District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2003
by Tom Kniest, St. Louis MO

It's spring in St. Louis and baseballs off the bats of Albert Pujols and Jim Edmonds are ringing off the walls of Busch Stadium. The Cubs are making their historically futile move to the top of the division. Although some of our panelists and Solvers are hitting ground balls, pop-ups and the occasional double play, guest panelist Arbha Vongsvivut and Solver Robert Lambert have hit home runs with perfect scores.

1.  Matchpoints, both vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
Double	100	11	53
Pass	70	5	22
1NT	70	1	15
Other	50	0	10

What is your call as South holding:
S-10764   H-3   D-AJ95   C-AQ83 ?

I think the panel and Solvers got this one right, although we had some dissenters:

WALKER: "1NT. I'm usually as happy as the next guy to make the opponents pay for a thin takeout double, but this isn't the hand for it. When they've found their 7+-card fit at the 1-level, you usually need much better trumps than this to beat it. If we can really scrape up 7 tricks on defense with zero or one trump trick, we probably had +600 coming in 3NT. Second choice is the forcing Pass, but that is pure torture for partner."

POPKIN: "Pass. If by chance partner can now bid 1NT, I believe it would play better from his side. My pass is absolutely forcing. If partner bids 2H, I'll bid 2NT since I have the takeout doubler surrounded. I don't approve of a double of 1S, because we may only beat it one, if at all, and we could have a game."

HUDSON: "Pass. I hope partner has 3 spades, in which case he'll double. I don't want to do it myself at the one level with only 4. If partner can't double, we'll have to grope for a contract."

I upgraded the 1NT call in the scoring. Not that I would ever consider it, but at least it doesn't pass the buck to partner, who is ill-placed to make an intelligent decision. Either of these bids, though, lets the opponents off the hook.

VONGSVIVUT: "Double. We have no fit. We do not have enough bridge to make 3NT, so we have no game. They should not be able to make 1S."

WILLIAMS: "Double. You would like better trumps, but... If you don't double on this hand, consider not playing penalty redoubles."

NELSON: "Double. Too many players miss the boat not defending 1- and 2-bids. Looks perfect to me;  positively will lead a trump."

KESSLER: "Double. Go for the gusto. Only other option is to pass, and then partner will never think I have 4 trumps."

HINCKLEY: "Double. Partner denies a distributional sub-minimum. System requires me to double with any four trumps (partner will pull with a stiff spade).  I have a stiff heart and the opponents are vulnerable. +200 or better will often be a great score when opener has a typical 2-5-3-3 minimum."

I'm not yet ready to grant that they even have 7 spades between them. It's possible that LHO is 2-5-3-3 with no place to go. Just lead a trump, and watch them struggle, then die.

2.  Matchpoints, none vulnerable

West	North	East	South
1D	Double	1H	???

What is your call as South holding:
S-8752   H-KQ1085   D-QJ3   C-4 ?

What's going on here? Partner's takeout double advertises at least 3 hearts, and that's our suit of choice. Our somewhat greedy panel chose to send this message with a penalty double:

POPKIN: "Double. I play double means that I was going to bid hearts."

STRITE: "Double. I don't know what Bridge World Standard defines, but double shows this type of hand with my partners."

KESSLER: "Double. I play this as penalty, and if we don't double here we may as well change our system."

DODD: "Double. How else to expose a psych? The more things change the more they stay the same."

The problem with this approach is that the opponents aren't going to stay in 1H. Surely they have two better fits. In fact, they may have a 9-card fit in a minor, and double makes it easier for them to find it. If you're all that worried about exposing a possible psychic bid, how about:

NELSON: "2H. This should be natural. If partner possibly misunderstands this (I have been there before), I have four spades to protect me."

HUDSON: "2H. Maybe this will prevent them from finding their double fit in the minors. The plan of bidding 1S and then 2H on the next round has some merit, but 1S is an underbid, and next time, the bidding might have reached the 3-level."

WALKER: "2H. Mike Lawrence has popularized the use of this bid as natural (5+ cards) with limited high-card values. The theory -- which is a good one -- is that there's no point in making a penalty double with so little defense outside hearts. Instead, the penalty double should show a hand with more high-card points and be used to send the message that we have the balance of strength."

