Contest conducted by Marc Smith
New Year greetings to everyone, and welcome to the final set of 2025. After eleven months of intense the competition, just 5 points separate the top 7 contenders for the annual title, so there is still all to play for!
A number of panelists were in action at the Fall Nationals in San Francisco earlier this month. Pride of place goes to Sartaj Hans (right) and Andy Hung, who stormed to victory with an impressive 77-IMP concession win in the final of the Soloway KO Teams.
In other events during the 10-day festival, Sjoert Brink and Michal Klukowski were members of the winning team in the Mitchel Open BAM Teams. Migry Campanile’s team won the Top-Flight Swiss Teams on Tuesday, with Simon de Wijs in the team right behind her. Wenfei Wang finished second in the NABC+ Mixed Pairs and third in the Whitehead Women’s Pairs.
On the final weekend, three panel members made it into the 10-team final of the prestigious Reisinger Board-a-Match Teams. In that final, Sjoert Brink finished second, Michal Klukowski third and Cedric Lorenzini seventh. Congratulations to them all.
A couple of this month’s hands were sent to me. Panelist Barnet Shenkin contributed Hand 3, and a competitor who is in the Top 20 in the annual competition, Graham Hazel from England, submitted Hand 7. Thanks to them. If you have a hand that you think would make an interesting problem for the panel to discuss, please send me the details.
The panel produce a majority vote on four hands in this set, but the splits on the others were not as extreme as last month. Those challenging for a place high on the annual competition leader-board will no doubt be hoping for a less challenging set than October and November. How’s it looking? The most popular action chosen by the competition entrants scores ‘10’ on four of the eight hands, and voting with the largest group of competitors this month scores 65/80 (up from 63/80 in November). The average score this month is 58.52 (well up from 51.53 on Set 25-11). Let’s see what the panel have to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
1NT |
10 |
10 |
28 |
|
1♠ |
8 |
5 |
16 |
|
Pass |
7 |
3 |
17 |
|
Dbl |
6 |
2 |
35 |
|
2♦ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.23
The panel offer four choices on this one and, although there is not quite a majority vote, they do select a clear favourite. The most popular choice of the competitors is the least-supported of the panel’s four choice, although over a quarter still collect top marks.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. I plan to bid on the way back.
CHRISTIAN MARI: Pass. This is not the right time to intervene, in my opinion.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: Pass. This is probably wisest in the long run, even if one would too often double, bid 1♠ or even 1NT.
There were just a couple of supporters for the competitors’ most popular choice…
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. It could go badly wrong (but so could anything else)! Partner will try hard not to bid clubs!
JOEY SILVER: Dbl. Despite this type of takeout double working for others but never for me, I'll take the gamble because my second choice, 1♠, leads to too many inconvenient auctions.
So, what about those 1♠ overcallers?
ANDREW ROBSON: 1♠. I really fancy a Moyse here, envisaging ♠K-J-x, the ♥J and a stiff diamond - 11 tricks on a crossruff…
BARNET SHENKIN: 1♠.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 1♠. The hand has a better shape for a suit contract rather than NT, especially when your long suit is the opponent's one.
PAUL MARSTON: 1♠. With partner being a passed hand, I think I need a spade fit to get anywhere.
WENEI WANG: 1♠. Although it is a four-card overcall, I think it is better than 1NT.
The largest faction on the panel disagrees with that assessment…
DAVID BIRD: 1NT. Those who don't like 1NT will have some difficulty persuading me why their choice is better.
MARTY BERGEN: 1NT. The lesser of evils.
SIMON DE WIJS: 1NT. Not perfect, but it’s better than pass.
HANOI RONDON: 1NT. I have the stopper and the values... Who cares about clubs?
LARRY COHEN: 1NT. It is likely this hand will play much better in a suit, but I can't pass up the chance to show my general hand type (albeit a little diamond should be in with the clubs).
If the ♦2 was the ♣2, wouldn’t everyone overcall 1NT and wonder why it was a problem?
JILL MEYERS: 1NT. What is the big difference between stiff jack and J-x? This will make the auction easy if partner can Stayman or transfer to a major. It will be tougher to get into the auction later if I pass now.
