By Tom Dodd, Boerne TX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding:
S-K102 H-1085 D-QJ5
C-A864 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A queasy little tickler to begin a rather interesting set of problems. Balancing doubles often wreak havoc with their wide range of distribution and strength.
Don't know about you folks, but I haven't defended a 1-level suit contract at matchpoints in about forever. That's because I want partner balancing on any average hand of 13 cards. It doesn't pay, almost never in my book, to pass out a suit bid at the one-level at matchpoints.
South's hand is marginal (flat distribution, minimum values) for a jump response. There's no stopper for notrump, not to mention the positional defects with the opening lead going through North's (presumed) stopper. What else can one do but chirp out a simple 2C?
POPKIN: "2C. The least of evils. At matchpoints, I'm not going to use the all-purpose cuebid just because I don't have a convenient bid. I may have 10 points but if we have a game, I'm hoping partner will be able to bid again. "
HUDSON: 2C. Opposite a direct double I might try 1NT, but here, that would wrong-side the contract (optimistically assuming partner has a stopper). Opposite a balancing double, I'm not worth more than a minimum bid."
Others weren't so sure:
KNIEST: 2H, and pass any response except a jump suit rebid. 1NT looks OK on values, but at matchpoints, the opening lead could make a big difference, so I elect to endplay RHO."
WALKER: " 1NT. A jump or cuebid is out of the question opposite a balancing double, which could be quite light, especially at this vulnerability. I don't like 1NT, but it's about the only safe way to show some values, which could be important if partner has a good hand."
BEYE: "1NT. Despite my heart holding. This is the only action that shows this hand. Too good for 2C, which is the only other action that I considered."
FEILER: "1S. If partner had made a direct double, I'd probably bid 2C, but the balance may be hiding a notrump hand, and I want to give him a nice, easy 1NT rebid. The deafening silence from the opponents may indicate that partner has some points and some hearts."
Do any of these folks sound happy about their choice? I admit that my own preference for 2C may backfire. But at least it's the smallest lie in a barrel of rotten choices. Your duty when responding to a balancing double is to respect partner's decision to keep the bidding alive and strive for a plus score. You want partner to keep balancing in the future, don't you? Well, one sure way to burn partnership trust is turning partner's balances into minus scores by advertising cards you don't hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding:
S-A H-KQJ10865 D-Q1085
C-4 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The latest version of BWS uses the Cappelletti convention over 1NT openings, which explains the scoring for 2C (showing a one-suited hand). With this convention, 2H shows hearts and a minor and double is penalty. The convention on your card doesn't really affect your main decision here, though, which is how many natural hearts to bid.
As you all know (?), 3H is a strong bid over 1NT. But is it enough?
WILLIAMS: 4H. I need a 5 count (heart ace or club king, and diamond J) to have a play. Double has the problem of making many discards on clubs. If I go down 1 or 2, they rate to have game."
WARD: "4H. Bidding more seems excessive, especially since 4 could be cold, and bidding less is wimpish."
Color me a wimp. 4H does have the advantage of taking up space, but is it worth the potential price?
WALKER: 3H. 4H is a real gamble, and when it's wrong (probably more than half the time), it will get doubled. There's really no reason to guess though, when you have a perfectly good way to show this hand with 3H."
BWS doesn't specifically mention jump overcalls of 1NT, but in standard bidding, a jump here is not a preempt -- especially at this vulnerability. It shows a strong suit with about 8.5-9 playing tricks and asks partner to bid on if he has a trick or two for you.
It was pleasing that no panel member voted for the risky penalty double, which makes it too easy for EW to get their suits in. It can also mislead partner as to the true nature of your hand. 2C (showing a one-suiter) also belies the trick-taking potential of the hand. If North does have that hoped-for ace and diamond filler (or shortness), he'll never be convinced your hand is this strong (otherwise you'd have tried an immediate jump overcall).
BEYE: "3H. Double is way too risky at IMPS. We could give up -180 when we're on for a vul. game opposite a number of partner's 5-point hands. I just hope he remembers to bid with one of those right hands."
