I’ve been writing this column for a looong time now. Nostalgia takes me back to my very first, written as a young man -- and I do mean written: No desktop PC, certainly no laptop, no software to arrange everything in neat little columns, no email to send the column with the click of a mouse button. Hell, I didn’t even own a typewriter, which meant Karen had to do her best to decipher my chicken-scratching. Thanks for putting up with me all these years!

A little glitch (plus, it’s summer vacation time, and if I don’t get my golf fix at least twice a week I get very cranky) delayed this month’s column, so apologies to all of you who waited patiently for your scores. Hopefully you’ll be happy. If not, please send all complaints to next month’s moderator. I’ll be on the links taking out my frustrations.

 What is your call as South holding:  J976   AK10643   5   J4 ?

Our first exercise is one of only two this issue that produced a majority, and barely at that. Half the panel chose the mundane, forward-looking 2H, which, after all, has a lot going for it.

BERNHARD: “2H. I usually like to set the trump suit early, but partner might want to know I have hearts and spades if this deal gets competitive at a high level.”

KESSLER: “2H. This is a great hand in support of spades. When the opponents bid 5C over 4S, partner will know where our cards are, which should help him make an intelligent decision.”

NELSON: “2H. So important to describe my hand. I do know where the hand is going, but partner must learn more about my hand for defending if they reach five of a minor.”

Some panelists (and solvers too), were even thinking about slam. If North is control rich, sure, you might have a slam. With my usual partners, I’m hopeful (but not certain!) of a game, and I sure don’t want to get pushed to the 5-level. More on that later.

PAOLO: “2H. I want to show which is our possible source of tricks. As for the diamonds, I can splinter or cuebid later on.”

MUNDAY: “2H. We will play at least game. Showing the heart suit may be the key to get us to a good slam opposite AKxxxx Qx xxx Ax. A diamond splinter does not appeal, as partner is almost forced to bid 4S lacking heart control (unless using 4H as last train).”

RABIDEAU: 2H. With a sacrifice likely to be on the opponents' agenda, no matter what we bid, it seems best to help partner judge her offensive/defensive values.”

I have a grudging admiration for those who chose the simple course, taking away the opponents' bidding space:

SPEAR: “4S. System does not allow the descriptive fit-showing jump, nor the jump cuebid of 4C showing a good 4S bid. So bid 4S, hoping to shut them out. Yes, there is a small chance of slam our way, but a much larger chance of the opponents finding a profitable save.”

FEILER: “4S. I'm worried about the opponents bidding 5C, but I don't know how to stop them. At least a direct 4S will take away their bidding room.”

MILLETT: “4S. The risk of them finding a save is higher than us missing a slam.”

A minority chose to show spade support and invitational-or-better values with an immediate cuebid:

BRIDGE BARON: “3C. Bridge Baron generally prefers to show major-suit support before worrying about side suits. This clearly qualifies as a limit raise or better.”

MERRITT: “3C. I will start by setting trumps. This should make the auction flow smoother than starting with 2H.”

WALKER: “3C. I feel a 5-level decision looming, and if I don't show support (and some defense) now, partner won't be able to help. Good hand for a fit-showing jump, but that's not in the system.”

The 3C call (and the splinter 4D) has a lot less going for it. Okay, it sets the trump suit, and if we do end up defending we are on lead, so there is no need for a lead director. But it’s thin on values and, most importantly, conceals what may (or may not!) be a source of tricks for either offense or defense, which leaves poor North completely blind as to the nature of your hand. If it does go 5C-Pass-Pass back to you, are you really going to feel comfortable with anything you say at this stage?

2.  Matchpoints, NS vulnerable              
                  

West	North	East	South
		Pass	Pass
1S	DBL	2H*	???

  * (Constructive spade raise - 8-10 support pts)          

 What is your call as South holding:  52   42   KJ103   K8762 ?

This little jewel split the panel into multiple parts. None were really sure about how to proceed, which is not uncommon when an artificial raise is made. If we are to learn anything from this hand, it’s that regular partnerships should put in quite a lot of time discussing how to handle these ever-more-frequent annoyances. In the real world, this sort of hand would be the subject of much discussion at dinner or in the bar after the evening session.

KNIEST: “Double. Some play 2NT shows the minors and double is responsive, implying 3 hearts. In the absence of discussion, double seems right. If it goes Pass-Pass-2S, you can now bid 2NT to emphasize the minors.”

