District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2006

 by Tom Dodd, Branchburg NJ

1. Matchpoints, none vulnerable                             

West	North	East	South
--	1S	DBL	RDBL
2H	Pass	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  K8   K93   KJ8754   Q10 ?

Despite the many arguments in their favor, I have always hated "omnibus" redoubles -- the blind counting of high-card points only rarely enables a partnership to accurately assess prospects. Here, at least we got “lucky” in that the opponents didn’t jam the bidding to a higher level and make our next call a complete guess. Bad enough as it stands -- a real Hobson’s choice -- my least favorite call is:

NELSON: “Double. I like a double as opposed to a 2S bid, and certainly not a 3D bid since that would be a one-round force.”

The biggest problem with the double is that’s it is penalty, so it's almost certain to end the bidding. While we rate to have most of the high cards, EW almost certainly have an 8- or 9-card fit and some ruffing values. Even a one-trick set seems destined for a low score. If EW were red, the merits of the double would climb significantly. 

Fully half the panel and solvers thought it wise to eat up an entire level of space so they could show their long suit:

STRITE: “3D. Double or 2NT could work, but 3D keeps three strains in play. I would expect 3H from partner with a diamond fit, over which I can try 3NT with more confidence. If hearts are 4-4, I even make opposite two black aces and the diamond queen. I'll pass 3S, assuming a misfit.”

PAOLO: “3D. Partner's pass looks positive. With a weak or freak hand he would have bid. The penalty doesn't compensate for the game bonus.”

The trouble with this reasoning is that nobody seemed to consider what North would reply to this holding a balanced minimum? Imagine North’s pain sitting there with something like AJxxx  xx  Ax  Kxxx, which is a control-rich minimum. There are worse hands by far that would justify an opening bid at this vulnerability. True, you may still back your way into 3NT, but with what level of confidence? Isn’t the primary objective with marginal hands at matchpoints to first secure a plus score?  

The primary reason I liked the “timid” 2S is that it defines my hand pretty darn accurately: a semi-fit (either xxx or honor-x, since I would have perpetrated a limit-or-better 2NT with the same values and an extra spade or two) and a minimum for the redouble. 2S also saves room -- if North has a few extras and wants to move forward, great. If not, I’ll take my +140 or thereabouts. Besides, opposite one of my own opening bids, game is a distant possibility! 

A few panelists, including my fellow editors, seemed to have their rose-colored glasses on at the prospects:

KESSLER: “3D. I think bidding any number of notrump is masterminding this hand. Over 3D, partner can bid 3H if he has interest in notrump, 3S with a 6-card or good 5-card suit, or cuebid with a good hand and diamond support. Partner's hand is only limited by the fact he did not open 1NT, 2C, or bid immediately to show a weak distributional hand. I would certainly want to be in 6D if partner held  AQxxx  x  AQxx  Axx. Also there are several hands where 5D makes and 3NT goes down.”

WALKER: “3NT. Partner's pass of 2H suggests he has a good opening bid and/or a balanced hand that will cooperate with a double of 2H. If so,  all roads lead to 3NT. A 3D bid here is a stall. If partner bids 3H or 3S, you're going to bid 3NT anyway, and if he bids anything else, you're going to wish you could go back to 3NT. A full 12 pts with a six-card suit is too much for 2NT, and double is for penalty.”

KNIEST: “3H. 3NT will be best by his side. If he rebids 3S, I'll bid 3NT. Since my cuebid will have shown doubt, he can correct to 4S, although his failure to rebid 2S over 2H suggests a somewhat balanced hand. The Ax of diamonds should be enough to bring home 3NT.”

By far my favorite for this month was the Jekyll and Hyde approach taken by one of my favorite partners when we both lived in the Midwest:

BERNHARD (Jekyll): “3D. Stuck because of that lousy redouble. Partner will at least know that I have 10+ pts and a diamond suit.”

BERNHARD (Hyde): ”2NT. Oh how I hate the redouble, especially when I cannot double the other major.” 

Oh, if only you could hedge your bets this way at the table!

