♠ District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2024

            by Karen Walker, Champaign IL

Participants from the web site Bridgewinners.com are our "virtual panelist". More than 50 readers -- the majority of whom are experienced players -- voted on each problem, and the plurality's choice is included as a panel vote. Each vote grid shows the percentage of Bridgewinners voters who chose each call.

1. Matchpoints, none vulnerable      

What is your call as South holding: ♠KJ   ♥Q4   ♦7543   ♣A9865 ?

When answering a quiz in a bidding forum, there's a natural tendency to assume that the most descriptive call -- and the one you want to make -- has an obvious "everyone plays it this way" meaning. It might even be the exact agreement that you have with your regular partner. The Forum conditions, though, specify that your partner is an anonymous but experienced player and you're using agreements based on Bridge World Standard (BWS).

BWS doesn't define every possible auction. Sometimes, you have to rely on what you believe to be the "expert standard" interpretation (the most widely played meaning for a call) and assume partner is of the same mind.

Here, the panel majority thought that Double was the expert standard call, but they had several different ideas about what it meant. Some were definitive; some were guesses. 

McALLISTER: Double. Values.

ROBINSON: Double. Double of 2H says that I would have bid 2H. If partner has six hearts, I want him to bid 3H if the opponents stop in 3D.

JONQUET: Double. Should show a high heart honor (probably doubleton) and near limit-raise values.

RABIDEAU:  Double. I have at least two hearts with an honor but not good enough to bid 3H.

So we have general values, a heart raise and two types of lead directors that show high honors -- one that suggests a doubleton and one that could be 3-card or longer support. And these panelists mention yet another way a double might be misinterpreted:

WARD: Double. If this is responsive in BWS, I have no idea what else to bid.

JONES: Pass. I don't have enough distribution or strength to bid anything. If I double, partner might underlead the ♥A. I have honors in both spades and clubs, so I don't want to suggest she lead something else. Also, she might read a double as responsive and play me for long spades as well as clubs.

If your RHO had raised to 2D or 3D, there would be no confusion about your double. It would have been responsive, showing length in the black suits. In the auction in the problem, responder's 2H cuebid is also a diamond raise (limit or better), so might partner think you're making a responsive double? It's another issue that could create a misunderstanding. 

I think the most widely accepted meaning for this double is that it's lead directing, but that it promises one of the top two honors. The problem with doubling with ♥Qx is that you really don't want a heart lead unless partner has the ♥K. If he's on lead and his suit is ♥A10xxx or ♥AJxxx, he'll assume it's okay to lead low, which could give up a trick. That may have influenced these two panelists:

HINCKLEY:  3C. We may belong in 3H or 4C and this is the best way to keep both options open.

KNIEST:  3C. The opponents have a big fit and I have pure values to compete. I can really stand a heart rebid and welcome a club raise.

Although we can't be sure the opponents have a "big" fit, it sounds like they have at least 8 diamonds. That means partner is short and likely to have club support, which is why they aren't all that worried about the strength of the clubs.

All this uncertainty, the lack of a great fit and the possibility of misleading partner on defense convinced me to pass. This panelist, though, brings up another argument for the double:   

SPEAR:  Double. Usually doubling 2H here would show the ♥A or ♥K. On this hand, though, there's an indication that their side does not have an 8-card spade fit, so they may play in notrump. If so, we would like a heart lead, and it may even be best versus a suit.

It's a good point and worth considering. If they play 2NT or 3NT, I may be sorry I didn't double 2H, even if I don't have the "right" honor holding.

2.  IMPs, EW vulnerable
 

    * (Forcing NT)

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AK3   ♥A108542   ♦KJ4   ♣K ?

There are three possible approaches that could work:
  (1)  Show your strength and suitability for notrump, but hide the 6th heart (2NT)
  (2)  Show your strength and 6th heart, but perhaps mislead partner about your suit quality (3H)
  (3)  Temporize to get more information from partner (2C, 2D, 2S) 

A fourth option -- forcing to game (3D, 3NT) -- was rejected by the panel. This 18-count doesn't really have enough playing strength to make game opposite a bare minimum with no fit.

The majority chose the notrump route (1), mainly because they thought 3H should promise a stronger suit.

HEINS: 2NT. Yes, I have six hearts, but they are poor and a 3H bid is putrid. 2NT is a perfect value fit. To boot, I have extra stoppers in partner's other short suit and great cards in partner's likely source of tricks. No second choice here.

HINCKLEY: 2NT. 3NT shows a solid heart suit and this hand doesn't look like a 3H jump.

SPEAR: 2NT. Showing the 18 points will be best if partner has a singleton heart, and may be okay opposite a doubleton.

