District 8 Solvers Forum -- February 2005

by Tom Kniest, University City MO

1. IMPs, both vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
2NT	100	6	25
3D	90	5	51
3H	80	4	19
3S	80	3	5

West	North	East	South
			1D
Pass	2S *	Pass	???

   * (Strong jump shift)

What is your call as South holding:  K   AKJ   Q98654   J102 ?  

It’s cold in St. Louis, but we’re warmed by the heat generated by the Fighting Illini, just a few hundred miles northeast. They're the hottest team in college hoops (22-0 as I write this) and justifiably ranked #1. As for bridge, we’re honored by the presence of two guest panelists for this issue: Richard Pavlicek -- one of the game's great bidding theorists, who beats opponents with deadly, straightforward logic -- and the flamboyant Harold Feldheim, a long-time expert, bridge author and master of schtick at the table.

Right off the bat, I’m forced to award the top scores to the two calls that I think are most inferior of the four possibilities. One is the rebid of that robust diamond suit, which was chosen by five panelists and a majority of the Solvers.

STRITE: “3D. Nearly automatic. Opposite an old time jump-shift, I know this hand will be played in a pointed suit. No purpose is served by fudging with a 2NT rebid."

GUTHRIE: “3D. It is right to be careful about emphasizing bad suits in slam auctions, but you must not suppress a 6-card suit with good intermediates. Key-card Blackwood will prevent you from reaching a slam missing the Ace-King of trumps."

When you have six missing the AKJ10, how bad can the intermediates be? Blackwood could save you, but that 5H response might be embarrassing.

Your rebid here is important, and in a potential slam auction, it’s not usually good strategy to emphasize a weak suit, even if it is a 6-carder. Nor is it a good idea to bid notrump when you don’t have a suit stopped, but that was the panel's first choice.

DODD: “2NT. Best of a bad lot. If partner has diamond support, I’ll hear about it next."

NELSON: "2NT. I think this best describes this hand since I hold so many slow cards. I dislike bidding 3D with a suit this lacking in quality." 

VISHNEVSKY: “2NT. Strive to rebid cheaply when partner jumps. Let him describe his hand. I assume we play Soloway-style jump shifts.”

Len is referring to a bidding style popularized by Paul Soloway and followed by many experts. It defines a jump-shift as showing one of three types of hands: (1) A strong one-suiter; (2) A strong, unbalanced hand with a good 5+-card suit and a fit for opener’s suit; or (3) A strong, balanced hand with a good 5-card suit. One of the tenets is that you never jump-shift with a two-suiter, so if the jump-shifter rebids a new suit -- for example, 1D-2S-2NT-3C -- it promises diamond support and shortness in the bid suit.

The 2NT rebid does have the advantage of keeping the auction low and hearing partner’s rebid. When he raises to 3NT, though, you should have a queasy feeling, at least until you see dummy.

My choice is the show-where-you-live call, which is also advocated by many Soloway Jump-Shifters. Its supporters on the panel include:

PAVLICEK: “3H, describing where my values are. Partner shouldn’t jump shift with a heart suit, so there’s little danger of a raise. Over 3NT, I’ll raise to 4NT."

ENGEL: “3H. To show where my real values are. I plan on supporting spades next, of course."

WALKER: “3H, a concentration-of-values bid. Rebidding the diamond suit will give a false picture of where my controls and high cards are. Second choice is the honor raise of 3S. That could work well here, but I think I’d want a prior agreement with partner about doing it with a singleton.”

That brings us to the other alternative, which could be just the bid partner wants to hear:

FELDHEIM: “3S. I guess partner would like to know about this card. 2NT is a joke."

FEILER: “3S. I haven’t played strong jump-shifts for the last couple of decades, but I think I’m supposed to raise with an honor. Pard should have either a spade one-suiter or spades and diamonds."

KESSLER: “3S. Very old fashioned, but raise your partner with an ace, king or queen in his suit after a jump-shift. Partner said he was taking control and I have no reason not to follow.”

2. Matchpoints, none vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
5D	100	10	41
4H	80	5	25
5C	80	2	11
Pass	70	1	23

West	North	East	South
1S	2H	2S	DBL *
3S	4D	Pass	???

   * (Responsive - shows the minors)

What is your call as South holding:  52   96   KJ964   AKQ3 ?

Is this hand worth a partscore, game or slam? What does 5C mean here? Should you give up hope on a 4H game? How much of a liability is that spade holding? There are lots of questions, but most of the panel settled on:

FEILER: “5D. Partner’s 4D was voluntary, not forced, so I should have a good chance of losing just the two spades ."

