Contest conducted by Marc Smith
Welcome to the second set of the 2025 annual competition. We start with congratulations to two panel members, Sjoert Brink (right) and Michal Klukowski, who were members of the winning team at the European Transnational Winter Games that took place in Prague this month. Not that their path to victory was entirely smooth. In the quarter-final, they trailed by 14 IMPs going into the final stanza, and they were still 2 IMPs behind with two boards to play. They advanced with a 1-IMP win. In the final, they were down by 50 IMPs at the midway point and 28 IMPs with one set remaining, before coming back to defeat a strong Italian team by 15 IMPs. Just another routine win for the magnificent Swiss squad!
This month’s guest panelists were co-winners of the December competition. Nigel Kearney is a 54-year old software developer from Wellington, New Zealand. He was a member of the silver medal winning Kiwi team at the 1995 Junior World Championships in Bali, and he has also represented his country at open level. He is currently a national selector and coach. His preferred system is 2/1 with a weak notrump. Muhammad Humayun Khan from Pakistan began playing bridge in 1971. He joined the ACBL in 1991, and has long been an avid bridge enthusiast with a passion for strategy and competition. He says, “When I am not working, you can find me at the bridge table or playing online, always looking for both improvement and fun.”
We are delighted to welcome a true legend of French bridge as the latest addition to our panel. Christian Mari was a member of the great French team that won the World Team Olympiad in 1980 and 1996, and the Bermuda Bowl in 1997. That team also won seven European Championship medals, including gold in 1974. In addition, Christian finished second in the 1994 Generali World Open Individual and won the European Senior Teams in 2002.
A couple of this month’s hands have been sent to me: Hand 6 by regular competition entrant Brian Ransley and Hand 7 by panelist Alan Mould. Thanks to them. If you have a hand that you think would produce an interesting panel discussion, please send me details.
The panel produce a majority choice on six hands in this set, three of them emphatically. The two deals on which they are split produce very close votes, so everyone scores fairly well on those. Just over half of panel members scored in the 70s, and my suspicion is that this will be a high-scoring set, with a significantly higher percentage of competitors scoring in the 70s than the 4% who hit that mark in January. Indeed, it would not surprise me to find that you need a perfect 80/80 to win the February competition.
The most popular action chosen by the competition entrants scores ‘10’ on only three of the eight hands, and voting with the largest group of competitors this month scores 57/80 (down from 59/80 in January). The average score this month is 54.82 (up from 53.82 on Set 25-01). Let’s find out what our expert panel has to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♦ |
10 |
9 |
14 |
|
4♥ |
9 |
4 |
3 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
2 |
14 |
|
5♣ |
7 |
7 |
32 |
|
3♥ |
7 |
1 |
10 |
|
3NT |
3 |
0 |
15 |
|
4NT |
3 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
8 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.24
We begin with a divided panel, but 16 of 23 advance with some form of slam investigation. That is the reasoning behind the downgrade in the marking for those who simply jump to game, which was the choice of a third of competition entrants. However, the voting is close enough that most people score fairly well. A number of the panel’s largest faction make a similar point…
HANOI RONDON: 3♦. I'll give partner maximum space to tell me more about his hand.
LARRY COHEN: 3♦. So many possibilities, so I am starting with the least space-consuming probe.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 3♦. This would be much easier playing Polish Club as I could have jumped to 3♣ on the previous round to show my extra strength. Anything from 3NT to 6♣ could be the right spot here. Even 4♠ could be right if partner has Q-x or K-x. I’ll leave maximum room for partner to tell me more, and hopefully we can figure it out between us.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♦. I show my fragment first, and will bid 5♣ later.
Some have high aspirations.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♦. This shows the singleton heart and leaves all options open. We’re hoping not to hear 3♠, in which case we can surmise partner has a singleton spade, putting 6♣ firmly in the frame.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. I am definitely going to be bidding 5♣, but I'm thinking if I bid 3♦ and pull 3NT, partner will get the message I am looking for slam. He will look at K-x or a stiff spade as a bonus. Do I need much more than x/xxxx/Axx/Kxxxx?
