District 8 Solvers Forum -- August 2019

        by Kimmel Jones, Euless TX
 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠K10    ♥J1043   ♦Q93   ♣8763 ?

It’s really hot in Texas. We exceed 100 degrees every day, and the A/C just broke on my car. But these six bidding problems are way cool!

Your cards on Hand #1 looked pretty bad when you picked them up, but now partner has bid both suits where your strength lies. And holding the queen in her longer suit and KT in her second suit makes it even better. With as little as ♠Axxx and ♦AKxxxx, she needs just one more working card to give you some play for game. So how do we proceed?

Nate tries the nebulous cuebid, which normally is quite popular in bidding contests.

Ward: 3H. No club stopper, and no idea how many cards partner has in the pointed suits. Could easily have enough for slam opposite AQxxx and AKxxxx with an ace on the side.

But other optimists were more direct in steering the partnership

Pavlicek: 4D. A nebulous cuebid serves little purpose with 3NT being far-fetched, so I'll tell it like it is. This leaves partner an out with  ♠AQJx  ♥x  ♦AKJxxx ♣xx, and we'll get to 5D (conceivably 6D) if he has better.

Walker:  4D. With two important honors for partner, I have to do more than make the gun-to-my-head 3D bid. This is not the hand for 3NT. If hearts don't kill that contract, clubs will.

Some panelists were more pessimistic.

Babin: 3D is the obvious choice since I have 3 diamonds & only 2 spades and only 6 HCP and most of my points in partner's suits. Partner probably has good hand, but I don't have enough to invite game.

One gun-to-their-head bidder thought the Lebensohl convention (2NT to start the description of a very weak hand) would apply here.

Kniest:  3D.  I think this is a Lebensohl situation so 2NT asks pard to bid 3C unless he can't stand to play there, in which case he'll bid 3D. I have two aces for him, so I show some speed with 3D.

I don’t think it is, Tom, in most partnerships. But it would be nice. You wouldn’t want to bid notrump naturally in this situation, would you?

Kessler:   2NT. Bid firmly and they may think we have a club stopper. My spade king and diamond queen are huge.

They sure might, Mark. Good luck! The highest scores went to folks trying hard to get to 5D, and reasonable scores go to those who at least kept the bidding alive. But several Solvers choose to pass 2S. That gives your partner no chance to bid again and your spade fit is much worse than your diamond fit must be.

2. IMPs, none vulnerable             

What is your call as South holding:   ♠AJ102   ♥AKQ53   ♦J82   ♣Q ?

When contemplating slam, the first thing an expert does is imagine if there exists a perfect minimum hand that partner can have for slam to make. Sure.  ♠KQxx  ♥xxxx  ♦x  ♣AKxx comes to my mind. Quite a number of our Solvers didn’t do this as they signed off in 4H or 4S. Every panelist probed for slam. Some simply asked for key cards, assuming (or hoping) that there wasn't a problem in diamonds.

Babin:  4NT. We might have enough for slam if partner has enough aces. I don't have any more aces to cuebid.

Baker:  4NT. This is a little bit of a gamble, and it could come back to bite me if partner is 4=4=2=3. But I don't like cuebidding shortness in a suit partner has bid. 

Yes, you are bitten when pard has   ♠KQxx  ♥Jxxx  ♦xx  ♣AKx .

Other panelists were more focused on the diamond problem. In an auction where we've bid three suits, a jump to five of our agreed trump suit specifically asks for a control in the unbid suit. Four panelists made this inquiry, differing only in what they thought would be the best trump suit:

Spear: 5S. Asking for diamond control, and risking partner has the right black cards to go with it.

Hinckley: 5H. Asking for a diamond control. Partner often will be 4=4=2=3. On a diamond lead, even if partner has Ax, a 4-4 spade fit will not play better than a 5-4 heart fit.

And you guys are bitten when partner has  ♠KQxx  ♥Jxxx  ♦KQ  ♣Kxx .

Let’s see if there is a way to check for keycards and a diamond control.