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
6S	100	7	20
5H	90	2	10
5S	80	2	23
4NT	80	1	2
4S	60	3	34
DBL	50	1	11

2. IMPs, NS vulnerable

West	North	East	South
--	--	4H	???

What is your call as South holding:  AKQJ976   Void   A5   AQ93 ?

Anyone who bids with any level of confidence here is deluded. As with all high-level preempts, a certain amount of guessing/hoping/praying is always involved. Note that the timid 4S was demoted because the general flavor of the panel’s actions indicated that aggressive action is warranted. I agree.

KNIEST: “ 6S. It's all a guess, so I go for the big reward.”

WALKER: “6S. Way too much for just 4S and way too risky to double. There's no scientific way to find out if partner has the cards you need, so I'll make the guess that offers the biggest payoff. 5S here would ask for a heart control."

I wouldn’t assume this unless previously discussed. The "It's Your Call" column in the June ACBL Bulletin poses this same problem, but from the other side of the table, after partner overcalls 5S. Not quite half of the expert panel thought 5S asked for a heart control, a little more than half thought it was some other type of strong hand, and almost everyone said they were guessing  

TAFJORD: “5S. Who knows? I'm hoping this sends the message that if partner has a useful card (say, a minor-suit king), bid 6.”

Maybe, but the problem I have with 5S is that if you end up there (likely) you’ve gained nothing, except perhaps beating those who go down 2 in slam.

MERRITT: “6S. I have been forced to guess at matchpoints. The saving grace is that I may induce West to try 7H, which I am happy enough to defend. I don't think that any more delicate option works. I would like to bid 4NT to which partner will surely bid 5C and then I could bid 5S, but will partner know that two minor suit kings are golden? Then again, what if he doesn't bid 5C?”

NELSON: “4NT. I think I'm too big to just bid 4S, so I will use the takeout bid first, then bid 5S to show my power. Partner will realize I have a barnburner.”

Only trouble is that 4NT here is defined as minors. There is little risk, though, since all roads lead to 6S anyway. Who knows, maybe this approach will endplay us into a cold grand slam?

Yes, I know I talked about plus scores being important, but the 4S bidders struck me as overly timid. And 4S will end the auction, so the 4S bidders will either be getting all of the matchpoints or none of them.

MILLER: “4S. I would take 5S to be asking for a heart control with a hand like  AKQJxxxx   xx   AKx   Void . I think we're helped by the vulnerability here. Partner knows I have a real hand and he can go forward if he likes. It's not inconceivable that we could even be down here.”

MATHENY: “ 4S. I hope we make it.”

Last but not certainly not least:

BERNHARD (Hyde): “4S. FIXED!”

BERNHARD (Jekyll): “5H. Converting 6C and 6D to 6S, only danger is 6NT by partner.”

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3H	100	7	22
2NT	90	4	10
4H	70	2	4
3D	60	1	55
Pass	50	2	2
3NT	50	0	7

3. IMPs, both vulnerable                             

West	North	East	South
--	1S	Pass	1NT *
Pass	2H	Pass	???

* Forcing 1NT (2-over-1 game force system)

What is your call as South holding:  A   K72   KJ7652   943 ?

A “modern” problem because of the forcing NT, but even old-fashioned 2-over-1 bidding has a tough time handling hands like this -- moderate values, a relatively long and weak minor, no guaranteed 8-card major suit fit … all part of a recipe for disaster. The form of scoring influences me to be aggressive here. Unless the hand is a big misfit and/or North has opened a real bowwow (both very real possibilities!), we should have at least some play for a red game at teams. 

3D was dropped considerably in the scoring for two big reasons. This bid advertises a misfit; and you have way too much strength and possibilities to send that message. I’d call 3D here with a king less and most, if not all, of the high cards in diamonds -- something along weak-jump shift lines, like   x  xx  AQJxxx   xxx. The current South hand has too much crossover potential and strength to justify what is essentially is an auction-ending call.

My decision was surely influenced by the fact that teammates tend to be more forgiving of overaggressive bids that cost IMPs than they are of teammates who miss vulnerable games.

