District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2015

    by Jack Spear, Overland Park KS

What is your call as South holding:  Void   52   AK97654   AQ105 ?

The first problem is a 0-2-7-4 hand with big distribution and good suits. After partner’s 1S response, the pesky opponents have raised to 2H, requiring our rebid to be made at the 3-level, an action with a wide point range. The big majority chose to rebid diamonds at the 3-level, and that makes sense to me.

KESSLER: 3D. This auction will not end here. The best way to describe this hand is to hope the bidding goes slowly.

KAPLAN: 3D. Perhaps I should proceed with caution. Yet, this hand has so much playing strength, I can't go silently. I realize 3D makes finding clubs tough -- but -- gotta bid a nice 7-card suit before a 4-bagger.

WALKER: 3D. 7-4 seems too big a disparity to introduce clubs now. I may get a chance to bid clubs later, which will give partner a better picture of this distribution.

ENGEL: 3D. Partner wouldn’t envision 7-4 if I bid clubs.

NIEUWENHUIS: 3D. Accentuating the length in diamonds so I can introduce clubs as being a lot shorter if Partner repeats spades.

BRIDGE BARON: 3D. Rebidding a seven-card suit with six playing tricks is a higher priority than showing an unbid four-card suit.

WARD: 3D. I’d like to show my clubs, but I may get a chance to do that later.

A couple of panelists didn’t wait until later to show the clubs. This is not without risk, as 3C could easily indicate a 5-card suit, and may become the final contract when diamonds would be better.

PAVLICEK: 3C. Lopsided for sure, but I'd hate to leave the suit on the sidelines and catch a stiff diamond and 4 or 5 clubs. Planning on 4D next if there’s more bidding.

What is your call as South holding:  QJ97   KQ52   AQJ4   A ?

Problem 2 is quite a good hand, but RHO has opened the bidding in front of us. With too much to pass, we chose to make an off-shape takeout double on the first round and LHO made a non-forcing 2C bid (usually a 6-card suit and around 5-9 points). When this is passed back around to us, we have an interesting problem.

The majority of panelists chose to double again, and said it was takeout. I hope their partners agree with them. (Has this agreement really been made to accommodate an initial double that's short in clubs?)

PAVLICEK: Double. Still takeout by my standards, though the shape is atypical. Seems ideal at matchpoints with the fair chance that partner may convert for the magic +200 or more. OK, minus 180, next hand.

KESSLER: Double. We have no source of tricks to bid NT. Double seems automatic, as partner can have a weak hand with a 4-card major or a club stack and can pass for penalty.

PAULO: Double. Partner should have some values; otherwise the opponents' bidding would have been different.

HINCKLEY: Double. This seems clear. The panelist comments may be more about the initial action than this decision.

NIEUWENHUIS: Double. Extra values and both majors; Pass from partner and a bid are both good. Hoping for pass and 200.

KAPLAN: Double. No; I do not think this is penalty!

WARD: Way too much to pass. 2NT kinda shows my values, but I don't see myself taking many tricks there.

One panelist did not agree that our hand had too much to pass, and supported his view with good logic.

BARNES: Pass. Give opener a 10-count, and there is not much left for partner after 2C. The diamond length and club shortness is a warning against offense, coupled with partner's silence.

If double is for penalties, or if partner may think so, we will either have to pass or bid something. One panelist chose 2NT, and seemed to like his choice:

BRIDGE BARON: 2NT. 18-20 HCP, stoppers in the opponent's suits, and a balanced hand -- er, well, two out of three ain't bad.

The rest of the panelists chose 2D, a clear takeout, with no possibility of misunderstanding. I agree with the logic for this choice, even though I would not feel that a double would be pure penalty. (Doubling 1D with 4-4-3-2 is allowable in my partnerships.)

RABIDEAU: 2D. I usually have a little more for this auction, but I don't want partner passing a second double based on the clubs he thinks I hold for my first double.

ENGEL: 2D. Too afraid of -380 to double again. Isn't double of a suit I promised the first time penalty?

    * Usually denies 3+ spades

What is your call as South holding:  AJ975   KQ1032   4   Q9 ?

Problem 3 has 5-5 in the majors, pretty good suits and opening values. When our partner opens, we should have game at least, but over our 1S response, a 2D overcall by LHO is passed back around to us. The most popular rebid was 3H:

PAULO: 3H. Natural and forcing.

KESSLER: 3H. Lets partner know we are 5-5.

WARD: 3H. Seems normal. Clubs could be right, but I'll know that if partner bids 4C.

BARNES: 3H. I want to get the nature of my hand pattern and strength across quickly. The problem may be the next call.

NIEUWENHUIS: 3H. In my methods this is invitational with 5+ / 5.

WALKER: 3H. I bid 2H when I held this hand, confident that the rule "new suits by responder are forcing" applied, but my partner thought I'd make that bid with a weaker 5-5. Makes sense (now that we talked about it), so I'm leaving nothing to chance with my Forum partner.

