District 8 Solvers Forum -- December 2015

    by Jack Spear, Kansas City MO

What is your call as South holding  ♠AJ108642  ♥107  ♦K1072   ♣Void ? 

The first problem is a decision of how many spades to bid. If your partnership has ever discussed opening 1S on a hand of this type (light in high cards with the playing strength of a long suit), it can be a good choice, but only Mark and Bud chose it besides me,

KESSLER:  1S. This hand is much better than the flat 11-13 point hands everyone opens. I'll take my zero and be honest about what I would actually do. If partner doubles, I do have defense.

HINCKLEY:  1S. Holding spades at matchpoints with none vulnerable, all of those factors tell me to bid. However, the hand is too good to open 2S or 3S. I find you usually regret passing hands like this.

The popular choice by a narrow margin was 4S. This can easily be a big winner, but may lose if a slam is missed. Our three guest panelists all chose this action, so I will let them make their case:

POKORNY:  4S. Too strong for 3S, too weak for 1S.

BERNHARD:  4S. Bid what you think you can make. It is matchpoints, more likely to steal the contract than make a slam.

BAKER:  4S. 7-4 hands play well enough to make this worth opening one level higher. If we miss a diamond contract, so be it. After 1S, you'll never convince partner you have this much playing strength and this little defense.

Karen tries to make a case for 3S:

WALKER:  3S. Closer to 3.5 at this vulnerability, but 1S is way too much (doesn’t even meet the dubious Rule of 20) and 4S is actually too preemptive because it reduces the chances of the opponents making a mistake. They’ll gamble at the 4-level, but rarely at the 5-level.

  * Good heart raise

What is your call as South holding  ♠K532   ♥10   ♦KQ6543   ♣84 ? 

Problem 2 is a big playing hand with a likely fit in spades (the boss suit) and a sure fit in diamonds. After partner’s takeout double, game is likely, but the opponents have announced values in a big fit of their own.

2D is the popular choice, which offers the benefit of being essentially forcing, since the opponents are committed to 2H. A later spade bid will complete our description. I like 4S on the next round over any number of hearts, while others may like just one-over the number of hearts bid by the opponents:

HINCKLEY:  2D. They often will have 10+ hearts and frequently will be in 4H when it gets back to me -- when I will then bid 4S to show my constructive 4-5 or 4-6 hand.

BERNHARD:  2D. Going to have another chance to bid spades, and this is the best start to describing my hand.

KNIEST:  2D. I’ll get a chance to bid again.

Another bid which takes advantage of the space available is the cuebid of 2H. This has an advantage over 3D or any number of spades, because the 4-card spade length is implied: 

RABIDEAU:  2H. Although I like the treatment used by my opponents, it sure helped me out on this one. We get to start investigating at the 2-level.

I admire bidding 4S directly, which could easily be a big winner, but could also go badly in a 7-card fit. This may also result in the opponents guessing to bid 5H, which could present another problem, and partner has no idea of our holding.

POKORNY:  4S. Pressure bidding. The real problem is what to do over 5H.

Some panelists thought that 2S was enough: 

BRIDGE BARON:  2S. The opponent's artificial major raises in two of a minor over a double give me the opportunity to bid 2D, but our possible major-suit fit takes priority over my six-card diamond suit.

PAULO:  2S. I am entitled to bid once only, so I choose the major suit.

Here's another strategy:

WALKER:  3D. Jumping in diamonds, then bidding spades next seems the best way to get across that I'm 6-4 instead of 5-4. It's important to give partner a choice, as this is not the hand for playing a 4-3 fit. 

  * Clubs and diamonds

What is your call as South holding  ♠864   ♥K987532   ♦Void   ♣J84

Problem 3 is another big distributional hand, but with only 4 high-card-points. We have three small spades in support of partner, and a 7-card major of our own with a diamond void. The unusual 2NT by the opponents warns us that they may be bidding/making a lot of tricks in diamonds, so overbidding now with a non-forcing 3H may be better than passing and getting shut out. The panel agrees with a big majority:

What is your call as South holding  ♠862   ♥A1063   ♦K8754   ♣9 ?

Problem 5 is a hand in the slam zone, and offers multiple choices in how to proceed. The most straightforward approach is 4NT, then probably 5NT to show all the keycards and invite the grand slam.

