District 8 Solvers Forum -- April 2006

 by Scott Merritt, Abuja, Nigeria

Greetings from sunny and hot Abuja, Nigeria. Currently, it is just over 100 degrees, and we are in the midst of the Harmatan, which is basically a three-month dust storm caused by lack of rain and wind blowing south from the Sahara desert. I have brought my first-born son, little Rory Lucas Merritt, to this garden oasis. So maybe there is more going for it than the weather.

1. Matchpoints, none vulnerable                             

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
2C	100	7	13
2H	80	6	36
Pass	60	1	23
DBL	60	2	27
1NT	40	0	2

West	North	East	South
1D	DBL	1S	???

What is your call as South holding:  J2   9864   543   KQ95 ?

Matchpoints is a game where the goal is to make the bid that’s most likely to score the most points. This problem gets to the heart of this statement. Bidding hearts has the  possibility of being very wrong, but it also is your most likely plus score. Bidding the very leadable club suit can never lose the post mortem. Unfortunately, you are bidding the unboss suit, and partner has asked you to bid a major and you passed up on the chance. The panel will set me straight:

WALKER : "2C. If LHO raises to 2S, I've at least gotten partner off to the best lead. If LHO rebids 2D (what I'm expecting), I can continue stretching these values with a 2H bid.”

WILLIAMS : "2C. I have a "bad good" hand and I want clubs led. I have a clear preference for clubs over hearts. Pass is weak as you have some values. 2H misdiscribes your hand.”

KESSLER:  “2C. I bid what I want partner to lead. If partner cannot bid again, it is not our hand, and if he does we can still find hearts. Blowing tricks on opening leads at matchpoints will guarantee low scores.”

KNIEST:  “2C. There's a good chance that we'll defend, and I certainly want the club lead as opposed to a heart. If lefty bids 2D and I'm in pass out, I bid 2H. You have values, and must bid.”

This seems like too much talent to go against the grain on this one. None of these players seem to have a problem with showing the heart suit on the second go-around, if they get the chance. With some people willing to bid twice, I had to downgrade passing further than I usually would. This is clearly a bidders’ game, and this may even be our hand. Or at least that is what the heart bidders are banking on.

DODD:  “2H. Just enough values for a 'free' bid. Where's the problem?” 

TAFJORD:  “2H. Double would be penalty, and I have both unbid suits, so I try 2H.”

STRITE:  “2H. Clear decision to bid on this minimum, not vulnerable at matchpoints. It’s also clear to bid a major, despite suit quality.”

I am also a 2H bidder, but these panelists and their answers seem to be the-dog-ate-my-homework excuses. I am disappointed. I was unsure what to do with those who chose to double, as Bridge World Standard seems to define this as a penalty double. Takeout or responsive seems like a handy treatment -- if you want to show a good hand, cuebid the takeout-doubled suit (diamonds), and if you want to show spades, bid spades (duh).

2. Matchpoints, none vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
Pass	100	7	53
4H	80	7	20
3NT	60	2	25
3S	50	0	2

West	North	East	South
--	1H	2C	Pass
2S	3H	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  K42   102   K753    Q1064 ?

This is a tough problem. The panel voted resoundingly for playing in hearts, but was evenly divided on whether to pass or go on to game. The Solvers' strong vote for the Pass was the tiebreaker.  

There is a much maligned convention called the Good-Bad 2NT. There is also a world of knowledge out there on this thing called “The Internet”. Unfortunately, I am living in country where the power grid and phone grid often make accessing these impossible, as is now the case. But if I were able to speak with the rest of the known universe, I would be able to check the Bridge World Standard website once again, and find out if they play a variant of this convention.

The Good-Bad 2NT convention, which may or may not apply here, offers the possibility that partner could have bid a forcing and artificial 2NT to begin the description of a hand with long hearts and game interest. With that available to show a good hand, a mere repeat of his suit, as in the  actual auction, would show a “just competing, partner; don’t get excited” hand.

That agreement would clear up this problem considerably. Partner may have a hand along the lines of  x  KQ109xxx  AJx    xx where he is semi-bluffing. On the other hand, he may have a hand where your smattering of fillers makes game virtually lay down: Jxx  AKQxxx  AJxx  Void . Can the panel make a more succinct case than that?

MILLER:  “4H. Comes down to trusting partner or trusting the opponents.”

WILLIAMS :  “4H. Partner did bid 3H by his lonesome? I have 2 trumps and the K of diamonds rates to be a good card. I like the club length behind the club bidder.”

BEYE:  “4H. Two options:  3NT or 4H. At the table I think I'd bid 3NT. But, the more I thought on this hand, the more I thought that 3NT had no chance on this auction.”