Tied for second choice of the panel was 2H, but as Karen pointed out, you had better be sure partner will treat it as forcing.

Also tied for second choice was 4H, which makes good sense, although some perfecto hands could produce slam in hearts. There is no award for the shortest auction.

PAVLICEK: 4H. Seems pointless to drag out the auction with the overwhelming odds we're headed for game in a major; even a 5-2 fit may be okay with my decent suits. Double does not appeal, as partner may speculate to pass in close cases with 2D doubled not game.

KAPLAN: 4H. Yeah, we might be getting diamonds for a number. Tempting to reopen with double here. We also might only get it for down one, however, when we have a game. Sometimes you just gotta bid your hand!

One panelist chose to double, which could be passed out for penalty, but partner better beat them two if our side has a game.

What is your call as South holding:  QJ104   Q976   1086   84 ?

Our hand in Problem 4 has only 5 HCP, and the opponents have preempted to the 4-level following partner’s first-chair opening of 1D. When partner reopens with a double, we have a choice of actions.

The most popular answer was 4H, which gets the top score of 100 (but only because Karen encourages me to assign 100 to the top vote-getter). Although it's often a good idea to bid your cheaper suit in similar situations, I don’t find the arguments for 4H persuasive on this deal.

When partner has the likely 4-3 in the majors, our bid will determine the final contract. Another type of hand -- a very strong 2-4-6-1 that's willing to commit to 5D -- is a rare beast indeed, but several of the 4H bidders mentioned this possibility.

HINCKLEY: 4H. Often we bid the higher major after partner's takeout double, but (1) I'm not bidding at the 5-level after their likely 5C sacrifice and (2) partner might have a huge 2=4=6=1 hand or similar willing to bid 5D over 4S.

RABIDEAU: 4H. Could partner hold something like 2-4-6-1 distribution, planning to correct 4S to 5D?

ENGEL: 4H. Gives partner a chance to be (4-2)-6-1 or so.

The other 4H bidders were making their best guess:

PAULO: 4H. I quote Edgar Kaplan: "Takeout doubles are meant to be taken out". As for the choice between the majors, with the same length, I bid the weakest suit.

NIEUWENHUIS: 4H. Hopefully partner is 4-4 in the majors or I chose his 4-card suit.

BARNES: 4H. I have useful cards opposite partner's hand, but I do not know which major he has. If I end in 5D, oh well ....

KESSLER: 4H. The only other bid I could make is 4S.

I do agree with the comments supporting the choice of 4S.

PAVLICEK: 4S. There's no way to explore, so I have to guess the major. Spades is likely to be more manageable if I catch only three, and could be better than a 4-4 heart fit (opposite a hand such as AKx  Kxxx  AKQJx  x) .

WARD: 4S. Since I could be landing in a 4-3 fit, I'll take the one where I can still draw trumps after the short hand gets ruffed.

WALKER: 4S. Tempting to pass, as partner probably has enough tricks to beat 4C, but I have enough in his suits that we might make a major-suit game. Whichever major I choose could be a 4-3 fit, so I'll guess to bid the stronger one.

KNIEST: 4S. Pass is ridiculous. They could have an 11-card fit.

There were a couple of votes for other actions that could work out:

BRIDGE BARON: Pass. We take partner's double as penalty, and see no reason to take it out.

What is your call as South holding:  74   AK86   J10653   K2 ?

Problem 5 is about slam bidding with our big supporting hand opposite partner’s reverse. What bid will best describe our hand after partner’s bidding sequence?

There are many facets to this problem, but best choice is the “expert standard” method of cuebidding controls up-the-line. This method proscribes the most popular choice of 4C. Other forward-going actions may also successfully lead to 6D, but partner will be most happy to hear about the club king, the cheapest control card. (Sometimes a cuebid may show a singleton as a control, but that does not usually apply in opener’s long suit.)

PAVLICEK: 4C. Looks like we're headed for 6D. To me, 3S shows the ace (or shortness if 3NT is pulled) . Showing the CK may be just what partner needs to know; e.g., with Ax xx AKQx AQJxx, he will Blackwood and eventually bid 7D. Conversely, if I take control, I'd be guessing.

KESSLER: 4C. We have agreed on diamonds, so this is a cuebid. If partner bids 4D, I'll continue with 4H.

PAULO: 4C. After having raised diamonds, this bid must show a control.

WARD: 4C. Partner may just be probing for 3NT, so I don't think I can Blackwood here. Nonetheless, I have an awfully good hand, so I want to cue what partner is most interested in.

WALKER: 4C. I have more than partner might expect, but if his 3S was a search for a notrump stopper, we probably don't have a slam. I'll make a slam move anyway and hope he was showing a spade control.

