Contest conducted by Marc Smith
The 2025 annual competition is as close as we have ever had. After seven months, a mere two points separates the top five contenders, and we still have 18 competition entrants averaging better than 70/80. A truly remarkable standard!
At the American Summer Nationals in Philadelphia, we had to wait until the final day of competition to record our first win by a panel member. Sartaj Hans (left) and Andy Hung, who had reached the quarter-finals of the Spingold earlier in the week, led an all-Australian team to victory in the three-day Roth Open Swiss Teams. Congratulations to two of our antipodean panel members.
The world championships in Denmark also concluded as we went to print. Going into the knockout stage, we had panelists in contention in all four events. In the Bermuda Bowl, the panel was represented by Sjoert Brink and Michal Klukowski (Switzerland) and Andrew Robson (England). In the Venice Cup, it was Cathy and Sophia Baldysz (Poland), and Jill Meyers and Migry zur-Campanile (USA2). In the Mixed Teams, Wenfei Wang (Hong Kong China) carried the flag for the panel. In the Senior Teams, we were well represented by Larry Cohen (USA1), Zia Mahmood and Bobby Levin (USA2) and Alan Mould (England).
In the end, members of our esteemed panel left Denmark with one gold and five bronze medals. Our lone finalist in Denmark was Larry Cohen, who returned to international competition to win gold in the Seniors Teams. Remarkably, this is Larry’s first world title victory. It comes more than a quarter of a century after his second-place finish in the 1998 World Open Pairs, playing with the same partner, David Berkowitz.
Larry’s USA1 team secured a 75-IMP victory over France in the final, having previously defeated fellow panelists Zia Mahmood and Bobby Levin (USA2) in their semi-final. USA2 subsequently defeated Austria in the playoff for third place. The panel also collected a pair of bronze medals in the Venice Cup. Cathy and Sophia Baldysz’s Poland team bowed out to China in the semi-final, but defeated France in the playoff for third place. Simon de Wijs collected a bronze medal in the Transnational Open Teams. Congratulations to them all.
This month’s guest panelists are the co-winners of the June competition. Maurice Choi was born in Hong Kong and learned to play bridge at university. He moved to the UK three years ago and is now an English Bridge Union (EBU) Tournament Director and an English Bridge Teachers Association (EBTA) teacher. He says, “My most recent achievement is bringing my 8-year-old son, Jasper, to join a club game.” Born in Mangalore, India, Archie Sequeira worked for a healthcare multi-national in Mumbai from 1961 until he retired in 2002. Now 85 years old, he has settled back in Mangalore. He has been playing duplicate bridge since 1970, and he has represented India in Seniors events at numerous world championships. He narrowly missed qualification for the quarter-finals, each time finishing 9th. He won gold in the Commonwealth Teams in 2006 and in the 2007 BFAME championship. He is married with three children. He says, “Success has been possible thanks to strong spousal and family support.”
Hand 7 this month was sent to me by Steve Rogers from Israel. Thanks to him. If you have a hand that you think would make an interesting problem for the panel to discuss, please send me details.
What a strange set this proved to be. At the bookends, we start and finish with huge majority votes from the panel. Indeed, there was a point halfway through the month when I thought that we were in danger of one, if not two, unanimous panels. In between, are six deals on which there is far less agreement, although three more choices attract a majority vote. With the panel widely divided, there are a couple of hands on which almost everyone scores well.
The most popular action chosen by the competition entrants scores ‘10’ on just two of the eight hands, and voting with the largest group of competitors this month scores 60/80 (down from 64/80 in both June and July). The average score this month is 55.27 (down from 57.48 on Set 25-07). Let’s see what the panel have to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♦ |
10 |
22 |
44 |
|
3NT |
6 |
0 |
14 |
|
4♣ |
6 |
0 |
4 |
|
5♣ |
6 |
0 |
6 |
|
2NT |
4 |
1 |
7 |
|
3♣ |
2 |
0 |
13 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
7 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.38
This is the closest we have yet come to a unanimous panel, with just one of our guest panelists diverging from the consensus choice. Nearly half of competitors also pick up maximum marks. I did expect a majority, but not this big, as the panel’s choice was not the bid chosen at the table in the European championships, when the partner of one of our panelists held the hand. With many panelists making similar comments, I just offer you a selection…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♦. Pathetically easy.
MATS NISLAND: 3♦. Semi-natural with extra values.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♦. I show my shape (with extras). What can go wrong?
WENFEI WANG: 3♦. A natural bid, showing short spades.
ROB BRADY: 3♦. Let's force to game and pattern out.
JOEY SILVER: 3♦. I am bidding out both my values and my shape below 3NT.
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: 3♦. Showing my shape and offering partner a choice of contract, 5♣ or 3NT.
DAVID BIRD: 3♦. Partner has denied a heart fit, so we must decide between 3NT and 5♣. An eleven-trick game could be some way off, but I can hardly bid 3NT with a singleton spade. 3♦, showing diamond values, is the clear next move.
