District 8 Solvers Forum -- October 2006

 by Scott Merritt, Abuja, Nigeria

1. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable    

West	North	East	South
--	Pass	Pass	1C
3D	Pass	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  AK5   10   KJ6   AQJ943 ?

The vast majority of the panel thought this was an easy problem, but the Solvers turned in votes for six different actions. Bridge has always been a bidders' game, but you will note that none of my panel invokes "The Big H" and his mantra (Bob Hamman, who once said something to the effect of "If 3NT is a possible choice, bid it."). Actually, some did quote him, but I excluded them from my masterwork of bridge literature.

KNIEST: "3NT. True, pard didn't have the right values for a negative double. He might have the missing diamond length, which will provide a second stopper, or he might have the club king and enough in hearts to stop them or build a trick. To me, pass is just off the charts."

WALKER: "3NT. If West finds the heroic heart lead, I may be sorry, but it's just too timid to pass."

STRITE: "3NT. I can't for a second think of bidding anything else, unless it's an insufficient 3C."

The Solvers turned in a fairly strong vote for reopening with a double. These panelists offer good arguments about why this rates to be unsuccessful:

NELSON: "3NT. I don't like any other options. I am certainly not going to pass nor bid 4C. A double will get me a 3H call. With all my clubs, I doubt I can even set 3D. If I do, it would probably only be one trick."

DODD: "3NT. Columbus took a chance. Give North a random 8-count and we might even make this. It's been awhile since I took a chance at going for a telephone number. I'll say no thanks to a reopening double with four whole major suit cards."

Some mentioned that they chose the double because it was "flexible", but it's not clear what other options they're hoping to discover. You're either going to make 3NT or you aren't, and that's about all the flexibility this hand has to offer.

I am less certain about 3NT than most panelists seem to be, but there were a few who shared my doubts:

SPEAR:  "3NT. The last time I did this, they took the first seven heart tricks."

KESSLER: "3NT. If we were not vulnerable, I think this would be automatic. Vulnerable, however, I believe passing and playing for a plus is certainly an excellent alternative."

FELDHEIM: 3NT. Yes, I know a heart lead may lead to an amazing number of tricks for the defense, but matchpoints plus the vulnerability is too tough to resist. 4C is a nothing bid. The only other possibility is pass and go plus. I'll know what was right at the end of the hand."

This seems more like it to me. I would love to see this hand in a simulator, as I don't believe that 3NT is as automatic as the first half of the panel would lead you to believe. West really could have just about anything from Q10xxxx of diamonds and out to an intermediate jump shift that he felt like underbidding.

2. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable

West	North	East	South
--	2C	2D	3C
4D	Pass	Pass	5C
Pass	5H	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding: 82   Q73   A   QJ109743 ?

I have no idea what the correct call on this hand is, but I do know one very important thing: Partner's pass means something much more complex than "I have nothing to say". We all know that he has something to say, as he opened 2C. If you got the message that partner is excited about his prospects, then you sure as heck better be excited about the trinkets that you can add to the collective pot.

LAMBERT: "6D. Hats off to the opponents for making things tough here. 6D will let pard go ape, and we should settle comfortably in 7NT. Arguably, 7NT may be the 'correct' bid here, but I get to share the success/blame with the cuebid."

FEILER: "6D. I'm taking 5H to be a cuebid looking for seven, so I accept. I think this has to show the ace instead of a void since our alternate contract is 7NT."

FELDHEIM: "6D. The trick is partner's pass at his second turn. This has to be very positive and his 5H over my signoff-ish 5C is a 'slam-force'. Not to bid 6D would insult partner."

WALKER: "6D. Partner's 5H could be a cuebid for clubs, but I think it's more likely that he has 6+ hearts and was setting up a pass-and-pull auction to show a monster hand. Whatever he has, I'm cooperating."

I like 6D because it is unassuming but positive, which is what your hand is. I don't believe that we can be sure what partner has, other than that he has a lot of strength. Deduct two points from your score if you were insistent that partner has hearts.

STRITE: "5NT. 5H is a cuebid for clubs based on the earlier pass. Diamonds aren't partner's only problem, else 5S showing controls in both  majors would be the correct call. As such, I take partner to have only the spade king, along with both top hearts and both top clubs and second-round diamond control. In case I'm too clever by half and pard really is only fishing for diamonds, I bid 5NT to deny the spade but show the diamond."