Yes, how will you like it if North’s 1NT comes back to you or, perhaps worse, a raise to 2♦ or even 3♦?
ROB BRADY: 1NT. At IMPs, we want to find games. Showing our strength will help us reach game in any of three strains.
LIZ McGOWAN: 1NT. I like a four-card 1♠ overcall, but this hand seems a little too strong.
ALAN MOULD: 1NT. Passing on this sort of hand never seems to work for me. I suppose Mike Lawrence fans will bid 1♠.
Sartaj tells us how he plans to continue, given the chance…
SARTAJ HANS: 1NT. If partner has a five-card major, this hand re-evaluates as overstrength for 1NT. My plan is to bid game over a transfer to spades; and to super-accept to 3♥ over a transfer to hearts.
Imagine partner with something like Kxxxxx/xxx/--/xxxx. Even 6♠ is not such a bad contract but, if we pass now, might we not end up defending 1NT or 2♦? Things were not quite that extreme when the deal occurred in the 2025 Buffett Cup. Hurd for the Americans overcalled 1NT whilst Percario for Europe doubled. Partner had Jxxx/Jxx/x/A10xxx, so 1NT made +120 and 4♠ +620. The 1♠ overcallers also seem sure to reach the good game. The doublers will have to settle for a moral victory.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♥ |
10 |
6 |
19 |
|
2♠ |
9 |
2 |
7 |
|
4♣ |
9 |
1 |
3 |
|
3♠ |
8 |
2 |
3 |
|
2♥ |
7 |
4 |
26 |
|
3♣ |
7 |
5 |
20 |
|
4♥ |
5 |
0 |
12 |
|
5♣ |
3 |
0 |
7 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.07
The panel offers six different options, with none attracting as many as a third of the votes. The competition entrants are even more divided.
The first questions here is, “What is partner’s 2♦?” For most, I suspect it is just natural and forcing for one round, although partner will occasionally not hold four diamonds. For example, it’s what he would bid with something like xxx/AQxxx/KQx/xx. For some, though, it is an artificial game force. The next question is, “What do bidding 2♥ and 3♥ now show?” Let’s start with that debate…
LARRY COHEN: 2♥. Are there no spades in this deck?
MARTY BERGEN: 2♥. I confess that I would have opened 3NT.
JILL MEYERS: 2♥. I already showed six or more clubs (albeit not seven great ones), but I also have three of partner's original suit. If I delay support, it will seem I don't have three, so I am giving partner this info now.
But does 2♥ now show three-card support?
DAVID BIRD: 2♥. I frequently raise to 2♥ directly with three-card support. When I choose to rebid my clubs before supporting hearts, partner should read me for a good suit.
I would expect only preference with a doubleton heart for this auction. A few panelists think so too…
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♥. The bid I really want to make is 4♣ - but at matchpoints we’d better get to the higher scoring game. 3♥ shows three hearts, 2♥ only two, so I’m not doing that.
SALLY BROCK: 3♥. For me, 2♦ is a game-forcing relay, and that works better here. Without that I need to jump to show three-card heart support. I don’t think my void will be so useful and partner may well have no clubs.
HANOI RONDON: 3♥. I want to show a three-card heart fit with a good hand. 3♠ might be an interesting choice, but it might also help them discover their big fit.
PAUL MARSTON: 3♥. It’s time to support the major, jumping to show my true intent.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♥. I wonder where the spades are lurking.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 3♥. This seems best, although high club bids are tempting.
Andrew mentioned 4♣ as an option, but Joey is alone in taking that route…
JOEY SILVER: 4♣. This should get the nature of my hand across to partner, and leave the rest up to him. 3NT is too small a target to aim at.
Is this akin to something like 1♣-1♥-4♣, which would show four hearts and 5+ good clubs? Here, partner has shown a fifth heart, so is this a similar ‘picture bid’ with three-card support? It seems it should be and, if so, would appear to be the most descriptive option. Something for regular partnerships to discuss.
This also seems to make some sense if 2♦ is not game-forcing in your methods...
ALAN MOULD: 2♠. Not an easy hand, as I have lots of different things I want to do. 3♣, 4♣ and 3♥ all have appeal. Let's get the game force established first, then I can try to show everything.
