♠ District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2023

            by Nate Ward, Champaign IL
 

Participants from the web site Bridgewinners.com are our "virtual panelist". More than 50 readers -- the majority of whom are experienced players -- voted on each problem, and the plurality's choice is included as a panel vote. Each vote grid shows the percentage of Bridgewinners voters who chose each call.

1. Matchpoints,  both vulnerable                 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠92   ♥K86   ♦K102  ♣KQ1053 ?

We start out with a tough matchpoint problem. Everyone is vulnerable, and everyone is bidding. One panelist wants to protect himself in case partner has stepped out on this hand.

SPEAR:  Pass. I am willing to defend 2D and wait for a different hand to compete for a vulnerable partscore.

Many settled for an off-shape responsive double, still cautious to protect partner.

LANGER:  DBL. No ideal action here. I am not good enough to bid above the presumed safety of 2S. Pass is a close second, but partner won’t expect such a good hand and may let them play 2D when we should be in 2S. That leaves the imperfect double, which should show 4 hearts, but I can probably survive any call partner makes next.

ROBINSON:  DBL. Shows values and hopefully we'll land on our feet.

HEINS:  DBL. Not perfect, but I really don't think bidding 2NT with no aces and no tricks makes sense. I'll be happy to pass a rounded-suit bid.

STACK:  DBL. My plan is double and pass partner's response. If they bid again then I will double for penalties. Hope we don't end up playing a 3-3 fit.

The 3-3 might not play that great. Another doubler at least planned to escape to their known 7-card fit.

RABIDEAU:  DBL. We'll pull a 2H response to 2S. It's a way to get into the auction without partner getting too excited about our support.

While the responsive double was the top vote getter, others were not willing to be so timid.

BAKER:  2NT. Balanced hand, stoppers everywhere, decent values. Seems like the best bet to me.

PAVLICEK:  2NT. Seems routine. If partner has made a joke overcall, he can foot the bill.

WALKER:  2NT. Not ideal, but the hand has too much to pass and it's wrong for a responsive double, especially if you play the popular (and valuable) agreement that it guarantees 5 cards in the other major.

JONES:  2NT. What caused this to become a problem?

I agree with Kimmel here. If we don't show our values in this day and age, we risk getting stolen blind by the light openers and raisers.

What is your call as South holding:  ♠J92   ♥Q   ♦AQ96   ♣AKJ108 ?  

We have a great hand and very good support for partner, yet here we are on the third round of bidding and we haven't shown it yet. Two panelists were keen on continuing to hide that diamond support.

SPEAR:  4S. I will suggest the 10-trick game to see if partner will agree this 4-3 fit is OK for us.

Some panelists were, understandably, unhappy with the auction thus far.

ROBINSON:  4D. Bidding 2C is not good bridge. The object of constructive bidding is to set trumps as soon as possible. 3H over 1H would have been a better start. Now I can finally support diamonds.

LANGER:  4D. I probably would have cuebid 2H. Now I show my fit and extras. 4D has to be forcing after we cued 3H.

KEARNEY:  4D. Perhaps we should have responded with a 3H splinter immediately. Now we have to tell partner what trumps are.

HUDSON:  6D. Pard probably has nothing in hearts, so he must have enough in the other suits to give us a play for 6D; say AQxx xxx KJxx Qx. Maybe I should have supported diamonds immediately, instead of bidding 2C.

Unfortunately we can't change our prior actions, so we need to try to recover at this point. A big question is, is 4D forcing now?

BAKER:  4D. Time to tell partner I have a big diamond raise.

HINCKLEY:  4D. Forcing, especially at IMPs, after the cuebid.

KNIEST:  5D. Should get my hand across pretty well.

WALKER:  5D. Slam might be there, but I've run out of ways to get partner to show a sign of life. 4D isn't forcing. You have to be able to stop if you've tried to find 3NT and were unsuccessful, which is why the 2/1 system defines “forcing to game” as 3NT or 4 of a suit.

Slam is still possible on this hand, and a few panelists wanted to make sure partner didn't pass 4D.

