By Tom Kniest, St. Louis IL

1.  Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:    S-Void    H-KQ10982   D-754  C-KJ92 ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
2H	100	7	47
1H	80	4	13
4H	70	2	2
Pass	70	2	33
3H	60	0	4

It might surprise many people that this hand is a "classic" weak two as they were invented, Bergen notwithstanding. Today, though, most of us will open 2H with a far weaker hand, and several of our panelists thought this one was out of our modern range.

 KESSLER: "1H. Way too good for 2H, and if it goes 1S-P-3S, you aren't in position to make an intelligent call."

POPKIN: "1H. I can't pass, and I'm too strong for a weak two."

WARD: "1H. Too good for a preempt. Passing makes it impossible to describe this hand later."

Aren't you all a little worried that you're misdescribing it now? Opening 1H risks hearing 4S on your left, Double by partner, and then what do you do? After they score +790 (or more), your partner may make an inquiry as to the location of your defensive quick tricks for your first-seat opening. Of course, if you preempt at any level and partner doubles them, you will now feel like you have extra strength and haven't misled partner. For the majority:

WALKER: "2H. There's nothing wrong with having a little extra every now and then. I can't see passing, and the hand certainly isn't a 1-bid -- it doesn't even meet Bergen's super aggressive 'Rule of 20' guideline."

BAINTER: "2H. First chair, spades unknown, I'll just tell my story."

FEILER will similarly tell his story, but will offer a club rebid at a cheap level, which I agree is good strategy. You will certainly have told your full story then.

Of all the approaches -- pass, preempt, one-bid -- I think passing is the worst possible action. It gives the opponents a free ride and the bidding may be very high when it gets back to you. The favorable vulnerability prompted a few panelists to make sure the auction was very high, very early:

JONES: "4H. Vulnerability and form of scoring are right. Too good for 2H or 3H at this vulnerability."

HUDSON: "4H. This will often get me 4S from the opponents, and maybe partner will be able to apply the hammer."

2.  IMPs, EW vulnerable

 * (limit raise or better in spades)

What is your call as South holding:     S-2    H-973    D-Q986543    C-83 ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4D	100	6	11
5D	90	6	58
Pass	60	2	14
3D	50	1	14
6D	50	0	2

Our panel voted to a tie for the two diamond jumps, which may produce very different results. I promoted 4D in the scoring because the majority of the panel had a conservative bent.

More than half our Solvers wanted to apply maximum pressure with the 5-level jump. With them were:

FEILER: "5D. With a good hand, I'd double or bid 3S, so this should be preemptive. Is this the right level? Who knows, but if they go to 5S, we may have a chance to beat them."

HUDSON: "5D. It looks like each side has a 10-card fit, and they probably have more of the high cards. They might double when they can make 5S, or they might bid 5S and go down."

I'll be the first to admit that 5D can work, either as a profitable save or by giving LHO a chance to go wrong. However, RHO may have just a limit raise, and if partner has a strong hand, it's no cinch they have game. Why take a bad dive in front of partner when you have a more descriptive bid available?

KESSLER: "4D -- long diamonds, weak hand, suggests a sacrifice. With this auction, I can't have a real hand."

This jump is clearly preemptive since the other three hands have shown strength (a jump here should also be preemptive if RHO redoubles). The other alternative -- a freebid of 3D -- grossly misleads partner, who will be playing you for a card on defense. Or were you going to pull his double of 4S?

The passers are once again giving the opponents a free ride:

WARD: "Pass. I'd hate to bid 4D and propel them to slam, much less let them know they need to bid a light game. This may make me sound like an LOL, but I don't think the upside of jamming them here is much better than the downside already mentioned. On the other hand, bidding 3D here is like saying 'sorry partner; you can never trust me.'"

POPKIN: "Pass. Do you want me to bid just because I'm nonvulnerable? Saves are a bad bet at imps."

Except when you gain imps. The point is that a preemptive 4D brings partner in on the decision. If a save is right, he can bid it over their 4S; if he wants to double 4S, you won't be hesitant to sit it. But if you pass or blast off to 5D, you're guessing. Or, put another way:

DODD: "4D. What else? 3D is too constructive, and 5D is sort of like jumping out of a plane without knowing who packed your chute."

3.  Matchpoints, none vulnerable

  * (Support double --  3-card spade support)

What is your call as South holding:    S-KJ65    H-94    D-QJ65  C-1032 ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
2S	100	7	27
2H	80	5	31
Pass	60	3	24
2N	50	0	18

We apparently have our choice of 7-card fits, and neither figures to play very well. On the other hand, it's not clear that they have more than a 7-card fit, and we've directed what appears to be a good lead. If they have only 7 diamonds, they may be in trouble. It's matchpoints, and the reward could be huge since we're going against the field, at least based on our panel's voting.