Pavlicek 4C. Slam is in the picture, but we're not going anywhere without a diamond noise. Playing in spades could be crucial if partner is 4=4=2=3 --  e.g.,  ♠KQxx  ♥Jxxx  ♦Ax  ♣Kxx .

I think Richard is right about spades playing better, at least when you aren’t just off two key cards and are too high in either strain.

The problem for some people is that they only cuebid aces. It's more flexible to simply cuebid controls -- including kings and singletons -- especially below 4NT. That allows you to then bid 4NT and check for keycards after knowing you have controls in all the suits. 

Popkin:  4C. Sounds like pard has stiff diamond. I will bid my stiff club and move toward slam.

Soper: 4C. I need to give partner a chance to show a diamond control. It would be embarrassing to be in six of a major and lose the first two tricks to the ace and king of that suit because pard is 4-4-2-3.

One final note. Dan had an additional comment.

Baker:  I'm not sure which suit would be interpreted as trump after 4C-4D-4NT.

This shouldn’t be a concern. If your partner is looking at either major-suit king, he will know it is key.

Okay. one more final note. Five solvers bid 3NT, which is explained by my long-time friend, Hugh Williams of Carbondale:

Williams: 3NT.  This must be a move in spades. Partner showed a max with 4 spades. He could have always just bid 4H with spade help.

But the problem with that, Hugh, is partner will often just cuebid 4C and you'll be left hanging, still wondering about diamonds. It’s far better to drive up to the call just below the suit you are concerned about.

3. Matchpoints, none vulnerable           

What is your call as South holding:  ♠9   ♥AJ10   ♦AKJ865   ♣K83 ?

Back up the Mack truck, open the doors wide. West is out of luck, going for the big ride.

Popkin: Pass. Partner was prepared to pass 1S doubled and we are going to put up a BIG number.

Kniest:  Pass. Why speculate on slam when we might get 500 or more?  The double only confirms a trap pass of 1S but I'm expecting a pitiful dummy. Pard had a chance to raise diamonds if he had a stiff club and couldn't bid notrump.

Baker:   Pass. Partner has a trap pass of spades and should have some willingness to sit for clubs as well. 3NT has some attraction, but 2C is unlikely to make and could easily be 500 or more.

Walker:  Pass. Partner is showing a spade stack with decent defensive strength and at least two clubs. Close decision, as the diamonds suggest this hand might be best for declaring, but with all these quick tricks, I like our chances for +500. If partner doesn't have a diamond fit, 3NT may not make, so even +300 will be fine.

Kessler:   Pass. They could easily go for more than 3NT.

Ward:  Pass. Seems normal to pass.

Not quite normal for everyone. Almost half the solvers pulled the double, some because they thought partner meant it as takeout, as this panelist did:

Soper:  2NT.  Since East didn't correct to spades and nobody plays any low-level doubles for penalty anymore, I think partner is something like 5-4-3-1 and wants to hear me bid a red suit. I won't oblige and instead will show my club stopper and extra values with 2NT.

Oh, they still play some low-level doubles in District 8, at least. This is one of them. The question is whether the penalty double should be pulled. This panelist says “Yes”.

Pavlicek: 3NT. Partner obviously has spades, and his double of 2C relies on my having at least three clubs. That I have, but my offense-oriented diamond suit and extra strength is likely to produce a game, while +500 seems unlikely.

Richard has great judgment, but he’s mightily outvoted here.

4. IMPs, both vulnerable     

What is your call as South holding:  ♠K8   ♥AJ   ♦KQ10   ♣AK8543 ?

Most panelists (and solvers for that matter) know what to do with big hands that are too strong to overcall in a suit and too strong to overcall in notrump. Twenty high-card points is obviously too many for either of those actions.

Popkin:   Double. Leaves lots of possibilities open.

Baker: Double. Not clear whether we're headed for clubs or notrump, but in either case, a double to show a hand too strong for a 1NT or 2C overcall seems like the right start.

