District 8 Solvers Forum -- February 2019

        by Kimmel Jones, Euless TX
 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠QJ7    ♥J9873   ♦A4   ♣K53 ?

Don't you just hate preempts when your opponents make them? That 3D bid forces us to either underbid or overbid. And it’s so close. Half the panel took the low road:

KESSLER: 3S. I would have opened 1H, but do not want to hang partner for opening light in third seat.

POPKIN: 3S. Pard opened in third seat. I have an okay 3-card Drury response, which the opponent screwed me out of. My hearts are crappy. If I double and pard bids 4C -- and suits probably aren’t breaking -- 4S may get punished. Let’s go plus. Pard knows I’m under pressure and may have enough to bid game on his own.

SPEAR: 3S. It's matchpoints, so I will go low with my 11 high-card points. At IMPs I would bid 4S.

While the low approach means a non-forcing 3S call, there are many ways to be aggressive with these cards. A few Solvers chose 3H. If partner assumes this is only a 5-card suit (because of your failure to open 2H) and you therefore must have spade support, it could work out. If he doesn't make that inference, you may play it there.

The other game bidders didn't want to miss spades, but some were considering other contracts, too:

BAKER: 4S. Soft values, but they're mostly well placed, and 3S leaves partner guessing whether I'm serious or competing on an 8-count because the auction got jammed.

GUTHRIE. 4D. Maximum pass with support.

HINCKLEY: Double. Close decision as passed hand at matchpoints between 3S, 4D and double. My first instinct was to bid 4D. I'll soon see if I regret not choosing it!

WARD. Double. A hedge for sure, but leaves 3NT and 4H open.

If you're going to overbid, a negative double appears to be the best option as partner might surprise you by bidding hearts or notrump or even passing. Nate, you’d be happy with that, too!

2. IMPs, both vulnerable           

    * Forcing NT

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AKQ1094  ♥A106  ♦A102  ♣4 ?

This one is a classic case of hand evaluation. About half of our Solvers counted 17 high card points, added little or nothing for distribution, and rebid a non-forcing 3S. No one on the Panel went there. Instead, my esteemed colleagues debate whether to go directly to a specific game or to explore other options.

BAKER: 3D. With 8 likely tricks in hand, I'm forcing to game. 3NT could easily be the best contract if partner has clubs under control, so I'm not going to jump to 4S just yet.

BAINTER: 4S. Both opponents passed. Pard figures to have something more than a sub-minimum 1NT response. Only fear might be missing 6, but my jump to game should inspire another bid from pard if maximum on the 1NT response.

KAPLAN: 3D. Too much strength and controls and potential for slam here to bid 3NT.

SPEAR: 3NT. I like this to show 6-card spades, or else 2NT to show 18-19 balanced. I will bid it here without that understanding to be sure we reach game.

And it’s all about options . . .

WARD: 3D. I want to leave my options open. 3NT asks to play there off the first 5-6 clubs when you are cold for a slam.

WALKER: 3D. Close between 3D and 3NT (partner almost always has clubs in these auctions), but I hate to give up on potential red-suit slams.

For extra credit, we have a special call that many of us don’t actually play, and certainly eliminates the option of getting to 3NT.

HINCKLEY: 4C. This shows a near 2C opening and a club "self splinter" with a self-sufficient spade suit. 3NT (showing solid 6+ spades) also considered.

POPKIN: 4C. Self-splinter. I know, I’m losing 3NT, but this is the best route to slam if it’s there.

Okay, Bud and Alan, you’ve convinced me this is reasonable. You give up on 3NT, but yes, partner can have as little as KQxxx of either red suit and there is a play for slam!

3. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable     

What is your call as South holding:  ♠K86542   ♥AJ4   ♦AQJ   ♣K

I overcall 2S. My suit is crummy. Better to trot it out on the 2 level, and see if I get another chance to call. The alternative is to double and then introduce this suit at a higher level? No, thank you.