BERNHARD (Jekyll): “3H. Yes, I would have bid 2D instead of 1NT. Now I have unsolvable problem that I will solve by lying about my hearts.”

BERNHARD (Hyde): “4H. 3H hearts is too little, notrump lets us watch EW run five clubs, 3D shows nothing, so ... “

MATHENY: “3H. I never raise a second suit without four.”

Never Say Never Again. Wasn’t that a remake of "Thunderball"? I am having too much fun with this. OK, on to seriousness (?):

WALKER: “3H. Vul at IMPs, you have to make a move toward game with this hand. If we land in a 4-3 fit, this won't be an awful dummy. I might have stretched to make a 2-over-1 response, but I'd end up with the same problem, except that we'd have no chance to stop when partner has a dead minimum.”

KESSLER: “2NT. An excellent problem. This is not a perfect bid, but least of the evils. It comes closest to describing our hand. Partner realizes we are red at IMPs and will be pushy with a decent hand.”

MERRITT similarly defended his choice, adding that 2NT gives North a chance to bid out his hand pattern. Of course, that is assuming he has an extra heart or a minor-suit singleton. Me, I’m a little nervous about angling for notrump and watching EW run off the first five or six club tricks.  Don’t get me wrong; I’m a little anxious about North taking a swing at 4H, too, just not quite so much. And at least I can table my hand at that contract and watch North sweat.

Finally, a call that would have garnered a few more votes at matchpoints (or opposite one of my typical opening bids)"

TAFJORD:  “Pass. These problems are hard. Partner has at most four minor-suit cards, so 3NT could be tough or laydown. I'll be conservative and pass.”

Pass could even be the right call. Who knows? Oyvind is right that these are tough problems. Then again, we don’t see too many gimmees in this forum, or it wouldn’t be a very lively discussion.

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
3NT	100	8	32
5D	80	3	22
Pass	80	4	19
3H, 3S	70	1	9
Other	60	0	18

4. IMPs, none vulnerable                             

West	North	East	South
--	3D	Pass	???

What is your call as South holding:  92   K765   AK42   K93?

An interesting exercise. EW have not yet acted, yet they're surely favorites to make a game given North’s advertised weakness and the apparent positioning of South’s kings. But how likely are EW to get there? Surely, we can’t pass and hope West lets us play 3D, but it is probably the only contract where we have a chance to go plus. 

But what if West can’t scrape up a takeout double with say, a 10-count and something like 4-3-1-5 distribution? I submit that my answer to this problem might change dramatically if I knew the tendencies of my opponents.

STRITE: “3NT. The opponents don't rate to have a slam and might not even have a game, so there isn't much profit in a 5D sacrifice. Throw a little smoke. 3NT might even buy a double game swing opposite the right side Ace and a favorable opening lead, while I can jack-rabbit, none the poorer, to 4D if doubled.”

MERRITT (and similarly WALKER): “3NT. This surely has two ways to win. It may make (doubtful) or it may end the auction (more likely). Us playing 3NT with seven peelers when we get in must be safer than them playing a partial or game in a major.”

PAOLO: “3NT. This bid is like a preempt, as I'll run to 4D if doubled.”

KNIEST: “3NT. In tempo. There's no damage until they double, in which case 4D seems right. No need to give them more than their game by bidding 5D.”

Minority views:

TAFJORD: “Pass. I don't see prospects for game, and my defense against 4S is minimal. I could interfere with 4D, but I doubt they'll get there, so I pass.”

KESSLER: “3S. I'm sure this will not win a bidding contest, but this just looks like the right hand to make the opponents work to find their spade game.”

I have a sneaking admiration for Mark’s call. In fact, at the table, 3S would probably be my first choice. I love watching opponents squirm.

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4NT	100	4	22
3D	90	4	14
3H	90	3	16
4D	80	0	2
3NT	70	1	14
Pass	60	2	19
6C	60	1	7
5C	50	1	4

5. Matchpoints, none vulnerable                                 

West	North	East	South
--	1C	1D	2D*
2H	DBL	Pass	???