KESSLER: “5D. Partner needs a stiff spade, AK of hearts and AQ of diamonds for this to be a good slam, and he may well have bid 5D with that hand.”

PAVLICEK: “5D. There could be a slam, of course, but I don’t see any precedent for 5C to be forcing. (To me, it would describe 4-6 shape and offer a choice of games.) Thus, the most sensible choice is game.”

This is obviously a difficult hand to evaluate. FEILER is justifying why he's bidding on to game, and KESSLER and PAVLICEK offer explanations of why they aren't trying for slam.

JONES: “5C. My double promised both minors, so this is obviously a cuebid in support of diamonds. Without a spade control, partner cannot go past 5D, but if he has a stiff spade and strong holdings in the red suits, he’ll move towards slam."

If partner will take 5C as a cuebid on the way to 5D, then it’s a great choice. I doubt that there is general agreement on this, or even that many partnerships have discussed this exact sequence. Without a specific discussion, I'd assume partner was showing longer clubs and offering a choice of games rather than making a slam try.

If your heart is set on game but the five-level makes you nervous, how about:

HUDSON: “4H. Second choice is 5D or pass. A slam try in diamonds would be ridiculous. I don’t like my major-suit doubletons or my probably wasted club strength. 4H is the only game with a play. I assume partner will read me for a doubleton heart. He can always correct to 5D, which conceivably might even make."

FELDHEIM: “4H. This is partnership agreement as choice of games. Partner should check the quality of his hearts -- for example, xx  KQJ10x  Axxx  xx  has three top losers, so 5D has no chance to succeed."

4H is a hero bid, offered in case your partner has a one-loser heart suit … as if partner never would have thought to rebid such a suit on his own. I agree 4H is a choice of games, but I think a more popular view would be to use that bid to show honor-doubleton.

Finally, some pessimism from an unlikely source:

MERRITT: “Pass. White at matchpoints, someone is pushing. My plus score might be enough.”

On the actual deal, partner didn't have much in reserve:  xx  AQ10xx  Axxx  xx. 5D made on a successful diamond finesse, but if the queen is offside -- or partner guesses to play for the drop -- your plus 130 would be a fine score. As is often the case at matchpoints, though, it's the optimists who get the big rewards.

3. Matchpoints, none vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3NT	100	9	50
2NT	90	8	40
Double	60	1	10

West	North	East	South
Pass	1H	1S	???

What is your call as South holding:
AJ103   J4   QJ5   QJ64 ?

Here’s a simple test of hand evaluation. Some saw the glass as half empty and evaluated this hand as a soft 12-count with no real source of tricks. Others took the glass-half-full view and fell in love with their spade stoppers and heart honor.

It's also a test of how much rope you're willing to offer partner. Ever since the Rule of 20 was introduced, most players don't seem to think twice about opening hands like  x  Axxxx  Axxx  Kxx.  That's 11 highs, 2.5 quick tricks and 9 cards in the two longest suits, but how would you like declaring 3NT with that dummy? Yet that hand is a clear opener to the vast majority of bridge players.

The panel didn't find much to argue about here, but you can take notes on the half-full/half-empty folks for future reference. Some of the 2NT bidders flirted with the overbid, but most thought their choice was clear:

PAVLICEK: “2NT. Natural invitation. I suppose the S10 and well-placed spade honors make a case to bid 3NT, but the lack of spot cards elsewhere surely offsets this."

DODD: “2NT. Tempting to soft-pedal with 1NT at this form of scoring."

ENGEL: “2NT. I’m not going to bid 3NT, as playing 2NT would be painful enough."

JONES: “2NT. Is there an alternative? We aren’t playing Roth-Stone, are we?"

MERRITT: “2NT. I don’t get it. Isn’t the rule 'Invite Rarely, Accept Often' still good bridge?"

I think it's the reverse of that. And I think I’ve just solved the problem in your game. :)

PAULO: “2NT. Matchpoints and quacks suggest to invite, not bid game."

STRITE: “2NT. Automatic. If in the spirit of this competition, we try to imagine any other possibility, only a trap pass comes to mind. Not with quacks, though."

The rest of the panel appears to be accustomed to playing with partners who don’t know how to raise to 3NT when that contract has a chance.

FELDHEIM: “3NT if I was the overcaller; 2NT if Tom Kniest is."

VISHNEVSKY: “3NT. My hand is very slow, but the spades jack it up to a game bid."

KESSLER: “3NT. Even at matchpoints, the spade 10 and heart Jack are huge cards. This is a really good 12-count."