FEILER: "2H. In case partner is 3-6 in the majors. I hope he goes back to 2S if he's 3-5-1-4. I also hope nobody doubles, since this isn't going to play well."

If you bid 2H, I don't think partner is ever going back to 2S. Your 1S response didn't deny three hearts; you could have a supporting hand with intermediate values where 1S was the right initial response. Of course, a reeaal sloow 2H might get you 2S . . . and a committee.

KESSLER: "2S. I think this 4-3 will play better than the 5-2 with a diamond out and a club shift."

WARD: "2S. If they were red, I might try for +200."

FOGEL: "2H. I don't like any of my options. I'd pass for fun if I was way behind or way ahead."

WILLIAMS: "2H. In my experience, a 5-2 usually plays better than a 4-3."

The 5-2 will often be easier if the hands are fairly balanced or if the short-trump hand has outside shortness. But here, you're expecting diamond shortness in partner's hand, so I think 2S will be the superior contract. The danger is a tapping defense, and bidding 2S protects your diamond holding on opening lead. If we do have to ruff diamonds, it will be in the short-trump hand.

However, we can also defend, which is my choice. From my kind of guy:

JONES: "Pass. Best shot at a plus score. We should have an acceptable spade lead. I'm hoping this is a misfit and that partner isn't 3514."

The wisdom of passing depends a lot on whether or not you think you have a plus score coming. Many panelists expected to make +110 or +140, which means you'd have to beat 2D two tricks (+300) to get any matchpoints. So many of them, though, mentioned passing that maybe I should raise my own score.

4.  Matchpoints, both vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:   S-A   H-J863   D-AK109873  C-A ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3NT	100	7	20
3D	80	4	24
DBL	70	3	52
4D	60	1	4

What a hand! As one Solver noted, 3NT will usually make opposite xxxx, xxx, xxx, xxx. Still, more than half the Solvers, worried about missing a heart fit, tried a takeout double. Just as I was wondering how they planned to escape from partner's spade bids, this panel answer came in:

MARSHALL: "Double. If partner bids 3S or 4S, I'll bid 5D, which should suggest a red two-suiter."

Finlay noted that this wasn't exactly a "perfect" two-suiter, but even if it were, would your partner figure this one out? It's handy for us to think we have an escape after a double, but the rest of the panel reminds us that we really don't:.

WALKER: "3NT. Yes, we may have a heart fit, but I'm forced to guess, and I think 3NT is our best shot at game. There's just no recovery from a double -- if partner bids spades and you rebid 3NT, he'll play you for 3-card support."

FEILER: "3D. I'll be unhappy if this gets passed out, but that's unlikely with this much distribution lying around. Doubling with hands like this is asking for disaster."

DODD: "3D. I could miss a cold game here, but it's worse to barge and misguess. Plus 150 beats -100 any day."

FOGEL: "3D. I wish I had the guts to bid 3NT."

Most of our panel went for the "obvious" 9-trick game, but they didn't think it took that much courage:

WARD: "3NT. It's matchpoints, my hearts aren't that great, and xx of diamonds and out gives a play for this."

Here's an interesting approach from our Odd Man Out:

JONES: "4D. Leaving room for the unlikely 4H bid, and suggesting a powerful diamond- oriented hand.  This bid is one dimensional, but I would feel comfortable passing if I made this bid and partner bid 4S over it. Likewise, I would pass 4S over 3NT."

There is actually a convention that will help you sort this out. After 3NT, 4C by partner asks what your 3NT was based on. The step rebids show your hand -- a long suit with moderate strength, or a very strong balanced hand, or a balanced stretch. You lose Stayman, but you may not want it at that level, and you can still use transfers.

5.  Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:   S-Q83   H-AJ1095   D-QJ6  C-J10 ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4S	100	7	56
DBL	90	5	7
3S	70	2	24
3H	70	1	13

I think 4S is an acceptable middle-of-the-road action, and I would often make that call if I was protecting a good game. It figures to make, even with the weak hand partner has advertised. However, if partner has 3+ clubs, we are going to get a big set after a club lead and continuation. If partner has just two clubs, they may make 3C -- not good. Partner will seldom pull this double since it confirms a heart trap and he can't see how many clubs I have. I wouldn't double at IMPs, but it's sure tempting here.