WALKER: “Double. Responsive -- exactly the same meaning as if RHO had bid 2S, which is essentially what he did. I don't know what a 2NT bid is in BWS, but with a responsive double available, it definitely doesn't show 5-4 in the minors.”

MILLETT: “Double. Responsive. Can't leave them at the two-level at matchpoints.”

MERRITT: “2S. This must be the equivalent of a responsive double. If I had hearts, I would double or bid 3H. This is the same agreement when you are in 4th seat, and the bidding goes 1NT on your left and there is a transfer on your right. Double is for the suit and bidding the transfer into suit is takeout.”

MUNDAY: “2S. I'd double with hearts, so this should show a decent hand with both minors. I prefer 2NT as not natural in competition of this nature, but use it to distinguish a competitive minor raise vs. a good one (the bid I would choose if I were an unpassed hand).”

PAOLO: “3C. This may be an overbid, but at matchpoints we must compete, and the initial pass limits my hand.”

SPEAR: “3C. Would like to make a responsive double to show minors, but double would be lead-directing (undiscussed fallback-type agreement). 3H would be hearts.”

RING: “3C. Had East bid 2S, a responsive double would be in order. But given the artificial bid, what is the meaning of double? Would partner view it as values and hearts -- perhaps xx, KQxx, Qxxx, xxx? Since I am not sure, and I cannot find anything in the BWS bidding notes covering this problem, I opt for the unambiguous 3C.”

But East did bid 2S, just in a roundabout manner. Why should that change anything? See below:

BERNHARD: “2NT. North is a good player right? So she should figure out that I have the minors and not really be interested in notrump. Yes it would be nice to have another diamond but this bid comes closest to showing my hand.”

MAYNE: “2NT. If this isn't minors, I'm going home. Even without a pre-existing agreement, 2NT simply has to be minors here.”

Out of all the calls, 2NT is the most dangerous. I’ve seen plenty of partnership arguments over the years over an interpretation of (IMHO anyway) the most overused call in bridge: the “unusual” 2NT. I would normally scoff at the timid Pass, but given the amount of confusion sure to be generated by the multitude of meanings assigned by the rest of the panel to the various actions, passing may well be the best course.

WALSH: “Pass. Partner would probably read a double as lead directing. So I'll wait for 2S-Pass-Pass back to me, then double. Partner should understand that.”

STRITE: “Pass. Hope to balance with 2NT later.”

My personal thoughts?  In these situations, when the opponents use an artificial raise, it’s often best to keep things simple in principle. East’s bid was not a “psychic” 2H, so why would you ever double to “expose” it or to make a lead-director? Treat East’s bid for what it is: a raise to 2S. Hey, the opponents actually did you a favor here, saving a step of bidding space (you could now bid 2S with a solid hand, where with a single raise you would have to use an entire level of space!) not only for themselves, but for you as well.

What is your call as South holding:  Q96   Q9   A1052   Q654 ?

Responding to balancing doubles is always fun, but I would have thought this was a pedestrian 1NT response, despite the half stopper. Apparently not. Although 1NT drew the most votes, the panel’s other four (!) calls (and the decided lack of panel commentary on any call) mystified me. Don’t we have a balanced hand with spread-out average values, responding to a balancing double? And aren’t we playing pairs? 

MATHENY: “2D. An underbid of my values, but I’ll try to show clubs later.”

WALSH: “2D. After downgrading the heart queen, this hand isn't worth a jump.”

RING: “2D. With a likely wasted queen of hearts and a partner who is in balancing, not direct seat, I choose a low-road action.”

MERRITT: “2D. No call is particularly appetizing. I would like to hog 1NT and see what happens, but this little chirping noise that comes from my subconscious suggests that this may not be the right time.”

I hear those voices all the time. Fortunately, my medication takes care of most of them.

BERNHARD: “2D. This hand is worth a lot less than its 10 high card points. A 2H bid will probably get a 2S bid from partner, then what?”

MUNDAY: “2H. Passing the buck. Partner figures to have some hearts on the auction, and I would like to get NT from his side. I will pass 2S next.”

FEILER: “2H. We need to have notrump contracts played from partner’s side.”

People used to laugh and say they would pay money to see Kent and I play, just to listen to the postmortems. I would love to be a fly on the wall to hear the postmortem if our cuebidders get together.