JONQUET:  “4H. Even if pard is stretching ‘a little’, there should be a play. My partners soon learn not to bid my cards for me except in balancing seat.“

I love the threatening tone of the last comment. And while I believe that partners sometimes take just a bit too much liberty in bidding my cards, this is still a hand full of garbage for partner. What will he do with all of these cards that surely look nice to us, but can’t cover his losers?

Only one panelist tried the notrump game:

FEILER: "3NT. I think this actually shows this kind of hand -- i.e., a hand where I passed planning to defend 2C doubled."

STRITE:  “Pass. Good-Bad 2NT anyone? Without that tool, I'll guess to go quietly. I don't like my chances for fast tricks in 3NT, and my black honors may be of little use in hearts.”

FELDHEIM:  “Pass. Partner didn't double so it sounds like a lot of shape. The spade king is poorly placed and 3NT might be very ugly with a club lead and a spade switch.”

KESSLER:  “Pass. I would bid at IMP's, but at matchpoints, go for the plus. Partner could have doubled and then competed to 3H with a really good hand. Let's not hang partner.”

I like the comments from those who scored all of the points. As they point out, partner did have other ways to get to 3H and show a desire for more. I think that we must pass now, and then take action next time if the auction isn’t yet finished.

3. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3C	100	11	41
Pass	80	3	34
2S	80	1	2
3D	60	0	2
3H	60	1	17
4H	50	0	5

West	North	East	South
--	--	--	Pass
Pass	1H	Pass	2D *
Pass	2H **	Pass	???

* Drury -- 4 trumps, 10+ support pts.
** Minimum or sub-minimum opener

What is your call as South holding:  Q43   A654   5   KJ963 ?

I think this hand is rather straightforward. First, should you bid? I think it’s pretty clear you should. Second, how should you advance? This is less clear, but also seems less important to me. If you play short-suit game tries, then 3D is clearly the proper advance. If you play help-suit game tries very strictly, 2S is the call. If you just look at your hand, 3C seems to be correct. The panel was fairly unexcited by these possibilities, especially the passers, who are represented by:

MATHENY: " Pass.  Take a plus score at matchpoints. Worth a 3C try at IMPs. "

Most other panelists thought it was worth a try at matchpoints, too.

TAFJORD:   “3C. There are good chances for game here, so I want to make a game try and 3C seems the most natural.”

DODD:  “3C. One more try seems worth the risk, although if I were North here I'd say the best call is pass and pray for down only one.”

STRITE:  “3C. An agreement is useful here. Since a move implies distribution, our system should have a way to show the stiff diamond. Anyway, the three level should be safe, especially at MP's, so I'll show partner where my tricks are.”

KESSLER:  “3C. Certainly, even at matchpoints, this hand is worth a game try. Very close to an opening bid!”

WALKER :  “3C. Partner could have a ‘real’ but minimum opener here, so I think this hand is worth a second game try. If he retreats to 3H (or bids 3D as his own second game try), I'll stop in the partscore.”

Sure, blah, blah, blah. I think this next comment is the most interesting of all:

KNIEST:  “3C. I know I may have defeated the purpose of Drury by bidding, but this hand qualified for a fit-showing passed-hand jump shift, and I accidentally pulled out the 2D card.”

The fit-showing jump of 3C would have been a superior call for your first response. It shows everything – game-going values with heart support and a club suit as a possible source of tricks. 

4. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable                             

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
5H	100	6	30
6H	80	2	30
7H	70	5	17
Pass	70	1	16
4NT	60	1	5
DBL	60	1	3

West	North	East	South
--	2H	4S	???

What is your call as South holding:  5   1098654   Q3   J832 ?

Let’s play some poker. We have lots and lots of hearts and vulnerability that is egging us on. The bizarre thing about this hand, though, is that I don’t think that the maximum-pressure bid -- 7H -- is the best way to really achieve maximum pressure.

KNIEST:  “7H. They have a sure vulnerable small slam if not a grand. Lefty will pass, showing interest in 7S and RHO, with his void, will figure a duplication of values and double . . . I hope.”

FELDHEIM:  “7H. No doubt a minority bid, but since I'm not defending 6S, let's put the question early and make 'em guess.”

KESSLER:  “7H. There is no lock the opponents can make 7S. Partner could have Jxx of diamonds or Qx of clubs. Certainly they should make 6S and our save should be less than 1430.”

BEYE:  “7H. Hope  they miss slam or hope to push them to an unmakeable position? How high now? How high later? Terrible problem. At the table, I think I’m bidding 7H. I may as well do it here too.”

TAFJORD:  “7H. They should be cold for 6S and probably 7S, so I'll try to keep them out of it. Partner has at least KQJxxx of hearts, so cannot have much outside. Down 6 is only -1400. Possibly 6H will make them stop at 6S when they're cold for 7S, but I'll take my chances with 7H.”

