District 8 Solvers Forum -- February 2007

    by Kent Feiler, Harvard IL

Since this is my first month as a moderator, I feel I should include a picture of myself.

This is me and a Barbary Ape (they're really monkeys) taken on top of the big rock in Gibraltar.
I'm the one on the bottom.

1. Matchpoints, both vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:  K92   84   K75   KQ1085 ?

Remember the old Disney animation about a mother swan and her brood of swanlets (cygnets?) plus one ugly duckling floating around on a pond? This pond has all ugly ducklings: Pass, Dbl, 2H, 2NT, 3C. No swans to be found anywhere. Still, we have to pick one.

3C comes under the heading of, "Bidding where you're at," usually a good idea if there's nothing else obvious. True, it'll make it hard to get to 2H if that's our best contract, but several panelists were hearing footsteps coming up fast behind them and wanted to establish the defense.

KNIEST: "3C. I feel a 3D bid coming on my left, and certainly want the club lead if we defend."

WALKER: "3C. With just one diamond stopper and no heart fit, I'm giving up on game and hoping to direct the defense."

NELSON: "3C. I'm bidding 3C to get the defense off right. Likely lefty will bid 3D...I am a hero then."

(Oh, Bev, you'll always be my hero!)

Partner will probably have some clubs for us, but it would be nice if we could ask him to describe his hand instead of just taking a stab ourselves. Is there a way to do that?

VONGSVIVUT: "Double. Showing values. 2NT and 3C are over bids."

DODD: "Double. In BWS the responsive double does not promise 4+ spades."

KESSLER: "Double. Just tell pard you had a club in with your spades!"

Hmm, interesting. I thought the Bridge World Standard responsive double would surely promise four spades. It looks like Mark Kessler did as well, since he was already preparing for the post mortem with the old "club in with my spades" routine!

SPEAR: "2NT. Makes sense, but 2H may be the only plus score."

I'm not sure what 2NT shows in this auction, but I think it's more than we have. If partner has a low-end overcall, his 6 plus our 11 add up to ... big trouble if an opponent decides to double.

I made another call just to make sure it got a vote. I don't know that I'd do this in real life but it's worth talking about.

ME: "Pass. Will partner balance if 2D gets back to him? If he has the hand that all the Solvers and panelists are dreaming about -- short in diamonds and more than a minimum overcall -- I think he'd choke out a bid. And if he has a bad overcall and passes it out in 2D, that may not be so bad for us."

Scoring:  Some of the panel seemed to be getting ready to defend while others were duking it out for the partscore. 3C and Dbl received the same number of votes, and since I couldn't detect a trend in the panel as a whole, I gave them both 100.

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4H	100	9	51
4C	90	1	3
Pass	80	3	22
Dbl	80	3	24

2. Matchpoints, both vulnerable

* Natural

What is your call as South holding:  A987542   KJ4  A3   5 ?

What's partner up to on this hand? He couldn't bid 1H or 2H over West's 1C opener but now he's bidding 3H all by himself on the second round! Our Fearless Leader was a bit perplexed by the bidding as well, but she did have a name for it!

WALKER: "4H. I've spent far too much time trying to figure out what partner could possibly hold for this BOON (Bid Out Of Nowhere). An esoteric game try for spades? The watchword in these situations is 'If it could be natural, it is' -- with the corollary of 'Support with support' -- so that's what I'm going with."

Another panelist considered a different term for partner's bidding, involving some decorative asterisks.

DODD: "Double. Somebody is fooling around here. I trust it is not my partner. Lots of inferences can be drawn. First, North did not preempt or even overcall. Second, 3H (since I trust partner) is not some chicken s*** escape bid. I expect at least something like  x  Axxxxx  QJx  xxx,  which begs the question, 'Which of East and West is playing around?' West must hold a long club suit and (sub)minimum values, so East is likely to hold a balanced pattern, but how could he have enough to justify a stab at game?"

To h*** with the analysis -- this could be bloody if they don't run. If they do, we should be a lock for 4H -- unless North really is crazy, in which case we're the ones in some trouble here! Ah, there's always the consolation where the drinks flow freely. . .

Speaking for the "chicken s***" escape bid theory.

MATHENY: "4H. I don't see us beating 3NT and it sounds like partner has seven small hearts."