WALKER: 2S. It’s heavy, but not by much, as my suit is very weak and this really isn’t a “good" 18 points. If I double and get a Lebensohl 2NT from partner, bidding 3S feels like a giant overbid.

SPEAR: 2S. Maybe I have a little extra here, but beginning with a takeout double is not ideal.

BAINTER: 2S. West/North both with unknown values; no sense getting overboard at this point.

POPKIN. 2S. An underbid, but it's matchpoints and if pard passes, it's okay.

In fact, the Doublers give even better arguments for bidding 2S!

KAPLAN: Double. Way too good for 2S. Hoping I can figure out an intelligent bid after partner responds to my double!

HINCKLEY: Double. But at matchpoints, 2S is tempting and I won't be surprised if that's the limit of the hand.

Several Solvers (but no panelists) actually bid 3S, which is a strong invitation, showing 6+ spades a hand too strong for a simple overcall. That could work, but my fellow Texan explains the flaw:

BAKER: Double. 3S would be strong, but it should also show more than one of the top six cards in the suit. Double then 3S shows less certainty about where to play. If partner bids 3C, I'd be sorely tempted to try 3NT.

And one panelist had a spade or two mixed in with his club(s).

KESSLER: 2NT. This is the closest bid to describing this hand I can make. Second choice would be 2S, going low at matchpoints.

4. IMPs, EW vulnerable      

What is your call as South holding:  ♠Q108542   ♥K9   ♦AK83   ♣A ?

There’s nothing quite like clearly being the best hand at the table and you are the only one NOT bidding. Funny game -- bridge! Let’s just keep laying in the bushes.

BAINTER: Pass. Can't see guessing where this might wind up. Pard has a chance at another call if West passes. With E/W vul, it is not only a certainty that pard doesn't have 7 clubs, he might not even have 6 (since many, myself included, preempt at the 3-level non-vul vs vul in 1st and 2nd chair).

WALKER: Pass. This feels like a big misfit for both sides. I can’t imagine why I would want to take the opponents off the hook.

GUTHRIE: Pass. Give them every encouragement.

With all our points, playing offense on this hand is most unappealing. Anything we bid now could be awkward.

WARD: 2S. I’m a small club away from potentially hanging partner. As it is, I'll pass 3C, but partner can easily have an unusual hand he didn't open 3C to begin with.

POPKIN:  2NT. Pard has at least six good clubs and only one or at most two spades. Probably another card somewhere. Queen of diamonds would be nice.

My partner would have preempted with 6+ good clubs, unless he also has a lot of hearts . . . Hmmm.

What does double mean? Penalty, I guess. How will that work out?

HINCKLEY: 2NT: I'd double for penalty with a third heart, but here, they frequently will hold 9+ hearts.

BAKER: Double. Either there's some really wild distribution afoot, or someone at this table is lying. This should suggest a trap pass of 1S. If partner passes this, I expect 500.

KAPLAN: Double is likely nuts. But I cannot bring myself to pass and can't think of another call.

I am now thinking that if you are going to call, double could work if we catch partner with 4+ hearts.

5. Matchpoints, none vulnerable     

What is your call as South holding:  ♠9   ♥AJ97432   ♦Q103   ♣AQ  ?

Everyone knows to pass here with a misfit and a minimum, but we have an extra heart and an extra queen. Is that enough to bid on? The entire panel says “NO”, although some think it’s close.

WALKER Pass, but with 2.5 quick tricks and good diamond fillers, I think it's close.

Some think it’s not.

WARD: Pass. Don't think this is even close.

Back in 1988, the Bridge World Master Solvers Club had a tougher time with this than our panel. The top vote-getter back then was 4H, with Pass a close second.

Our unanimous panel chose to tap the table, with many explaining that they were influenced by the form of scoring.

BAKER: Pass. I'm minimum, we aren't fitting well, and it's matchpoints, so +170 isn't a disaster if I'm wrong. Give me a second spade and I'll go for it.

HINCKLEY: Pass. Easier decision at matchpoints. Opposite 9 high-card points, a moderate 6-bagger in spades and a stiff heart, 3S is high enough.