PAVLICEK:  4NT. Partner's failure to bid 3NT makes 6D likely. Surely this is RKC for diamonds since I'd bid 2S with four spades.

JONES:  6D. With heart values, pard would bid 3NT, so I believe he will have a great play for 6D.

Considering we didn't take a stronger move originally, how is partner to distinguish between a "clearly forcing" 4D on this hand and a lesser hand that wanted to play 3NT opposite a heart stopper? This is certainly what you should be thinking about when partner's next call in this auction is Pass.

What is your call as South holding:  ♠54   ♥K97543  ♦732   ♣Q5 ?

Now it is partner's turn to throw us a curveball. A 1NT rebid by them would have shown 18-19 balanced, so what do we think they have to be jumping to 2NT here? A few of our panelists were not sure.

HEINS:  3D. What the heck is partner doing? Could be 6 diamonds and 4 clubs, or long diamonds and a spade stopper. Either way, 3D fits. If I had an ace, I'd bid 3NT.

RABIDEAU:  3H. I don't know what 2NT means.

STACK:  3H. This is a great problem. Opting to show what must be a 6-card suit and hoping it is at least slightly positive.

The majority, however, had a pretty good idea.

PAVLICEK:  3NT. Routine. Partner should have long, strong diamonds as a mere 1NT would show 18-19.

HINCKLEY:  3NT. 1NT would show 18-19 balanced. 2NT shows the hand that planned on jumping to 3NT over my 1H response.

JONES:  3NT. The 2NT rebid does not show a balanced hand, as 1NT would show that. I believe pard has a lot of running diamonds.

ROBINSON:  3NT. Since 1NT would have shown 18-19 balanced, 2NT should show a different hand such as a singleton heart.

LANGER:  3NT. My hearts are poor, so I'm not interested in playing a possible 6-1 trump fit. Having shown nothing so far, I have just enough to try 3NT.

If we did want to try for hearts, it would need to be from partner's side. While this is admittedly a strange auction, does your regular partnership have agreements about what responder's 2-level bids would show had partner rebid a more normal 1NT? Is 2D a transfer, or just an attempt to go plus?

What is your call as South holding:  ♠KJ105    ♥J9743   ♦3   ♣K63 ?

Just how desperate are we to get into the auction at matchpoints, especially at favorable vulnerability? The majority of our panel drew the line on this hand.

HUDSON:  Pass. Too weak to double, neither suit good enough to overcall. An easy problem in a hard set.

KNIEST:  Pass. Not enough to bid in front of partner.

RABIDEAU:  Pass. We'll (hopefully) know what to do later.

WALKER:  Pass. A white-vs-red Michaels overcall has some appeal, but not a lot with this heart suit. I'd like it better if all my honors were in the majors.

A few however, still wanted to get in. Some preferred to overcall on this poor heart suit.

ROBINSON:  1H. I have found that overcalling with 8 or more points is a winner in the long run.

STACK:  1H. Start with the five card suit to establish a basis to compete if partner has three card support.

While a few thought a Michaels cuebid was the best approach.

PAVLICEK:  2D. Which brings to mind the age-old question:  Is matchpoints bridge?

HEINS:  2D. 1H seems ridiculous. I hate to pass with 9 cards in the majors, though, so I'm a 2D bidder.

While I have sympathy for getting into the auction, I'd have to draw the line here. I think bidding here covers the narrow target of when LHO bids 1NT and it comes back to us. Double now would not show this hand.

  

West	North	East	South
1H	3C	4H	???

What is your call as South holding: ♠AKQ8654   ♥Void   ♦J4   ♣A642 ?

Now we have what is likely the best hand at the table, and partner and RHO have both preempted in front of us. If we were sure the opponents would lead a major, 7C, and maybe 7S, is likely cold. But the fear of a diamond lead keeps some of the panel low.

LANGER:  4S. Opposite a non-vul preempt, we almost certainly have at least two diamond losers, so I'm not trying for or blasting slam hoping they miss the lead.

RABIDEAU:  4S. Even if we have a spade loser, 420 beats 400.