Hey, would I let you down? Honestly though, an immediate leap to game does have merit, despite the risk of going for 500 against a partscore. There is always the pressure factor, after all:
SIEVERS: "4H. Bid what you think you can make (that's why I bid 3H!- TJD). Partner rates to have about 6 HCP and I'm rooting for the diamond king. I'll let LHO decide whether to wander into the bad spade break. If this is a mistake, my guess is that it won't be the last one in this auction. Apply the pressure."
BOSWELL: "4H. Let's make it difficult for EW to find 4S or 5C. Besides, I may make this. Double could work out, but who says they won't take 7 tricks before I get back in? Double may make it easy for them to find their game.
I'd hazard a guess if this hand had been presented 25 years ago, the vote would have been 2 to 1 for the simple value bid of 3H. The times they are a changing to more aggressive preempts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding: S-8654
H-AKJ42 D-J
C-1075 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This teaser had a surprisingly close vote. Willfully playing in a minor suit (and likely only a 7-card fit at that!), and at matchpoints! What happened to aggressiveness? My initial thoughts here paralleled those of my fellow editor:
KNIEST: "2H. This may be unanimous, but that statement always begets calls I never contemplated."
In all honesty, I did contemplate passing ... for about 1.6 seconds (no director's coming to my table!). Perhaps it's the aversion to playing 2C versus the major, where I get the same score making a trick fewer. Of course, there's a risk of going set in 2H when 2C makes, and it is tough for the opponents to balance into a 3-suit auction, but ...
MARSHALL: Pass. Who knows? You have a fit of sorts and 2C isn't forcing. Other than your magnificent hearts, what else have you?"
MATHENY: Pass. Not a good sequence to pass, but this may be our last chance for a plus score."
BOSWELL: "Pass. My partners raise often with 3. Even if partner has something in hearts, clubs may play better, and partner may have 5 clubs."
FEILER: "2H. I'm a little too good to pass, and if 2H turns out to be the final contract, it should play pretty well, even opposite a singleton."
Exactly my thoughts. And those of the boss, too:
WALKER: "2H. It's matchpoints, so you want your plus score, and you're expecting to get it if you pass 2C. But then again, it's matchpoints, and you want the biggest plus score, which will come from 2H. Normally, I wouldn't think of rebidding a 5-card suit here, but the singleton sways me as I may be able to sneak in two ruffs with that pathetic 42 of trumps and score up 8 or 9 tricks."
Hope springs eternal, in Champaign and all the way to Texas. Hey, with the Spurs winning an NBA crown, anything's possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding:
S-Void H-KJ954 D-AK97
C-AKQ4 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A note on the scoring. 4NT as a plurality would normally receive the 100 score, and pass would earn the same score as 5S. But Blackwood here is a real stab in the dark, in more ways than just the obvious. Even with the perfect" 5S response (showing AKQ of spades), slam is iffy at best. Hands like this are one of the reasons for the popularity of the NAMYATS convention, which uses 4C and 4D to show solid 4H and 4S openers. It even gets the contract played from the correct" side more often.
Enough soapboxing. The Blackwooders seem to feel, with varying degrees of confidence, that they'll be able to place the final contract.
FOGEL: "4NT. If pard shows one key card, we play 5S. With two, we play six. I wish this were matchpoints, then it's only one board."
BEYE: "4NT. Partner knows we're vulnerable, I expect
his 4S call to be a good one. My rebids if he shows:
1 Keycard = Drat! I knew I should have played with someone
else (5S);
2 Keycard, w/o the queen = 5S;
2 Keycards w/ the queen = 6S;
3 Keycards = Ask for the queen."
Blackwood does have one advantage as pointed out by WILLIAMS, in that if North has a perfect fitter -- solid spades and a heart void -- we'll probably find the laydown grand. But can you bid anything with confidence after a 5-level response? The real key cards in North's hand are the spade fillers, without which any slam is destined to fail. Blackwood won't find jacks and tens in the trump suit, yet at least one of them is critical to success or failure here.
In a perfect world the correct" response would be:
WARD: "5H. Very tough problem, but I think finding first- or second- round heart control is more important than good spades. The one drawback is when partner has two little hearts and I just turned a plus into a minus."
BWS defines a new suit here as an asking bid with step responses, so this concept is sound. Even if partner has xx in hearts, the ace may be onside, or his spades may indeed be solid, so 5 still makes. At least you'll find out something useful with an asking bid, for unless North is the type who makes seat-of-the-pants 4S bids red at IMPs, we can assume his suit is at least semi-solid.