PAULO: "4H. Partner should have seven hearts and a Yarborough. If this is the case and West opened with Jx  x  KJxx  AKQxxx or similar, then East makes 3NT, we have a good save at 4H, and the opponents can't make 5C or 5D."

Now I see what my problem has been with bridge all these years, I just don't bid enough! Well, wait 'til next time!

SPEAR: "4H. Seems right, whatever this bidding means."

Don't be too sure, Jack! Except for one panelist, we may all have had the wrong idea! Here's what might really be happening.

KLEMIC: "Pass. I expect to beat this, probably a lot unless they have 9 running. This assumes partner is on the same wavelength. Given the lack of 1H overcall initially from pard, this auction reeks of 'Isn't 2S Michaels?' But, even if not, hearts will be a stronger side suit lead than diamonds, and it's clear a spade lead is getting nowhere. No double because we don't want to see a run to 4C."

Our new panelist, George Klemic, is off to a flying start by being the only one who saw what must be happening on this hand. Partner thought our 2S bid was Michaels! Of course! All this peculiar bidding clicks and snaps into place and makes perfect sense after that.

Scoring: Let's see ...  if George Klemic is right about partner thinking our 2S was Michaels, then our high score goes to a bid (4H) that's probably on a 4-3 or even a 3-3 fit and may go for a number that requires logarithms to properly represent it. Oh well, scoring isn't an exact science.

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
Pass	100	12	52
Dbl	70	3	27
4H	60	1	21

3. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:  103   AQJ4   KJ94   QJ5 ?

The first hand in this set was impossible, the second one was mysterious, but this one looks easy. For once in my life I made a bid that shows my hand pretty well and what that means is that I leave the future bidding decisions to partner. Agreeing:

STRITE: "Pass. Easiest call of the set. Didn't I already show this hand twice?"

KESSLER: "Pass. I have no more than I said I had with the takeout double--and they are soft values with little shape. Exactly why would I consider bidding again?"

MERRITT: "Pass. I hate to take the low road, but to double or bid game would disincentivise partner from bidding directly in the future."

Er . . . right, we certainly wouldn't want to do that. Disagreeing:

VONGSVIVUT: "Double. North should have either 2K or A-K for his 3H freebid."

KNIEST: "4H, which I would have considered before being pushed here. I have an awfully good takeout double for a passed hand partner - I could have a lot less, and partner was ready to play 3. RHO's 3rd hand opener could be trash, and lefty could be pushing with a big spade fit. -140 figures to be worth nothing, so I go for the make or minus 100 - down 2 if they don't double or down one if they do. This might be a law hand with both sides having 9 trumps...or 10. I can't tell, so I bid. If the vulnerability were reversed, I'd defend."

What I really don't like about bidding/doubling is overruling partner's decision to let the opponents play 3S. Presumably, partner understands the scoring in bridge and THE LAW as well as we do, and if he's staring at defensive tricks in his hand, he should double himself. The only difference between him and us is that he knows more about our hand than we know about his.

4. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:  7643    Void   A52   AKJ1042 ?

On Problem 1, we had to choose a bid from a bunch of ugly ducklings. On this one, we have too many swans. If we want to raise spades directly, we have a choice of 3H (Mini-Splinter?), 3S, 4C (Anti-Splinter?), 4H (Void-Showing Splinter?), and 4S (Denying a Splinter?).

Some of the panel ended up with one of those splinters in their thumb, but is this hand really even good enough to force to game?

KLEMIC: "3S. This should be enough. Lots of controls, but bad trumps and light on high-card points. A lot of hands will give partner trouble; for example, even a hand like  Q10xx  KQxx  Qxx  Qx (a clear accept) will have 2 1/2 trump losers, and a diamond suit difficult to deal with."

WALKER: "3S. A straight value bid, as no matter how you count it, this hand isn't worth more than 15-16 support points. 4C and splinter bids show power hands with a maximum of 4-5 losers. If partner shows even lukewarm interest in going beyond game, I'll certainly cooperate, but making my own slam-try with this 6-loser hand -- and its ultra-weak trumps and non-solid side suit -- is way too much."

DODD: "3S. Short an ace for a splinter, and I hate making jump raises on x-high trumps. North always needs more than one thinks to make a slam worthwhile, and any I'll risk the auction stopping right here to preserve the bidding space we may need."

