District 8 Solvers Forum -- from the April, 2001 issue of the District 8 Advocate

by Tom Dodd, Boerne TX

1.  Matchpoints, both vulnerable

What is your call as South holding:    S-J9875    H-AQ    D-KJ5   C-A94 ?

This set starts with a bang and ends with a whimper. Rather like the last five John Grisham books. This one had friends and long-term partners offering different viewpoints, indicating it must be a good problem.

MARSHALL: “Pass. There is a ‘rule’ that you don’t let the opponents sacrifice undoubled after you bid game, but this operates only when your bid was based on values. Why offer them a  choice after you made them guess?”

WERTHEIMER: “4NT. Sacrifice. Without a heart lead, I expect to be down two, and 4H should make. My bid puts pressure on West who need brass you-know-whats to bid further.”

Unless West has you beat off the top, which seems likely with him sticking his vulnerable neck out at the 4-level. Another pair with differing opinions:

WALKER: “Pass. It appears we’ve been outbid, so I’ll go quietly and hope for a plus, although that’s far from sure. I’m certainly not confident enough to double. The one thing I am sure of is there’s no hope for a plus in 4NT, which can’t have more than 8 tricks.”

KNIEST: “4NT. Might make, or might be a good sac against a cold 4H.”

4NT making? And I thought my glasses were rose tinted. I suppose North could have an 8th club, or (gasp!) an ace for a red preempt, but only two panelists were optimistic enough to suggest a make for 4NT. And none of the 4NT sackers so much as hinted that they’d run to 5C if doubled. Serve them all right if North puts down x, x, Qxxx, KQJxxxx as a dummy in 4NT. Told you my glasses had rose tint. Another pair in turmoil:

MERRITT: “4NT. I would much rather the opening leader be in the blind and protect that heart queen.”

WARD:  “Double. Anything could be right, including 4NT. I was almost convinced to bid again to give us a chance with pairs who were left alone in 3NT, but I doubt I’m the only one facing this problem. Knowing partner’s style would help, but I’d rather take a small plus than a minus.”

An excellent analysis, even if the majority didn’t double (and they have good reason according to my math). If 4H goes down, any plus will beat the savers. And if 4H makes, at least you’ll have company for the bottom score.

2.  IMPs, both vulnerable

    What is your call as South holding:    S-542    H-Q74   D-KJ1065   C-74 ?

I must be getting soft as I approach middle age. When the fires of youth burned in my belly, I would have castigated the panel and solvers for not knowing their own bidding system and dinged all the calls that went against the system, as most did here.

POPKIN:  “2D. Since the redouble was simply a support double showing 3 diamonds, and it is IMPS, I bid 2D, the safest contract.”

Yes folks, BWS plays support doubles/redoubles, and some panelists thought this was one. My editor says she’s never heard of support doubles used after 1C-1D and can’t imagine that BWS means for them to apply here. Add to that the fact that we add an asterisk even to widely played treatments (i.e., neg. dbls.), and I’m not sure why so many thought this un-asterisked redouble was conventional. But since there was some confusion, everyone gets 100 for playing.

For argument’s sake, we’ll look at what might have been had North made a “standard” redouble. The passers offer some  good arguments, but IMP scoring dishes out rather harsh punishment for missing red games.

WALKER:  “Pass. North is showing power, but there are important inferences to be taken. With a solid 19 and/or moderate diamond length, he wouldn’t be torturing me with the subtleties of this auction — he’d have made the simple value bid of 2NT instead of redoubling. Redouble shows a willingness to double at least one of their suits and therefore implies diamond shortness, which means 3NT, and probably even 2NT, are hopeless.”

BOSWELL argued similarly for Pass, citing an example hand for North (2-4-2-5, with a scattered 18 count). While I agree that game is not a big favorite, pass is just too final. Unless North is known to bid games simply because he’s red, you owe him one call here. So should we invite?

ATHY:  “2NT. Most of partner’s diamond holdings won’t make 3NT (Axx is only a slight favorite and Qxx  a mild underdog). Not that he’ll  be able to figure this out, but at least we have a chance to stop in 2NT. Whatever the case, I’m not passing at IMPs.”

Or bash into game?

WHEELER:  “3NT. Partner figures to have a big hand. Hope the 5-card diamond suit will be enough.”

G. KESSLER:  “3NT. With a fifth diamond and partner’s values well placed, 3NT may succeed. Even if it can be beaten, it must be defended right. How many matches have you won or lost on a close red game that’s really hard to defend?”

