniavsky who came in first with a score of 490. She wins a free entry to the Unit Game and will be invited to be on a future panel. Second was Larry Kahn with a score of 460 Tied for third were Yi Zhong, Mark Chen, Joe Lentz, Bob Boorman and John Lawrence with a score of 440. Eighth was David Chechelashvila with a score of 430. Ninth was Michael Pearlman with a score of 420. Tied for tenth were David Rodney, Terry Carpenter, Noble Shore, Jim Wakefield and Josh Donn with a score of 410. Tied for fifteenth were Linda Gaylor, Barbara Israel, Elliot Grant, Sam Keiter, Craig Olson, Robert Stone and Dave Abelow with a score of 400. The average score of the 165 solvers was 326. The average score of the experts was 390.

All readers are encouraged to send answers and/or new problems to Steve Robinson, 2891 S. Abingdon St. #A2 Arlington, VA, 22206-1329. In addition to the winner receiving a free play at the WBL Unit Game, Steve will play with anyone who gets a perfect score or who exactly matches all five of his answers. If you send a self-addressed stamped envelope to the above address along with your answers, I will send you a copy of the new problems to ensure that you can meet his next deadline. You can pick up a copy of the problems at the WBL Unit Game in Maryland, and can send answers or requests for problems to robinswr@erols.com. You can also see and answer the problems at the WBL web site. WBL Solvers Club uses Washington Standard as published July 1996.

I personally score all the problems. If a majority of the solvers vote for an answer, and the answer is reasonable I will give that answer 100 points. I will not give 100 points to an answer that I consider bad no matter how many experts vote for it. There are times when I want to make a point. I will give that answer 100 points and will therefore give the majority answer 90 points. For the other answers I consider how good the answer is and how many experts vote for it for its score. If you submitted an answer that got 20 points, that bid would get a bad score at the table. A good exercise would be to figure out why I gave your answer 20 points. You might have misread the problem.

The book Washington Standard second edition is out.  If you are a serious bridge player, this book is a must.  You can purchase a copy from Steve for $25.00 at the Unit Game, at tournaments or can send him a check for $29.05 that includes $4.05 for priority mail. 

If partner has the Jack of hearts and spades break, you can take six spades, three hearts and a diamond. That’s making 4. There are two sure ways to get to 4. You could jump directly to 4. A direct 4 has the advantage of being natural and preemptive. The second way is to pass and then bid 4. Passing allows you to change your mind if East rebids his spades. If West rebids 1NT, you might get a chance to play 1NT doubled. If East was kidding about his spade bid, West might actually have enough points to jump to 2NT. You’ll get information as to the opponent’s distribution. On the other hand, if the opponents have a minor-suit fit, passing gives them room to find it. Seven experts bid 4 directly.

Parker: ”4---If 2 is natural so is this. Any other bid such as double will just get things complicated later on. I think I can make 4 so I bid it. Simple game.”

Woolsey: ”4---Riddle: What is AKQJxx called? Answer: It is called trumps. A takeout double will be right only if North has hearts and East has five spades. Against that, the 4-call could put West under a lot of pressure if he has a long diamond suit or a minor 2-suiter, either of which is quite likely. In addition, if I double and partner bids clubs, will he then take my spade bids as natural? I don't want to take the chance that he will think otherwise.”

Deverin: ”4---Why not?  West may have only four spades, and partner needs only to have Jxx in hearts to give us a good shot. Also, it's pre-emptive.”

You figure to make 4 unless West has more then four spades.

Theurer: ”4---I'm not sure if I can make this, but it also gives the opponents a guess. They may have a big fit in one/both minors and a good save or make there, but it also could be partner with the minors. Tough to double to try to find hearts, since after the expected club response, spade bids by me will sound like cuebids. Just the heart Jack in partner's hand gives me a play if RHO doesn't have five spades.”

If the opponents have a good save, they will usually find it. With neither vulnerable, +300 would be a good IMP score.

Lublin: ”4---It has to be natural and all I need is the heart Jack to make it and not a 5-1 break in trump.”

Or a 7-0 break!

Landen: ”4---I bid what I think (hope?) I can make. At least this bid shouldn't confuse partner. Doubling and then later bidding spades, at whatever level, will muddy the waters unnecessarily.”

Adams: ”4---I really want to double on this hand, but I do not know any follow-up over partners club bids where spades are natural. This is probably the only way to bid naturally. 2, hoping for a second bid is overly hopeful. If I thought double followed by 4 showed Spades, I would double. If they save in 5, I have to guess.”

Three experts make a takeout double. I don’t think they thought about the follow-ups. One fatal scenario is partner bidding clubs. All spade bids by you might be interpreted as cuebids or splinters. If partner does bid hearts how can you be sure he’s not 3352?

Cappelletti: ”Double---Here the double is even more clear since partner might bid hearts. I have seen a similar problem solved by Schenken's rule that a second major suit "cuebid" where you have other cuebids available is to play.”

King: ”Double---2 may be natural, but it is non-forcing. If partner has Jxxxx of Hearts and out, game is almost cold and even with less, there is a play.”

