District 8 Solvers Forum -- October 2013

* (Forcing NT)

What is your call as South holding   AKJ1076  KQ83  K4  3 ?

Good problem, with very close panel voting between 2H and 3S. Any tie should be broken in favor of 3S, since two hyper-aggressive panelists went for the game-forcing 3H jump shift.

KNIEST:  "3H. Surely the playing strength here justifies a jump-shift."

WARD:  "3H. Don't need much for game, much less slam. Axxxx of hearts and another ace makes 6H."

A good case can be made for vulnerable-at-IMPs 3S bid:

SOKOL:  "3S. Too much risk of missing game with 2H. 3H virtually forces to the 4-level. It's time to show strength and hope for the best."

MATHENY:  "3S. A 2H rebid might work but is more likely to miss a game."

WALKER:  "3S. Only bid that gets across the suit quality and hand strength. 2H feels like an underbid and 3H is an overbid. Can't think of too many hands where it's critical that we play in hearts instead of spades."

KESSLER:  "3S. Spades are too good, and I do not want to play 2H when partner has one spade and three hearts."

Those aggressive bids are strong votes against the conservative 2H:

HINCKLEY:  "2H. Especially at IMPs, responder will strain to keep the bidding open. No reason to bid 3S and find responder with five hearts and a stiff spade."

RABIDEAU:  "2H. Not quite a jump-shift in my book. Partner sees the vulnerability and knows the form of scoring, so is unlikely to pass with a hand that produces game."

DIEBEL:  "2H. Where's the problem?"

Still, I found myself agreeing with the majority of the Solvers who chose 2H. They'll go plus much more often, and their partners will usually bid again on game-going hands, possibly leading to an informative auction such as 1S-1NT-2H-2S-3S. And they'll always reach game opposite heart values.

* (Denies 3+ hearts)

What is your call as South holding  A  KJ6543  1042  J87 ?

Another good problem with multiple possible actions. Double gets 100, because the panel's preference for action vs. inaction demotes the Pass.

Mark offered an especially strong argument against passing at matchpoints:

KESSLER:  "Double. Shows cards and a willingness to compete. Passing is losing bridge over a period of time in this position."

WALKER:  "Double. Yet another "Do something intelligent" double. I hope I'm not torturing partner, but this hand is just a bit too good to give up."

PAULO:  "Double. With four spades, North will pass and with two hearts, he should raise my suit. His critical distribution is 3=1=4=5. Then, I trust partner's judgment."

Bridge Baron didn't want to defend, either, but came up with:

BRIDGE BARON:  "3H. Show the sixth heart. Just strong enough."

The passers didn't have so much to say:

RABIDEAU:  "Pass. Looks like a misfit. Pard probably has a stiff heart, 3-4 spades, and any diamonds cards are ill-placed."

BOHACEK:  "Pass. I said all I needed to say."

MATHENY:  "Pass. I've bid enough."

HINCKLEY:  "Pass. The three small diamonds and the singleton spade ace sway me to the conservative pass. If I was going to act, an artificial 2NT should show the partial club support.

And here's my choice:

DIEBEL:  "3C. I don't hold out much hope for beating 2S, although it could be our last plus. I'll take a two-way shot with 3C and hope one of the two contracts make. Partner doesn't have 6 clubs, but -50 or -100 might still be a winner. Clear pass at IMPs.

I prefer 3C, which allows us to play in a 5-3 club fit or 6-2 heart fit. (Partner would not have raised with Qx of hearts.)  I like the offensive value of this hand and dislike the matchpoint expectancy of defending 2S, as the ace of spades is well-placed for declarer.

3.  Matchpoints, NS vulnerable 

What is your call as South holding   Q843  K5  K53  AJ105  ?

There were some objections to the initial 2NT:

KNIEST:  "4C. Surely a cuebid was in order before any notrump bid. Now, it's hard to find spades. We still have a possible laydown slam, so I bid 4C.

Interesting that they both complained about the 2NT bid obscuring a possible spade fit, but neither wanted to bid spades when given this second opportunity.

With the auction we're given, the main choices are now 3S and 3NT. I like 3S here to keep open all possibilities.

KESSLER:  "3S. At some point, we should let partner know we have a four-card major. Not that I object to 2NT -- I'm just happy to have a second chance to show the spades."

WARD:  "3S. I'm probably alone on this one, but pard could have four spades and five hearts."

WALKER:  "3S. Partner's 3H accepted the game try and showed five hearts. He might also have four spades, so I might as well throw that suit into the mix. If that's not our fit, he'll go back to 3NT."

DIEBEL:  "3S. If partner insists on a suit contract, so be it. 3S must be forcing. This should show good clubs and bad spades."

The triple stopper in clubs made 3NT a more attractive choice for these panelists:

BOHACEK:  "3NT. I have more points than expected, but I don't like them much."

HINCKLEY:  "3NT. Very close decision between 3NT and 4H since a sneak attack in spades or diamonds may hold 3NT to a trick less than 4H."