NELSON: "3NT. I could be one level too high, but we've all been there before. Or am I the only one?"

FEILER: “3NT. I’ll probably get a spade lead, which not only helps set up two or even three spade tricks, but also gives me a tempo. With all these slow honors, I want to talk partner into putting his six-card heart suit down in dummy instead of bidding it again."

WALKER: “3NT. This is closer to 2NT on general values, but when in doubt, my rule is to avoid making non-forcing bids in situations where I think a pass by partner can't result in a decent score for us. If 2NT is passed out, I'll be wishing I had tried for +300 by doubling 1S instead. That expectation of disappointment -- along with the three spade stops and what rates to be a very valuable Jx pusher in partner’s long suit -- talk me into the slight overbid."

4. IMPs, NS vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3S	100	7	32
4S	80	4	7
3D	70	5	42
Pass	60	2	10

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

What is your call as South holding:  AJ9754  J2   AKQ83   Void ?

Wow, what an auction. The only thing normal about it is that partner has values opposite your void.

Here’s my guess as to what's going on: RHO has a real, but marginal third-seat opening because he elected to open a poor suit. He could be 4-2-4-3. LHO took advantage of his passed-hand status and stretched to bid a non-forcing 2H. Partner has me stumped. He didn’t preempt, so maybe he had a flaw like a 4-card major (hearts). But if he has good defense against hearts, why is he taking them off the hook?

The implication here might be that partner has spade tolerance, but can I take that to the bank? Maybe he likes his heart position for offense, and hopes I have less in diamonds and some club help. Give him a hand like  x  Kxxx  xx  KQ10xxx . Is that consistent with this auction? If so, the winning bid rates to be:

PAVLICEK: “3S. Conservative, but I can’t get myself to bid 3D, which partner would surely take as fit-showing (I might hear 5C next); and I won’t solo in 4S. I think partner will bid that most of the time it makes.

JONES: “3S. While it’s possible we might miss a game, it’s also possible we could be in trouble. Partner doesn’t need two spades for his bid, especially if we are playing the Snapdragon convention where a double by him would show clubs with spade tolerance."

KESSLER: “3S. I want one of my opponents to be the last bidder. I can’t imagine bidding anything else. No double would be good."

Doubling your partner would be pretty attractive here. No matter what you do, though, I don't think the opponents are going to bid again. Our passers, however, were hoping for just that:

FELDHEIM: “Pass. If 2H is not a negative freebid, then pass, waiting to double.

It appears that Harold has forgotten that LHO is a passed hand and RHO is thus off the hook for a rebid. I'm pretty sure you're going to be playing 3C if you pass.

VISHNEVSKY: “Pass. If partner thinks his bid was fitting, we need to write it on our card. Bidding might lead to ugliness."

You’re already in a very ugly contract, and the auction is over. There will be great mirth when you table your dummy, and this hand will become a topic at the dinner tables of you and your partner and your opponents.

The pass, though, rates to lead to less ugliness than:

ENGEL: “3D. Partner should suspect this is natural, rather than a raise."

FEILER: “3D. Partner couldn’t open 3C in first seat, but now he backs in between two bidding opponents when all I did was squeak out a 1S overcall. He either has spade support, or a brilliant master plan of some kind. I’m hoping for the former."

NELSON: "3D. Bidding a natural 3D seems logical. It's not a cuebid since I have a 3H bid available for that purpose."

GUTHRIE: “3D. In the USA, 1C and 1D are often artificial. An American might open 1D with 3 diamonds, so I assume my 3D is natural here."

If opener had just three diamonds, then his pattern would be exactly 4-4-3-2 and he surely would have raised hearts. I demoted 3D in the scoring because I just can't believe partner will interpret it as natural. NELSON brings up a good point that ideally, 3H should be the cuebid for clubs, but how many of us have discussed this with our partners? Most Norths will take 3D as a space-saving cuebid for clubs, so you can imagine the nightmare auction that will now ensue. And as some panelists pointed out, even if partner guesses that 3D as natural, what will that accomplish? Do we really want to play in diamonds rather than spades?

Our 4S bidders were convinced that partner had to have a spade fit:

MERRITT: “4S. If partner doesn’t have some sort of spade tolerance on this hand, I will trade her in."

RABIDEAU: “4S. Would partner do this to me with a stiff spade? I hope not, but I might still survive."

HUDSON: “4S. The bidding is practically impossible. My partner must have some sort of spade fit to bid 3C after passing originally. His hand: Kxx  Kxx  Void   Q10xxxxx."