* Limit-raise or better for clubs

What is your call as South holding:  A4   3   AQJ2    A86432 ?

Predictably, this problem drew the largest number of different responses. I would have preferred a direct splinter raise, but the auction as it has transpired thus far has actually saved us some room to maneuver. 

Which is why I fail to understand the bashers trotting out Blackwood even in the face of known wasted values. If North has zero key cards (unlikely but possible), you are going to wish the hand had played in 3NT, and if he has one, you are endplayed into bidding a slam with no idea if there is a play for it. If North’s hearts match your diamonds, he could have both key cards -- say something like  Qxxx  AQJx  xx  Kxx, or my favorite nightmare hand of  KQ10x  AQJx   xx    xxx -- and you still need some good breaks to make a slam.

I’m not advocating pessimism here, but while you have the room, why not investigate?  I was somewhat dismayed by the lack of comments from the panel here, as this problem has plenty of meat on the bone for discussion. Some views:

NELSON: “ 3D. I can smell a slam. I may be wrong, but I am taking action trying. If partner now bids 3H, I will bid 3S. I don't need much for 6Cs, but I do need top clubs and the heart ace, preferably along with two diamonds or the spade king and not the heart ace. I can always sign off in 4NT if partner puts on the brakes.”

MERRITT: “3H. I plan to follow the expected 3NT with 4C. If partner gives up with 4NT, I rest in peace. Otherwise, I bid 6C.”

The bashers at least have simplicity on their side:

KESSLER: “4NT. Key card for clubs. If partner has two controls and the club queen, I bid 6NT. With less, I bid 6C.”

STRITE: “4NT. On a bad day, we've lost 3NT, but this hand boils down to the heart ace and two top trump honors. With a regular partner, 4C or 4D would be ace-asking, leaving 4NT as a possible contract opposite a negative response.”

WALKER: “4NT. Make the opponents pay for telling you where the red kings are. If partner shows two keycards with the club queen, I'll bid 7C, playing the odds that both finesses are onside if I need them. Any other bid here will set up a Tortured Cuebid Auction that will waste more of partner's brain cells and may make it impossible to find out about trump honors.”

I killed enough brain cells in college and law school, thank you, but I‘d rather kill off the rest in a tortured auction that gets to a decent contract, then racking what’s left of them trying to figure out how to make the grand you’re dragging me into.

The minority views: 

KNIEST: “6C. We could have a grand, but what auction leads to it if it's cold? Yes, I could splinter, perhaps talking them into a spade lead. I think 6C gets to the right contract with minimal info for the opponents and the best possible chance of success. I'll leave other bids to the scientists.”

BERNHARD: “3NT. There might be a slam, but very doubtful with partner having stuff in hearts.”

The call I do not understand is this (talk about torture):

BERNHARD (Hyde): “Pass. Close between this and 3NT.”

Action	Score	Votes	% Solvers
4S	100	13	70
Pass	80	1	13
5C	60	1	6
DBL	50	0	11

6. Matchpoints, NS vulnerable                             

West	North	East	South
--	2NT *	Pass	3C
3D	3S	4D	???

* (20-22 HCPs -- may be a strong 19)

What is your call as South holding:  A83    9874   6   K10976 ?

I must confess that in 30 years of playing bridge, this situation (partner opens 2NT and the opponents bid up to the four-level) has occurred exactly twice, and both times, the correct action was clear, as it seems to be here. Note that I said “seems”. North will not always have the perfect fitter to allow you to sneak by in 4S. But what else is better?

KNIEST: “4S. Looks like we have a club fit for our source of tricks, and I have diamonds controlled, and the lead is coming up to partner, so I'll go for the 10 trick game, especially at matchpoints. The auction suggests a lack of diamond power and chunky spades, so I hope this works. Interesting question:  if 3C was puppet Stayman, how is the diamond interference handled?”

WALKER: “4S. This is a pretty good dummy for a 4-3 fit. Unless our opponents are crazy, we won't get rich defending 4D.”