SALLY BROCK: 3♦. It seems reasonable to pattern out. There is no reason why partner shouldn’t have a double spade stopper, when he will bid 3NT and I will pass.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♦. It seems very clear to show my shape. Anything from 3NT to 6♣ is possible.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. I am headed towards game and patterning out to clue partner in that I have a stiff spade. Partner could even have the magic Axx/x/QTxx/Kxxxx needed for slam.
Alan has obviously forgotten this hand, and understandably so, but he was the East player responsible for causing the problem…
ALAN MOULD: 3♦. I'm lost as to what else I might bid.
Maurice saves us from a unanimous panel.
MAURICE CHOI: 2NT. I am not strong enough to bid 3♦/3NT, but I don’t want to sign off in 3♣. I hope partner can bid 3NT with the right hand.
Curiously, Maurice might be the only one to get a plus score on this deal from the Senior Teams in Poznan. At the table, West jumped to 5♣. South doubled and, with trumps 5-0 offside, declarer lost control and went for 1100 (yes, five down non-vulnerable) when partner produced QJx/10x/AQ10x/10xxx. In the other room, West went four down in 4♣ undoubled (-200) so that was 14 IMPs out. 3NT, which East seems likely to bid over 3♦, goes one down on a spade lead when the club finesse fails, gaining 4 IMPs.
I suspect that a number of panelists would take issue with the 2♠ bid. Some propose that is should show at least five-card support, and I cannot dispute that perhaps 3♣ is enough on this East hand. Even so, you might still make 5♣ on a good day. It is certainly very unlucky to go five down!
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♠ |
10 |
8 |
10 |
|
3♥ |
9 |
3 |
5 |
|
4♣ |
9 |
2 |
7 |
|
3NT |
8 |
9 |
67 |
|
4NT |
8 |
1 |
4 |
|
4♦ |
6 |
0 |
3 |
|
5♦ |
3 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.16
This is a tricky one to mark. The primary question is whether to settle for 3NT or to keep other options open. Although the largest single vote from the panel is for 3NT, just, the majority (13-10) choose to look for an alternative to no-trumps, hence the marking. With the vote so close, though, everyone scores fairly well. We start with those panelists agreeing with two-thirds of competition entrants…
JOEY SILVER: 3NT. Signing off in 3NT seems pathetic, but frankly, my dear, I don't know what else to bid. So, I grab the contract, and hope for the best.
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: 3NT. Why dilly dally? 3♠ may put partner in a fix if he does not have anything in clubs.
ALAN MOULD: 3NT. John always does this and it always seems to be right, so who am I to argue?
MAURICE CHOI: 3NT. Partner didn’t make a support redouble, so we have no heart fit. My ♠Q-J-x is devalued after North’s double, and I am not sure how to explore slam.
DAVID BIRD: 3NT. My black-suit stoppers are similar in value, so I have no wish to emphasize a stopper in just one of them. My extra HCP may come to the rescue if one suit is weakly stopped.
A couple mention the meaning of 3♦ in this auction…
SARTAJ HANS: 3NT. The 3♦ rebid in a competitive auction can be a bit lighter than usual. A slight underbid from me caters to that possibility.
MATS NISLAND: 3NT. 3♦ after the double is not very strong.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3NT. In a competitive auction, 3♦ does not show a strong hand for us.
Simon clarifies this view, and I think he is closer to the mark.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3NT. I go low. I don’t like two small diamonds, and the double didn’t help there. BTW, I am used to 3♦ not being that strong after double, but obviously after a passed-hand double that’s different.
Marty is the only one to make a slam try via a quantitative no-trump bid.
MARTY BERGEN: 4NT. Natural and invitational. That describes this hand well. (Although I am concerned that North's takeout double might be based partly on diamond shortness.)
The rest are all wary of playing the wrong game…
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♥. It is necessary to avoid 3NT if partner has a black-suit singleton. If he has, we may even be able to make 6♦ with 3NT going down.
LARRY COHEN: 3♥. Forcing, of course. Partner can punt with 3♠, and we can still reach 3NT. But, every time I use 'punt' outside the USA, it is misunderstood.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♥. Forcing. I cannot tell whether we want to play in hearts, diamonds or no-trump, so I prevaricate. Maybe partner can give me a little more information.
The largest group aim to focus partner’s attention on his club holding…
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♠. This looks like a kneejerk 3NT, but do we want to play there opposite a stiff club? We could make 6♦ and go down in 3NT. 3♥ is possible too, but doesn’t impart the slow spade stopper situation.
PAUL MARSTON: 3♠. I am not interested in 3NT if partner cannot bid it over 3♠.
WENFEI WANG: 3♠. 5♦ will be better than 3NT if partner has a singleton club.
HANOI RONDON: 3♠. I can take care of the spades, but I'd really appreciate some help in clubs for 3NT. Otherwise partner can support hearts or rebid his diamonds.
Sally raises some questions for regular partnerships to discuss.
SALLY BROCK: 3♠. Very difficult. Quite a lot depends on what redouble by partner would have meant. If it would just show a strong hand, then partner may be light on HCP, but if XX would have shown heart support then he has to bid 3♦ on more HCP. Also, what would 2NT have been? If partner is short in clubs he will bid 4♣ over 3♠, and my hand then looks better, and 6♦ is quite a likely resting spot.