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♦. If my partner bids 3♥ or 3NT, I’ll stop in 5♣. If he bid 3♠ or 4m, I will try six.
ALAN MOULD: 3♦. We will doubtless end in 5♣, but we could have a slam opposite something like x/xxx/QJxxx/AKxx. There seems no harm in this and it might even attract a diamond lead from a suspicious North.
Only David is willing to stop below game.
DAVID BIRD: 3♦. Even if this elicits no helpful information, I can still guess between 4♣ and 5♣ on the next round.
Muhammad also starts at the three-level, but with the suit in which he holds first-round control, although his ambitions also seem limited.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 3♥. Biding 3♥ will encourage partner to cue-bid 4♦ with the ace, enabling us to reach 5♣.
Despite warnings about splintering with a singleton ace, some are undeterred on this hand.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♥. There could easily be a slam if partner has nothing wasted in hearts.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 4♥. The key to making slam is a singleton spade in partner’s hand, in which case we will need very little. Hopefully 4♥ will get us some information.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♥. Having no Gazilli makes things much more difficult. I will bid 4♥ now and leave the rest to partner. With a perfecto he will know to bid slam now. And yes, I realize we might sometimes go down in game.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♥. I have no interest in 3NT, but I will force to game in clubs. As slam is possible even opposite the right 7-count (x/xxx/Axxx/Kxxxx), I am willing to try for 6♣ by splintering.
A fourth alternative suggested by the panel is a simple club raise…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♣. Forcing (we never play in 4m with a clear fit in a non-competitive auction, except for certain situations where we have investigated 3NT first, which is not the case here). Almost always, partner will hold 5♣ and a spade shortness in this auction, so we may easily be able to make 6♣. Let's start the cue-bidding process.
SALLY BROCK: 4♣. It seems straightforward enough, but I am not familiar with the methods.
A small portion of the panel decided that game was enough.
BARNET SHENKIN: 5♣. This should have a play.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 5♣. I expect to make between ten and twelve tricks.
Although the second-largest group of competition entrants opted for 3NT, on the panel, only Marty and Wenfei even mentioned no-trumps as an alternative game.
WENFEI WANG: 5♣. I think 5♣ will be better than 3NT.
Nigel highlights a danger of jumping to 4♥.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 5♣. Slam is not impossible if partner has nothing in hearts, but we will need a very suitable hand opposite. The danger of splintering in hearts is that he will not stop with a hand like xx/xxx/Qxx/AKxxx. It’s easy to see why he would picture us with something like AKQxx/x/Ax/QJxxx.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 5♣.
JESSICA LARSSON: 5♣.
JOEY SILVER: 5♣. I need too many specific cards from partner to have a play for slam, so I will keep it simple by making a game try.
At the table, partner had x/Kxx/QJ10xx/K109x, so 5♣ was clearly the best spot, off just the minor-suit aces. Probably only Pass, 3NT and 4NT seem to lead to a less-appealing spot, so we kick off the set with a comfortable +600 for all of the panel and most competition entrants.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
6♦ |
10 |
13 |
34 |
|
7♠ |
8 |
6 |
16 |
|
5NT |
7 |
2 |
4 |
|
6♠ |
4 |
2 |
39 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
6♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.52
Just a majority vote from the panel, who are essentially split into two main camps. The competitors were also split, with a third collecting maximum marks, but the largest group score poorly for taking an ultra-conservative view of the hand that attracted only minimal support from the panel. Let’s start with the explorers…
ALAN MOULD: 6♦. I feel like just bidding 7♠, but I suppose I ought to be sensible.
HANOI RONDON: 6♦. It's not just a choice between being scared and bidding six or being bold and bidding seven. We can also try the 'scientific' way.
WENFEI WANG: 6♦. Grand slam try.