With that hand -- and just about any other hand with at least 3-card support -- wouldn't he just raise spades? A good partner is going to try to make things as simple as possible for you in a competitive auction. Unless we had a rock-solid agreement that 3C here showed spade support, I'd take his bid at face value and try to find a landing spot.

5. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
2C	100	11	52
3C	80	5	31
2H	60	2	17

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

What is your call as South holding:  3  KJ54   K   AQJ8763 ?

I’m in the minority on this one (again), but it sure seems that 3C is the most descriptive bid available. It helps partner visualize your hand, it doesn’t preclude finding hearts, and it brings the 3NT potential across better than 2C. That seventh club could easily be your ninth trick.

The majority, though, was willing to risk the underbid:

PAVLICEK: “2C. Conservative, but it’s surely substandard for a reverse, and 3C seems too pushy. I doubt we could miss a good game if 2C is passed out."

GUTHRIE: “2C. With potential misfits, a slow underbidding approach is often advisable."

RABIDEAU: “2C. A reverse is out of the question, but I wouldn’t argue much with 3C."

FEILER: “2C. I’ll take the low road on this one. I don’t think it will be passed out. It’s a bit weak for 2H, and 3C would deny a 4-card heart suit."

FELDHEIM: “2C. 3C could work, but I really want to leave room for partner to further describe. There’s no chance 2C will get passed out.“

No chance? Your passing, vulnerable opponents haven't yet shown any desire to enter the auction, and partner is certainly allowed to pass your non-forcing bid. Also non-forcing, but much more encouraging, is:

JONES: “3C. Seems most descriptive."

WALKER: “3C. A bit light on high card values, but I can’t justify bidding just 2C with this much playing strength. If partner stretches to bid a game or slam, the seventh club may be a compensating value. The hand is all wrong for a reverse to 2H."

The one thing all of the club bidders agreed on was that the reverse was just too much of an overbid with this 14-count. Two panelists and several Solvers, though, thought the extra-long suit and distributional values made up for the skinny high-card strength:

VISHNEVSKY: “2H. I have great playing strength."

HUDSON: “2H. 3C is just about as good, as I’m not eager to play in hearts even if partner has four. I am tempted to bid 3NT; I almost have a running club suit and I almost have a diamond stopper, and I don’t care to hear about partner’s 5- or 6-card spade suit. I like keeping the opponents in the dark (too bad about partner) but I don’t have enough tricks. Some would say I’m too weak to reverse, but a good 7-card suit compensates for a slight lack of high cards."

That covers just about every alternative, but he still doesn't sound convinced.

6. Board-a-match teams, both vulnerable 

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4C	100	14	50
4H	80	2	35
3S	80	1	2
3H	70	1	13

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

What is your call as South holding:  AQJ8   AQ43  J9742   Void ?

This one seemed clear to the majority of the panelists. We’ll only hear from a few of them, then give the naysayers  their chance.

PAVLICEK: “4C. Surely, 3H is a gross underbid, so as long as I’m going to bid 4H, it seems right to show the club control when partner is unlimited.”

FELDHEIM: “4C. An overbid, but practical. This could be a 'magic' hand opposite Kxx  KJxxx Void  xxxx." 

FEILER: “4C. The only other bid I might make is 4H, and that shows more HCP and some club losers.”

JONES: “4C. I still think you need to bring back opening lead quizzes."

Okay, what would you lead with this hand? For the minority:

WALKER: “4H. 17 dummy points is on the light side for 4H, but it’s too strong for a competitive 3H. 4C is a possibility, but it depends on how partner will interpret it. Is it a ‘semi-obligatory’ cuebid on the way to 4H, or a real slam try with extra values? I prefer the latter, as I think you need to make a distinction between the 14-count that's stretching to game and the 19-count with a club control. If partner has enough to make slam opposite the hand I have, he’ll probably bid on.”

This hand was from the finals of the Reisinger Board-a-Match Teams at the Orlando NABC. Eddie Wold chose the 4C cuebid. His partner, Mike Passell, held something like Kxx  Jxxx  Ax  AJxx and carried on to slam, and who could blame him? It’s certainly not a slam you’d want to be in, although he made it on a lucky lie of the cards and some misdefense.

Finally, two other approaches:

STRITE: “3S. A 4C cuebid eats space and doesn’t buy me much since 4D by pard will be a ‘last train’ cuebid. 4H immediately gets the values right, but pard will expect better diamonds. If luck holds, I can convert pard’s 3NT to 4H, delivering a gold-plated auction.”