After seeing these comments, there is nothing that argues for bidding all the way right now. Usually, maximum pressure denies space to the opponents and forces them to guess. On the other hand, 6H seems to me like a transfer to 6S.

DODD:  “6H. Best bid to talk them out of a grand. I’m tempted (for about 0.444 seconds) to bid 7H just in case North has minor-suit holdings that doom an East-West grand. Any cute bids here (4NT or a minor suit) deserve zeroes.”

JONQUET:  “6H. Very cool problem! They have the master suit and somewhere between 12 and 26 tricks. (A) I can't let them Blackwood. (B) I can't let them cuebid our suit. (C) I can't stop them if they have a grand. (D) I must warn pard not to double, even 7S. (E) I might get them to stop in 6 when 7 is laydown. (F) Don't push them to 7.”

These two panelists opted for more subtle tactics:

FEILER:  "Pass. When opponents are in game, sometimes they have trouble going forward. A big jump in hearts or a psych might help them." 

MATHENY: "Double. The classic stripe-tailed ape double, as I know what to do if they redouble. Minus 1390 is better than minus 1460."

I'm actually surprised that only one panelist chose the penalty double. We read about these psychic doubles all the time, and when we finally get a chance to try it out, we all go and raise partner's suit!

WALKER :  “5H. There's a good argument for passing, since any further preempt will surely stampede them into a contract you don't want to defend. 6H is a transfer to 6S, and 7H gives them a two-way shot at you -- if LHO thinks he has the right hand for 7S, he probably does, and 7H goads him into bidding it. 5H is a compromise that at least impedes their ability to locate all the controls, and keeps open the chance that they won't find their slam.”

STRITE:  “5H. Feels right. I don't want them to bid 6S, so why bid 6H immediately? Depending on the sound of the auction from here on in, my next call may be 7H.”

WILLIAMS :  “5H. I’m avoiding the knee-jerk response of 6H over 4S for fear of pushing them into a cold slam. Passing, which there is a good case for, gives them an easy cuebid or Blackwood bid. 4NT is simply silly; they can cuebid at the 5 level and perhaps double to ask for aces/keycards.”

I think these three comments really cover all the bases, but I am just a silly commentator. In the end, without the boss suit, I expect lefty to finish the auction with panache, and my choice here may not matter at all.

5. IMPs, NS vulnerable                             

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
Pass	100	6	63
5H	80	4	9
4S	60	3	22
6H	60	1	3
4NT	60	0	2
5S	50	2	0
5D	40	0	2

West	North	East	South
--	--	--	2S
Pass	3D	Pass	3S
Pass	4H	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  AK10974   Q92   86   52 ?

This is the kind of hand that keeps me playing bridge year in and year out. On Day One of learning to bid a bridge hand, you are trained that there are forcing and non-forcing bids. It seems like a simple rule that should be done and dusted after a few weeks of serious play. And then you have played for ten years and you run into this hand. There is a guideline that states, when in doubt about the meaning of an undiscussed bid, play it as forcing. On the other hand, could you blame partner for bidding like this with x  KJxxx   AQJxxx   x ?   On a bad day, you’re down in 4H. I believe 4H must be forcing, but the panel doesn’t see it that way:

TAFJORD:  “Pass. It sounds like partner might be 6-5 in diamonds and hearts, and my hand might not be all that useful, so I'll stop in 4H.”

FELDHEIM:  “Pass. Good heavens, I've never passed this often. Yes I like my heart queen, but my spades may be duplicated opposite shortness. If partner is 6-6 solid, ah well.”

KNIEST:  “Pass. Let's say pard had opened 1D and we had responded 1S; then he reversed and rebid hearts. Would we do more than raise to game without a club control?  I think we're in much the same position here.”

WALKER :  “Pass. Sounds like partner is at least 6-5, probably with a spade void, and I don't want to hang him for getting us to the right strain. The queen of hearts is a good card for him, but not enough to make slam a good bet.”

BEYE:  “Pass. Gawd, not an IMP problem like this one. Last makeable contract or forcing and forward going?  I think we have other tools that would have confirmed spades.”

STRITE:  “Pass. My spade suit may be of little use, and my red suits are not exceptional in context. A comfortable pass, though we may miss slam if the red suits are breaking.”

I’m picking up what they are all putting down, but we announced that we really only like spades, yet we are a super max with Qxx of partner’s suit and two quick tricks in ours. How many weak twos like that have you ever opened?  QJ10xxx   xx   x   K10xxx  is what I usually have. I hate to bid, but I just feel I must. Who needs a plus score when you have the powers of right and good on your side?