For many, the intention is clear…
PAUL MARSTON: 6♦. If partner comes back with 6♥, I will bid the grand.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 6♦. This should set spades, otherwise I would have bid 5NT. If partner can bid 6♥ over 6♦, I will bid 7♠.
SIMON DE WIJS: 6♦. Pinpointing the void and hoping to get a 6♥ bid from partner.
JILL MEYERS: 6♦. If partner has the ♥K, I want to take my shot at 7♠. I am going to bid 6♦ to see if I get a 6♥ peep out of her.
DAVID BIRD: 6♦. This grand-slam try should persuade East to cue-bid the ♥K, even though he is missing all the good cards in my hand. With the ♣K as well, he may consider bidding the grand himself.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE/JESSICA LARSSON: 6♦.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 6♦. I would love to bid 5NT to hear 6♣, then I can bid 6♦ to see if we should play in hearts. But, 5NT pick a slam focuses on which strain to play at the six-level and that is not the issue here. If partner can bid 6♥ over 6♦, I will raise to 7♠.
Andrew has an even deeper plan.
ANDREW ROBSON: 6♦. This is a grand slam try with first round diamond control. If partner bids 6♥, I’ll bid 7♦ to get to 7♥ if he’s QJxxx/KTxx/xx/xx (he’ll have more than that eg. ♦A, irrelevantly).
Barnet is the only one willing to stop at the six-level even if partner does cue-bid hearts.
BARNET SHENKIN: 6♦. 5NT may be confusing, but is perhaps a way to find out about both missing kings if partner is on the same wavelength. If I bid 6♦ and get 6♥, now 6♠ suggests I need something more. Any missing king is likely wrong. It is just possible that only the ♥K is needed, but that seems like a stretch.
The second-largest faction on the panel decide that they already know where they are going.
SALLY BROCK: 7♠. Who knows? I’m less frightened of being wrong as I get older!
Larry earns the first ‘Comment of the Month’ awarded this year.
LARRY COHEN: 7♠. Why would I play around with 6♦? To reach 8♠? 7NT is not on my radar.
MARTY BERGEN: 7♠. We might be on a finesse, but since the grand is great opposite virtually nothing, I can't do less than this.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 7♠.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 7♠. If partner has no wasted points in diamonds and K-K in the rounds, I'll take a million tricks in 7♠. Even if he is missing the ♣K, we might be making seven if he has something like Qxxxxx/Kx/xxx/xx. I'll take the bull by the horns at matchpoints. At IMPs, I'd investigate with 6♦, especially if I would like to play with my teammates again.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 7♠. I could bid 6♦ first, but I have all the first-round controls and ♠A-K, so partner may be worried about bidding a second-round control at the six-level. So, even if he bids 6♠ over 6♦, I would still raise, so I might as well just bid 7♠ directly. Best to avoid the problem presented by a slow 6♠!
Our French contingent are united in their choice, so I guess 5NT is defined differently in The Republic than it is elsewhere.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 5NT. This should initiate cue-bidding.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 5NT. In our dreams, we hear 6♣, then bid 6♦ and partner bids 6♥. I discussed with Joanna whether 5NT can be understood as keycard, but we agreed that not in this auction. Bidding 6♣ here would not be forcing (strong hand with clubs and only mild support for spades), therefore 5NT is the only bid available with the kind of hand we have.
Only a couple were not tempted by a potential grand slam bonus.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 6♠. We need partner to hold the ♥K or the ♣K, which seems likely for his free bid.
JOEY SILVER: 6♠. I am not going to break my head by trying for a grand slam in a crowded auction (how can I find out about controls in both rounded suits at this level?) We are playing pairs, so reaching any making slam rates to give us a decent score.
The meaning of 5NT here is something regular partnership might think worthy of discussion. Should it be RKCB? Does it initiate cue-bidding (as it seems to in France)? Or, is it still a ‘pick-a-slam’ tool in this type of auction, where it is highly likely that you will want to agree spades? The French method enables us to find both key kings, although might we then stop out of a good grand when one of them is missing? Might hearts be better if partner is 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-1-3, or can he be 5-5-1-2? Are the odds good enough to just punt the grand, as some panelists suggest?