More than I can count, but I’ll never tell.

3.  Matchpoints, NS vulnerable

What is your call as South holding: S-A9653  H-A1073   D-AQJ  C-J ?

Another fun preempt. At least we only have to endure one round of bidding in the Forum; at the table we’d be screaming for the aspirin by now. Many were content to silently invoke Hamman’s Rule (If a number of bids are available and one is 3NT ...).

MYERS:  “3NT. The sure game will be worth more than the set. Partner will bid on if he is shapely.”

WEINSTEIN: “3NT. Unless I have an agreement that partner must reopen with shortness it is too likely to go all pass. Partner will not play me for trapping at this vulnerability and will pass out many minimums.“

MARSHALL:  “3NT. A negative double will work if North has four good hearts, but if not, what have I done?”

Exactly. Preempts were invented to cause headaches. Look at the pounder we got from Problem 1, and that was our side preempting! The passers are hoping for a reopening double and a Bergen 3-bid from East.

BOSWELL:  “Pass. If you never look for big numbers, you’ll never get them.”

WILLIAMS:  “Pass. I hope partner reopens with a double.”

G. KESSLER: “Pass. With trump promotions and quick tricks, I think we can collect 800 or more.”

According to Dave Wetzel, who sent  this problem, it was indeed 800. East even had a good 3S bid -- KQJ10xxx -- and all he could score was 5 trumps.

I’m wondering if Hugh and Gary  still pair up and play EHAA (Every Hand An Adventure). We had some rollicking good times playing (and playing against!) that system, where 3S at this vulnerability might be Qxxxx.

FEILER: “Pass, and pass the reopening double. The truth is I just like to double, but my other options aren’t wonderful if I don’t double. If I make a negative double and partner bids 4C, where do we go from there?”

The negative-doublers were willing to risk missing 3NT and perhaps get too high. Their spokesman:

HUDSON: “Double. This gives up on 3NT, but I can probably bid 4NT later . Bidding 3NT now would give up on hearts and on slam.”

I don’t see how 3NT gives up on slam. And while 4NT over a 4C rebid should be to play, are you sure North will read it? One simple rule I follow when dealing with preempts is that when you get fixed, stay fixed. If you try to get cute, you get burned more often than not, and partnership harmony isn’t worth the occasional spectacular result.

4.  Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

What is your call as South holding: S-AQ6   H-3  D-KQ109  C-KQ853 ?

Still another preempt headache. When we opened 1C we intended to reverse, hoping to land on our feet if North responded 1H. Our hand has now gotten better, which prompted some to advance a cuebid:

WARD: “3H. I had a similar hand two years ago in a Swiss match and the cuebid only propelled later confusion at the 5-level.”

What a great reason to select the same bid again.

WERTHEIMER: “3H. This leaves all options open, shows strength, and suggests I might not have a 4-card spade suit. Pretty good for one bid.”

Making a cuebid in the Forum at least guarantees you won’t have to cope with the next round, especially if partner bails into 4C  or 4D.

WALKER: “3D. A cuebid really overstates this hand’s strength and hangs partner if he has a minimum. 3D isn’t a reverse, but I think it should imply mild extra values, since partner hasn’t really shown that suit.”

MYERS:  “3D. The ideal fit makes the hand just worth a reverse. I can come back to spades next.”

But is 3D really a reverse? Wouldn’t we bid the same with x, Kx, AJxx, AJxxxx? Again, the preempt did its job, creating confusion out of what would likely have been a comfortable auction. Given the matchpoint scoring, I’m a bit  surprised no one bid spades.

ATHY:  “3D. I hate this underbid on my 4-loser hand, but 3H seems a bit much. Besides it’s too early to worry. Wait until North bids 3NT; then you get to guess again.”

If North chirps 3NT at the next turn to call, I pass cheerfully. May all your guesses be that easy, Obi-wan.

5.  IMPs, both vulnerable

What is your call as South holding: S-Void  H-KQ  D-KQ10843  C-AJ752 ?

I love balancing problems; we always seem to get good discussions on many plausible calls, and this one came within one (2H) of what Jeff Rubens used to call a perfecta -- at least one panelist voting for each suit, plus NT, pass and double. A plurality thought it best to suggest playing in East’s suit:

MYERS:  “2D. This must be natural since I would have doubled with a general takeout type of hand.”