KESSLER: “3H. Timid is sometimes good at board-a-match. Besides, if partner can’t raise, maybe 3H is a good spot.”

Here we all are discussing the slam try, and Mark comes up with the partscore option! If his opponents at the other table get to the hopeless slam and go down, Mark's +200 is going to give him a win on the board ... and the opponents' award as their Fix of the Day.

Thanks again to Richard Pavlicek (owner of the best bridge site on the Net: www.rpbridge.net) and Harold Feldheim for sharing their wisdom with the panelists and solvers. Thanks, too, to all who sent in answers and comments and to this month's guest panelists, Will Engel and Len Vishnevsky. Congratulations to William Johnson of Farmington MO, Mike Tomlianovich of Bloomington IL and John Seng of Champaign IL. They topped all Solvers for this set and are invited to join the April panel.

Special congratulations to Nigel Guthrie of Reading UK and Jim Hudson of DeKalb IL, who won the 2004 Solvers Contest by averaging more than 560 on their best three submissions. They'll be joining the panel for 2005. See the Solvers Honor Roll article in this issue for a list of the top runners-up.

This is the first issue of the 2005 Solvers Contest, so there's still plenty of time to join in. The six new problems are below. Please submit your solutions by March 22 on the web form or by email to our April moderator:

Scott Merritt -- scottmerritt@verizon.net

 

How the Panel voted  (Panel/Staff Avg. -- 541):
	1	2	3	4	5	6	Score
Will Engel, Freeport IL	3H	5D	2NT	3D	2C	4C	540
Kent Feiler, Harvard IL	3S	5D	3NT	3D	2C	4C	550
Harold Feldheim, Hamden CT	3S	4H	3NT	Pass	2C	4C	520
Nigel Guthrie, Reading UK	3D	4H	DBL	3D	2C	4C	500
Jim Hudson, DeKalb IL	2NT	4H	3NT	4S	2H	4C	520
Kimmel Jones, Euless TX	3D	5C	2NT	3S	3C	4C	540
Mark Kessler, Springfield IL	3S	5D	3NT	3S	2C	3H	550
Larry Matheny, Loveland CO	3D	4H	3NT	3S	3C	4H	530
Bev Nelson, Fort Myers FL	2NT	5D	3NT	3D	2C	4C	570
Manuel Paulo, Lisbon, Portugal	3D	5D	2NT	3S	2C	4C	580
Richard Pavlicek, Ft. Lauderdale FL	3H	5D	2NT	3S	2C	4C	570
Larry Rabideau, St. Anne IL	2NT	5D	3NT	4S	2C	4C	580
Toby Strite, Mysiadlo, Poland	3D	4H	2NT	4S	3C	3S	500
Len Vishnevsky, San Francisco	2NT	5D	3NT	Pass	2H	4C	520
How the Staff voted
Tom Dodd, Branchburg NJ	2NT	5C	2NT	3D	2C	4C	540
Tom Kniest, University City MO	3H	5D	2NT	3S	3C	4C	550
Scott Merritt, Arlington VA	2NT	Pass	2NT	4S	2C	4C	540
Karen Walker, Champaign IL	3H	5D	3NT	3S	3C	4H	540

Solvers Honor Roll  (Average Solver score: 502)

Solvers Forum -- April 2005 Problems

1. IMPs, none vulnerable                             West    North      East     South  1H Pass ??? What is your call as South holding: AJ82   Q87543  7   64 ? 2. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable   West      North      East     South   1S 2H DBL * Pass ???    * (Negative -- both minors) What is your call as South holding: AK10954   K6   4   KQ102 ? 3. Matchpoints, both vulnerable   West     North      East     South  1D Pass 3D * Pass Pass DBL Pass ???   * (Preemptive) What is your call as South holding: 65   A102   QJ8   AKJ54 ?

4. IMPs, both vulnerable                 West     North      East     South  1NT * 2C ** Pass  ??? * (15-17)   ** (Cappelletti -- unknown one-suiter) What is your call as South holding: Q1076   85   63   AKJ74 ? 5. Matchpoints, none vulnerable   West     North     East     South   1C Pass 1H Pass 2H Pass Pass DBL Pass 2S ??? What is your call as South holding: QJ5   Q874   J92   A63 ? 6. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable                          West    North      East     South  1H 1S DBL * 2S 3H  All Pass    * (Negative -- both minors) What is your OPENING LEAD as South holding: A9864   A72  876   K3 ? Thanks for the problems above to Kent Feiler (#1, #4 & #5) and John Seng (#6).