Roman: ”Double---It's true that 2 here is natural, but it would be a serious underbid, since we obviously want to play in game. 4 if partner bids them, 4 spades if he doesn't.”

One expert agrees with me and passes. If I was vulnerable and they were not I would be more worried about the opponents finding a cheap save.

Hopkins: ”Pass---My hope is that 1NT will come back to me so I can double for penalties. Also, I should be able to double Diamond (or Club) contracts for take-out later, if necessary.”

One expert voted for Reagan (conservative). With 19 HCPs, why do you think there’s going to be further bidding?  2 is mostly played as natural with opener’s minor or 1NT played as Michaels. I like 1NT to be an opening 1NT, 2 natural and 2 Michaels. A lot of players respond on nothing so you have to be able to show a strong balanced hand.    

Schwartz: ”2---Only reasonable way to get to spades is to bid them now. Might be able to get hearts in later.”

Don’t create unusual bidding sequences because partner might not be able to field them.

 Partner has made a takeout double. You have a four-card heart suit, a diamond stopper, a five-card club suit and a game-almost-force, four pieces of information that you want to tell partner. And it would be nice to play the final contract from your side. There’s no system that would tell partner everything. Which pieces of information are you going to show? It’s usually right to play in an eight-card major suit fit, hearts assuming partner has four of them. However, your hearts are the 6543. Give partner a typical takeout double AJxxAJxxxQxxx, 3NT has very little play and 4 just needs a hearts to break 3-2. You could just as easily give partner AKQxJxxxQQxxx and 4 has no play. I try to be consistent. When partner makes a takeout double, I try to bid a four-card or longer major if that is possible. If partner does not have four hearts, you probably belong in 3NT. If you want partner to choose between hearts and notrump and you’re playing Lebensohl, you bid 2NT which forces partner to bid 3. You then bid 3, which is game-forcing Stayman with a stopper. 2NT followed by 3NT shows a hand with a doubtful stopper such as Qxx or Jxxx. The type of stopper, that you want partner to run with a singleton or void. This is just the opposite of Lebensohl over 1NT. The logic is who is more likely to have the stopper. After a takeout doubler it’s the responder, after the 1NT-opener is the opener.

Two experts agree with me and bid 2NT.

Woolsey: ”2NT---I assume we are playing Lebensohl. I will follow with 3NT. This shows doubt about notrump. Partner will run with a stiff small diamond, and then we can get to 4 or 5. That is better than insisting on hearts and finding partner with only three-card support.”

Woolsey is not even going to show his four-card heart suit.

Schwartz: ”2NT---Followed by 3, Stayman with a stopper. If my diamond King is not worth anything this is an overbid but at least I get to 4 when it’s right.”

Stayman with a stopper! If partner is flat, he might not show his four-card major knowing that you are suggesting notrump.

Four experts cuebid. Usually when you cuebid in this type of auctions you have two places to play. The cuebid will make sure that you don’t play in a 4-3 heart fit. You promise another bid when you cuebid so partner should not jump to 4 with extras. The worst scenario is doubler, who happens to be 3325, bids 4. 3 followed by 3NT over 3 shows four hearts and a diamond stopper.

Adams: ”3---Followed by 4 or 5 if partner jumps in Spades. Shows hearts that will not play well opposite three-card suit.”

Hopkins: ”3---I am going to raise 3 to 4 and bid 3NT over 3. The only worry I have if we end up in 4 is that I might have wrong-sided the contract.”

I’d be more worried my king of diamonds being worthless.

King: ”3---Either 3NT or 4 could be the best game. I want to start with a game force and see what partner bids.”

Landen: ”3---I need the added flexibility that the cuebid affords to maximize the probability of reaching the correct strain. If partner doesn't bid hearts I will bid 3NT.”

Three experts bid 3NT. Can’t partner have AxxxKQJx-Qxxxx. 4 easily makes and 3NT is down. If you had to make the final decision, 3NT would be a reasonable shot but Lebensohl allows you to show doubt about notrump. Woolsey ignores the heart suit also but at least plays in a suit contract when doubler is short in diamonds.

Cappelletti: ”3NT---Nine tricks in notrump probably more likely than three or fewer losers in hearts.”

Parker: ”3NT---Too many times partner puts down a dummy of 8762 of hearts and we can make 3NT but go down in 4 because of a bad trump split. I should have six tricks in my hand and hope partner has three. I might get tapped out of trump in both hands and never score my clubs in hearts. If I bid 3 I am forced to bid 4 over 3, since 3NT bid shows four spades if I don't raise hearts.”

Roman: ”3NT---If my hearts were a four-card suit (say J10xx or better) I would bid 2NT (Lebensohl) and then 3NT, telling partner I had two places to play, but not here.”

Two experts follow my rule. Opposite a takeout double bid a major whenever possible. The problem with 3 is that it is not flexible. You will play in hearts, even opposite Jxx.

Deverin: ”3---Jump to show a little extra opposite partner's double. With bad hearts, he may bid 3NT to play or 3 at which point you will bid 4.”

Over 3, partner will not look for a different strain. His only two options are to pass or bid 4.

Lublin: ”3---Invitational because of bad suit and diamond King.”