KNIEST: “2D,  confirming a trap. I’ll bid 3C if they compete or if partner bids 2H. I’m aware partner may have two minor-suit doubletons. However, it seems silly not to show my holdings with this much  strength and shape.”

Wouldn’t a NT bid now show something like this? Were the diamond-club holdings reversed, we would have overcalled the first round, wouldn’t we?  Or could 2NT still be for the two lowest unbid suits?

MERRITT: “2NT. Yuck. It makes perfect sense to me. Hopefully, partner understands that this is for the minors and not for clubs and hearts.”

WEINSTEIN: “2NT. Partner should read this as minors since I didn’t overcall 1H, bid 2NT the first time, or double 1S. This gets the hand off my chest, and hopefully partner can judge reasonably over any further EW bidding.”

FEILER: “3C. These situations where you pass RHO’s opening bid and spring to life with a strong bid later  all show a stack in opener’s suit.”

WILLIAMS:  “Double. Way too good for a simple 2D. When I bid diamonds over North’s heart call, he should figure it out. Obviously, 2S is a cuebid since if I had a decent hand with spades, why didn’t I overcall?”

If 2S is an obvious cuebid, why double? If you’re lucky, your next action won’t be to grip your chest in pain as North ponders his opening lead!

My preference is to keep the bidding low to allow room to investigate. If  NT shows the minors, why not bid it at the 1-level?  This can’t possibly be natural, and leaves room for maneuvering if partner makes an encouraging noise. After all, isn’t one of the problems with the jump that it forces North to pick a minor no matter what he holds, forcing us to guess whether to continue?  At a lower level, we can raise comfortably, and if North’s hand is unsuitable (Kniest’s double doubleton is highly likely) we get out low for a likely plus. Certainly EW aren’t going to compete too high, at least not without peril.

What about the cuebid?

WARD:  “2S. Rather simple logic: I trapped, and I don’t want to defend, or I have some flaw for a double. From that, she should be able to figure out I’m two-suited when I bid clubs next.”

HUDSON:  “2S. An easy problem. The cuebid shows a good hand and suggests a spade void, so I must have diamonds since I passed last time. And I must have a second suit, or I would just bid diamonds. My second suit must be clubs, for with hearts I would have overcalled. There: partner knows my hand almost to the card!”

Granted, the balancing cuebid is likely to show decent values and a probable minor two suiter (with both majors you would’ have bid Michaels over 1D, or 2NT with the round suits), but unless you’ve discussed this sequence with partner, don’t expect him to know your hand almost to the card.  

6.  Matchpoints, none vulnerable

What is your call as South holding: S-43   H-KJ865  D-AJ3  C-Q87 ?

If you were wondering why so much ink was spilt on the first 5 problems, it’s because this one had me yawning even before the first answer hit my e-mailbox. John Seng said it resembled something out of an old beginner’s text on standard bidding. Except for the 5th heart, this hand would presumably have led to the second unanimous panel in my memory. Apparently, that innocuous H5 swayed a few otherwise “normal’ bidders into forcing another bid from North.

POPKIN:  “2D. Fourth suit to hear if partner can raise hearts.”

A slight misconception from some solvers, and even a few panelists, about the impact of a fourth-suit bid. First, 4^th-suit-forcing here is not game forcing, since it isn’t a reverse or a 3-level bid. It does, however, promise a rebid, so unless you decide to violate system and pass North’s minimum rebid, good luck landing on your feet.

BOSWELL:  “2NT. Get in the general nature and strength of my hand.”

WERTHEIMER:  “2NT. Direct, definitive and does not deny 5 hearts.”

Enough said. See you all (I’m from Indiana, so don’t look for any Texan yawls) on the flip side in October.

Solvers Honor Roll  (Solvers’ average:  498 )

Bob Bernhard, Florida -- 600
Tony Curtis, Chicago -- 600
Judy Eaton/Glafkos Galanos, Carbondale IL --  570
Richard Beye, Webster Groves MO -- 550
Charles Blair, Urbana IL -- 550
Larry Rabideau, St Anne IL -- 550
Adam Miller, Hermosa Beach CA -- 550
Ed Rauch, Montgomery IL -- 550
Tied with 540: Bob Carteaux, Ft. Wayne IN; Chris Depetro, Chicago; Jim Slaughter, Champaign IL;
Dave McNitt, Elkhart IN; Allan Sheppard, St. Louis.