Spear  Double. I plan to bid notrump later, showing too much to overcall 1NT. Hope pard does not insist on a major.

Pavlicek: Double. Isn't this routine to describe a hand worth a natural 2NT? If partner insists on a major, that's probably right too -- e.g.,  ♠xxxx  ♥Q10xxxx   ♦xx   ♣x  would be an excellent 4H.

Then again, there is something to be said for the direct approach. What would we all bid if partner was barred from the auction?

Kessler:  3NT. What I hope to make without giving too much info to opponents.

Walker:  3NT. "Big double" auctions can often become awkward. Here, double followed by 2NT doesn't really show this hand's playing strength and double-then-3NT might make partner think I have something in at least one major.

Yes, Karen, or you might consider doubling first and then bidding 3NT if you feel the hand is too good to rebid 2NT.

One panelist predicted she might be making a solo bid and she was right.

Kaplan: 2C. I may be alone with this call. But, I prefer to show my length first, hope there is a "next time" -- and then investigate more.

Yes, there are two more next times: Hands #5 and #6.

5. IMPs, NS vulnerable     

What is your call as South holding:  ♠KQ2   ♥KJ74   ♦Q75   ♣953 ?

This time I am not in the plurality. I learned a long time ago to have the unbid suit stopped whenever I bid notrump. Otherwise, partner will never understand. Richard and Peg offer a reasonable alternative.

Pavlicek:  2S. More encouraging than 2D. The flat shape warns against an aggressive move to invite game. I suppose there's a case for 1NT, but in my view, anyone who bids it should be packed away in that case.

Kaplan  2S. I can't see bidding 1NT on this hand (and surely not 2NT). Can't see jumping to 3D, and 2D sounds like I got nothing. If partner passes 2S, maybe we're in the right spot?

Yes, we can devalue this hand if we're committing to spades as we only have three trumps. Or we could take a simple preference to diamonds:

Hinckley: 2D. Too bad Bridge World Standard now plays 2C as game forcing instead of a one-round force. Not good enough for an invitation, especially with the hands we open these days!

And here's a third option if you want to take a conservative view:

Seng: 1NT. Taking the low road with this shape and no club card. Would be easier at matchpoints, though.

I think you'd see more votes for these "low-road" bids at matchpoints. Red at teams, though, you want to be in any game that's 40-percent or better, so the majority of the panel was hesitant to underbid these values.

The most aggressive move is 2C, which was chosen by several Solvers. There was some confusion about whether this was a full game-force in our Bridge World Standard system. It is. I looked it up:

“After a one-level new-suit response and opener's simple new-suit rebid:
    (a) two notrump or three of any suit previously bid is invitational;
    (b) a fourth-suit bid at the two- or three-level is forcing to game”

The 2C bidders on the panel knew this, but still thought the fourth-suit bid was a good idea.

Spear: 2C. I wish 2C were a relay to 2D showing my next bid to be a game try.  If I am stuck with 2C as fourth-suit-forcing, I will try that without comment on continuations.

Baker:   2C. This appears to be a game force in BWS, unfortunately, which means it's probably an overbid. But nothing else fits, and I'd rather be too aggressive than too wimpy vulnerable at IMPs.

The “too wimpy” folks were making simple raises or preferences to 2D on 11 high-card points, and I respect their concerns. For those of us wishing to step out and invite, though, the choice really is between 3D or 2NT with no club stopper.

Popkin: 3D. Tough hand. Nothing's perfect. 2C is game forcing, lacking values. 2NT is right on values but wrong-sides the contract. 3D is right on values and if pard bids 3NT, it right-sides the contract.

Soper. 3D. Not quite enough to force to game, but if partner has a club stopper and a little extra, we might make the notrump game. I'm hoping for   ♠Axxx  ♥x  ♦AKxxx   ♣Kxx or better.

I, too, am a 3D bidder, but another call received more panel votes.

Babin:  2NT. Almost perfect for a 2NT invitation -- flat hand and 11 high-card points.

Kessler:  2NT. Right shape, just can't bring myself to bid 1NT red at IMP's. Hope I play it well.