SARTAJ HANS: 2♠. In the methods I prefer to play, this shows a good 3♣ bid without a spade stopper.
Alan and Sartaj clearly think 3♣ would not be forcing…
WENEI WANG: 3♣. Rebidding a solid suit is very important.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♣. If our only winning contract is 4♥, 2♥ could be better, but how can you resist to bid again such a strong club suit?
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♣. I prefer to play in clubs rather than in hearts or 3NT.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♣.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♣. First, I will bid my hand and, later (over partner’s 3NT). I intend to bid 4♥.
It sounds like they think 3♣ is forcing: Something for regular partnerships to know.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♠. This should be clear.
Apparently not, Christian 😊
ROB BRADY: 3♠. Splinter. If partner bids 3NT, I will have to decide whether to continue with 4♣ or 4♥. I'm not sure this is the final decision point of the hand, since there will be several more rounds of bidding, but 3♠ describes my feelings quite well. Spade shortness is a main feature of our hand, and we have a maximum for the 2♣ bid, with slam interest opposite extras. Extras that partner is likely to hold with silent opponents who have at least nine spades. In slam-going auctions it's often correct to avoid bidding weak trump suits because those losers can go elsewhere, so 2♥ doesn't appeal, although it may be the most popular choice on the panel. Imagine something like AKx/Axxxx/AKx/xx opposite and, with 6♣ an easy make, you can see why you do not want to get locked into hearts.
At the table, partner had Qxx/AKxxx/AKxx/x, so 6♣ was on a 3-2 trump break, and you might even end up with all 13 tricks (via 3-3 diamonds or a red-suit squeeze). However, getting to slam still seems difficult no matter what you choose on this round. If you are stopping in game, then 11 tricks in 4♥ will score better at matchpoints (assuming trumps split).
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♦ |
10 |
15 |
39 |
|
4♥ |
6 |
4 |
29 |
|
5♥ |
3 |
0 |
4 |
|
4NT |
3 |
1 |
6 |
|
Pass |
3 |
0 |
8 |
|
6♥ |
0 |
0 |
6 |
|
4♣ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
6NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.18
I thought this was a tough problem, but most of the panel considered it a no-brainer. Over a third of competitors also saw it as a seasonal offering from the conductor.
JOEY SILVER: 4♦. The question I have is, “Why would I ever do anything but bid 4♦?”
CHRISTIAN MARI: 4♦. Sorry. I don’t see the problem.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♦. What else? Our next bid, when the tray comes back, will probably be more difficult.
WENEI WANG: 4♦. I just bid naturally.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♦. When in doubt, make the cheapest reasonable bid.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♦. It could be our trump suit, so how can I not?
LARRY COHEN: 4♦. To give partner a chance at a heart preference.
Will he prefer hearts with something like K10x/x/Jxxx/AQJxx? Do we really want to play 5♦ opposite that? With hearts 3-2 and diamonds 4-1, 4♥ is an easy make but 5♦ will probably fail.
DAVID BIRD: 4♦. I thought of bidding 5♥, asking for a spade stopper, but if partner has the ♠K it will be led through. He also might hold only one heart. Partner is at liberty to bid 4♥ next, with two low or a singleton queen or jack.
Do you really want him to bid 5♣ when he has a low singleton heart?
HANOI RONDON: 4♦. This seems forcing and a slam could be on. I don't like the fact that the lead might come through partner's spade stopper, but that's what happens when we don't play transfers.
It sounds like a number of panelists plan to bid again if partner bids 4♥…
ALAN MOULD: 4♦. Another difficult hand. This for now. Probably 6♥ sometime...
SALLY BROCK: 4♦. This seems OK for now. I need partner to bid hearts before I can really consider something like 5♥.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♦. I’m unsure where we will end up, but let’s start with introducing my decent four-card suit.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♦. I am not sure how I will proceed, but there will be a lot of options.
ROB BRADY: 4♦. Over 4♥, I'll cue 5♣ to highlight the spade problem. Over 5♦, I'll pull to 5♥. Does anyone play transfers over 2♠ here?
Yes, indeed, that is a method that regular partnerships might care to discuss.