Some panelists were anxious to get the board over with. I’ve never liked these piddly part-score fights either, which is probably why I’ve always done better in team events.

SPEAR: “2C. Not very exciting, hope to later bid 2S over 2H to show three of those. Just trying to avoid a bad result. There are lots of boards left to win the tournament.”

The voices of matchpoint “reason”:

KESSLER: “1NT. Just feels right, usually we will have a heart stopper as hearts were not raised or rebid. Also, it is matchpoints.”

NELSON: “1NT. I think Qx is good enough for a stopper on this auction. I must describe some values to partner.”

RABIDEAU: “1NT. The opponents' silence suggests -- but does not guarantee -- that partner has a few hearts. And we might be okay (+90) even if they can run six tricks.”

WALKER: “1NT. If the heart queen is worth anything, it's in notrump, and 1NT is the only bid that shows this approximate strength. Cuebid promises another bid, and I'm not strong enough. If you're going to bid a minor, it has to be 2C (partner could have a doubleton minor, so you need to give him room to correct).”

 What is your call as South holding:  9   654   K8643   KJ92 ?

Several panelists commented on the single raise not being inverted. I had to look it up, and BWS does indeed call for a single raise in this instance to be “game-invitational or stronger and denies a four-card major.” That doesn’t invalidate this problem, though, as lots of partnerships still play old-fashioned limited single raises (and you're happy to have those conditions here, as this hand is a problem for inverted-minor systems).

The majority of the panel thought this hand to be worthy of introducing the second suit in view of North’s redouble.

MUNDAY: “3C. Showing what I have without going past 3D.”

KNIEST: “3C. Pard could have the 4-4-3-2 18-count and they have nowhere to go, or he could have a good hand willing to compete further in diamonds. If the latter, 4S seems right. If the former, nothing stops him from bidding 3NT. Passing 2S doubled when they have a known 8-card fit seems like taking hope to a high level.”

WALKER: “3C. Partner's redouble shows extra values, and the helpful opponents have now told me that I have something extra, too. 3C shows my outside strength and some interest in game. With just a little more, I'd bid 4S.”

NELSON: “3C. Once again, talk to partner about defending if the outcome is to defend. Partner has a good hand, so 3C starts to describe mine.”

STRITE: “3C. Show pard where I live.”

MERRITT: 3C. This may be a bit aggressive without aces or even good spot cards, but my hand isn't totally embarrassing.”

SPEAR: “3C. Maybe I should do something stronger, but this shows some speed and is certainly descriptive. I hope to get a chance to bid more.”

I can’t see where it would go all pass, so you should get your wish. The same cannot be said for”

WALSH: “Pass. Partner may want to penalize at this vulnerability.”

MAYNE: “3D. Partner wants to hit them; I don't want her to. 3D now tells her so.”

KESSLER: “Pass. This is the hand I wanted for problem two. I have nothing more to offer. Let's see what partner has.”

BRIDGE BARON: “3D. Apparently we are not playing inverted minor raises on this deal. Bridge Baron has no real understanding of partner's redouble, and chooses its call based purely on simulation: 3D +80.50,  5D -110.00,  2S by the opponents -137.00.”

Last, but certainly not least:

FEILER: “5D. I was thinking of 4S, but partner would really have to have ‘the nuts’ for a slam.”

5.  IMPs, both vulnerable 
      

West	North	East	South
	1S	1NT	???

 What is your call as South holding: J96   KQJ976   Q3   102 ?

Another split of the panel, but with one choice commanding a slim majority. Again, I would love to be a fly on the wall for these post-mortems. “Conventional” wisdom says double:

PAOLO: “Double. From the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge: ‘A double of a 1 NT overcall is made with almost any hand with 9+ HCPs since the partnership is virtually certain to have the balance of strength.’”

STRITE: “Double. I should be able to bid 2H later over the 2C or 2D runout.”

MILLETT: “Double. They are in for a big trouble. I have a perfect lead.”

Perfect if partner has at least Ax of hearts. If not, it’s going to be tough to cash those hearts with no entry.

BRIDGE BARON: “Double. Automatic double for Bridge Baron with 8+ HCP on this auction.”

WALSH: “Double. I'll take a sure +200 with game uncertain. +500 versus a partscore or +800 versus game are also possible.”