At the table, partner had something not unlike the hand Sophia suggested: QJxxxx/Kx/xx/xxx, so 13 tricks were easy.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2♥ |
10 |
13 |
51 |
|
3♥ |
8 |
8 |
28 |
|
1NT |
5 |
1 |
12 |
|
2♠ |
4 |
1 |
7 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
2NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.22
An excellent hand for competitors, with half scoring a maximum and the second-largest group voting with the panel’s other major choice. The panel essentially boiled this down to two options: do we force to game despite only 8 HCP, or do we invite in our long suit and ignore our fit for partner’s major?
Competitors who bothered to read the system published on the web site would have noted that it says jump-shift responses are strong and game-forcing. Apologies to those few who did so, and thus this question was a bit unfair, as everyone else has just assumed that 3♥ is invitational. In view of this apparently widely-held view, we are changing the system henceforth so that jump shifts to the two-level are weak (excuse me while I fetch a bucket), and to the three-level are natural and invitational.
ALAN MOULD: 2♥. A wild overbid, but I ain't bidding 1NT or 3♥ (invitational) with three-card spade support, nor 2♠/3♠ with seven hearts.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2♥. This is too volatile a hand not to bid game, so I may as well try to play in the right suit.
JILL MEYERS: 2♥. This is tough. Vulnerable at IMPs, I am willing to take my chances and force to game with 2♥. I am not saying we will make game, but nothing feels particularly good on this hand, so let’s at least maximize our chances of playing in the right major.
SALLY BROCK: 2♥. I know, but I can’t leave them unbid.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2♥. I am close to bidding 3♥, but this hand is just too good.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 2♥. Hoping partner has a heart filler, long spades and/or minor-suit aces. I want to be able to investigate both 4♥ and 4♠, and maybe even slam if partner is really strong.
DAVID BIRD: 2♥. I am willing to make this overstatement, to convey my splendid heart suit. The more accurate response (in terms of strength) is an invitational 3♥, but that will not discover whether we are better off in spades.
BARNET SHENKIN/CHRISTIAN MARI/JESSICA LARSSON: 2♥.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 2♥. My heart suit is not robust enough to insist on it as a trump suit by bidding 3♥.
MARTY BERGEN: 2♥. I'll overbid seeking a vulnerable game. I am hoping to play in hearts rather than spades.
JOEY SILVER: 2♥. My spade support is just too good to unilaterally bid 4♥, so I will risk simply bidding a forcing to game 2♥. (2-over-1 is forcing to game in the Mother Country isn't it? Although, frankly, I really don't care with this hand!)
The other major faction on the panel settled for an invite in their long suit.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 3♥. Invitational.
WENFEI WANG: 3♥. Assuming that 3♥ is natural and invitational, that seems to be the best description.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♥. If we play 3♥ as invitational with hearts, that would be my choice. If I don’t have that option available, I supposed I’d start with 2♥ and hope for the best.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♥. A tough one. We play 3♥ as natural and invitational. Of course, sometimes, you make 4♠ and not 4♥, but the contrary is true also. So how much is "sometimes"?
PAUL MARSTON: 3♥. I am not happy about ignoring this spade holding, but neither can I say nothing about this beautiful suit.
LARRY COHEN: 3♥. Assuming this is invitational -- which is what this hand is all about. It won't play well in spades opposite short hearts.
HANOI RONDON: 3♥. I hope to hear once more from partner to enable us to get to the best game but, if he passes, this might be out best spot.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♥. Ideally, you would want to show the spade fit and heart length but, with no obvious way to do that, I will show my hearts with an invitational bid.