The best choice would be to describe our hand to partner, and let him make a decision between 6S or 7S. How to best describe our hand is the problem, and our methods (partner's jump to 3S) allow for immediate cuebidding with spades agreed. The largest group of the panelists started the cuebidding with the lowest control, the singleton club:

KNIEST:  4C. Start with the club control and get to show the heart control below game.

WALKER:  4C. An embarrassment of riches with three possible cuebids. There’s an argument for showing the high-card control (diamonds) rather than the shortness. 4C works better, though, if partner can cue 4D, which gives me room to cue 4H and show everything. Second choice is Keycard Blackwood -- unusual for responder to use it after a 2C opening, but this might be the hand for it.

The second-largest group of panelists elected to use Keycard Blackwood to show their riches:

BERNHARD:  4NT. We could be on our way to seven. Cuebidding could get messy.

POKORNY:  4NT. With all suits controlled, the only question is 6S or 7S. Let's find it, hoping we are playing some good keycard Blackwood continuations.

HINCKLEY:  4NT. Give partner ♠AKQxxx ♥Kx  ♦Ax  ♣Axx   and 7S is a great contract. If partner has the diamond queen instead of the heart king, it will be harder to find 7S with confidence.

Starting the cuebidding with 4D was the choice of some panelists: 

BAKER:  4D. Partner wants a cuebid, and I have control in all three suits! This seems like a matter of partnership agreement; I play that this requests a king or ace rather than shortness, which rules out 4C.

RABIDEAU:  4D. Hoping this will help partner evaluate her hand. If 5C were a splinter, I'd probably choose that, but unfortunately it's Exclusion KCB.

Speaking of a partnership agreement about 5C being a splinter:

KESSLER:  5C. Maybe a spade short, but shows cards and a stiff club. Over 5D, I'll bid 5H, then over 5S or 6C, I'll bid 6D. A pretty good picture of this hand.

6. Matchpoints, both vulnerable

What is your call as South holding  ♠53   ♥AKQJ94   ♦982   ♣J4 ?

Problem 6 is a fairly straightforward choice of actions. The opponents have preempted to 4S, and we have a good hand with six almost-solid hearts plus 3-card support for partner’s suit. The vulnerability at matchpoints seems to encourage bidding. Partner may well have a singleton spade, making 11 or 12 tricks a good possibility. Playing in hearts rates to score higher than diamonds, and may also be safer.

The big majority of panelists agreed with bidding 5H. Some were hoping it might lead to a slam:

POKORNY:  5H. Bidding a suit in such spots always shows at least mild slam potential. If partner's got a good 1-2-6-4 or 1-3-6-3 hand, he can bid further.

Others thought they might even be sacrificing:

RABIDEAU:  5H. Who knows?  East "should" have unusual distribution and they may have a make in 4S.

WALKER:  5H. Not thrilled with this bid, but at this vulnerability, East is bidding to make, and I don’t have enough sure tricks to challenge him. If anyone was stretching, it was probably partner.

Most, however, just hoped to make 5H:

HINCKLEY:  5H. Especially at matchpoints. Even if partner has a stiff spade (which is not guaranteed) and a decent hand, we may not have 12 tricks.

KNIEST:  5H. I have my suit and this is how I show it.

BERNHARD:  5H. Matchpoint scoring and the lead direction if opponents go 5S made me do it.

PAULO:  5H. A shoot.

Let’s close out the column with another computer simulation from Bridge Baron: 

BRIDGE BARON:  Double. Expecting to pick up +337 as opposed to +121.5 for passing. The simulation rejects 5H and 5D out of hand.

Thanks to all who sent in answers and comments to this challenging and low-scoring set. Topping all Solvers with a perfect 600 was Nigel Guthrie of Glasgow, Scotland. Runners-up were Adam Miller of Chicago IL, Ig Nieuwenhuis of Amersfoort, Netherlands and John Seng of Champaign IL. All four are invited to join the February  panel.

If you'd like to receive an email notice when new problems are posted, please send your request to kwbridge@comcast.net .

I hope you'll give the February problems a try (see below). Please submit your solutions by January 31 on the web form.

October moderator:  Kimmel Jones   kimmel.jones@gmail.com