JONQUET: "5S. Not sure where we're going, but I think 4H is forcing (too many possibilities to list in this format). I have heart support and a maximum, but two losing clubs. By the way, I would not have opened 2S with this hand because of the heart support.”

WILLIAMS :  “5H. If partner had spades, he could have bid 2NT over 2S. That having been said, partner should be 6-5 with some juice. I have something for pard and would pass 4H with much less."

PAULO: "5H. If partner has a good 6-5 -- e.g., x  AKxxx  AKxxxx  x  -- I have the best heart support I can in this context. If partner has a spade fit and is looking for a club control - e.g., Qxxx  Ax  AKQxx   xx -- my bid suggests lack of it."

The panel was fairly certain all partner's bids were natural, but as a few pointed out, it doesn't hurt to cover all your bases, just in case. There were no slam tries for this panelist:

FEILER. " 6H. I assume that 4H showed a strong 5-6 in the reds, but partner may have another idea. If it was some kind of cuebid, he can convert to 6S." 

Probably the best explanation of the bunch comes from: 

DODD:  “5H. [no comment]

For my money, if slam is on, I surely think 5S is the best call. If slam isn’t on, I would never bid 5S. Tell me if I was right after the round.

6. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable                             

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3H	100	9	56
2NT	80	1	5
4H	70	4	13
2D	70	0	8
2C	70	2	6
2H	60	0	5
3NT	60	0	3
3S	50	0	3
Pass	50	0	2

West	North	East	South
--	1H	Pass	1S
Pass	1NT	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  KQ1053    Q54   A62   43 ? 

What entertained me about this hand was the number of people who passed on the last hand, and then hung partner on this hand. Mssrs. BEYE, WALKER, FELDHEIM and KNIEST passed in case they were in the last makeable contract on Problem #5, and then throw matchpoints to the wind and blast into game on this hand. I’m sure their partners are the catchers in those partnerships! 

I thought that this would be unanimous at matchpoints, except for the few people who never score well in these quizzes and who chose to try 2NT. I was wrong. But the blasters get no sympathy from me.

BEYE:  “4H. I don't like my shape, but I still think 3H is too tough on partner. I bid what I think partner can make.”

KNIEST:  “4H. We fit partner, the lead's coming up to him, and we're giving the opponents minimum info.”

WALKER :  “4H. With all prime cards and the good outside source of tricks, this hand is worth a game bid. I have no reason to go searching for a 5-3 spade fit, especially since it looks best to have partner declare.”

FELDHEIM:  “4H. This seems clear. I agree this may be a no-play special but this a seven- loser hand opposite an opening bid and anything less would be cowardly. An invitation (3H) would be inquisitional.”

I guess I’m up for an inquisition! If this hand isn’t a matchpoint invite, what hand is?   First, to the guy who knew he wouldn’t get all of the points:

WILLIAMS :  “2NT. I have an invitational hand and bid accordingly. Partner can bid 3S on the way if he is accepting.”

Way to stick to your guns and know the drop points.

PAULO: "3H. There is no point in checking back to find spade support, as I can raise the other major. Whatever partner holds in the minor suits, he should be declarer, not me."

JONQUET:  “3H. Pard can pass with absolute minimum, show secondary spade support or bid game in any of three denominations. Whatever he does should be right.”

STRITE:   “3H. Have you seen what people open these days?”

I think Mr. Strite hits the nail on the head. Partner is the only one who can see his hand. If he passes and then makes game, it surely wasn’t a percentage position. Other people could pull some sort of New-Minor-Forcing implications into this hand, but that will be content for another day.

You know we had a good set when no one had a perfect score! Cheers and goodbye for now from sunny Abuja.

Thanks to all who sent in answers this month, and congratulations to Hugh Metzger, Brandon Einhorn and Gary Dell, who topped all Solvers for this set. They're all invited to join the June panel. 

The six new problems for June are below. There's still time to join in the 2006 Solvers Contest, which is based on your best three scores for the year, so I hope you'll all give them a try. Please submit your solutions by May 20 on the web form or by email to our June moderator:

     Tom Dodd -- fieldtrialer@yahoo.com

Solvers Honor Roll  (Average Solver score: 481)

Hugh Metzger, South Bend IN	580	Alvan Bregman, Champaign IL	540
Brandon Einhorn,  Millford NJ	560	Chick Fyffe,  St. Louis MO	540
Gary Dell, Champaign IL	560	Jim Hudson, DeKalb IL	540
Greg Berry, Sleepy Hollow IL	550	Asher Axelrod, Jerusalem, Israel	530
Mike Halvorsen, Champaign IL	550	Nigel Guthrie, Reading UK	530
Robert Lambert, Warsaw IN	540	Phyllis Rahn, Dunlap IL	530