Some choose this option because they are not sure that game is enough.
JILL MEYERS: 3♠. I have too much to just bid 3NT.
ROB BRADY: 3♠. I will pull 3NT to 4♦. Hands like AKx/xx/AKJxxxx/x are almost cold for 6♦, but 3NT is likely to go down. A bit nervous about later decisions, because the takeout double may suggest a poor diamond split, but let's see what partner has to say.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♠. We can be cold for six or seven.
A couple choose to make their try with a club cue-bid.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♣. I have to make a try.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♣. Diamonds may not break, but I am too good to just bid 3NT. The clubs may be more dangerous than spades, but I am worth a try and I can always stop in 5♦ if things don’t work out.
On this hand from the final of the Mixed Teams in Poznan, partner had AK/xx/KQJ109xx/xx, so 6♦ was a decent spot, just needing reasonable breaks (i.e. spades no worse than 5-3). Getting to the slam may still not be easy. However, 5♦ is much better than 3NT, which needs clubs 4-4. At the table, West bid 3NT and North had an obvious club lead from 10xxxx/x/Ax/KQ10xx. So, even if you don’t get to the slam, you gain 10 IMPs for playing a diamond game rather than the doomed 3NT. (At the other table, East bid only 2♦ and our West hand looked no further than 3NT.) Although only 13 Miltons, this East hand is surely worth a jump to 3♦ in anyone’s language.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Pass |
10 |
11 |
36 |
|
2♠ |
8 |
4 |
9 |
|
1NT |
7 |
3 |
26 |
|
2♣ |
7 |
3 |
6 |
|
Dbl |
5 |
1 |
8 |
|
2NT |
2 |
0 |
11 |
|
3♣ |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
2♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.20
The panel came up with five different solutions, but there was a majority vote and more than a third of competition entrants agreed with the panel’s choice. Let’s start with those who chose to support clubs…
MARTY BERGEN: 2♣. I'm not proud of this.
MATS NISLAND: 2♣. An underbid, but I cannot find any really good alternative.
ROB BRADY: 2♣. I expect Pass, 2♠ and 1NT to all receive support. The best contract is often 1NT from partner's side, but we can't get there. This should make and might win the board against the passers or 1NT bidders, even if we score up +170!
When I first saw the problem, I thought the bid that described our hand/values best was…
SALLY BROCK: 2♠. Again, it could be right to bid a natural 2NT, but that could also be very silly. I’ll show my values and club ‘fit’ with 2♠ and hope for the best.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2♠.
PAUL MARSTON: 2♠. This is showing a good club raise, but I see ice forming on the tips of my wings.
DAVID BIRD: 2♠. My spade holding is not good enough for a no-trump bid. Nor can I make a negative double with only two hearts. The 2♠ cue-bid shows a sound raise in clubs. This might be a 4-3 fit but, with partner sure to be fairly short in spades, he is likely to have a five-card suit. This seems like the best description available.
Another faction chose to bid 1NT, which was also the choice of over a quarter of competitors.
LARRY COHEN: 1NT. This is understrength, no stopper and wrong-sided. But, for me, it is still better than all the other awful options.
WENFEI WANG: 1NT. No stopper, but still I do have 11 points.
SARTAJ HANS: 1NT. Passing is out nil vulnerability at matchpoints. My second choice would be 2♣.
Liz makes a key point in favour of this choice.
LIZ McGOWAN: 1NT. I have to bid something, and surely they can cash only five spades before I get in and, probably, claim the rest of the tricks? +120 rates to be better than defending 1♠ for +50 or +100. If partner produces a second suit, I may have trouble getting the hand over, but I can always punt some large number of clubs.
I did not expect any support for this solo effort, but Joey’s reasoning is not completely bonkers…
JOEY SILVER: Dbl. The ubiquitous negative double strikes again! With no sense of direction, double seems like my best bet, and maybe partner can help. I, of course, have an escape hatch in clubs should partner's next bid prove embarrassing.
Some of the majority were not that enthralled with their choice…
CHRISTIAN MARI: Pass. Horrible. No comment, just pray.
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: Pass. Let’s wait to see how things develop.
ALAN MOULD: Pass. I seriously cannot think of anything else. What do I do when partner doubles? Thankfully, you haven't asked me that 😊.
Maurice does reveal his intentions…
MAURICE CHOI: Pass. I can’t find any bid that describes my hand, so I pass. If North passes and partner reopens with a double, I’ll pass and hope 1♠-doubled by South is a good spot for us.
SIMON DE WIJS: Pass. I am not intending to defend 1♠, but waiting to see what happens and catch up later.
Remarkably, after playing the game for more than 40 years, I learned something new from this deal. I have never heard this before, but there is an expert treatment of this situation that seems to be fairly widely known…
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. This is a classic pass-then-2♠ (over the expected re-opening double). For me, this is a no-brainer.
JILL MEYERS: Pass. When partner makes the expected reopening double, I will bid 2♠.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. After a double from partner, I will bid 2♠.