JILL MEYERS: 4♦. I’m certainly not done yet. If partner has long non-solid or semi-solid clubs, I would rather be in some number of hearts.
I confess I am with this minority group…
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♥. I think I held this hand at table, and bid 4♥.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 4♥. Reluctantly, listening to the opponents.
For me, our two Australian panelists both come to the key conclusion here, but we are heavily outnumbered…
PAUL MARSTON: 4♥. There could easily be a slam, but I cannot see any safe way of investigating. Better to lock up the game.
SARTAJ HANS: 4♥. A gross underbid. But, the five-level is not safe and there is no sensible path to a cooperative auction.
What partner will make of Liz’s solo effort, I cannot predict…
LIZ McGOWAN: 4NT. Impossible problem!
On this hand from the English National League, East held QJx/Q/Jxxx/AKQxx. Hearts were 4-1, so you can make ten tricks in hearts or NT. Diamonds broke 3-2, so you can also make 5♦ even if the defenders start with three rounds of spades, but a 4-1 trump break would beat that game. Getting to 5♥ or beyond is too high, so quite a few are going minus on this one, I suspect.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♥ |
10 |
4 |
4 |
|
Dbl |
10 |
4 |
5 |
|
4♦ |
9 |
2 |
15 |
|
4♣ |
9 |
1 |
13 |
|
3♦ |
8 |
7 |
32 |
|
5♦ |
7 |
2 |
26 |
|
3♠ |
3 |
0 |
1 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.83
This is a particularly difficult one to mark, as the single most popular choice amongst panelists and competitors is 3♦. However, the crux of the question is really whether a competitive 3♦ is enough, or whether the hand is worth more. The panel vote 13-7 in favour of making some form of game try, hence the marking.
When the choices range from signing off (3♦) to bidding game (5♦), it seems reasonable to conclude that the consensus view is that the hand is worth a game try. It is curious, therefore, to find the two largest groups of competitors at either end of the scale. This is clearly a difficult problem – even though there are two chances to score a 10, still less than 10% of competition entrants do so.
Let’s start with those who simply compete to the three-level…
MARTY BERGEN: 3♦. Conservative, but I want to go plus.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. I bid what I have.
LIZ McGOWAN/P.-O. SUNDELIN: 3♦.
One who is not generally shy about coming forward, Joey offers the experienced matchpoint player’s explanation for choosing the conservative action.
JOEY SILVER: 3♦. I am going for a plus score as we are playing the form of scoring that rewards that philosophy.
SALLY BROCK: 3♦. This gets my shape across. It’s a slight underbid, but I have no reason to think partner has anything.
DAVID BIRD: 3♦. My initial thoughts were to bid higher than this, but the spade losers are worrying. I would need a very lucky dummy to make 5♦.
The rest offered a smorgasbord of more ambitious ways forward. Some simply invited in diamonds…
WENEI WANG: 4♦. Invitation to 5♦.
ROB BRADY: 4♦. It doesn't sound like partner has a great deal, but we don't need that much for game. I’m not sure that we will get there opposite xx/Kxxxx/xxxx/xx but, even then, diamonds could split poorly given the auction. Double is a close second choice, shooting for a possible 3NT, but I'm a bit nervous partner will pass.
…either directly or via a cue-bid.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 4♣. A game try in diamonds.
Others made their try at the three-level.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♥. Assuming I denied three hearts by bidding 1♠, I now think this will show my shape. Dbl would lean more to only 5♦ with extra values.
HANOI RONDON: 3♥. I have a great hand and this should show my extra values and a doubleton heart honour.
PAUL MARSTON: 3♥. Keeping 3NT in the loop. No support redouble, so partner should not expect more in hearts.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♥.
Let's be a bit optimistic. When partner has a club stopper, we probably want to play 3NT. Normally, we have denied three-card heart support, as we did not redouble, so partner will know what we are expecting from him. We hope that those who will double (intended as takeout) have discussed the situation at length with their partners.
There were a few willing to take that route, which also has the advantage that you may still be able to stop in 3♦.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Hopefully, showing a good offensive hand, not penalty. My other option is 3♥, on the understanding that I’ve already denied three hearts by my lack of a support redouble.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. This seems normal. No, it isn't for penalties.
