What is your call as South holding:  ♠QJ   ♥9763   ♦Q5  ♣98754 ?

Now we move on to a simpler decision. Do we try to keep the opponents out of the auction? And if so, how?

If I were inclined to bid, I’d agree with these panelists, since if we don’t bid hearts now, it is hard to get there when partner has a big, round two-suiter.

Adam Miller: “1H. Would pass at unfavorable, but why should I invite the opponents to come in by passing.”

Bud Hinckley: “1H. Pass is not even close to being seriously considered, especially when non-vulnerable.”

Drawing on that favorable vulnerability, others decide to push the level up immediately:

Don Stack: “3C. I won't be disappointed if partner bids 3NT.”

Jack Spear: “3C. I'll tell partner I had a heart in with my diamonds.”

Peg Kaplan: “3C. My experience is that preempting the opponents is more productive than showing my weak heart suit with this bad of a hand.”

And, finally we have some who don’t think this hand is worthy of any response:

Larry Rabideau: “Pass. According to Bridge World Standard, 3C is preemptive, but must be able to support partner bidding 3NT or 4C.”

Our system, Bridge World Standard, plays 2C as inverted (forcing), so that's not a reasonable option.

Karen Walker: ”Pass. At IMPs or with a gun to my head, I’d consider 1H, but there's no way I'm putting down this dummy in 3C.”

Mark Kessler: “Pass. Just an old-fashioned guy. I have no bid.”

I guess I am old-fashioned, too, as Mark pretty much sums up my feelings on this hand.

3. Matchpoints, none vulnerable      

   *  Michaels (both majors)
  ** Natural, not forcing

What is your call as South holding:  ♠9   ♥AK10   ♦A84   ♣AK10875 ?

This hand presents us with a plethora of options. But, first, what exactly does partner have? He could have cuebid a major to show a strong hand with diamonds, or he could have bid a preemptive 3D. I have always played 2D here as resembling a good weak two-bid. Well, if partner has that, it is going to be awfully hard to stop short of 6.

Taking it slow:

Mark Kessler: “3H. 4S seems descriptive, but partner cannot possibly have enough to bid more than 5D. Maybe another round of bidding will help us know whether to bid 6 or not.”

Peg Kaplan: “3S. What a huge hand I have! Might be a tougher problem with my next bid.”

Bud Hinckley: “3S. I will pull partner’s 3NT to 4D, but will pass it he rebids 4NT.”

These are two good options for taking it slow, but are we really going to play 3NT on this hand? For that to be right, partner needs to stop spades and be able to run a minor, presumably diamonds. And if diamonds are running, I can think of at least one higher-scoring contract.

Jack Spear: “6D. I hope partner has KQJxxx of diamonds. If so, it's unrealistic to expect him to cooperate with a slam try.”

Karen Walker: ”4NT. 6D seems like a good bet, but I can make it less of a guess by asking for keycards. 3H and 4S are reasonable but neither is going to convince partner to bid 6D, so I’ll just be guessing next round.”

Larry Rabideau: “4S. Which approach is likely to work out best -- an immediate 3S followed by a heart cuebid, or a direct splinter? So I’ll start with 4S, then 5H over his rebid, or 6D if they bid 5S.“

Strauss: "4S. Splinter-ish. Partner, pick a minor-suit game or slam if you have extras."

Tom Kniest: “4S. Splinter, and guarantees real clubs, so we should end up in the right spot.”

I’d almost agree with real clubs, but you might just have a big 1444 hand here.

Overall, I think this is a tough hand, but one thing that is missing from all of the panelists' comments are their thoughts on what they think partner holds. To me, it is at least a good weak two-bid suit, or something close to that with a high spade on the side. Otherwise, partner could have just bid 3D to begin with. Given that, I think you have to clue partner in to your hand, just in case he has the perfecta for a grand slam, such as Axx, xx, Kxxxxxx, x.  

4. IMPs,  both vulnerable 

* Forcing NT

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AQ9872    ♥95   ♦KQ   ♣AQJ ?

Next we have a much simpler problem. It would be even easier if we had the jack of spades instead of one of our minor-suit quacks. But it is IMPs, and we can’t miss those games, can we?