HANOI RONDON: Pass. I hope partner can double, and I can then bid 2♠ to describe this hand. At this moment, no bid shows what I have.
ZIA MAHMOOD: Pass. Pass and cue-bid on the next round is the traditional treatment for this type of teaser.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Pass. As we don't like at all 1NT, double or 2♠. Let's expect partner's next move. Very often he will reopen the bidding with double, and then our 2♠ bid will show what we have, no?
Well, now we all know! At the table, partner had x/AQxx/Kxx/AQJxx, so 5♣ is probably the right matchpoint spot, although 6♣ is playable. Those who started with 2♠ seem to be off to a good start, and pass then cue-bid should also leave you well-placed. Curiously, Joey may survive his negative double, even though partner will support hearts enthusiastically. (Let’s hope he doesn’t think 5♣ is a cue-bid when you correct.)
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♣ |
10 |
7 |
28 |
|
2♦ |
8 |
2 |
16 |
|
2NT |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
2♠ |
7 |
3 |
4 |
|
2♣ |
6 |
4 |
30 |
|
1NT |
5 |
2 |
8 |
|
Pass |
4 |
1 |
5 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.11
The panel are all over the place on this one, with support for seven different options and no choice attracting even a third of the votes. Two choices each received just under a third of support from competitors. Let’s start with the cheapest actions and work upwards…
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: Pass.
It is far from clear that passing partner’s takeout double is likely to be the winning action.
JOEY SILVER: 1NT. I just cannot bring myself to make the "value" bid of 3♣. So, I show my values at the one-level, in NT. Hopefully, my robust diamonds will compensate for my rather feeble spade stopper.
SARTAJ HANS: 1NT. While we lack a spade stopper, I feel we need to make a bid that describes our values and the nature of our hand. A 3♣ bid would look something like xxx/Kx/Kxx/Qxxxx, which is a far cry from what we have.
Or we could support one of partner’s suits…
ALAN MOULD: 2♣. Game seems a long way away. I won't try to encourage partner. I am mildly surprised that South hasn't raised, which suggests that partner may be something like 4414, which doesn't do my hand any favours. I suppose we might make 3NT but, short of a serious overbid, I cannot see a route.
SIMON DE WIJS: 2♣. I am trusting the vulnerable opponents for now, so I start with 2♣ and hopefully I’ll get to double later.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2♣. It might be right to bid NT.
LIZ McGOWAN: 2♣. I expect a nine-card fit but, with both opponents bidding, it is hard to imagine that we can make game. If they compete further in diamonds, I shall risk a double.
The next question is whether 2♦ is natural or a cue-bid in this auction…
HANOI RONDON: 2♦. I want to show a good hand with values in diamonds, in case NT is an option. I can show my clubs later if it isn't.
ROB BRADY: 2♦. We can be fairly sure that the spades are 7-2-2-2 or 6-3-2-2 around the table (no support double), so North is likely to bid 2♠ whatever we do now. I'll bid 3♣ when 2♠ comes back to me. A bit conservative, but maybe partner can find a 3NT bid. Starting with a 2♠ cue-bid is unlikely to tell us much, even if he has a spade stop. With two low diamonds, is partner not likely to bid 3♣ (which we will have to pass), rather than 2NT?
A couple did start with 2♠…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♠. I am too strong to bid 2♣, and I don’t like to bid 3♣ with only J-10-x-x.
MATS NISLAND: 2♠.
Stoppers? Who needs stoppers?
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2NT. IMPs, vulnerable...
WENFEI WANG: 2NT. Just an invite to 3NT.
SALLY BROCK: 2NT. It sounds as if partner has some spade length.
JILL MEYERS: 2NT. I think partner has spades in with his hearts and clubs too.
PAUL MARSTON: 2NT. Searching for something.
The largest faction on the panel showed their fit and some values, and hoped partner would move with a spade stop…
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. To show my invitational hand…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♣. This is an approximately accurate assessment.
Larry seems to be reaching his choices in this set via a process of elimination.
LARRY COHEN: 3♣. This might have more flaws than my answer to #3, but I hope fewer flaws than all the other possibilities.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♣. Partner must be at least 4-4 in the unbid suits, so this feels normal to me.
DAVID BIRD: 3♣. I am rarely tempted to overbid when an opponent has opened the bidding and received a new-suit response. Of course, I would bid my four jacks more strongly, if playing a different card game.
MAURICE CHOI: 3♣. South didn’t make a support redouble, so he has at most two spades. Partner’s double shows the other two suits, so he likely has something like xxx/AQxx/xx/AQxx and may have a fifth club. The opponents may have a 6-2 spade fit (it would be useful to know if they play weak jump shifts) and they may be able to make 2♠. Even if they can’t make 2♠, we have a good chance of making 3♣.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♣. Not perfect, I agree.
On this deal from the Mixed Teams in Poznan, partner had K10x/AK109/9xx/Axx so the objective was to get to 3NT. At the table I watched, West started with 2♠, North bid 3♠, and East closed his eyes and bid 3NT. If you jump to 3♣ and North passes, partner presumably moves with 3♠, showing something in spades, and you can then bid 3NT. (Of course, having played it from your side, you will be glad when his spade stop is not K-x.)