One expert bids his strong club suit. Over 3, partner will think about 3NT and 5 as possible game contracts, not 4.  With no club help, he might pass 3 with a fourteen count.

Theurer: ”3---Tough problem - difficult to find both correct level and strain. My hearts are so bad I'm not sure I want to play in that suit even opposite some decent four-card holdings, and he could have only three of them. I'm tempted use Hamman's rule and bid 3NT, but I'd need the clubs to run plus three fast major suit winners from partner.  Besides, being nonvulnerable I don't think I need to be quite so pushy. Partner might find another call and we can still get to game, but if he has a minimum, 3 could be our only making spot (example hand for partner: KQxxAQxxxQxxx - RHO didn't raise diamonds, increasing the chance partner doesn't have a stiff diamond).”

When in doubt make the most flexible bid.

    You are dealt AxAQJ10K10987A2. Partner opens 1 and you are thinking about how you are going to get to slam when RHO bids Michaels and he’s vulnerable. Double you say, hoping they will end up in hearts. Double says that you have at least 10 HCPs and can double at least one of their suits. Double is like a redouble of a takeout double. When you redouble a takeout double you want to double the opponents if they land in one of your suits. You want partner to double if they land in one of his suits. LHO bids 2NT asking for overcaller’s minor and sadly the Michaels bidder bids 3. He has clubs and hearts. You pass hoping that partner can double.  Maybe you should double but what if partner has a singleton club. You have your lead ready, the ace of clubs, when  ---

Cappelletti: ”Pass---Your partner merely has ten points (or more) and fewer than three spades. Simply defend and try to go plus.”

Partner’s double is forcing. Forcing means that YOU CAN’T PASS. Since the opponents are not playing in hearts, partner has a penalty double of hearts. Where are their tricks coming from? They are in at best an eight-card club fit, have less than half the points and partner’s hearts are behind the Michaels bidder. This should be bloody.

Landen: ”Pass---Partner probably intends his pass as forcing, but what can I bid? 3NT wth no tricks? Double with little defense? If we can make game then they should go down a couple of tricks here (the four of clubs is on the table before I pick up my pass card) so we'll only lose five IMPs more or less.”

A lead out of turn would be bad for the defense since declarer can now bar a trump lead.

Roman: ”Pass---I guess I'm being asked if partner's pass is forcing. No, it's not.”

I probably should have given the pass zero points but I was feeling generous.

Two experts have a different interpretation of partner’s double of 2.

Deverin: ”Pass---I assume partner's double shows a small spade raise.  (I didn't buy your book.)  He doesn't have much and you don't either, so quit now before they find a game they can make.”

Hopkins: ”Pass---This depends strictly on your agreements and I'm not sure if there is a standard. If partner's double just showed a raise to 2 (my agreement with all partners), then you have nothing further to say. If partner shows a penalty oriented hand (in analogy to standard practice when they Michaels over our one-of-a-minor opening, then you should double.”

    Three experts agree with me and make the correct bridge bid. The opponents have given you a chance for a jackpot and only three experts join me and cash in.

Parker: ”Double---Pass by partner is forcing so I must bid. I have three clubs and no long suit so a double is mandatory. Pass by him just denies three clubs and three spades.”

Woolsey: ”Double---Partner has announced that we have the balance of strength. He doesn't have a spade fit, and he figures to have a doubleton club or he wouldn't want to defend. He also figures to have hearts under control. Where will the opponents take any tricks? The play figures to go: Trump lead, and declarer plays on hearts. I overruff dummy on the third round of hearts and if the second round of trumps hasn't been played I play it, removing dummy's last trump. End of the line for declarer. I think +800 is a lot more likely than -670, with +500 the most likely estimate.”

Notice the trump lead. Lead trumps when you have the balance of the HCPs to stop possible ruffs.

King: ”Double---I think partner's pass is forcing. With a better hand I would have doubled 2NT, so partner should not expect much more than this.”

Four experts fail to cash their lottery ticket.

Theurer: ”3---Partner's pass is forcing and he clearly has the red suits and is hoping I can double clubs. My holding there isn't good enough, and besides, my hand is dead minimum overall. At matchpoints I might chance a double trying to get +200, but at IMPs I can't take that chance - better to bid something and hope to find our best contract.  Partner may only have the same strength I have so can't bid 3NT unless he shows extras.”

Lublin: ”3---Partner is likely to have hearts and diamonds and if he bids 3 I bid 3NT.”

Schwartz: ”3NT---I am going to assume the opponents are sane and 2NT shows real minor preference as they have pass and redouble to make partner pick a suit. At matchpoints I would chance double but IMPs its too big a risk and they probably won't be able to double 3NT. Partner must have a heart stopper on this auction so don't want to fool around with 3. This auction is forcing or I would pass.”

The opponents could be sane, West holding xKJ9xxxxAQ10xx for instance, and with trump leads +800 is easy.

Adams: ”3NT---Partner has hearts stopped, I have clubs stopped, and partner expects me to bid again. Maybe down two will be a push VS 3 making, maybe partner will have the real deal and we go plus.”

It’s important in partnerships to know which bids are forcing and which bids can be passed.