Whew, the staff is pretty conservative here in the District 8 Advocate. I'm not sure I'm going to fit in. It's true that we're under-strength for a 4H splinter bid, but what about...

MERRITT: "3H. I am not afraid to splinter with this hand. The prime cards, source of tricks and lots of exploratory bidding room make me happier than the paltry trumps disappoint me."

I think a mini-splinter auction can conceivably go 1C-1S; 3H-3S; P. That would make me feel a lot better about stopping below game. But maybe the best bid is to forget about all the splinters and start with a reverse into 2D.

STRITE: "2D. I play 4H as a void splinter since 3H mini-splinter is available. Failing that agreement, this is a harder rebid. I'm going to reverse to 2D and insist on spades later to get the void and playing strength across, though I don't remember making too many 12 HCP reverses in the last decade!"

KNIEST: "4C. The standard bid for this type of hand. I wish my spades were better, but the trick power is so great that I need to make this descriptive bid."

NELSON: "4C. I hope this bid is a BWS bid, it is so descriptive with this hand...the bid was made for this hand."

SPEAR: "4C. Showing something like what I have, without discouraging the heart lead I want."

I think Jack Spear is right on target. Splinter enthusiasts forget that they're lead inhibitors. The opponents won't lead a suit in which we're known to have a singleton or void, and that's likely to be the best lead for us. On this hand, it's easy to imagine that the difference between a heart lead and a diamond lead might be two or three tricks.

As far as I can see, 4C is not a BWS bid, but maybe we shouldn't let that stop us. I've bid it undiscussed with several partners and they all knew what it was. It's as much a "system logic" bid as it is a convention.

Scoring: I thought the panel was a bit wary of passing the hand out below game, so I demoted the 3S bid slightly.

5. IMPs, NS vulnerable

  * Two-suiter (any two suits)

What is your call as South holding:  Void   K8764  Q98642   K3 ?

Our little 8-HCP hand has turned into a fire-breathing monster! Partner's two suits are almost certainly clubs and a red suit, so first we need to find out which red suit it is. Second, if he thinks we might belong at the five-level, maybe we ought to raise the ante and bid a slam. In fact, how about a grand?

KESSLER: "5S. Lets find out which suit we have to play our slam in, and let partner know we have a spade control in case partner is interested in a grand. Without a real spade control, but wanting to bid a slam, we could have bid 5NT."

Yup. 

KNIEST: "5D. Very tempting to bid 5S to get to the right slam, but if pard truly has the minors, my heart king might be toilet paper."

I'd say that's too gloomy an outlook. Even with: Void  xxxxx  xxxxxx  Kx , a slam is still likely. Let's hear from the player who knows the whole story:

NELSON: "5S. North held  x  AQJ10x AK  AQJxx, and he should bid ... what? Since he's looking at all the controls, South must have a spade void to justify forcing to the six-level, and I think North should bid the grand."

6. IMPs, none vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:    AQ763   9   52   J7642 ?

Is this the same partner we had on Problem 2? On this one, he had a chance to bid 3NT on his previous turn and bid a non-forcing 3D instead. Now, with no encouragement from us, he boosts himself up to 3NT on the following round. He must be trying to tell us something, but what? Some panelists thought he was showing clubs:

KLEMIC: "4C. This is not the hand to play 3NT on a flimsy heart stopper. 4C should be correctible to 4D, but in case pard has a 6-4, this should be a better spot."

STRITE: "5C. If pard has a hand which wants to play 3NT, he'd have bid it in lieu of 3D, so this bid suggests clubs, along the lines of 7-4 in the minors. I got clubs."

With 4 diamonds and 7 clubs, a conventional 3NT bid makes sense, but with 7 diamonds and 4 clubs, it sounds a bit suicidal. Anyone have another idea?

WALKER: "4D. Partner's message is pretty clear -- since he was willing to play just 3D but is now suggesting 3NT, he's communicating doubt about notrump, but enough playing strength to compete to 4D. He probably needs a diamond filler or another heart stopper from me, and when I hold neither, he doesn't want me to leave him here."

Wow, Fearless Leader really squeezed a lot of juice out of that 3NT bid, but it does sound like the right idea. Since we have a singleton heart and two diamonds, maybe we should even bid:

BERRY: "5D."

Panelist Berry is a man of few words -- in fact, no words at all. Too bad, but you have to think he went through a thought process similar to Karen's.