The 5NT bid has merit, but Toby really baffled me with his analysis. Betting the farm that 5H is not natural is a bigger position than I'm ready to take. What does partner do with a very powerful hand with long hearts? If he had bid 4H rather than passing the last round, he would risk having you pass. If he had jumped in hearts, it would sound like a question about diamonds. Maybe Toby and I each give ourselves too much credit! Maybe we aren't smart enough by half? I was worried about this, but then I read this:

KNIEST: "6NT. Here's what I think has happened: Partner has a 22+ hand ready to play 6C because he has the guarded diamond king. He doesn't have a one suiter because he didn't bid over 4D. So, I can count 12 tricks -- 7 clubs, 2 diamonds, a major AK and another Ace. I can't count 13 tricks because I can't find out if he has the heart AK."

I guess that is the solution. Randomly pick 13 cards and assign them to your partner. Everything becomes his fault when he doesn't hold enough. It really is quite elementary, after all.

3. IMPs, both vulnerable 

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

What is your call as South holding: K7    654   A10732   984 ?

I love the power of the pen! I was in the distinct minority with my 3NT call, but amazingly enough, I score the thing and it turns out that 3NT scored well. Fancy that! I was not stoned, and I did not think that 654 would play as a stopper at any point in the near future, but on this misfit, nine tricks must be easier than 10 or 11. Can the panel smack logic into my thick skull?

The majority of the panel opted to either bid game directly or show some strength on the way to game. The more circuitous route was taken by the 3D bidders, who offered varying justifications for their choice. Here's one interpretation:

KESSLER:  "3D. I would have bid 2S the first time, unless I thought my RHO was a lunatic. I'm too good for 3S and don't have enough spades to jump to 4S (for fear partner might bid on) so I'll cuebid and raise, hopefully showing a good hand with only two spades."

Five panelists chose to apply the brakes:

KNIEST: "Pass. Partner didn't double, which he should do with any big hand. However, he felt the need to keep it open with his shape. While I have a hand that would have cheerfully passed 2D doubled, I don't have a hand good enough for 10-11 tricks in a suit or nine in notrump."

PESTIEN: "3S. Since partner didn't reopen with a double, I hope he'd rather hear about my spade tolerance than a diamond ace."

DODD: "3S. Easiest problem of the set. I hope we make it. North is still in the picture to take the final plunge into game. For those who jump willy-nilly to 4S (or worse, toss in an under-strength cuebid), ask yourself how this auction would have gone if East had passed? 1S-1NT-2C-2S? Or 1S-1NT-3C-3S?"

Those burning questions are answered by:

WALKER: "4S. Too much to pass or retreat to 3S, and 4C sounds like a hand that's 4-1 in partner's suits. With a 5-5 hand, partner surely would have reopened with a double, so I'm betting he's 6-2-0-5 (or perhaps 6-1-1-5). Although he probably has a diamond void, the ace isn't necessarily worthless, as it may provide a pitch for a heart loser."

PAULO:  "4S. I hope my ace is valuable. For example, with  Axxxxx  Ax  Void  AKxxx, partner can take 10 tricks, even against some 4-1 black breaks."

FELDHEIM: "4S. Partner didn't reopen with a double, so he's shapely. My cards rate to be very useful and, in addition, partner declaring may protect a suspect heart holding. I hope no one bid 3NT. Yuck!"

So I win the Yuck Award for this issue. I like the comment about potential dubious heart cards, but what is to be done? I have two questions about this hand:
   (1)  Does BWS have any agreement about opening hands that are 5-5 in the blacks? As many people open weak 5-5 black two suiters with 1C (this allows for a cheap 1S rebid), what implications exist on this hand? (As an aside, I would look this up if I had any internet, but the joys of living in Nigeria have deprived of that minor luxury during an ill-fated lightning strike.)
   (2)  If we could avoid the heart lead on hand one where we had a singleton, why can't we avoid it now with an opponent that had a chance to bid the suit? We do, after all, have three of them this time.

4. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable 

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

What is your call as South holding:  1064   Q9653  J102   A5 ?