SPEAR:  4S. I can't think of anything better than continuing to bid spades over hearts until the bidding stops.

STACK:  4S. Bidding 4S and competing to 5S if they bid again. I may have a problem if they go to 6H but I will hope they don't.

Others decided to roll the dice and hope our RHO doesn't know which pointed suit to lead.

HEINS:  6C. If West was on lead, I wouldn't do this.

HINCKLEY:  6C. If I bid spades, West cashes two diamonds but East might not lead diamonds against 6C. Hope to not hear a (Lightner) double. Nearly chose 4NT to give false impressions about my hand.

JONES:  6C. We probably will make 5 or 7, but if I bid 7, they are more likely to believe I'm void of hearts.

ROBINSON:  6C. They will have to find a diamond lead and that will be hard on this auction.

Two panelists did decide to take the sneaky path suggested by Hinckley.

PAVLICEK:  4NT. Tactical. I plan to bid 6C but want East to expect a heart is cashing.

WALKER:  4NT. Psychic Blackwood. I don’t expect this to score any points in the Forum, but it's a deception that could work. It's the best way to talk the opponents out of getting brilliant with a diamond lead.

The one drawback here, is that we are giving LHO a chance to clue partner into the correct lead by bidding 5D over this.

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AQ943   ♥6   ♦52   ♣J9863 ?

We finish with a confusing auction. Partner made a non-forcing bid at the 3-level, and when the opponents competed, now tried for game with 3NT. As in problem 3, there is some confusion on what partner is showing. Is 3NT a legitimate try for game, or is partner trying to show secondary clubs now?

Whatever it is, some panelists want to get out now.

HUDSON:  Pass. Pard is willing to stop in 3D, then he bids 3NT on his own?

JONES:  Pass. It might be right to pull, but if it’s wrong, I'll be in more trouble with pard.

PAVLICEK:  Pass. Who am I to say otherwise? This may depend on the lead or diamond break, but I won't rescind partner's enterprise.

STACK:  Pass. Refuse to violate the rule that 3NT ends all auctions. If partner thinks that 3NT has play, then so do I.

Others are not willing to quit yet. A few are trying to find that magical 9-card club fit.

HINCKLEY:  4C. Partner bids 3D non-forcing and now has enough to bid 3NT? Is he artificially showing secondary clubs when 4C would have shown 6-4 shape? I'm bidding 4C to keep the ball in the air.

KNIEST:  4C. Sounds like pard is 1-2-6-4. If he had running diamonds and a heart stopper, he could have bid 3NT at his prior turn.

If partner was 6-4 in the minors, couldn't they have bid 4C instead of 3NT? Meanwhile, a few panelists make a convincing argument for retreating to the safety of the known fit.

KEARNEY:  4D. Partner's previous 3D suggests 3NT is a gamble with (at most) something like  ♠xx   ♥Kxx   ♦AKJxxx  ♣AQ. I don't have the right cards for it and would prefer to play 4D.

ROBINSON:  4D. If partner really wanted to play in 3NT, he wouldn't have bid 3D.

WALKER:  4D. You have to assume there's a method to partner's madness. My guess is that he’s suggesting 3NT as a long shot only if I have something he needs. The only thing that makes sense is that he has just one heart stopper and some doubt about how many diamond tricks he can run, so I think I need a diamond filler to pass.

My initial instinct was to pass and let partner suffer in 3NT, but the 4D voters have convinced me that can't be the right move.

Thanks to all of the panelists and solvers who participated in this set of problems, certainly the wildest one we have had in a while. Leading all Solvers with a score of 560 was Tom Vermeersch of Council Bluffs IA. Close behind with 550 were Clay Cuthbertson of Quincy IL, Robb Gordon of Prescott AZ and John McAllister of Charlottesville VA. All four are invited to join the panel for the next issue, which will be in September.

The six new problems for September are below. You can submit answers and comments on the web form any time until August 31. If you send more than one set of answers, the first one will be discarded.

If you'd like to be notified when new problems are posted, click here to add your email or send your request to kwbridge@comcast.net .