SARTAJ HANS: Dbl. Showing a good hand.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl.
Only a couple thought they already knew enough.
LARRY COHEN: 5♦. This just feels like what I am worth.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5♦. This is the game with most chance, in my opinion.
Partner had Ax/J10xxx/Jxx/xxx, so 5♦ has good chances. Will he accept a game try with that? Maybe, but perhaps only Larry and Miguel will score a game bonus.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Pass |
10 |
14 |
29 |
|
Dbl |
6 |
2 |
7 |
|
4♦ |
6 |
3 |
49 |
|
3♠ |
5 |
1 |
12 |
|
5♦ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.86
A big majority for passing from the panel, and almost a third of competitors agree. However, almost half of competition entrants prefer one of the panel’s minority choices.
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. I have no reason to believe we can make 3♠ or 4♦.
JILL MEYERS: Pass. I’m not sure they are making this, or that we are making 4♦.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. I think 4♦ is probably going down, so let’s try to beat them in 3♥.
LARRY COHEN: Pass. Why should we go minus instead of plus?
P.-O. SUNDELIN: Pass. Both 3♥ and 4♦ may make, but the odds are that both will go one down.
PAUL MARSTON: Pass. No game looks likely. The four-level is too high to compete.
LIZ McGOWAN: Pass. It’s too late to show the diamond support now.
WENEI WANG: Pass.
David mentions another of the alternatives.
DAVID BIRD: Pass. I'm not bidding 3♠ or 4♦. A double is possible but, with nothing at all in hearts and clubs, it may end in tears.
Andrew toys with an alternative before joining the majority…
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. The question is: will 3♥ and 4♦ (or 3♠) both make? Only if the answer is Yes, is it worth bidding. That feels unlikely, although ♠A-x and ♦A-Q-x-x-x-x with partner will make me wrong. If I bid, it’s 3♠, playing for that, but partner may be 1♠/3♥ and I’ve then turned +100 into -300.
ROB BRADY: Pass. This often ends the auction, and we could miss game, but this hand is not quite good enough for me to bid opposite spade shortness. 1-3-5-4 is a common hand pattern for partner and our spades are useless opposite that shape.
A couple mentioned the total tricks element of this decision.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Pass. Difficult. Pass or 4♦ (clearly not forcing). There is probably not much difference at the end of the year. We judge both contracts will not often make (unlikely there are 19 total tricks).
SARTAJ HANS: Pass. They have nine hearts and we have eight or nine diamonds. "Defend at Game All", is good advice.
ALAN MOULD: Pass. If partner has a typical weak no-trump (or short spades and five diamonds), we will make nothing and they usually won't either. I hate ignoring four-card support, but I just cannot see 4♦ making.
A couple were prepared to brave the four-level…
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♦. Right or wrong, I will support my partner. This hand doesn't like to defend a heart contract, I feel.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♦.
JOEY SILVER: 4♦. A slight overbid, but I cannot bring myself to pass with such excellent trump support.
Most of the panel managed to go plus, but only three would have collected the big bucks…
CHRISTIAN MARI: Dbl. This hand is deserving of a little effort.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. We have great values and a good fit for diamonds. Doubling leaves open the possibility of playing in 3NT.
SALLY BROCK: 3♠. I hope my suit is good enough.
West bid 4♦ at the table, which was theoretically right, until his partner raised to game. East had x/AQ/AQxxx/J9xxx, so 5♦ had three obvious losers. Either Double or 3♠ would propel you into the cold 3NT (five diamonds, two hearts and two spades). Defending 3♥ gets you +100.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♦ |
10 |
13 |
38 |
|
2♦ |
7 |
6 |
17 |
|
2♠ |
6 |
1 |
9 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
23 |
|
1NT |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
2♣ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
4♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
5♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.99
Another clear majority vote from the panel, and more than a third of competitors pick up top marks too. However, the second largest group of competition entrants, nearly a quarter of them, choose an option that received no support at all from the panel, looking for partner to reopen with a double and defend. The panel was simply divided by the question of how many diamonds to bid…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♦. They have the hearts, so I show my support for partner’s suit.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 2♦. They have nine or more hearts. It could be necessary to anticipate some violent bidding by N/S.