I thought that this would be another 100-percenter from the panel, with everyone answering along the lines of:

MILLER: "3D. Seems like the choice to find heart support or cater to notrump if partner holds Ax of diamonds."

I was mistaken. The winning call came from the 2NT bidders, but I was underwhelmed by their defense of this choice.

STRITE: "2NT. Whatever this shows, I've got it."

SPEAR:  "2NT. I like 2NT to be artificial here, but J10x should be fine as a stopper if partner's next bid is 3NT."

WALKER: "2NT. This just shows the nature of my hand -- at this point in the auction, I don't think it guarantees a full stopper. If partner has a singleton deuce of diamonds, he'll probably do something other than raise to 3NT. 3C might work if it induces partner to bid 3NT, but that risks misleading him about my club support, and it's really necessary only if he has one specific diamond holding (Ax)."

PAULO: "2NT. I'm showing a balanced hand, without a good suit and without good support. If partner sees this bid as a relay, that's okay, as I don't know our best strain."

LAMBERT: "2NT. I'm in no hurry to rebid hearts, or support spades. I'm well placed for subsequent bidding."

KESSLER: "2NT. All bids have a flaw, and I think 2NT is the most flexible and descriptive bid available."

I don't get it. They're all treating 2NT as a mark-time bid, but no one explains why 2NT without a stopper is better than 3D, which doesn't show a stopper and costs just one two more rungs on the bidding ladder.

DODD: "3C. Ever the pessimist this month. J10x in the fourth suit is not a stopper."

KNIEST: "3C. Let partner bid the notrump or rebid spades. The biggest card in my hand is the club ace, and partner might read my club preference to suggest that as a running suit in notrump."

Raising partner's minor with a doubleton seems just as problematic as bidding 2NT without a stopper. The panel seems to agree that we have nothing to say, and I think 3D is the bid that says that best.

5. IMPs, none vulnerable  

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

What is your call as South holding:  102   AK  102    AKQJ984 ?

STRITE: "4NT. 4C might have advantages (you may get partner to cuebid the diamond ace), but it will be difficult to stop in 4NT unless I bid it right now. Partner can still cuebid on the way to slam."

I worked for some time on coming up with what to say about this auction, but found that Mr. Strite had already explained it perfectly. There may be some idealized world where 4C has a theoretical advantage, but this is a notrump hand, and the real world favors the real bid.

KESSLER: "4NT. Not Blackwood, but showing a good hand with tricks. All partner needs is AK of spades and the king of diamonds and we are cold for 6NT. Take away one club and the king of hearts, and most would still bid 3D."

DODD: "4NT. Assuming the initial cuebid merely asked for a diamond guard, North will (I hope!) read this advance as an invite to slam and not as keycard Blackwood. I'm tempted to just blast into 6NT opposite an unlimited partner, since I can't envision less than AQxxx  Qxx  Kxx   xx for the forcing freebid, but North could easily hold QJx of diamonds (or even Qxx)."

TAFJORD: "4NT. Quantitative. It's tempting to just bid 6NT, though, as I need only three tricks from partner."

KNIEST: "4NT. Clearly quantitative. Partner's diamond stopper could be soft and the opponents could have two aces. I can clear up the number-of-aces question, but not the combination of correct aces and stopper quality. If I don't have nine tricks in my own hand, I can't make this bid."

WALKER: "4NT. This bid will probably get all the points, but no one can really be certain of how partner will -- or even should -- interpret it. Would partner take 4C as Gerber here?  If not, there's a very strong argument for playing 4NT as keycard Blackwood. Still, I expect the majority of the panel will insist that this cannot be ace-asking (while muttering that they haven't used Blackwood since the Reagan Administration)."

Here's a simple compromise: I like to play that if partner makes a quantitative notrump bid and you plan to accept the invitation, you answer aces on the way. In this case, as in most cases, the simple answer is the best one.

6. IMPs, both vulnerable  

West	North	East	South
--	1S	Pass	1NT*
Pass	2C **	Pass	???

 * Forcing 1NT      ** 3+-card suit

What is your call as South holding:  K8    74   AK1093   J642 ?

This is a case of last but certainly not least. This is just the sort of boring hand that separates the winners from the losers and keeps all of us coming back to the bridge table. I really don't think there is a right answer with this hand for every deal. Instead, there is probably a 27% solution and a 23% solution and a 22% solution. Any bid could be right on any given day, and that demonstrates why I truly love this game.