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♣ |
10 |
13 |
23 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
1 |
3 |
|
Dbl |
7 |
7 |
24 |
|
4♦ |
4 |
0 |
2 |
|
2♥ |
4 |
2 |
26 |
|
3♦ |
2 |
0 |
8 |
|
5♦ |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
3♥ |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
2♦ |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
2♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.56
For the panel, this was essentially a two-way choice with a couple of mavericks. The competitors were split into three groups, each representing close to a quarter of players. The first question is whether 2♥ is forcing here. If it is, then it seems like an obvious way forward. However, all but a couple of panelists rejected that as an option (some of them saying categorically that 2♥ would be non-forcing). Only Jill and Joey seem to think this is forcing…
JILL MEYERS: 2♥. This looks the right way too start. I can always support diamonds later.
JOEY SILVER: 2♥. Before getting carried away by my good diamond support, it seems prudent to explore for a heart fit. After all, we are playing pairs.
The second-largest faction on the panel were prepared to risk a double, with various degrees of enthusiasm…
PAUL MARSTON: Dbl. Not ideal, but I see nothing better.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. I hope my partner bids something.
SARTAJ HANS: Dbl. 3♣ will almost certainly lose the hearts, as it is usually suggestive of a single-suited hand. Doubling could be a disaster if partner passes, but we should be well placed after all other possible developments.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. 2♥ and 3♦ are both non-forcing, and 3♥ would show a five-card suit. We need to learn more about partner's hand.
CHRISTIAN MARI: Dbl. 2♥ is not forcing, 3♥ shows five cards, and 3♣ denies four hearts (could be 4333). So, double... Horrible, as usual.
MAURICE CHOI: Dbl. Keeping all options open.
Including defending 2♣-doubled, although one panelist actually thinks that might be a good idea…
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. I strongly suspect this will go all-Pass. My alternative is 3♣, but we could easily get enough out of this to compensate for our non-vulnerable game, and it is possible we don't have a game on.
The rest were not so keen on defending…
HANOI RONDON: 3♣. This is forcing and avoids the potential disaster of defending 2♣-doubled.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♣. I don’t risk a double with four-card diamond support.
LARRY COHEN: 3♣. Through my computer screen, I can see partner foaming at the mouth, awaiting my double, but I a-void doubles with voids.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♣. I am not willing to defend 2♣-doubled.
ROB BRADY: 3♣. I don't expect to get rich against 2♣-doubled, so let's start with a game force. Should 4♣ show this hand, perhaps?
A good question, and only Archie took that option…
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: 4♣.
DAVID BIRD: 3♣. A re-opening double has two big flaws: a very good fit for partner's suit, and a void club. I am happy to show my strength and hear partner's next bid.
SALLY BROCK: 3♣. It could be right to double, but I don’t fancy it with a void. Partner will probably bid 3NT over 3♣, and then I’ll have another problem. I think I will pass as partner should expect me to be very short in clubs (no double).
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♣. This shows short clubs with a diamond fit. “Any” other hand starts with double.
It is unclear to me who ‘they’ are, but…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♣. They tell me that 2♥ is non-forcing (although not my preferred method). Double would be obtuse, or is it obese? (Obscene is perhaps the word you are looking for, Z. MS) That leaves us with this 3♣ cue-bid.
MATS NISLAND: 3♣.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♣. If he bids 3NT, I will continue with 4♦.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♣. An amorphous force, but I need to get us to 4♥ where available.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. Every good pair must have discussed this type of auction, as to whether a new suit bid (2♥ here) is forcing.
At the table, partner had x/Kx/AQxxxx/QJxx so you can make at least 11 tricks in diamonds. Will he pass a re-opening double with that hand? The doublers certainly hope the answer is ‘No’. As Marty says, regular partnerships need to agree whether 2♥ would be forcing, although the consensus on the panel is clearly that it should be non-forcing.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♠ |
10 |
10 |
19 |
|
Dbl |
9 |
8 |
69 |
|
Pass |
8 |
5 |
8 |
|
5♦ |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.77
The panel offer only three options on this one, and all receive a degree of support so everyone scores fairly well. By comparison, the competition entrants are almost of once voice, with more than two-thirds choosing the panel’s second option. Let’s start with the largest faction on the panel…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♠. A sick bid, but nothing inspirational comes up.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♠. This is a very imperfect 4♠, but I hate the alternatives.
WENFEI WANG: 4♠. Obviously, the opponents’ suit is hearts.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♠. My best guess for game. No lonely search for slam for me.
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA/MATS NISLAND: 4♠.
Perhaps Christian amusingly sums up the feeling of those who choose this option…
CHRISTIAN MARI: 4♠. It’s like diving into an empty swimming pool.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♠. If it goes Pass-Pass-Dbl, I can bid 5♦.