JOEY SILVER: 2♦. No guarantees that I have finished bidding.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♦. We are curious to see if someone envisages defending 1♠-doubled.
Not one.
LARRY COHEN: 2♦. This doesn't feel no-trumpy.
WENEI WANG: 2♦. This hand is not worth more than a simple raise.
The rest all disagree with that evaluation
PAUL MARSTON: 3♦. This is a good hand for diamonds.
Most are concerned with not letting North in cheaply…
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♦. Let’s take North's 2♥ bid away.
SARTAJ HANS: 3♦. A value bid, hoping to bury or at least impede the hearts.
ALAN MOULD: 3♦. Let them find their hearts at the three-level.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♦. I am hoping to make it tough for them to find their heart fit.
SALLY BROCK: 3♦. I want to keep them from bidding their hearts too cheaply.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♦. There are hearts in this pack, so I want to get the bidding as high as possible.
HANOI RONDON: 3♦. Let's take away as much space as we can in order to shut the hearts out of the auction.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. I am not defending 1♠-doubled. And, they have at least nine hearts, so I am not letting them discover this at the two-level.
ROB BRADY: 3♦. The opponents have at least nine hearts and haven't found their fit yet. This is the perfect time to pre-empt.
P.-O. SUNDELIN/BARNET SHENKIN: 3♦.
David at least mentions the third alternative…
DAVID BIRD: 3♦. This hand is way too good for 2♦, but 2♠ would be an overstatement. Goldilocks' three bears would get this one right.
I thought this hand a bit too good for 3♦, so this was my choice when I was given the problem…
ANDREW ROBSON: 2♠. I assume this shows a good diamond raise. I’ve a good hand if partner has a fifth diamond, and I’d like to freeze out the hearts (although they’ll be splitting badly).
Partner had J/KJxxx/AKxxxx/K, so shutting out the opponents’ hearts was not such a concern after all. The deal belongs to us and 5♦ needs no more than a 2-1 trump break. No doubt Andrew and I will get there after 2♠, but I suspect most of the rest will too once they raise diamonds.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3NT |
10 |
15 |
76 |
|
4♣ |
7 |
5 |
18 |
|
4NT |
4 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.90
All of the panel and the vast majority of competition entrants could see only two possible options on this one. With three-quarters of each of those groups thinking the answer was clear, we can class this as the month’s second late Christmas gift from the problem setter. Let’s start with the minority faction…
MARTY BERGEN: 4♣. A club slam is more than possible.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♣. I don’t see how I can guess not to bid a very possible trump suit - hopefully in a slam.
HANOI RONDON: 4♣. I have quite a strong hand, and partner responded at the three-level. I'm probably going to play a slam.
ROB BRADY: 4♣. No-trumps could be our best game, but we may be able to get out in a natural 4NT later (4♣-4♦-4NT). This hand has too much slam potential to give up with 3NT now. If we find a fit we could make 6♣/7♣. Even 6♦ could be right if partner has a good suit.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 4♣. A bit optimistic, perhaps. Maybe 3NT would be wiser.
The rest of the panel thought so, P.-O.
PAUL MARSTON: 3NT. You can laugh, but I want to lock up my game.
JILL MEYERS: 3NT. This is clear to me.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3NT. For me, this is the only option.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3NT. Restricted choice
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3NT. When 3NT is a possible contract, bid it.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3NT.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3NT. If we belong in hearts, partner will bid them.
A few panelists acknowledge that they have some values to spare.
DAVID BIRD: 3NT. Yes, I am 'a bit good', but 4♣ would be a step into the unknown. Auctions move in one direction only - upwards...
ALAN MOULD: 3NT. Something of an underbid, and maybe I should bid 4NT, but I have lousy suits and no fit.
SALLY BROCK: 3NT. Tricky. But I’ll go for the underbid … again!
LARRY COHEN: 3NT. The spade holding draws me to this underbid.
WENEI WANG: 3NT. To play, not minimum.
You wouldn’t bid 3NT on a minimum opening with a spade stopper?