STACK: 2NT. The straightforward value. Cannot bid 3H on a suit this weak and 2H is just not enough.

ROBINSON: 2NT. I play 2NT practically forcing, which gives partner room to show me two hearts in case she does not have a good stopper in one of the side suits.

The 3H bidders were concerned about missing a heart fit, with some expressing hope that they could still find notrump.

KNIEST: 3H. Tempting to bid 3NT but we might get there anyway if pard has less than honor doubleton of hearts.

JONES: 3H. A slight underbid perhaps, but the trumps are not great and the club king is stiff, so I'm content to invite game.

WARD: 3H.  I don't want to bury the sixth heart by bidding 2NT.

Both 2NT and 3H are telling bids that limit your strength and ask partner to make a decision about the final contract. The panel's other choice -- 2S -- is essentially an asking bid that shows a wider point-range and puts off the decision. 

BAKER: 2S. As long as this doesn't talk partner into playing what he thinks is a Moysian fit, it seems best as the cheapest forcing bid.

RABIDEAU: 2S. Holding no more than three spades, partner is unlikely to raise or pass. If he rebids, 2NT or 3C, I'll bid 3NT. Over his 3H, I'll bid 4H. Over 3D, I'll bid 5D.

2S will drag another bid out of partner, but none of his possible choices seem to be very helpful. In all of RABIDEAU's examples, partner could have an awful 6-count, so you're still guessing about game chances.  

When in doubt, telling is usually preferable to asking because it simplifies the auction and gives partner a clearer choice. Here, the telling bids of 2NT and 3H each show a specific hand type and issue a game invitation, which is what this hand is worth. Either could work, but I think partner will expect stronger hearts for a 3H rebid. Even with the sixth heart, this looks like a notrump hand to me, so I'm a 2NT bidder. 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠KQ92   ♥K10874   ♦AJ95   ♣Void ?

The evaluations were all over the place on this one, with votes ranging from passable simple raises to slam tries.

The more conservative panelists liked their diamond fit, but had concerns about wasted values in other suits. 

SPEAR: 3D. Our hand is 13 points with 4-card support and a void, which would normally justify a 2S cuebid. With the spade overcall behind us, however, our 5 points in spades will probably only score one trick. Also, partner's high cards in clubs may be wasted opposite our void.

HEINS: 3D. My values are nice and all, but there is no reason to believe game is likely opposite a minimum hand from partner. A void in the unbid suit bars the only other value bid, 2NT.

STACK: 3D. Raising to 3D to await further bidding, if there is any.

Partner's 2D shows a constructive hand and a long suit, but it's not forcing to game. He isn't promising any more than 9 or 10 points for his 2-over-1 in competition, so it's possible that we're short on high-card points. Our trump fit, though, is at least 9 cards and could be more. That and the side void convinced the rest of the panel to make stronger moves.

BAKER: 2S. The void makes this good enough that even if partner stretched a little to bid 2D, I'm happy to force. 3D has the problem of making it hard to find out about the club situation for 3NT, and 4C has the problem of going past 3NT.

HINCKLEY: 2S. Showing a diamond raise too good for a non-forcing 3D. A 4C splinter at IMPs.

JONQUET: 2S. Need to focus Pard's attention on their club holding. Not giving up on 3NT yet (I like that ♠9), but if I don't hear 3C from Pard next, I'll probably bid game in whatever I do hear. If LHO doubles 2S and it's passed back to me, then 4D seems about right.

ROBINSON: 2S. Gives partner a chance to show something else about his hand.

The advantage of the 2S cuebid is that it saves space and keeps all possible games in the picture. The downside is that it pressures partner into making another bid without knowing what you're looking for. 2S shows strength and implies diamond support, but doesn't guarantee it (you might, for example, bid 2S here with  ♠xxx  ♥AKQxx  ♦Ax  ♣KQx).

If you think your hand is worth a slam try, how about this?

WARD: 4C. Yes, we are missing 3NT now, but I'd hate to play there opposite  ♠x  ♥Ax  ♦Kxxxxx  ♣xxxx .

Way back when at the Illini Union duplicate club, if you bid four of a minor at Kimmel Jones' table, he'd start singing (to the tune of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"):

    "Everyone smiles as you bid past 3NT and get so in-CRED-ibly high . . ."

Kimmel would be singing to himself this time:

JONES: 4C. A splinter raise of diamonds, showing short clubs. I considered 5C (exclusion Blackwood), but we will be too high if partner has just one keycard outside of clubs. After 4C, partner should cue a major-suit ace if he now likes his hand, and we will go slamming.

If a slam is there, this is probably the best way to involve partner in the decision. If not, we've made it impossible to play 3NT, but as Ward pointed out, that could be a good thing.