I suspect that South will manage to avoid falling into that trap 😊
JOEY SILVER: 4♠. Dangerous indeed, but passing at this vulnerability seems even more dangerous to me. A takeout double may seem tempting, but playing in 5♣ ain't! If doubled in 4♠, I intend to run to 4NT. Hopefully, partner will interpret that as natural.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♠. It is too likely that partner will bid 5♣ if I double.
The next group are willing to take that risk…
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. For me, doubles of natural 4♥ bids invite partner to bid spades. If partner bids 5♣, I’ll throw up!
(Sick bag for Mrs. Brock, please)
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Scary, but I’ll try my luck. It feels like 6♦ may be very close, so I will payoff to the hands where we belong in 4♠.
MAURICE CHOI: Dbl. They are vulnerable, so they won’t be broke. It’s unlikely we have a slam. We may have a game, but we may not. At this vulnerability, I am much more inclined to double and hope it ends the auction.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. For now. I play this as "hearts or takeout of hearts." I sort of have a hybrid.
Had the auction gone 2♥-P-4♥, I’m sure we’d have had a majority for 4♠. However, a number of panelists point out the significant difference the Multi opening has made.
ROB BRADY: Dbl. With South promising length in both majors, spades is much less likely to be the right suit. 7♦ isn't that far off if partner has the two missing keycards, and just bidding 6♦ outright could be the winning decision. At these colours, we should earn enough if partner decides to pass our double. I'll pull a club bid to diamonds and hope we land on our feet. Let’s hope partner isn’t 2-0-3-8!
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. The vulnerable South may have good spade support for his jump to 4♥, so I discount 4♠ as an option. I will double, to show my strength, and this will often end the auction. If partner ventures 5♣, volunteering for an 11-trick target instead of a four-trick one, it will be a close decision whether to retreat to 5♦.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. I'm planning to bid diamonds if partner bids clubs. With South likely to hold spade length for his bid, 4♠ doesn't look so good.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. We certainly wouldn’t blame a teammate who bid 4♠.
A handful of panelists chose what would have been the least stressful route to a plus score.
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. The opponents are vulnerable v not, so they won’t be joking. Partner is probably 2-1-4-6 or something, and doubling will attract 5♣ – ugh!
SARTAJ HANS: Pass. I hope they go down. A double at this vulnerability does not fit this sort of hand.
JILL MEYERS: Pass. They are vulnerable vs not, so I do not think my RHO is screwing around. If I double, I am not going to be happy when partner bids 5♣. I am going to take what I think is my sure plus score.
LIZ McGOWAN: Pass. There are two possibilities here. a) Vulnerable opponents have conned me stupid. b) partner has a void heart and lots of cards in the minors. If I double partner will presumably bid clubs. I suppose 5♦ might make ... but passing seems most likely to get me a plus score.
ALAN MOULD: Pass. I cannot believe that I am passing with a 19-count, but what am I supposed to do? At this vulnerability, South is absolutely bonkers unless he is at least 4-4 in the majors, and probably a lot of shape as well. I cannot see an alternative, other than 4♠ and, as I say, that looks to have two or more trumps to lose for a start.
Alan was right to the extent that South was bordering on bonkers (QJ97x/xxx/Kx/Axx), but he did get almost half of the panel to go minus, so who can argue with success.
On this deal from the semi-final of the Mixed Teams in Poznan, West bid 4♠ at the table. Partner had 10x/x/Qxxx/KQ10xxx, and the 5-1 trump split meant that declarer had to go one down. As the cards lie, 5♦ is an easy make (and some good guessing enables you to make 6♦ and 5♣ as the cards lie – win the spade lead, cash two high hearts to pitch a spade, and play a club to the ten).
If West doubles, should East pass, bid 4NT or 5♣? Perhaps I should have saved that one as a future problem for the panel to answer.
Passing 4♥ scores +400, which seems like a less stressful way of gaining 10 IMPs than playing a non-vulnerable game in a minor. Of course, if you double and partner manages to pass, you’ll reap the big bonanza.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
14 |
16 |
|
3♠ |
7 |
4 |
40 |
|
3♥ |
6 |
1 |
5 |
|
3♣ |
4 |
4 |
29 |
|
4♣ |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
6 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
5♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.88
Almost a third of competitors think 3♣ is enough, but most of the panel disagree with that assessment. That leaves the question of how to get spades into the auction. A majority of panel members do so via a double, while the largest group of competition entrants choose to just bid their suit. Let’s start with the conservatives…
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. This is an underbid, but I plan to follow with 3♠ when the opponents bid 3♥.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♣. I toyed with 3♠, but this suit is hardly a source of tricks under the opening bid, and I do not particularly want a spade lead. If they sign off in 3♥ and it comes back to me, I can try 3♠ then...
ARCHIE SEQUEIRA: 3♣.
Maurice has a different plan…
MAURICE CHOI: 3♣. It seems that North has a light opening, or East has overcalled based on distribution rather than HCP (or both). I want to bid 3♣, first to show my clubs, then I plan to double 3♥ to show my strength. I’m happy to defend 3♥-doubled at matchpoints, but partner knows I have club support so he can pull the double to 4♣ if thinks that is right.