Vulnerable at IMPs, just about every panelist thought you had to make a move toward game with this had. The plurality settled for:

KNIEST: "2NT. Shows values and lets partner further describe his hand if he's so inclined."

WALKER: "2NT. Too much strength for 2D or 2S, and not enough length for 3C or 3D. I'd rather play 2NT with no heart stopper than 3C with Qxx opposite Jxxx."

MILLER: "2NT. Yes, the opponents have 8+ hearts, but they haven't bid them. To make no gametry at all is awful, and 3C could be just as ugly as notrump."

NELSON: "2NT. I'm between 2NT and 3NT, but I'll take the underbid looking at this ugly heart holding. I don't want to push partner if he opened a 12-point rag."

Looking at our hand alone, we are a heavy favorite to receive a heart lead. But does knowing that mean that notrump is still not the right strain? I like the idea of bidding a minor, but as the above panelists point out, bidding 3C or 3D may dump us in a low-scoring, poor fit. So what do the club and diamond bidders have to say?

FEILER:  "3C. The forcing notrump: You gotta love it!"

LAMBERT: "3D. What a mess. Lowballing my hand with 2D or 2S risks missing a vulnerable game, 2NT lies about heart stoppers, 3C or 3D risks pard passing, and 3S will propel us into a no-play game more often than not. Maybe 2NT risks the least, but 3D is the sexiest choice, in my opinion."

I am sad that my fellow minor-suit bidders didn't come up with stronger defenses of my position, but I'll stick to my guns. In my world, 1NT is only semi-forcing, which means partner's 2C rebid is based on either some shape or some extra values. If partner has a shapely minimum, I would surely rather play 3C. If he has a flat 14-count, 3C is usually a transfer to 3NT. Oh well, that would be another hand, another day.

Cheers and love to all of you, and here is wishing that the next time I write to you, Nigeria will have had a peaceful presidential election and all of those silly coup and civil war fears will have long vanished like dew on the morning leaves.

Thanks to all who sent in answers to what turned out to be quite a difficult set of problems. Congratulations to Arbha Vongsvivut of Godfrey IL, who topped all Solvers, and to runners-up Boris Richter of Pula, Croatia and Paul Soper of Sierra Vista AZ. They're all invited to join the December panel. 

The six new problems for December are below. Please submit your solutions by November 22 on the web form or by email to our December  moderator:  Tom Dodd  -- fieldtrialer@yahoo.com 
  

How the Panel voted  (Panel/Staff Avg. -- 531):	1	2	3	4	5	6	Score
Kent Feiler, Harvard IL	3NT	6D	3S	2NT	4NT	3C	540
Harold Feldheim, Camden CT	3NT	6D	4S	2NT	4NT	3S	570
Mark Kessler, Springfield IL	3NT	5NT	3D	2NT	4NT	3S	540
Robert Lambert, Warsaw IN	3NT	6D	3D	2NT	4NT	3D	540
Larry Matheny, Loveland CO	3NT	6C	Pass	3C	4NT	2NT	470
Adam Miller, Chicago IL	3NT	6H	3D	3D	4NT	2NT	540
Bev Nelson, Fort Myers FL	3NT	6H	5C	3C	4NT	2NT	480
Manuel Paulo, Lisboa, Portugal	3NT	6D	4S	2NT	4NT	3D	590
Rich Pestien, Peoria IL	3NT	6H	3S	3D	4NT	3D	460
Jack Spear, Kansas City MO	3NT	5NT	4S	2NT	4NT	2S	540
Toby Strite, San Jose CA	3NT	5NT	4S	2NT	4NT	4S	520
Oyvind Tajford, Eugene OR	3NT	6H	3D	3D	4NT	3D	530

How the Staff voted

Tom Dodd, Branchburg NJ	3NT	6D	3S	3C	4NT	3S	510
Tom Kniest, University City MO	3NT	6NT	Pass	3C	4NT	2NT	500
Scott Merritt, Abuja, Nigeria	3NT	6D	3NT	3D	4NT	3C	560
Karen Walker, Champaign IL	3NT	6D	4S	2NT	4NT	2NT	600

Solvers Honor Roll  (Average Solver score: 440)