JOEY SILVER: 3NT. The inflexion point of the auction, protect my spade holding with what I believe is a secure 3NT, or bid on with the hope I will hit a profitable fit. I show my age and conservatism by taking the $.
A couple comment that partner may not have full game-forcing values in this position.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3NT. I have something to spare, but not enough to bid 4NT here. Partner is allowed to have longish diamonds with less than 12 points in my book.
SARTAJ HANS: 3NT. Partner's 3♦, bid in competition, can be very light, so I am giving him a lot of leeway for that action. I want to encourage partner to keep bidding aggressively in such situations.
I won’t tell you partner’s hand, as you’ll be seeing that as a problem sometime in 2026 😊
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Pass |
10 |
9 |
22 |
|
1NT |
9 |
6 |
50 |
|
Dbl |
8 |
5 |
22 |
|
2♣ |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.46
The panel are split three ways here and everyone scores fairly well. Some of the 1NT bidders have misgivings, most of the doublers choose that option as they think 1NT is too risky, and the passers universally think any action is too dangerous. Although the passers are outvoted 11-9 by the bidders, I think they win the debate.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 1NT. Dangerous, but it’s matchpoints.
PAUL MARSTON: 1NT. It could go wrong, but so too could passing.
HANOI RONDON: 1NT. I see no reason not to bid 1NT. I hope these are not famous last words before -800.
SIMON DE WIJS: 1NT. Yes, I don't have a maximum, but overcalling 1NT makes life so easy for partner.
You mean he can go fetch coffee while you go a couple down doubled? 😊
MARTY BERGEN: 1NT. Sure, I'd like a better hand, but I don't believe in "scared bridge."
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 1NT. Double is a reasonable alternative for cautious players.
Let’s see what some of those ‘timid’ ones have to say…
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. This is such a raunchy 15, and partner is a passed hand, so not 1NT.
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. Latterly I’ve taken to doubling with these hand-types. It seems to get us into the auction less dangerously than a 1NT overcall.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. John bids 1NT on these hands, and it always seems to be right, but vulnerable opposite a passed partner at MPs, I just cannot bring myself to do it. Nor can I bring myself to Pass and see 1NT on my left passed back to me, when I know that will score badly for us. It's matchpoints, so the occasional -1100 doesn't matter.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. Bridge has changed. Ask this question 20 years ago, and the vast majority would have passed. Nowadays, we expect a majority to bid. Of course, it's dangerous but, if you don't bid now, you will probably never enter the auction. However, 1NT facing a passed hand is too much for us.
The largest faction on the panel wanted no part of this one…
SARTAJ HANS: Pass. A dangerous vulnerability for a dangerous hand.
DAVID BIRD: Pass. I often overcall 1NT on 15 HCP. Not here, though, with a single stopper in the suit opened, 4-3-3-3 shape, little trick-taking potential and a passed partner.
WENEI WANG: Pass. If my partner wasn’t a passed hand, I would double, but it is too dangerous now.
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. For me, this clear. 1NT and double both deserve to go for a number. This is particularly obvious at these colours.
Watch this space, Andrew.
CHRISTIAN MARI: Pass. I don't like to bid with this type of hand, even at matchpoints.
Larry sums up for the largest faction.
LARRY COHEN: Pass. I don't like -800. Yes, I have 15 HCP but, vulnerable opposite a passed partner, I am not prepared to stick my neck out on this junk.
LIZ McGOWAN: Pass. I have no good call. Sometimes it pays to make a bad bid at matchpoints, but -200 rarely scores well. I am hoping North bids 1NT and partner has a good lead.
That Joey is not willing to get involved is a sign that it is probably wrong to do so.
JOEY SILVER: Pass. At this vulnerability, opposite a passed partner, prudence is called for. My values are too soft for heroics.
Rob finishes the year with an accurate prediction…
ROB BRADY: Pass. This looks like a trap for the competition entrants, many of whom will count their points and bid 1NT! We are vulnerable, partner is a passed hand, and we don't have a source of tricks, so a 1NT overcall will often be a disaster, even if they don't double us. Between Pass and Double, I don't have a strong preference, but I'll lean toward Pass because I don't have four hearts.