Hearts has to be a good spot for us. Even if RHO has "real" hearts, his holding will be negated by ours. I think we should bid them now, natural and non-forcing. Note that if we had a stronger hand that could cuebid, then the proper cue here is 2D (the suit bid on our left), not 2H.

2H is the only contract we can defend, and if we double now, I suspect partner is going to make a possibly out-of-tempo double of their runout, particularly if it's 2C. Back to you ... and the director and/or committee. And if partner passes 2C or 2D, will he know exactly what your 2H bid means now?

Yet another approach:

MERRITT: "1S. While all of my values are bad, we have the boss suit and the only way to get them bidding to a point where I want to double them is to bid now."

OPPENHEIMER: "1S. Double is ambiguous. The auction will not end there. Lefty will bid 2D or 2C and I will compete with 2H, which ought to be natural."

Odd man out:

FEILER: "Pass. 1H could be a psych, but it isn't necessarily one. I think I'll listen for a round and then make some dramatic and probably stupid bid."

3. Matchpoints, both vulnerable

West	North	East	South
--	1D	1S	Pass
2C	Pass	2S	Double
3C	Pass	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:
S-AJ986   H-AQ94   D-54   C-102 ?

One thing we all know: partner's pass was forcing. Unless he has a very distributional hand, he won't bid in front of you, in case you have 3C by the short hairs. Well, you don't, but maybe partner didn't double because he has a weak club holding. So now, you need to make a decision: double again, or try to find a heart fit. The panel is heavy on the double, although they aren't in total agreement on its meaning:

WALKER: "Double. This doesn't show a club stack. After I've clarified that I had a penalty pass of 1S, a double of their run-suit just shows high-card points and a modest trump holding. Partner should pull if he has 2 or fewer clubs."

POPKIN: "Double. Obviously, I had a penalty of 1S, so partner should know now that I have points outside of spades, not necessarily in clubs. Doubles in front of the bidder should be takeout. There will be hands where partner can't double 3C just because I have a penalty of 1S, so I am hoping he can either pass for penalty or bid hearts or bid notrump."

MERRITT: "Double. The old DSI double (Do Something Intelligent) . I am clearly unable to fulfill the intelligence quotient on this hand, so I pawn it off on my more intelligent partner."

KESSLER: "Double. I would have made a negative double the first time, which would have made this decision much easier. So this rates to be a plus, since we don't know if we have a game."

Some of the doublers are going for the throat, while others are thinking it's just a passing-the-buck bid. Here, though, partner has passed the buck to you, so your double must be penalty. You can't have it both ways. Those who claim the double is for takeout are saying they can never penalize them when they have 3 or more trumps in this situation.

I give the edge to double for four reasons:
   1 - You may not have a game
   2 - If you do have a game, 3C doubled may go down 800.
   3 - We may not have a playable spot if partner doesn't have four hearts.
   4 - It's matchpoints. At IMPs, I'm a 3H bidder if partner couldn't double 3C.

A significant minority of the panel gave up on defending and chose to move on with 3H. Maybe I should raise their scores because at least they know what their bid means:

HINCKLEY: "3H. I might double on 10xx in clubs and a stiff diamond, but not with this hand. I've shown 5+ spades and likely at least invitational values. With any four clubs or 3 good ones, opener should have cracked 3C. Since partner didn't rebid 2D, he'll often have 2-4-5-2 or possibly a 1-4-5-3 or 2-3-5-3 hand with bad clubs. He's likely to hold four hearts on this auction, and if not, a Moysian could play well."

STRITE: "3H. If partner doesn't have 11 diamonds, he must have some hearts."

ATHY: "3H. I would think partner would expect something like this, very forward-going. This is reasonable, as partner did not take action over 2C and did not double 3C. Up to now, pard doesn't know you have heart interest. This action is almost forcing."

FEILER: "3H. If partner didn't double 3C, I'm certainly not going to."

4.  IMPs, both vulnerable                   

West	North	East	South
--	1C	Pass	1D
Pass	1S	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:
S-K5   H-Q64   D-KJ96543   C-K ?