STRITE: “4S. The Moysian should play reasonably well, though I'd make a forcing pass opposite a trusted partner. I get a sneaky feeling 5C is our best spot.”

MERRITT: “4S. This must be fine. And the bid must be made confidently. I will almost surely get another bite at this at 5D.”

I wouldn’t bet on EW bidding any more here, even at this vulnerability, unless they are crazy.

BERNHARD (Jekyll): “4S. Ruffing in the short trump hand. Partner may have five spades.”

Unfortunately, Mr. Hyde didn’t comment on his choice of 5C, denying me one last shot. Finally, we have:

MATHENY: “4S. I never raise without four.”

Somebody is going to have to call Webster’s and revise the definition on “never” in their next publishing.

MILLER: “Pass. What's the hurry when I will be pulling if partner doubles anyway.”

Pass actually could work out better. It will almost surely guarantee that EW won’t bid 5D, which they may trot out if you bid 4S too confidently. Bid this way (pass and pull) sounds weaker, and we are anything but weak here. As STRITE pointed out, our best spot may be in clubs, but I’m thinking higher than 5C. Lots of North hands would give us a good play for slam, so long as there are minimal wasted diamond values.

But enough for now. Everyone, enjoy your summer and I’ll see you all again for the Christmas issue.

Thanks to all who sent in answers this month, and congratulations to George Klemic and John Seng, who topped all Solvers for this set. They're invited to join the August panel. 

The six new problems for August are below. There's still time to join in the 2006 Solvers Contest, which is based on your best three scores for the year, so I hope you'll all give them a try. Ideas for new problems are always welcome, too. Please submit your solutions by July 22 on the web form or by email to our August moderator:

Tom Kniest -- kniest@swbell.net
  

How the Panel voted  (Panel/Staff Avg. -- 529):	1	2	3	4	5	6	Score
Bob Bernhard, New Smyrna Beach FL	2NT	5H	3H	Pass	Pass	4S	500
Bob Bernhard, New Smyrna Beach FL	3D	4S	4H	5D	3NT	5C	440
Gary Dell, Champaign IL	Dbl	5S	3H	5D	3D	4S	510
Mark Kessler, Springfield IL	3D	5H	2NT	3S	4NT	4S	550
Larry Matheny, Loveland CO	3D	4S	3H	5D	3H	4S	530
Hugh Metzger, South Bend IN	2S	Dbl	Pass	Pass	5C	4S	410
Adam Miller, Chicago	3D	4S	3H	3NT	3H	Pass	530
Bev Nelson, Fort Myers FL	Dbl	4NT	2NT	3NT	3D	4S	520
Manuel Paulo, Lisboa PT	3D	6S	3H	3NT	4NT	4S	600
Larry Rabideau, St. Anne ON	3D	6S	2NT	Pass	Pass	4S	530
Toby Strite, San Jose CA	3D	6S	3D	3NT	4NT	4S	560
Oyvind Tajford, Eugene OR	3NT	5S	Pass	Pass	3D	4S	500

How the Staff voted

Tom Dodd, Branchburg NJ	2S	6S	3H	3NT	3D	4S	560
Tom Kniest, University City MO	3H	6S	4H	3NT	6C	4S	510
Scott Merritt, Abuja, Nigeria	3D	6S	2NT	3NT	3H	4S	560
Karen Walker, Champaign IL	3NT	6S	3H	3NT	4NT	4S	570

   Solvers Honor Roll  (Average Solver score: 484)

George Klemic, Bensenville IL	570	John R. Mayne, Riverbank CA	540
John Seng, Champaign IL	560	Robert Lambert, Warsaw IN	540
Micah Fogel, Aurora IL	550	Cliff Pleatman, Cincinnati OH	530
Steve White, Broomall PA	550	Asher Axelrod, Jerusalem, Israel	530
Arbha Vongsvivut, Godfrey IL	540	Rich Pestien, Peoria IL	520
David Wetzel, Rantoul IL	540	Paul Soper, Sierra Vista AZ	520