Yes, half of competitors were indeed tempted by the 1NT overcall. At the table, Pass would have resulted in -110 or -120 defending 2♠ or 1NT. Either 1NT or double led to -500 in 2♥-doubled opposite Kxx/109xxx/10xx/xx. Even if they forget to double, -200 will not be a great result at matchpoints. Almost half of the panel score a well above-average board. For the competitors, that number is around a quarter.
Two Brits an American and an Australian make the podium this month. Alan Mould leads the way with 76/80. Close behind are David Bird (75/80) along with Rob Brady and Sartaj Hans (both with 74/80). It’s hard to tell whether this will be a high-scoring set for competitors - 76/80 leading the panel points to it being a tough set, and yet the whole panel separated by just 12 marks suggests that the percentage of competition entrants scoring in the 70s will be well up from the 3-5% of October and November.
I finish by wishing all of our readers and our panel members a very Happy New Year from everyone at RealBridge. We thank you for your support throughout the past year, and look forward to seeing you all again when the 2026 competition gets underway. Marc
|
Alan MOULD |
1NT |
2♠ |
4♦ |
Dbl |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
76 |
|
David BIRD |
1NT |
2♥ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
75 |
|
Rob BRADY |
1NT |
3♠ |
4♦ |
4♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
4♣ |
Pass |
74 |
|
Sartaj HANS |
1NT |
2♠ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
74 |
|
Paul MARSTON |
1♠ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
1NT |
73 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
1NT |
2♥ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
73 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
1NT |
3♣ |
4♦ |
3♥ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
3NT |
1NT |
72 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
1NT |
3♥ |
4♦ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♦ |
4♣ |
1NT |
72 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
1NT |
2♥ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
4♣ |
1NT |
71 |
|
Larry COHEN |
1NT |
2♥ |
4♦ |
5♦ |
Pass |
2♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
71 |
|
Liz McGOWAN |
1NT |
3♥ |
4NT |
3♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
71 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
1♠ |
3♣ |
4♦ |
4♦ |
Pass |
2♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
71 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
1♠ |
3♥ |
4♦ |
Dbl |
Pass |
2♠ |
4♣ |
Pass |
70 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
1♠ |
3♣ |
4♦ |
3♥ |
Pass |
2♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
70 |
|
Sally BROCK |
Dbl |
3♥ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
3♠ |
3♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
67 |
|
Christian MARI |
Pass |
3♠ |
4♦ |
4♣ |
Dbl |
2♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
67 |
|
Joey SILVER |
Dbl |
4♣ |
4♦ |
3♦ |
4♦ |
2♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
67 |
|
P.-O. SUNDELIN |
Pass |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♦ |
Pass |
3♦ |
4♣ |
1NT |
67 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
Pass |
3♣ |
4♦ |
5♦ |
Pass |
2♦ |
3NT |
1NT |
67 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
1♠ |
3♣ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
4♦ |
3♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOP SCORE |
1NT |
3♥ |
4♦ |
3♥/Dbl |
Pass |
3♦ |
3NT |
Pass |
|
|
HAND 1: |
1NT 10 |
1♠ 8 |
Pass 7 |
Dbl 6 |
|
|
|
HAND 2: |
3♥ 10 |
2♠/4♣ 9 |
3♠ 8 |
2♥/3♣ 7 |
4♥ 5 |
5♣ 3 |
|
HAND 3: |
4♦ 10 |
4♥ 6 |
Pass/4NT/5♥ 3 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 4: |
3♥/Dbl 10 |
4♣/4♦ 9 |
3♦ 8 |
5♦ 7 |
3♠ 3 |
|
|
HAND 5: |
Pass 10 |
Dbl/4♦ 6 |
3♠ 5 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 6: |
3♦ 10 |
2♦ 7 |
2♠ 6 |
Pass 2 |
|
|
|
HAND 7: |
3NT 10 |
4♣ 7 |
4NT 4 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 8: |
Pass 10 |
1NT 9 |
Dbl 8 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 1: |
7.23 |
|
HAND 2: |
7.07 |
|
HAND 3: |
6.18 |
|
HAND 4: |
7.83 |
|
HAND 5: |
6.86 |
|
HAND 6: |
5.99 |
|
HAND 7: |
8.90 |
|
HAND 8: |
8.46 |