HINCKLEY: 4C. 4H should be a forcing control cuebid, but I prefer saving room with the 4C bid, showing the important high club honor. The "Scrabble Principle" yet again -- kings and queens in partner's long suit are worth triple letter scores!

NIEUWENHUIS: 4C. If partner was offering a cue, I cooperate. If not (fishing for 3NT), this shows a good hand with club cue.

KAPLAN: 4C. My cards are golden. Gotta show 'em!

Again, there were a couple votes for other actions. Because we made a direct raise of partner's reverse suit (instead of going through a Lebensohl 2NT sequence), this created a game-forcing auction. Signing off in 5D would be a dim view of our promising hand.

ENGEL: 4D. Expecting to lose two spades and a diamond.

BRIDGE BARON: 5D. No, I don't have a spade stopper. Yes, we do have strength for game and a diamond fit.

    * Forcing to game

What is your call as South holding:  AKQ10643  2   3   K764 ?

We have an opening hand with a big spade suit in Problem 6. Partner has made a game-forcing 2C response to our 1S opening, and we have to decide how best to continue with our club fit and strong spades. Another very interesting problem, with multiple good choices of contrasting actions.

The panel was evenly split between 2S and 3C, both minimum bids to keep the auction  low. The Solvers chose the same two top choices, but gave 3C more votes. However, the panel had additional votes for bidding spades at the 3-level. This became the tie-breaker, because a clear majority wanted to emphasize spades instead of clubs. These three choices have been awarded the highest scores, along with Blackwood.

Good comments were made for each choice, and we will start with the spade bidders.

PAVLICEK: 2S. Blackwood has appeal, but with silent opponents I'll bide my time. I don't like jumping to 3S (presumably setting trumps) because it rules out a club contract, not only because of a possible spade loser, but a club ruff could sink 6S (say, x  Axx  AQx  QJTxxx) .

BARNES: 2S. I need to hear partner's planned rebid. I am supporting clubs at the 4-level at some point.

ENGEL: 2S. Hoping to discover a fifth club on responder’s rebid.

BRIDGE BARON: 2S. We can always mention the club fit later, but majors before minors, especially with this self-sufficient suit.

KAPLAN: 3S. It's what is trump. Partner might have bid 2C on Axxx to set up a force.

The 3C bidders are interested in partner’s rebid following a club raise. This may also lead to finding if partner has the club queen, which is the big advantage of bidding clubs instead of spades. I wish one of the 3C bidders would have stated their plan over partner’s likely rebid of 3NT.

KESSLER: 3C. This way Keycard Blackwood will be for clubs, and we can find out about the club queen. At matchpoints, I'm going to play in spades anyway -- unless partner indicates a void when responding to Blackwood.

PAULO: 3C. At matchpoints, it's likely that we'll play in spadesm but for the moment, I raise clubs to wait and see.

KNIEST: 3C. Yes, pard could have an aceless wonder, so I raise clubs, forcing, and see what happens. Minorwood would work here on some hands, but I don't see how we can get back to spades except at a higher level ... and it's matchpoints.

RABIDEAU: 3C. A 4 diamarts splinter would be nice! Keycard Blackwood and 3S have their drawbacks, so I'll let partner know about my primary club support while I still can and hope to be able to bid lots of spades later. If she bids a club slam, I'll probably convert to spades.

The fourth high-scoring group is the Keycard Blackwood 4NT bidders, with the intention of discovering the club queen and playing slam in spades. I am always hoping for comments about continuations, and this time Bud has brought up one major problem signing off over a 5H response (two keycards, no queen). Unfortunately, 5S is now a relay to 5NT. Nate also mentions he wants to sign off somehow if we don’t have enough keycards. (Kickback or Minorwood might save us here.)

HINCKLEY: 4NT. Roman Keycard Blackwood for clubs, but will not at matchpoints be playing in clubs. The club queen is vital and presumably after a 5H response, I can bid 5S to play.

WARD: 4NT. Big decision is going to come later. If we don't have enough keycards, I'll sign off in 5S.

WALKER: 4NT. Keycard for clubs (only sure way to find the important club queen), with the intention of playing 6S or 7S. A club raise or spade rebid is too likely to lead to an auction where it's not clear I'm Blackwooding for clubs.

The last bid to be considered in this month’s column is the 3D splinter, complete with possible continuations. This is a forward-going bid for clubs, which may well succeed in arriving at a club slam when right. At matchpoints, however, the spade slam rates to score better.

NIEUWENHUIS: 3D. Splinter for clubs. After 3S, I can offer the other red. If not 3S, we need only a fairly simple hand for partner to make 6C or 7C. A 2-3-3-5 hand with the heart ace and AQ of clubs makes six and is not enough for a  2/1 response.

Thanks to all who sent in answers and comments to this set. Topping all Solvers were Hugh Williams with a 590 and Bob Bernhard and Clay Cuthbertson with 580. All three are invited to join the August 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 August problems a try (see below). Please submit your solutions by July 31 on the web form. 

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