There were just a couple of outliers. Nigel risked what he clearly considers a semi-forcing 1NT response, so I guess an immediate jump to 3♥ is not natural and invitational in New Zealand.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 1NT. Very tough decision. I am going to treat this as invitational in hearts, i.e. start with 1NT then rebid 3♥, taking the slight risk that 1NT ends the auction. I don't like suppressing support for partner, but it's likely my hearts will not be useable in a spade contract. Obviously, if partner rebids 2♠ I can reconsider.
Whilst P-O was the only one to support spades.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 2♠.
Partner had AK98xx/---/K108x/Axx. Those who start with a game-forcing 2♥ will have no problem reaching the excellent 4♠. Partner will also bid game opposite P-O’s gentle spade raise. Will partner continue over a natural and invitational jump to 3♥? Perhaps I’ll save that one for the panel later in the year.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♥ |
10 |
9 |
22 |
|
2♠ |
10 |
8 |
11 |
|
3♥ |
8 |
6 |
35 |
|
2♥ |
3 |
0 |
22 |
|
2NT |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
1NT |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.88
Close to a three-way tie on the panel and, with neither side emerging from the debate as a clear winner, the two most popular choices both score 10. Another good hand for competition entrants, with more than two-thirds scoring at least 8/10. Let’s start with those panelists supporting the competitors’ most popular choice.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♥. Showing a better hand than 2♥.
SALLY BROCK: 3♥. I don’t want to bid NTs with a singleton outside. Maybe I should settle for 2♥ playing pairs, but it seems a bit of an underbid to me.
WENFEI WANG: 3♥. Invitational.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 3♥. Middle of the road.
ALAN MOULD: 3♥. I won't hang partner.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♥. I am almost worth 4♥, but we want partner to double here with x/Jxx/etc.
The rest of the panel thinks this is simply not enough. One faction just bids game in their long suit.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♥. This should have decent play.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♥. Yes, partner can be weaker in fourth seat, but I don’t think 3♥ does my hand justice.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 4♥. I don’t need partner to hold more than x/AKxx/xxxx/xxxx, and he is very likely to have more than that. 4♥ looks like the optimum contract.
HANOI RONDON: 4♥. I'll have to wash my hands very well after a double jump in such a suit, but I'm not willing to stop short of game here.
Sophia sums up the problem philosophically.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 4♥. Opposite a bunch of average 12-counts, I would want to be in game: something like x/AKxx/Axxx/Jxxx or x/AKxx/xxxx/Kxxx. Sometimes I'll win, sometimes I'll lose. I wouldn't want to stick my head in the sand and bid only 3♥, as partner will pass far too often when game is good.
Joey offers his assessment of choosing to defend.
JOEY SILVER: 4♥. Passing for penalties at this vulnerability is, in my opinion, ridiculous, so I'll make the bid that is in front of my face. (Slam tries be damned at this form of scoring.)
JESSICA LARSSON/BARNET SHENKIN: 4♥.
Larry mentions the third possibility, and points out a potential pitfall associated with it…
LARRY COHEN: 4♥. Inelegant looking, but I am too strong for 3♥ and I don't want to bid 2♠ and later have partner correct from hearts, thinking I have two places to play.
So, what say those who chose to start with a cue-bid?
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♠. When we bid a forcing 3♥ on the next round, at least we will show both points and some spade length (as we did not bid over 1♠). The double from partner does not guarantee heart length.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 2♠. I plan to follow 3m from partner with a forcing 3♥.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 2♠. I'm a bit too good to just invite in hearts, even opposite a balancing double. Most likely we are headed for 4♥, but I'll give partner some space in case they have a non-classical double.
Some wanted to keep open the option of an alternative game…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2♠. I guess we will get to 4♥, although 3NT is still possible. This is an easy start. The hand is too good to bid only 3♥.
DAVID BIRD: 2♠. This may allow me to bid a forcing 3♥ on the next round. I could then continue with 3NT over partner's 3♠ waiting bid.
MARTY BERGEN: 2♠. Another overbid, hoping that all my black-suit honours are working. If partner has a good hand with good diamonds, such as x/Axx/KQJx/KJxxx, it could be crucial to play in 3NT rather than 4♥.