I notice that Mark bids notrump whenever he can -- four times in this set! I also notice the only other call he considered was 1NT. He gets plenty of notrump practice and does play them well.

6. Matchpoints, none vulnerable    

What is your call as South holding:  ♠A   ♥Q109754   ♦KQ94   ♣86 ?

Unless we are playing with a cave person, we know partner has a running club suit and stoppers in the pointy suits. Bid 6C. Score it up. We know how this works in Texas:

Baker:   6C. Partner has solid clubs, stoppers in diamonds (almost surely the ace)  and spades, and shortness in hearts. Opposite  ♠Kxx   ♥x   ♦Ax  ♣AKQxxxx, we likely make seven if the opponents don't cash a heart at trick one.

And from Champaign, my home town, this panelist explains the concerns:

Seng:  6C. The question is, does partner have a stiff heart? If so, 6C. If not, 3NT. But then, maybe they won't lead hearts since I bid them.

Right, John, especially if you bid it directly!

While only the three of us on the panel bid it directly, a majority did make a move towards 6C and hopefully many will get there.

Kniest:  4NT. Pard has long clubs and stoppers. We should be safe at the 4 level with this hand.

I wonder how she will interpret that call. If she chirps again, you can then say 6C.

Ward: 4D. Too much to not make a move.

Hinckley: 4C. Forcing with slam interest. Passing 3NT at matchpoints is tempting and partner frequently holds a stiff heart on this auction, for example   ♠Kxx   ♥x   ♦Axx  ♣AKQJxx  makes slam cold. We may stop in 4NT.

Walker:   4C. Too much to pass. Partner has solid clubs and he isn't gambling -- he has more than just one outside card. If he can bid 4D, I'll bid 4S and he'll have a pretty good idea of where my cards are.

Pavlicek. 4C. Partner should have a long, strong club suit and short hearts. Slam would be cold opposite a classic hand -- ♠Kxx   ♥x   ♦Ax  ♣AKQJxxx  -- but I'll give some leeway to my usual non-classic partners and pass a retreat to 4NT.

Notice that we are only listing hands for partner where slam makes. Not one panelist listed a hand where slam isn’t a heavy favorite. We know that in the rare case where pard could hold two losing hearts, they still are unlikely to find that lead.

While Richard allows his partners to overbid when they shouldn’t, the passers are actually expecting it.

Kessler: Pass. Sounds like solid clubs and a prayer.

Kaplan Pass. 3NT to me is solid clubs and "I think we can make 3NT."  I'm hoping partner can, too. If he has a hand where slam makes, he might have found a different 2nd round call.

Spear:  Pass. Partner has shown long running (probably) clubs, possibly with a singleton heart. If he has the spade king, diamond ace, seven solid clubs, and a heart control we have a slam. But he may not have that perfect hand, and I am not sure how to investigate anyway.

He doesn’t need the spade king. With say ♠QJx   ♥x   ♦Ax  ♣AKQxxx, you pitch one spade and ruff the other. He undoubtedly has the diamond ace (if not, his hand must be ♠Kx   ♥Void   ♦J10xx  ♣AKQxxxx). If he doesn’t have 7 running clubs, how did he expect to make 3NT across from a typical minimum 1H response?  Why would he needlessly overbid on a lesser hand when the auction was still very low?

Thats all, folks. I thank all our fine panelists and solvers. I enjoyed all your thoughtful comments. Stay cool this summer and keep playing all the bridge you can possibly stand!!

Thanks to all who sent in answers to this interesting set. Congratulations to Ken Koorsen of Fort Wayne IN, Thomas O'Reilly-Pol of Silver Spring MD and Kevin Stewart of Champaign IL, who tied for the top score of 570. Close behind was Ronald Mak of Manchester NH with 560. All four are invited to join the October panel.

To receive an email notice when new problems are posted, send your request to kwbridge@comcast.net .

I hope you'll give the October problems a try (see below). Please submit your solutions by September 30 on the web form .