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AQJ754   ♥AKJ7   ♦5   ♣64 ?

Like the previous problem, you have strong trump support and a number of different ways you could show it. Not everyone thought the hand in Problem #3 was worth a move past game (or for some, even a partscore), but almost everyone had slam aspirations with this hand. How do you get partner to tell you what you need to know?

One strategy is to introduce your strong side suit and show your enthusiasm for hearts later. 

BAKER: 2S. Hiding a 9-card fit in an auction where the opponents might be about to preempt sounds crazy, but I'm willing to bid 5H next if needed, and showing the spades may give partner a better idea of what to do if the opponents take the dive at 6C.

There were also several votes for a jump to 3S, which it's assumed was intended as a fit-showing raise, describing a good spade suit and heart support. Although that agreement isn't part of BWS system, 3S gets the same score as 2S. The fit-showing jump has the advantage that it tells partner more about your hand than 2S, but it uses up so much room that it could defeat your purpose. The one thing we know about partner's hand is that he has weak hearts. Even if he has help in spades, with a minimum and that heart suit, he's going to be hesitant to cooperate with a slam try. 

The panel thought it was important to tell partner right now that hearts were trump: 

ROBINSON: 3C. Sets trump as soon as possible. I don't like 4D since it doesn't give partner a chance to invite back. I really dislike 2S because it doesn't set trumps.

SPEAR: 3C. Show the excellent heart support first, with control bidding to follow.

STACK: 3C. Start with the attempt to show a heart fit and then explore for slam after that.

WARD: 3C.  I don't want to bury spades, but we want to protect partner's club holding. Going to be a tougher problem when LHO bids 5C and that comes back to me.

The cuebid doesn't tell partner much, but it keeps the auction low. It shows a limit-raise or better, so you'll find out right away if partner has more than a dead minimum (he'll do something other than retreat to 3H). It will take more bidding to get information about partner's minor-suit controls.

Five panelists (but surprisingly no Bridgewinners voters) chose a more direct slam try.

HEINS: 4D, splinter. The bid that is most likely to get us to the right place. It highlights the need for second-round club control and lets partner determine if we have no diamond wastage, which is key to a minimum-value slam.

KNIEST: 4D. I certainly don't want to play a spade contract with a club lead from lefty. Splinter now and see what that elicits.

JONQUET: 4D. Surely my singleton diamond, 4-card heart support and game-going strength are more important than my spades. Real question is: do I bid 4S over Pard's 4H?

RABIDEAU: 4D. If I go slow with a 2S bid, I'll never convince partner that we have a 9+ heart fit, especially important here given her crappy suit. I'll bid 4S over 4H.

This uses up more space than 3C but it gives partner a better idea of what you're looking for. It should also ameliorate his concerns about his weak trump suit, as you almost always have at least four trumps for a splinter raise.

Here's yet another option that will simplify the slam exploration. For maximum auction economy, ask a direct question:

HINCKLEY: 5H. Asking for club control. If partner bids 6D (both minor suit aces), we are in a grand. (For those playing 5H as weak, see Karen Walker's http://kwbridge.com/bb/habits-9r.htmm .)

What is your call as South holding:  ♠J4   ♥963   ♦AQJ5   ♣AKQ10 ?

As we all learned in bridge class, high-card points aren't the only justification for competing over an opponent's opening bid. Unless you have a real powerhouse, you need stoppers, shortness, a long suit . . . something other than what this hand offers, especially when the auction has started at the two-level. These panelists and the Bridgewinners voters thought that was good advice:

BAKER: Pass. Ugly, but what can you do? If you double, partner will bid spades and this hand isn't good enough to do more after that. 2NT with this "stopper"? No.

JONQUET: Pass. Some preempts work.

McALLISTER: Pass. Easier since they are vulnerable.

Then again, we've also learned that at teams, the payoff from the vulnerable game bonus can be worth taking some chances. That moved the rest of the panel and almost 2/3 of the Solvers to enter the auction. They offered five different ways, the panel's top choice being:

HEINS: 2NT. Yes, we could be off 6 top heart tricks. But with no raise from East, it is likely partner has a heart card or that the suit blocks. Too many 8-point hands from partner yield 9 top tricks. Besides, what other call is there?

HINCKLEY: 2NT. I commend those able to pass and take their plus 200 -- and not risk minus 200 to possibly score plus 600 like I am!

SPEAR: 2NT. Bidding NT without a heart stopper is a flaw, but no bid is very descriptive. Hearts were not raised, so partner may come through for us.

ROBINSON: 2NT. Partner promises a stopper on this auction. Any bid is bad, but 2NT has the biggest upside.