Though you might be throwing away a telephone number when E-W foolishly stay put, double would be a much more attractive call at pairs, where that 200 might be worth something. At teams, I’ll stick with the suit bidders. Even with all the losers, game is possible, and even if we only make 140, we won’t miss or lose much, depending on what the other table does. And unless our opponents are idiots, they aren’t going to be playing 1NT doubled, and your hand has about zero defense against either minor. My partners don’t need that much to open 1S at teams, so we may be equal in strength to East-West.

SPEAR: “2S. Looks like a spade partscore hand. I will try to go plus. I have no side entry, or I would double and lead hearts.”

Same here... but if we had a side entry, I doubt we’d have seen this problem in the Forum.

KESSLER: “2S. My first thought was 2 hearts, but 2 spades puts the NT hand on lead, and allows me to compete with 3 hearts over 3 of a minor.”

A fuller analysis, but I don’t want to play this hand in spades unless North insists. The heart quality is good enough to play opposite a singleton, and if North is short in hearts, how many tricks can you hope for your hand to take in spades, especially with North perhaps never reaching dummy?  Even novice opponents will know to lead trumps once dummy hits, so unless that diamond queen is an entry…

NELSON: “2H. My hand will probably play better in hearts even though I have three spades. My bid isn't forcing I know but I want to declare.”

MATHENY: “2H. This aceless hand does not guarantee we will beat 1NT.”

MAYNE: “2H. Hitting it is likely to strand the hearts. Sure, it could be a bonanza, (and it'll be fine if they run, too) but a healthy 2H now is likely to be best. I recognize there's a chance we'll miss a game.”

WALKER: “2H. This hand looks like all offense to me. Nine points is usually enough for a penalty double, but the lack of an outside entry is a big warning sign that my suit might not run (and that their suits will run).”

How times have changed. Twenty years ago, most all of us would have put the axe to 1NT without a second thought.

6.  IMPs, NS vulnerable     
                           

West	North	East	South
			Pass
Pass	1D	3C	???

 What is your call as South holding:  A3   K8643   K7    8754 ?

Do you or don’t you?  This one is more a matter of personality and style than anything “right” answer. At least we didn’t get any kooky bids like an off-shape negative double or a crazy 3NT or some other such tomfoolery. Just a straightforward decision.

About two-thirds of the panel couldn’t bear to pass:

PAOLO: “3H. At IMPs, vulnerable, I try for game, hoping to reach a favourable percentage of 37.5% or more.”

RING: “3H. I'm ashamed to make this bid with this poor of a suit, but I'd be more ashamed to miss a cold game and defend for 50-a-trick instead. Partner is likely to be short in clubs, so I like the odds of catching a useful hand opposite.”

MUNDAY: “3H. Not without trepidation.”

KNIEST: “3H. Passing is not bridge. My club length suggests a fit, and my values may be enough for 3NT if partner has a club stop.”

STRITE: “3H. I'd rather stab at 3H than make a negative double or pass.”

WALSH: “3H. Maybe pushing it, but I'm not willing to risk missing game. With short clubs, partner rates to have a few hearts.”

RABIDEAU: “3H. Sorry I don't have better hearts, but glad that I'm a passed hand and glad to have good high-card structure -- not quacky and nothing wasted in clubs. Two Glads beat a Sorry.”

BRIDGE BARON: “3H. Shows 11 or more total points (maybe 10) and a five-card suit. Hey, that's what Bridge Baron has!”

The passers were in the minority, but were much more confident about their choice.

WALKER: “Pass. I can't find any reason to be stampeded into a huge overbid with this sparse hand. If we have a game, partner will reopen. If he passes it out, I'll be glad I didn't hang him for a third-seat opener.”

NELSON: “Pass. I am certainly not entering this auction.”

MATHENY: “Pass. If my partner (who opened in third seat) doesn't reopen, we defend.”

SPEAR: “Pass. Not the right suit for 3H immediately, so I’ll pass, hoping for a reopening double. Then I can bid hearts knowing pard is short in clubs with heart support.”

MAYNE: “Pass. I have enough clubs to be protected; partner is likely to reopen with a stiff club. If he's got two, defending should be a plus score.”

KESSLER: “Pass. Stay fixed and hope partner with shortness in clubs can reopen. It is just too big of a position to bid 3H and catch partner with a light opener in third seat and 4-2-5-2 distribution. If partner does not have enough to reopen, I have no interest.”

That’s all, folks. Enjoy the rest of your summer and I’ll see you next when we’re all griping about the short days and the endless shoveling of snow.