Still, the fact that partner is trying to communicate some arcane message to us with his 3NT bid doesn't necessarily mean that we should pull it. After all, 3NT is . . . 3NT.

PAULO: "Pass. Partner's last bid looks like a gambling bid, e.g. with  Kx  K10x  AKQxxx  10x,  but it may be a good gamble."

KNIEST: "Pass. I have my free bid, and a hand that might produce some tricks opposite Kx of S. However, more importantly, I have a sure entry and two  diamonds, allowing pard to possibly pick up the suit, either by splitting them out or finessing, if required. If my red suits were reversed, I would still pass, but be pessimistic about our chances. Pard may be taking a gamble on an iffy game, but this is not the hand to rescue him."

Scoring: The moral of the hand is that you need a crowbar to pry a bridge player out of a 3NT contract.

Thanks to all who sent in answers to this interesting set. We had a four-way tie for top Solver score this month. Scoring an impressive 570 were Zoran Bohacek of Zagreb, Tim Francis-Wright of Medford MA, Robert Lambert of Warsaw IN and Dave Smith, one of our hard-working ACBL staff members in Memphis TN. They're all invited to join the April panel.

Special congratulations to George Klemic of Bensenville IL and Arbha Vongsvivut of Godfrey IL, who won the 2006 Solvers Contest by averaging more than 560 for their best three submissions. They'll be joining the panel for 2007. See Solvers Honor Roll in this issue for a list of the top runners-up in the 2006 contest.

The six new problems for April are below. This is the second of the six sets in the 2007 Solvers Contest, so there's still plenty of time to join in. Please submit your solutions by March 23 on the web form or by email to our April moderator:

   Scott Merritt -- merritt604@gmail.com 
 

How the Panel voted  (Panel/Staff Avg. -- 552):		1	2	3	4	5	6	Score
Greg Berry, Sleepy Hollow IL		2H	Dbl	Dbl	3S	5D	5D	440
Bob Carteaux, Fort Wayne IN		3C	Pass	Pass	4S	5D	Pass	510
Mark Kessler, Springfield IL		Dbl	4H	Pass	4H	5S	Pass	570
George Klemic, Bensenville IL		3C	Pass	Dbl	3S	5S	4C	540
Tom Kniest, University City MO		3C	4H	4H	4C	5D	Pass	530
Larry Matheny, Loveland CO		3C	4H	Pass	3S	5S	Pass	590
Bev Nelson, Fort Myers FL		3C	4H	Pass	4C	5S	Pass	600
Manuel Paulo, Lisbon, Portugal		Dbl	4H	Pass	3H	5S	Pass	590
Larry Rabideau, St. Anne IL		2H	4C	Pass	2D	5S	Pass	550
Jack Spear, Kansas City MO		2NT	4H	Pass	4C	5S	4D	520
Toby Strite, San Jose CA		Dbl	4H	Pass	2D	5S	5C	550
Arbha Vongsvivut, Godfrey IL		Dbl	Pass	Dbl	4C	5S	Pass	560
How the Staff voted
Tom Dodd, Branchburg NJ		Dbl	Dbl	Pass	3S	5S	Pass	570
Kent Feiler, Harvard IL		Pass	Dbl	Pass	4C	5S	Pass	560
Scott Merritt, Abuja, Nigeria		Dbl	4H	Pass	3H	5S	Pass	590
Karen Walker, Champaign IL		3C	4H	Pass	3S	5S	4D	560
Solvers Honor Roll  (Solver average: 491)
Zoran Bohacek, Zagreb, Croatia		3C	4H	Pass	3S	6D	Pass	570
Tim Francis-Wright, Medford MA		3C	4H	Pass	3S	6D	Pass	570
Robert Lambert, Warsaw IN		3C	Pass	Pass	3H	5S	Pass	570
Dave Smith, Memphis, TN		2H	4H	Pass	4C	5S	Pass	570
Sandy Barnes, Wildomar CA	550	Terry Goodykoontz, Champaign IL						540
Jim Diebel, Wood Dale IL	550	Nigel Guthrie, Reading UK						540
John R. Mayne, Riverbank CA	550	Linda Lubeck, Troy IL						540
Fred Sandegren, Quincy IL	550	Glenn Smith, Chesterfield MO						540
John Seng, Champaign IL	550	Michael Spurgeon, Muncie IN						540
R. Tewari, Delhi	550