FEILER: "Double and lead a trump. The double shows a heart stack, not a club stack. In fact, after passing at your first turn, any forward- going bid shows a heart stack."

WALKER: "Double. A gamble, but a good one at this vulnerability and form of scoring. There's even a chance we'll get to defend 3H doubled -- there's a reason partner didn't reopen with a double, and if it's because he has a heart void, then LHO will be bidding 3H."

JONES: "3S. Too scary to double. I don't know if the trump lead will be effective because the club bid might have struck gold with the mystery hand on my left. Hope the diamond quack and spade queen are adequate fillers."

I wonder if 3S is forward-going here and confirms a heart trap, or could it be a "Law" bid at this vulnerability? Your partner might not be sure.

KESSLER: "4S. Game is makeable opposite several 10 counts, even though your hand is very soft."

FOGEL: "4S. I learned the hard way not to double without trump tricks. 3S is way too weak. Partner is just guessing if you call 3H."

WARD: "3H. I may be a tad light, but most of my cards are working."

No Nate, that's Bud light ...

6.  Matchpoints, none vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:   S-A   H-AQ83   D-AK975  C-874  ?
 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4H	100	6	49
4S	100	5	27
3NT	70	3	7
6D	60	1	2
4D	50	0	12

There's good thinking behind the two cuebids, both of which show interest in diamonds, not notrump, and hopes for slam. The distinction between 4H and 4S is small, so they share the top score.

My personal choice is for 4H because partner might be able to infer a spade control (for the moment) because of the auction, and he might have a heart holding that encourages further bidding. Opposite S-xxx  H-Kxx  D-Qxxxx  C-Kx, you are practically cold for 6D. Opposite S-Kx  H-xxx  D-Qxxxx  C-AQx, you are probably toast -- but then, partner might well have bid 2NT with that hand instead of cuebidding to raise your suit.

FEILER: "4S. I don't know if it's the right bid, but there is an appealing symmetry about it."

From the man who knows:

KESSLER: "4S, which is what I bid at the table. Partner held S-xxx  H-K10  D-J10xxx  C-AJx. 3NT is down as diamonds were 3-0 offside, but 6D had a play with Jx or Jxx of hearts onside."

WARD: "4S. I think 4H is passable in this auction, especially at matchpoints. I can't Blackwood, since that won't give me any clue for a grand. In any event, I'm not stopping short of 6D."

I don't see how he can pass 4H, but  maybe Nate has been burned before.

POPKIN: "4S. The call has much symmetry; I can't resist. Actually, I'm hoping partner can put me in slam; otherwise, game should suffice."

There's that symmetry word again. I thought it referred to Culbertson's Law of Symmetry, which has to do with distribution, not how the opponents bid. From our asymmetrical panelists:

WALKER: "4H. 3NT could be going down when 6D is cold. I think 4H is a better description than 4S -- it shows where my outside values are and helps partner evaluate his hand for slam."

WILLIAMS: "4H. It happens to be the cheapest cuebid, and can serve as sort of a help-suit slam try."

And finally, from the man who can visualize his partner's hand:

HUDSON: "6D. Partner probably has a club control, and even if he doesn't, we probably won't get a club lead. It's encouraging that partner didn't bid notrump, so his high cards seem to be working. If he has  S-xxx  H-KJx  D-Qxxxx C-Ax , we can make 13 tricks, but I'm not trying for a grand."

And if he has  S-xxx   H-Jx  D-QJxxx  C-KQJ, you can claim on the heart finesse for making or down 1. I love fast hands.

How the Panel Voted   (Panel/Staff Average:  527)

How the Staff Voted
 

Tom Dodd, Boerne TX	2H	4D	2S	3D	4S	3NT	550
Mike Jones, Champaign IL	4H	3D	Pass	4D	3S	4H	410
Tom Kniest, Clayton MO	2H	4D	Pass	3NT	DBL	4H	550
Karen Walker, Champaign IL	2H	4D	2S	3NT	DBL	4H	590

Solvers Honor Roll   (Solvers' Average:  474)
 

Rick Beye, St. Louis	570	Norm Athy, St. Louis	540
Bob Sievers, Champaign IL	560	Ken Vogelbaugh, Bloomington IL	490
Lisa Sievers, Champaign IL	560	Bob Wheeler, Florissant MO	540
Jim Feinstein, South Bend IN	550	Dave McNitt, Elkhart IN	530
Sheldon Kessler, St. Louis	550	Eula Walworth, Mattoon IL	530

New hands for August