Does a single raise accomplish much?
HUDSON: "5S. If I'm going to make a slam try, it's either this (asking about trump quality) or 4NT. The cowardly pass (wimpish and cowardly in the same set, I must be going soft- TJD) has a lot to be said for it. What emboldens me to make the try is that they might not lead hearts, which will let partner pitch his, even if he has trump loser. I hope in assessing his trump quality, North envisages a void rather than a small doubleton."
No worries there, Jim. The 5-level raise has long been used to ask for rock-solid trumps (a suit that can play opposite a void). That's what made 5S my second choice, just behind Pass and just ahead of 5H, which really does give EW information they may need to set you.
I'm not all that comfortable with passing, just less comfortable with anything else. Any bid here is risky. It comes down to this: are you better than even money to make 6S opposite a normal" 4S opener (since the swing is 12-13 IMPs either way)? If yes, then bid on. If no, pass. And be ready for the postmortem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding:
S-J H-Q5 D-J9753
C-AQ765 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To bid or not to bid. The reward is, after all, a vulnerable game at IMPs, something to be sought for vigorously. So why did 2/3 of the panel and more than 3/4 of Solvers eschew the prize?
POPKIN: "Pass. All I have for sure is the ace. If partner only needed an ace, he would have bid game already, knowing that 3H is an attempt to keep us out."
But would North really bid game on his own with something like AK109xx, xx, AQx, Kx? Hardly. I did consider a raise, albeit briefly; the prospect of a red game always tempts even dyed-in-the-wool conservative bidders (which those who know me will vouch that I am not).
The problem with a game raise is simple to my simple mind. Partner is highly likely to own a doubleton heart (with 10, EW would have bid 4H at this vulnerability). He doesn't have solid spades or he'd have bid 4S. That's 3 losers right off the top, so unless we can escape without a minor-suit loser, this dog ain't gonna hunt. Even one of the game bidders didn't sound too confident:
WILLIAMS: "4S. I don't like it, but partner should have 6+. If he had a good hand and fewer than 6 spades, he could always double first."
MARSHALL and FEILER didn't hesitate in raising. Did I miss something? Do I have more than North played me for when sticking his neck into the middle of the auction? An ace and a trump honor is about what partner is hoping for, really. And that's to make 3. I'll be happy to make 3S on the nose here, and not too surprised if we go set.
WALKER: "Pass. The spade jack is tempting, and 4S might have a play if partner has a truckload of trumps. Of course, if he had that and a decent hand he'd have bid 4S. The standard guideline is that North is playing you for about 7-8 HCP when he overcalls their preempt. This 10-count has to be downgraded back to 8 because of that Qx, so I'd pass -- -with no worry at matchpoints, but with some doubt at IMPs."
FOGEL: "Pass. Partner would double with a hand that is likely to make game opposite this mixed bag."
Sure, a game could be on here. We could also be down at 3. Isn't that what makes bridge so much fun?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is your call as South holding:
S-AQ975 H-KQ1074 D-65
C-4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Competing over a weak notrump can be a bigger pain than finding the right spot after a preempt. Against a preempt, at least you know that most other players holding your cards will face the same dilemma. Not so with a weak 1NT. Most Souths will probably have an easy time showing their stuff after West opens a minor and North overcalls 1NT.
MARSHALL: "2NT. Passing should net 500, but will it be 800? Not all Wests will open 1NT, so why not bid your hand? Give yourself a couple of rounds of uncontested bidding to enable you to make an informed choice. I assume 2NT is a two-suiter forcing to game?"
Partner probably has a strong notrump, or (less likely), a running suit and controls. The real problem is in finding a response to the double to show this hand. Of course, you could avoid the dilemma and:
POPKIN: Pass. I've never passed so many times. Let's carry them out. They'd better have good runout tools."
WILLIAMS: "Pass. Let's see, partner doubled and I have 11? Hmmm."
The trouble with passing is the anti-field nature, since most EW's will play strong notrumps. It's hardly unreasonable to assume most NS pairs will reach game, which means we must beat them four tricks to avoid a dismal score. Possible, but not likely. As for the runout, West can see the white pockets on their side of the board, and may elect to sit tight and try to scramble 4 tricks, especially since East had a chance to run and didn't. No, the form of scoring and East's silence point to action. But what?