Unfortunately the panelists who bid 3NT didn’t have much to say to defend this action, so I can help them out. You don’t have the hand that bid shows -- namely, one with close-to-running spades and these values.

If you are going to force, a little more flexibility is in order here, I think.

Mark Kessler: “3C. The exact reason some play 2C to show a really good hand and is forcing”

Tom Kniest: “3C. Will elicit partner’s natural rebid and we can correct to 4S.”

Peg Kaplan: “3C. I don’t like 2NT with two little hearts, and 3S is not enough on this hand.”

If you aren’t going to force to game, your other choices are somewhat flawed in showing this hand:

Jack Spear: "2NT.  I like to play that 3NT here shows 6-card spades, but these spades are not good enough." 

Karen Walker: “2NT. There’s no need to manufacture a 3-card jump shift with a balanced hand. The spades are too weak and the hand a bit too strong for a jump to 3S.”

Bud Hinckley: “2NT. Showing 18-19 high-card points, this will be passed less often than 3S. It also allows reaching 4H more easily if partner holds a good 6 -card suit there.”

If not notrump, how about rebidding our long suit?

Dan Baker: “3S. Suit isn’t as strong as I’d like, but 3C overstates the hand slightly.”

Bill Strauss: “3S. 18 points and six spades.”

Don Stack: “3S. Believe this is closest to what I have in suit and values.”

Given the flaws with any choice on this hand, I have to agree with Don. As my long-time bridge partner, Bill Doroshow, has told me often: “Never hurts to have something extra.”

5. Matchpoints,  both vulnerable 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠KQJ    ♥J92   ♦864   ♣Q874 ?

After these first four hands, finally an easy one. If partner had opened 1S, this would be unanimous – as it is, it is pretty close.

Don Stack: “2C. I’ll hope partner can get it to notrump if it belongs there.”

Bill Strauss: "2C. Partner should expect this hand -- no diamond stopper for notrump, no 4-card major, stronger than a weak 3C."

Peg Kaplan: “2C. A little heavy, but my hand is so soft and flat, nothing seems better.”

Some panelists had a plan for the rest of the auction:

Jack Spear: "2C. If they bid again, I can double to show a maximum.  (Partner likes the challenge of playing 4-3 fits.)

Mark Kessler: “2C. If 2D comes back to us we can double. A negative double the first time, even at matchpoints, is very aggressive.”

Several Solvers chose 1NT. A few panelists said they had the nagging feeling that 1NT might well be the right contract, even if partner doesn't have a diamond stopper, but they still went for the club raise with the majority.

I have to agree. The simple raise, after all, shows 7-10 points and support, which describes our hand rather well, doesn’t it?

6. IMPs, EW vulnerable      

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AQ54   ♥AK   ♦K109642   ♣J  ?

Finally, we are left with a high level decision at IMPs. Are we even allowed to bid here? And if so, does this hand qualify for further action?

Going low:

Adam Miller: “Pass. Our LHO bid to the 5-level at unfavorable vulnerability. No way I am going to hang my partner.”

Tom Kniest: “Pass. It’s a guess.”

Karen Walker: “Pass. There’s no way to know if partner is bidding to make or stretching. At this vulnerability and opposite a passed partner, LHO could have quite a good hand for 5C, so if 6D depends on a spade finesse, it is likely to lose.”

Bud Hinckley: “Pass. No reason to expect anything more than AQxxxx of diamonds from partner.”

And going high:

Peg Kaplan: “6D. Yes, we might not make it, but it might be laydown, too.”

Don Stack: “6D. Not going to try for the grand slam.”

Mark Kessler: “5H. It can’t hurt to make a grand-slam try.”

Unless our LHO is a known overbidder, I’m inclined to trust him on this hand and go quietly.

Thanks to all who sent in answers and comments for this interesting set. Leading all Solvers with 570 were Michael Clegg of Fort Wayne IN and Mike Heins of Cocoa Beach FL. They're both invited to join the December 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 December problems a try (see below). Please submit your solutions by November 30 on the web form.

    December moderator:  Jack Spear    jack5spear@gmail.com