SPEAR: Pass. Going low again at matchpoints, but I have good value and hoping we don't miss a game.

KESSLER: Pass. Plus scores at matchpoints are good. Bid 4S at IMP's.

Mark mentions the obvious alternative to passing. Partner is showing a hand that has good trick-taking power if his suit is trumps, which means that if you're going to bid on, your first choice should be 4S. The seventh heart brings that suit into the mix, although you'd like to have another heart honor or two. The other possibility -- 3NT, chosen by almost a quarter of the Solvers -- is doomed when you have no fit. Partner won't always have a sure entry outside his suit, so 3NT is a only when you have extra values.

POPKIN: Pass. David Berkowitz said that at matchpoints there is no bonus for game, but there is a bonus for going plus.

Many years ago I was playing in the finals of the National Swiss Teams. I’m in a 2S contract where my trump suit is Q98xxx in my hand opposite Kx in a dummy that has no side entries. I lead low from my hand. Larry Cohen, on my left plays the Jack, King from the dummy, low from David Berkowitz. So I lead a second trump from dummy, finessing the 9, hoping Cohen started with AJ. But he really had JT.

This cost me the contract. Berkowitz had smoothly ducked with Axx. Had he won the Ace earlier, I would have been forced to play the second round out of my hand and drop the 10 to make the contract.

6. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable  

What is your call as South holding:  ♠J963   ♥J102   ♦3   ♣AQ654

Here we are back to a divided panel. Do we compete to 5H, possibly making a lead-directing 5C on the way? Or do we sit back eyeing our defensive values, possibly reaching for the red card?

KESSLER: Pass. I need a foutth heart to save. No guarantee 4S is a make.

GUTHRIE: Pass. Probably about 18 total tricks, but don't discourage partner from bidding again. Anyway, discretion is the better part of valour.

BAKER: Pass. If we have a 5-level contract, I expect partner will balance. In the meantime, I have reasonable hopes of setting 4S, though I'd prefer not to tip them off about the bad split they're getting.

Yes, playing defense seems best, unless partner wants to bid again.

WARD: Double. I think 5H is too unilateral. I have values, so I should let partner make a decision. While he is likely 6-4-3-0, he may have a stiff spade and leave this in, which rates to be good for our side.

WALKER: Double. Partner showed a good hand and I have tricks and trumps. If he stretched with a spade void and lots of hearts, he’s allowed to pull.

So the doublers think partner may bid again if they double, while the passers thought he might bid again if they pass. But the 5H bidders just make that decision themselves.

BAINTER: 5H. Three-way guess: 5H might be right, 4S doubled might be, or 4S left alone might be. Let's choose option #1 -- 5H.

KAPLAN: 5H. Maybe we will make it! Try to put the last guess to them.

POPKIN: 5H. Pard is void in spades. I would like to bid 5C, but that might be an offer to play. 5H seems clear. What is going to happen when they compete to 5S?

Yes, you’ll do great if that happens!!! But the arguments for not competing to the 5-level seem stronger to me.

No panelist voted for 5C, but a handful of Solvers did. 5C was the plurality's choice when this problem was posed to an expert panel thirty years ago. Eddie Kantar called it an "ambiguous overbid", but he and the other 5C bidders  believed it was forcing and suggested heart support. They also thought it was necessary to get a club lead if the opponents bid 5S. Maybe these Solvers are onto something.

And for all those who think our panel is populated by aggressive bidders:
   Did anybody notice? The 100-point answer on every hand except #2 is the conservative action. It’ll be different next time. See you then!

Thanks to all who sent in answers to this interesting set. Congratulations to Todd Holes of Glen Ellyn IL, who led all Solvers with a score of 580. Close runners-up were Monika Plumb of Carbondale IL and Mary Lou Clegg of South Bend IN. All three are invited to join the April panel.

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

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

Help wanted:  If you'd like to serve as a Forum moderator and write up the column (twice a year), contact Karen at kwbridge@comcast.net.