Zia was alone in choosing to raise clubs via a cue-bid…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. Perhaps we’ve caught South in a semi-psyche. We certainly have a much better hand than we would expect with the other three players all bidding in front of us.
Everyone else wanted to get their own suit into the auction…
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. I am too strong for 3♣, but not worth 3♠ or a 3♥ cue-bid. Ah, good, I can see a red card in my box.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. Showing spades.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. 4+♠, points... That's what the double shows.
CHRISTIAN MARI: Dbl. Showing spades (4-5) and usually 2+♣.
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. This is responsive, so it seems clear to double.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. For now.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. I think double is an attempt to get us to spades. What else?
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. I have a great hand in context, so I'll try to find out if partner holds some spades.
Would 3♠ be forcing?No, says…
SARTAJ HANS: Dbl. I am trying to get spades into play. I'll bid 4♠ next (over 4♥) and maybe partner will get the message. A hand with six spades would bid 3♠ directly (non-forcing in the style I'm used to).
Yes, says…
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. Showing spades and values. 3♠ would be forcing, which will be okay if partner has spades or good clubs, but it might force him into a raise on a doubleton.
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. A double here shows clubs with spades. This seems easy. But what will I bid over 3♥ or 4♥ from the opponents? Hopefully, with the information I’ve given him, partner will be able to make an informed decision before it gets back to me.
MATS NISLAND: Dbl.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. To be followed by a spade bid.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Takeout. The spades are not good enough to bid right away
Paul makes a good point for regular partnerships to discuss…
PAUL MARSTON: 3♠. I expect partner will read this as fit-showing.
And Miguel seems to agree…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♠. I can play 4♣ or 5♣ if my partner does not have a spade fit.
It is difficult to argue with Joey’s logic…
JOEY SILVER: 3♠. Who knows what we can make or where we belong at this point in the auction, and NOT bidding my five-card spade suit won't help us know.
ROB BRADY: 3♠. The other choice is to start with 3♥ and then balance 4♠ if they bid game. I slightly prefer to start with 3♠, intending to offer partner a choice by doubling 4♥. We do have significant defensive values if partner doesn't have a spade fit. At matchpoints, I'd rather to play for four tricks on defense than commit to trying to take 11 tricks on offense. Form of scoring matters a lot here.
At the table, partner had Qx/x/Axx/KJxxxxx, so 5♣ was an easy make. Anything other than 3♣ seems likely to get you to the top spot.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3NT |
10 |
20 |
14 |
|
4♦ |
6 |
1 |
63 |
|
5♦ |
6 |
1 |
2 |
|
Dbl |
5 |
1 |
13 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
7 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.21
We finish with another huge majority from the panel. Alas, there is also a big majority from the competition entrants, with almost two-thirds choosing an action that was not the panel’s first choice. Again, just a selection of comments…
ANDREW ROBSON: 3NT. Don’t we all? “When you’ve shown a stopper in the bidding, you don’t need one in the play.”
ALAN MOULD: 3NT. An old chestnut. Don't we all do this?
SARTAJ HANS: 3NT. A man's got to do what a man's got to do.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3NT. This feels like the normal bid.
WENFEI WANG: 3NT. I have a stopper in my heart 😊.
For his efforts here and on Hand 6, Christian earns the “Comment of the Month” award…
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3NT. I will explain to my partner later, if he is still here.
ROB BRADY: 3NT. Our most likely game, especially if we bid it confidently. Isn't that right Zia?
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3NT. I play for the blockage.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3NT. I would rather have a singleton heart, which would give partner a better chance to stop the suit with something like 10-x-x-x or J-x-x-x.
PAUL MARSTON: 3NT. No problem so far. The real question is, “Do I stick a double?”
A couple comment on one of the alternatives…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3NT. No choice for us here. 4♦ would show 5+/5+ diamonds and spades, so that is not an option.
DAVID BIRD: 3NT. Many players use 4♦ as Michaels, showing diamonds and the other major. Before this scheme became very popular, 4♦ was usually described as a 'nothing bid', because it bypassed 3NT. Partner will have some sort of heart stopper around 30-40% of the time. If not, I trust our North player to make the same pre-empt at the other table.
JOEY SILVER: 3NT. In the famous words of Marty Bergen, "Stoppers? Who needs stoppers." (Well, maybe he didn't quite say that, but with his philosophy on vulnerability, I am sure he would agree.)
MARTY BERGEN: 3NT. This is one of the infinite hands that convinced me many years ago to define a double in these auctions as THRUMP; meaning that the doubler was looking for 3NT and did not promise the unbid major. However, since others are less enlightened, the best I can do here is to bid 3NT in tempo.
Larry finishes with a prediction…
LARRY COHEN: 3NT. This seems like a fitting way to conclude a set where I was guessing on every hand. Let's see how smart partner is. Prediction: Nobody is scoring 80 this month.
There were just a few mavericks…
MAURICE CHOI: Dbl. It’s a guesstimate, but I'm happy to be in a game. Double keeps 3NT open. I’ll bid 4♦ over 3♠/4♣ and 5♦ over 4♠.