It's IMPs, and partner knows it, too. If we have a game in notrump, I'm probably the right guy to bid it because of the heart queen. But we really have other options, diamonds being one of them. Plus, we have a soft hand  for any contract unless partner is slammish with a diamond fit, in which case we have a very good hand with the extra diamonds and black kings.

2H doesn't tell partner anything, and 3NT ends most auctions. Therefore, I like 3D here. We can still get to 3NT, and we haven't ruled out any black-suit games.

HINCKLEY: "3D. Opposite a good minimum of S-AQxx H-KJx  D-x  C-QJxxx, do I want to be in game? Probably not. Partner is going to bid game with anything other than a horrible misfit red at imps."

MATHENY: " 3D. We can invite with 2NT or 3D or get to game via 2H or 3NT. But with the hands people are opening today, if partner can't move over 3D, we are probably high enough."

HUDSON: "3D. Cowardly, vulnerable at IMPs, but I'm worried about partner's red-suit holdings. So I won't overbid with 2H or (gasp!) 3NT."

STRITE: "3D. No hurry to bid notrump. I can still make slam opposite three aces and a heart singleton."

The risk, of course, is that 3D is not forcing. It's interesting that some of the 3D bidders are pure pessimists, almost hoping partner will pass, while others are holding their breath and praying that partner bids on (and even hoping to find a slam!).

The 2H bidders aren't willing to risk missing a game. They make some good points, but they won't be able to stop when partner has slop:

MERRITT: "2H. We are going to game, so I'll start the hunt now."

KESSLER: "2H. Seems weird that double is not a possibility. Vulnerable at IMPs, I bid 2H and force to game. Perhaps my next call is the real problem."

WILLIAMS: "2H. I will temporize. We belong in game or perhaps a slam someplace. If partner can bid 3D, I'm off to the races. If he bids anything else, I'll bid 3NT."

FEILER: " 2H. I think this is game-forcing. That might get us too high, but 3D might get us too low."

Here are two panelists who have the hand already figured out, but much differently:

DODD: "2D. Much as I hate (and I mean HATE) missing red games at teams, if North can't bid on, we likely don't have much of a play for game here."

WALKER: "3NT. I have some sympathy for the heavy 3D at matchpoints, but at IMPs, this just can't be an option when partner has opened and you hold 12 pts. and a 7-card suit. The alternative route to game is the fourth-suit-forcing 2H, but that gets 3NT played from the wrong side when partner holds the likely Ax or Axx."

5.  IMPs, both vulnerable   

West	North	East	South
1S	Pass	3D*	???
* Artificial limit-raise (Bergen)

What is your call as South holding:
S-753   H-AQ108   D-7   C-AQJ86 ?

This one looks pretty clear to me. You have two suits, and you'd like to (or have to, according to some panelists) get them both into the auction. There's only one sure way to do that: 

HINCKLEY: "3S (hearts and a minor), with Pass a close second choice. Hardest problem of the set. Give partner the round kings and we can make lots of tricks with half the high cards. But so can the opponents!"

WALKER: "3S, showing a two-suiter with hearts. You just have to bid here. With partner holding a  spade singleton or void, we have a virtually laydown game opposite as little as one round-suit king in his hand -- and a decent play if he has a suitable Yarborough. Against Bergen raises, most pairs play that a double of the single raise (3C) is takeout, but a double of their limit-raise (3D) is lead-directing."

ATHY: "3S. I know this action gets me a clear 50 on this problem. But what are you going to do? Pass and try to enter the auction over 3S, or worse, 4S? I'd prefer to tell partner I like his singleton and let him bid. If I wait, he won't have a choice. Now, he may be able to choose."

STRITE: "3S. Close enough for government work when pard has singleton spade at most. We'll find clubs if that is right."

One panelist and several Solvers chose the takeout double. This looks a can of worms to me. Even if you play it as takeout (and not all partnerships do), you can't support diamonds, and you certainly don't want one led against their final contract. Here are two other approaches:

FEILER: "4C. Double would be penalty. I might lose the heart suit this way, but if I get cute and bid 3S, partner might decide to bid 5D over 4S. If I get lucky, someone will bid 4D and then I can retrieve the heart suit."

POPKIN: "3H. This is tough, but I am going to be an optimist. The best contract if we fit (and that's a big if) is hearts. Partner will be taking the tap in the short hand if he only has three trumps; that is why I don't bid 4C. Of course, I never considered the sane bid of pass."