Earning ‘Optimist of the Month’ honours, a couple are concerned that their hand is too good to just settle for game…
JILL MEYERS: 2♠. I’ll start with a cue-bid and then I will bid hearts. This hand is too good to jump to 4♥.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♠. I start with a 2♠ cue-bid, then bid 4♥ on the next round.
As Muhammad pointed out, as little as x/AKxx/xxxx/xxxx gives you play for 4♥, so is 3♥ really enough on this hand? At the table I watched, West bid 3♥ and East passed with x/AKxx/Jxxx/Kxxx. Even though there was a trump loser, 4♥ was still an easy make.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♥ |
10 |
16 |
51 |
|
Pass |
6 |
4 |
21 |
|
Dbl |
5 |
3 |
28 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.76
With only three options from which to choose, many make short work of this one, and it is the first of three deals in this set that produce a big majority vote from the panel. Holding exactly what we have shown with our previous bid, I thought this might be the view of more…
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. With my minimum, I have nothing to say.
For a few panelists and half of competitors, this is a lead problem, either against 3NT…
ZIA MAHMOOD: Pass. Let’s pass and lead the ♠A if they stick it.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: Pass. Strange hand. The only thing that makes sense is for partner to have a stiff club honor (the queen?). I pass and lead a heart.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: Pass. Although not explicitly stated, I'm going to assume partner’s 3♥ shows a minimum (as we are forced to the three-level after 2NT). Now I'm hoping to guess the right opening lead.
…or against 3NT-doubled.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. Who knows? I can defend or partner can pull. If it goes all pass, I will lead the ♠A.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. My partner opened the bidding, so I don't think they are making this game.
JESSICA LARSSON: Dbl.
The rest see the hand completely differently. A few raise the question of what partner’s 3♥ means…
JOEY SILVER: 4♥. I don't know the difference between partner passing and bidding 3♥. However, I am not about to let the villains play what might be a cold 3NT. Any outstanding heart honours rate to be onside, so we might have good play for game anyway.
ALAN MOULD: 4♥. You haven't given us the vital information as to whether 3♥ was partner's weakest action or not (ie. are we forced to 3♥?) (I was hoping the panel would tell us. MS) I will bid 4♥ as a two-way shot on the premise that pard is short in clubs and the heart finesse is working.
SALLY BROCK: 4♥. Undisciplined, I’m afraid, but it doesn’t sound as if partner has much in clubs. What was 3♥? I’ve been having that conversation a lot recently – which is the weaker action, pass or 3♥?
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♥. First of all, what does 3♥ mean? In our methods, it shows minimum opening values (as 2NT means we are committed to play at the three-level at least). We can double, but it's probably a waste of time as the opponents will retreat to 4♣ most of the time. If a heart finesse has to be taken, we know it's good, so let's take our chance in game, with no wasted values opposite the marked club shortness in partner's hand. We picture something like KJxx/QJxxx/KJx/x opposite.
Those who express a view agree that partner’s 3♥ is the weakest action he could take.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♥. My partner probably has a weak hand with shortness in clubs. The heart finesse is ok, so 4♥ it is.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 4♥. It's always risky to trust the opponents, but it sounds like partner has a minimum opening with a singleton club and the heart finesse is working for us. I hope partner has something like KQx/QJxxx/K10xx/x. If I double, I will have to guess the right lead or they will rattle off at least 7-8 tricks.
A couple of panelists mention the potential danger of finding the wrong lead if you choose to defend.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♥. Partner will be minimum with short clubs. It’s no surprise that we might do better defending, but I’m not risking a wrong lead and see them taking nine tricks. My alternative is to double, hoping to push them to 4♣ and then defend that.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 4♥. All the leads are dangerous against 3NT, so I bet on ten easy tricks in 4♥ with short clubs in the East hand.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♥. I could double, but partner seems marked a singleton club, in which case any minimum should give us good play for 4♥. Leading v 3NT-doubled, I’d guess to open a diamond, but getting off to the lead wrong could be very painful.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♥. This seems indicated with no wasted values in clubs.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 4♥. Partner appears to be short in clubs, so game is in sight.