Like the two-thirds of competitors who chose this action, Jill presumably hoped that her partner didn’t expect this to show diamonds and spades…
JILL MEYERS: 4♦. I have a feeling this hand is here because it is right to bid 3NT, but I just can't bring myself to do it.
Liz took the opposite view…
LIZ McGOWAN: 5♦. I suppose we are playing non-leaping Michaels, so I cannot bid a natural 4♦.
One good reason for playing non-leaping Michaels in these auctions is that it stops partner bidding 4♦ on this type of hand. When the deal came up at the 2025 Asia Pacific Championships in Beijing, West at the table I was watching duly bid 3NT. His partner held K10xxxx/Ax/xx/J10x. North led a spade from Q-J doubleton, so declarer immediately cashed six tricks in that suit. When South discarded a diamond from Jxxx, declarer made all 13 tricks. The defenders do not have a club ruff against 5♦, but declarer is still likely to lose two clubs and a trump.
It’s close at the top this month, but Larry’s prediction of no perfect score proves to be an accurate one, although he might perhaps be surprised to discover that he is not far short of that mark on this set.
Leading the panel this month is Andrew Robson with 78/80. With his second consecutive second-place finish, is Hanoi Rondon with 77/80. The podium is completed by French legend Christian Mari, with 76/80. Our thanks, as always, to all of the panel. See you next month. Marc.
|
Andrew ROBSON |
3♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♣ |
3♣ |
Pass |
Dbl |
3NT |
78 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
3♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
2♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
77 |
|
Christian MARI |
3♦ |
3♥ |
Pass |
3♣ |
Dbl |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3NT |
76 |
|
David BIRD |
3♦ |
3NT |
2♠ |
3♣ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
75 |
|
Larry COHEN |
3♦ |
3♥ |
1NT |
3♣ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
75 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
3♦ |
4♣ |
Pass |
3♣ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
3♥ |
3NT |
75 |
|
Sally BROCK |
3♦ |
3♠ |
2♠ |
2NT |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
74 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
3♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
2♠ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
3♠ |
3NT |
74 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
2♣ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
73 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
3♦ |
4♣ |
2♠ |
2♣ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3NT |
73 |
|
Mats NILSLAND |
3♦ |
3NT |
2♣ |
2♠ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3NT |
72 |
|
Rob BRADY |
3♦ |
3♠ |
2♣ |
2♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
3NT |
71 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
2NT |
Dbl |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3NT |
71 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
3♦ |
3♠ |
1NT |
2NT |
Dbl |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3NT |
71 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
3♦ |
4NT |
2♣ |
3♣ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
3♣ |
3NT |
69 |
|
Paul MARSTON |
3♦ |
3♠ |
2♠ |
2NT |
Dbl |
4♠ |
3♠ |
3NT |
69 |
|
Alan MOULD |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
2♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
Dbl |
3NT |
69 |
|
Sartaj HANS |
3♦ |
3NT |
1NT |
1NT |
Dbl |
Pass |
Dbl |
3NT |
65 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
3♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
2NT |
2♥ |
Pass |
Dbl |
4♦ |
65 |
|
Archie SEQUEIRA |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
Pass |
4♣ |
4♠ |
3♣ |
3NT |
64 |
|
Liz McGOWAN |
3♦ |
3♥ |
1NT |
2♣ |
3♣ |
Pass |
3♣ |
5♦ |
60 |
|
Joey SILVER |
3♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
1NT |
2♥ |
4♠ |
3♠ |
3NT |
59 |
|
Maurice CHOI |
2NT |
3NT |
Pass |
3♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
3♣ |
Dbl |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOP SCORE |
3♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♣ |
3♣ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3NT |
|
|
HAND 1: |
3♦ 10 |
3NT/4♣/5♣ 6 |
2NT 4 |
3♣ 2 |
|
|
|
HAND 2: |
3♠ 10 |
3♥/4♣ 9 |
3NT/4NT 8 |
4♦ 6 |
5♦ 3 |
|
|
HAND 3: |
Pass 10 |
2♠ 8 |
1NT/2♣ 7 |
Dbl 5 |
2NT/3♣ 2 |
|
|
HAND 4: |
3♣ 10 |
2♦ 8 |
2♠/2NT 7 |
2♣ 6 |
1NT 5 |
Pass 4 |
|
HAND 5: |
3♣ 10 |
4♣ 8 |
Dbl 7 |
2♥/4♦ 4 |
3♦/5♦ 2 |
|
|
HAND 6: |
4♠ 10 |
Dbl 9 |
Pass 8 |
5♦ 2 |
|
|
|
HAND 7: |
Dbl 10 |
3♠ 7 |
3♥ 6 |
3♣ 4 |
4♣ 2 |
|
|
HAND 8: |
3NT 10 |
4♦/5♦ 6 |
Dbl 5 |
Pass 2 |
|
|
|
HAND 1: |
6.38 |
|
HAND 2: |
8.16 |
|
HAND 3: |
7.20 |
|
HAND 4: |
7.11 |
|
HAND 5: |
5.56 |
|
HAND 6: |
8.77 |
|
HAND 7: |
5.88 |
|
HAND 8: |
6.21 |