BEYE: 3S. This problem I hate. I could pass, but we should do better declaring, especially since partner will probably lead the 'wrong' suit. Opposite North's strong NT equivalent, I simply have to hope we land on our feet. I'll be discussing this sequence the next time I play!"
3S would be fine if it were 100% forcing. But are you sure? In any event, this is a two-suiter and we want to give ourselves a fighting chance to find the proper suit. Partners don't always conveniently bid 3NT. Sometimes they do silly things like raise spades when hearts would play a lot better.
And there is a way, almost ancient it seems, to show a forcing two-suiter.
FEILER: "2NT. I know this is how you show a good two-suiter in these auctions, but I've never had it come up. Partner will probably emit a minor and I'll bid 3H. He should figure it out then."
HUDSON: "2NT. This must show a forcing two-suiter. There shouldn't be any problem showing the suits later."
And much as I enjoy watching opponents sweat out my doubles of their weak notrumps, I enjoy scoring up my vulnerable-vs.-not games even more.
Hope I saw you all at the San Antonio Nationals in July!
This relatively tough set was handled well by panel and solvers. Thanks to guests Rick Beye and Bob Sievers, and congratulations to John Seng, who outscored all Solvers. And to Bill Rotter and John Contarino, who were runners-up by the narrowest of margins. All are invited to join us for October's inquisition, er, Forum.
If you'd like to get the problems by email, just send a request to kwbridge@comcast.net. Details on our bidding system, Bridge World Standard, are at: www.bridgeworld.com/refernce.html
New problems for October are here.
To submit your answers, send an email by Aug. 22 to:
Mike Jones,
1717 Mayfair, Champaign IL 61821 Email:
judgemqj@hotmail.com
How the Panel Voted
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|
|
| Dick Benson, , Leroy IL | 2H | 4H | 2H | Pass | Pass | Pass |
|
| Rick Beye, St. Louis | 1NT | 3H | Pass | 4NT | Pass | 3S |
|
| Mark Boswell, Belvidere IL | 2C | 4H | Pass | 5S | 3NT | Pass |
|
| Kent Feiler, Harvard IL | 1S | 4H | 2H | 4NT | 4S | 2NT |
|
| Micah Fogel, Aurora IL | 2NT | 2C | 2H | 4NT | Pass | Pass |
|
| Jim Hudson, DeKalb IL | 2C | 3H | Pass | 5S | Pass | 2NT |
|
| Finlay Marshall, Northern IN | 2C | 4H | Pass | 4NT | 4S | 2NT |
|
| Larry Matheny, Bloomington IL | 3C | 3H | Pass | Pass | Pass | Pass |
|
| Nancy Popkin, St. Louis | 2C | 4H | Pass | Pass | Pass | Pass |
|
| Bob Sievers, Champaign IL | 3C | 4H | Pass | 4NT | Pass | 3S |
|
| Nate Ward, Champaign IL | 1S | 4H | 2H | 5H | 4C | 2NT |
|
| Hugh Williams, Normal IL | 1NT | 4H | 2H | 4NT | 4S | Pass |
|
How the Staff Voted
| Tom Dodd, Boerne TX | 2C | 3H | 2H | Pass | Pass | 2NT | 540 |
| Tom Kniest, Clayton MO | 2H | 4H | 2H | 5S | Pass | Pass | 570 |
| Karen Walker, Champaign IL | 1NT | 3H | 2H | 5S | Pass | 2NT | 550 |
Solvers Honor Roll (Solvers' Average: 470)
| John Seng, Champaign IL | 550 | Pete Ashbrook, Champaign IL | 500 |
| Bill Rotter, Granite City IL | 540 | Norman Athy, St. Louis | 500 |
| John Contarino, Bloomington IL | 540 | Dave McNitt, Elkhart IN | 500 |
| Judith Eaton, Carbondale IL | 530 | Steve Babin, Normal IL | 490 |
| Alvan Bregman, Champaign IL | 520 | Midge Beiger, Champaign IL | 490 |
| Allan Sheppard, St. Louis | 510 | Ron Sholes, Springfield IL | 490 |
Back to Karen's Bridge Library