JILL MEYERS: 4♥. Yikes! If I double, they will run, so I am not doubling and not passing, so 4♥ is my bid. If they really have a heart stopper, my ace is well placed. Partner didn't make a game try but, assuming she has a stiff club, I still like my chances in 4♥.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 4♥.
DAVID BIRD: 4♥. If the opponents were not in the auction, you would be happy to stop in 3♥. Now we are dealing with a 30-HCP pack, so surely the heart game will be worthwhile.
WENFEI WANG: 4♥. This is a good two-way shot. Maybe we can make 4♥. If not, it may turn out to be a good save against their making 3NT.
Larry offers an accurate summation of the problem.
LARRY COHEN: 4♥. Presumably, 3♥ was partner's weakest action, so this looks like a violation of bidding the same values twice. But, with three small clubs and likely all working cards, this has three ways to win (they were making, we are making, or both make).
When this deal occurred in the Spingold, North at the other table passed and so E/W played peacefully in 3♥, but Sjoert Brink’s raise to 3♣ created the problem posed. At the table, West bid 4♥. As some suspected, East had a minimum opening: KJ9x/Qxxxx/KJx/Q. However, the ♠Q was singleton and, as expected, South had ♥K-J-x, so that was E/W +790 and 12 IMPs. Leading a low heart gives declarer an eighth trick in 3NT and anything else holds him to seven, but that would still be small recompense. If you double, they might run to 4♣ (which is one down), and you would again be faced with the same bid/defend decision.
Well judged by most panelists and half of competition entrants.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♥ |
10 |
15 |
35 |
|
4♥ |
7 |
4 |
14 |
|
2♥ |
6 |
4 |
30 |
|
2♦ |
4 |
0 |
13 |
|
Dbl |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
2♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.88
For the panel, this simply came down to deciding how many hearts to bid. Let’s hear from them with increasing degrees of enthusiasm.
HANOI RONDON: 2♥. Partner passed, so he either has no fit, no strength, or both.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 2♥. I can’t pass and allow them to make 1♠.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 2♥. We could miss a game if partner is trapping with a decent hand, but cannot find a bid over 2♥. However, I think a jump to 3♥ is too much and will cause partner to raise too often when it doesn't make.
JESSICA LARSSON: 2♥.
Going up…
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 3♥. Again, middle of the road.
JILL MEYERS: 3♥. I don’t have quite enough to jump to 4♥ on my own.
SALLY BROCK: 3♥. Conservative because it is matchpoints. It must be quite a good hand to bid like this vulnerable v not.
Some addressed the possibility that partner has passed with a penalty double of spades…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. I am not re-opening with a double on this hand.
WENFEI WANG: 3♥. I don’t like defending with this hand.
ALAN MOULD: 3♥. I am not doubling 1♠ on this, and 2♦ sure ain't this hand either. For me, the only alternative is 2♥.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 3♥. It is possible that partner has a trap hand with spades, although I would not want to defend with this hand. For game to be good, I will need the ♦K and the ♥J (or a heart split with some fit from partner). 3♥ is not a weak bid, so I'm guessing he would accept the invitation with the right hand.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♥. It sounds like partner has spades and is trapping. I have no interest in defending 1♠-doubled, but partner's hand might be weak or terrible for offense. 3♥ is a strong bid, and although we might miss a cold game, at matchpoints I will risk that. FYI: Opposite a passed hand, I definitely would have opened 4♥.
PAUL MARSTON/CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♥.
Per-Olof highlights two reasons for jumping to the three-level.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 3♥. This might discourage North from bidding again or, perhaps, encourage partner to raise with something like Axxx/J/10xx/xxxxx.