The rest of the panel chose to play it safe and sane with a Pass. Although this was the majority vote, and thus gets the highest award, it doesn't look all that safe to me, and I think it will cost too much in the long run.

VONGSVIVUT: " Pass. First, the bidding is not over yet. If they stop bidding at 3S, I will compete with 4C. If they bid 4S, I will pass again."

WILLIAMS: "Pass. We probably have a club fit, but I don't want to find out at the 4-level. I hope all doublers' partners bid 4D or 5D."

DODD: "Pass. Color me chicken, but risking a telephone number isn't a good way to keep teammates happy. Partner could have a mess of diamonds to go with his spade shortness, since East's 3D call doesn't show diamonds."

OPPENHEIMER: "Pass. They got me. Any bid could create disaster. (Have you discussed double here? I like a double of 3D to show diamonds and a double of the weaker 3C to be takeout.) There's too much risk of partner bidding diamonds. I'd like to bid my 4-card heart suit at the 3-level, but my team- mates may not appreciate the minus 1100."

I hate those minus-1100's, too (although I don't think that's likely here). What I hate even more, though, is explaining to my team-mates why neither of us took a single bid on a deal where we had a laydown red game (or slam). 

6.  Matchpoints, both vulnerable

West	North	East	South
--	1C	Pass	1D
Pass	2NT	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:
S-53   H-KQ72   D-K109853  C-6 ?

The panel saw this one pretty clearly. Bidding hearts here guarantees that you hold extra length in diamonds. This description might get to a superior game, or you might find a diamond slam.

NELSON: " 3H. Think partner will get the message? All of my partners would know I was 5-4 or 6-4 or using hearts for fact-finding."

HINCKLEY: "3H. Shows 4 hearts, 5+ diamonds, and is game-forcing. There's no reason to use the convoluted, artificial 3C on this hand. The harder question is: What is responder's third call after partner bids 3NT over 3H? Note that Bridge World Standard bypasses majors on the jump rebid to 2NT."

OPPENHEIMER: "3H. Why not describe this hand and let partner weigh in? With prime values we might belong in 6H or 6D. My partners have been known to bid 2NT with 4 hearts.">"

Bud and Tom mention the possibility that partner has 4 hearts, and that's the sole advantage in rebidding a "checkback" 3C or 3D here. Partner can bid 3H over this and you'll get 4H played from the right side. However, this comes at the expense of missing a possible diamond slam.

In deference to the 3NT bidders, since this is matchpoints, you might win the board by avoiding a heart game with a spade lead through partner's king. The 3NT bid is taking a shot, and that's not what this forum is about (or so they tell me). If you bid 3H now and partner bids 3NT, at least you'll know you're in the right game.

Thanks to all who sent in answers for this interesting set. Congratulations to Robert Lambert for a perfect score of 600 and to Dave Wetzel, who was close behind with 590. They're invited to join the panel for August.

Thanks to Bud Hinckley and Tom Oppenheimer for serving as guest panelists for this issue. Also joining the panel this month were former District 8 members Toby Strite, Hagendorn, Switzerland (formerly of Champaign IL) and Bev Nelson, Fort Myers FL (formerly of Rockford IL).

I hope you'll all enter the monthly and yearly Solvers Contests by trying the six new problems for August (see below). Please submit your answers by July 15 on the web form or by email to our August moderator:

Scott Merritt -- merritt@shout.net

 How the panel voted:

How the staff voted:

Solvers Honor Roll  (Average Solver score: 479)

Robert Lambert, Warsaw IN	600	John Samsel, Chesterfield MO	570
Dave Wetzel, Rantoul IL	590	Thomas Rossow, South Bend IN	560
Manuel Paulo, Lisbon, Portugal	580	Mark Fritz, Naperville IL	530
Bob Bernhard, N. Smyrna Bch. FL	560	Sid Ismail, South Africa	530
Mike Dodson, Bellingham WA	570	Larry Wilcox, Springfield IL	530
Will Engel, Urbana IL	570	Warren Bosch, Elgin IL    Bob Wheeler, Florissant MO	520   520

Solvers Forum -- August Problems