Plus there's always the chance that West has read David Bird's opening-leads book and won't even lead his long suit.

And here are four more planets heard from:

KNIEST: 3H. See if that elicits 3NT. If not, I'll have a new bid to deal with.

JONES: 3D. Can't bid 2NT or 2S or double or pass. 3H wouldn't work either, as partner would think I have spades. So the least of evils is to bid 3C or 3D . . . and I picked 3D over 3C because I open 1D with 4-4 in the minors.

STACK: DBL. Start with double to see what partner can bid. 2NT as a balancing bid is tempting.

WARD: 3C. I'll go alone here. Double could lead to a disaster. Our best hope is that partner has some random 10-count with a heart stopper.

There's a slight tone of apology in some of the comments, but in general, they all seem fairly comfortable with their offbeat choices. I think it's very close between passing and everything else, but at IMPs, I just couldn't talk myself into letting the opponents play 2H, even at +100 per undertrick. I'm a 2NT bidder -- partly because outside of the "missing" heart stopper, it's the best description of my general strength and pattern and partly because, as Robinson pointed out, it's the call that rates to get us to the highest-scoring contract if it's right.

* (Negative double. Does not promise 4-4 in unbid suits)

What is your call as South holding: ♠KJ1054   ♥Void   ♦AQ   ♣KQ10943 ?

We're happy and a bit surprised by the encouraging noise from partner, especially by the possibility that he has spades. That's not a sure thing, as you need to be flexible in interpreting a negative double at the 4-level. The higher the auction, the more likely that partner intends this as more of an informative, "this is our hand" double. That prompted the plurality of the panel to be cautious:

BAKER: 4S. If I could be sure of a 9-card spade fit, I might push harder.

KNIEST: 4S. Matchpoints. Go plus, not crazy.

RABIDEAU: 4S. Taking the low road due to partner's likely wastage in hearts. Close second choice is 5D (and keep my diamond streak going).

WARD: 4S.  Second choice would be pass, but that would be extremely speculative. I'd rather try to go for a reasonable plus score in game than hope partner has more than the black aces.

ROBINSON: 4S. Why did I not open 1S? We could be cold for 7S if partner has ♠Axxxx  ♥xxxx  ♦x  ♣Axx -- or 4S if partner has ♠xxx  ♥AKQx   ♦x  ♣Jxxxx .

Robinson's second example hand is Exhibit A for why it could be risky to force the auction too high with this hand. The rest of the panel, though, saw too much potential.

HEINS: 5S. Could be wildly optimistic, but when a shapely 6-count or a balanced 10-count yields a cold slam, I have to try.

So what does 5S mean? You don't have a confirmed fit, so it's not a control-asking bid (like the jump to 5H in Problem #4). It should be forcing, since spades is a suit partner may not have and you're therefore saying you're prepared for him to bid 6C. That inference is easy to miss at the table, though. To partner, 5S may sound like an invitational jump.

This panelist thinks partner will figure it out by looking at his own cards:

SPEAR: 5S. This does not ask specifically for a diamond stopper for slam, which the black aces and spade queen will make clear.

Here's a different route to 6 of something:

McALLISTER: 5NT. Pick a slam.

Partner will know that's forcing, but will he know what suits are up for consideration? He may think you're showing a 4-4-1-4 pattern and offering to play in any suit but diamonds.

Others considered more subtle tries but eventually decided to just blast to the final contract: 

HINCKLEY: 6S. If I knew partner would take 5S as forcing, that is the clear choice. I need to declare to protect my diamond holding. I expect partner to have approximately 3=5=2=3 shape or similar.

STACK: 6S. Not going to try and get to 7S or 7C and will just bid what I think we can make. Can partner bid seven with the black aces ? Yes. Can opponents double with the black aces ? Yes.

JONES: 6S. With partner holding the right two cards, 6S will roll. So you've got to ask yourself just one question: Do I feel lucky? "Well, do you, punk?" I certainly do.

I'm with them, and not just because I'm feeling lucky. Partner needs a pretty good hand -- with, I hope, a black ace or two -- to compete at the 4-level. I also think it's likely he actually has four spades, as he's short in diamonds and probably doesn't have more than five hearts.

Thanks to all of the panelists and readers who participated in this set of problems. Leading all Solvers with 570 were Scott Lewis of Murray KY and Lars Erik Bergerud of Oslo, Norway. Both are invited to join the panel for the next issue, which will be in September 2024.

Problems for the September issue are below. Please submit your solutions on the web form by August 31. The September issue will be online around September 9.

If you'd like to receive notices when new problems are posted, click here to join the Forum mailing list or send your request to kwbridge@comcast.net .

Thanks for participating!