DAVID BIRD: 3♥. With these hearts, bidding diamonds would be senseless, so it's between 3♥ and 4♥. We are still in the lap of the gods, because partner will value the ♦K and ♣K equally. He may also have values in spades, with not much outside.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♥. Partner might pass with 4♥ making, and then I blame matchpoints for this bid. 2♥ cannot be right as it may be important to take away their bidding space.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♥. I am between 3♥ and 4♥. Either the player on my left bid 1♠ with a monster, or my partner has the spades and 0-2 hearts. Either way, 3♥ is ok.
LARRY COHEN: 3♥. Straight to the point. I want partner to raise with something prime. I don't want to go lower and make it easier on the opponents.
There were just a few who went the whole hog…
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♥. The practical choice.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♥. This looks right. 3♥ is not enough.
JOEY SILVER: 4♥. I'll take a chance. Columbus did, and look what happened.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♥. We hate this kind of situation. Why not open 4♥? It seems obvious in third seat. So, now let's not waste our energy guessing whether 3♥ here would be enough.
At the table, however many hearts you bid, North would bid that many spades. Partner had Jxxx/Jx/Kxx/Jxxx. You can make nine tricks in hearts, but the opponents can make ten in spades if they get the clubs right. Passing out 1♠ gives you the best chance of getting out for -140, and most of the matchpoints, but I was apparently the only person who even considered that an option (deemed insane by The Abbot when we discussed the hand). If you bid 2♥, North’s 2♠ comes back to you and you get a second chance to defend below game. Neither 4♥ now nor a 4♥ opening works, as North bids 4♠ and he would surely get the clubs right after you have shown such heart length.
Jumping to 3♥ is not disastrous, you might think. However, our correspondent reports that when his West jumped to 3♥, “East’s decision to double North’s 3♠ was not a resounding success!” Should East perhaps bid 1NT on the first round? Might North then be deterred from rebidding his spades at a high level? Perhaps.
Almost half of competitors match the panel’s majority verdict and collect maximum marks.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
12 |
27 |
|
Pass |
7 |
5 |
17 |
|
4♥ |
7 |
4 |
6 |
|
3♥ |
5 |
2 |
48 |
|
2NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.71
Only just a majority vote, but still a clear favourite from the panel. More than a quarter of competitors collect top marks, but the largest faction opt for the panel’s least-popular choice. The majority all have a similar plan…
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. 3♥ would be forcing to game, so I want to double and then bid a non-forcing 3♥.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. Even Sophie (our cat) rates Double and then bidding a non-forcing 3♥ as clear-cut.
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. I’ll then continue with 3♥. Isn't this what that sequence shows?
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: Dbl. I will pull partner’s 3m to 3♥, which I'm guessing should be non-forcing, as a direct 3♥ would be forcing.
It must be nice to play against opponents willing to allow you two or three bids to describe your hand 😊
CHRISTIAN MARI/P.-O. SUNDELIN/JESSICA LARSSON: Dbl.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. I start with a negative double and then bid hearts on the next round.
After the auction has continued Dbl-(4♠)-5♣/5♦-(Pass)-?
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. I can’t really force this to game via 3♥. Double and then 3♥ will be best when partner has 3-4 spades and only one heart.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. 3♥ would be game forcing in our methods. Pass is not in the picture, so double (and bid hearts next turn) is our only option.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. And then hearts forever. I am afraid that a direct 3♥ will get us too high.
Last word from the majority goes to the man who knows the hand.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. The intention is to then bid a non-forcing 3♥ on the next round. This is what I did when I held the hand at the table, and it worked horribly for me, so I will try it on paper and see if I do better. I’ll be interested to hear what the panel think.
If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again! Sticking to your convictions certainly produced a better outcome this time around, Alan.
How about a more passive approach?
HUMAYUN KHAN: Pass. Pass seems best for now. If partner can re-open with a double, I can then bid a non-forcing 3♥.
SALLY BROCK: Pass. I think bidding 3♥ can only get me into trouble.
SIMON DE WIJS: Pass. I might regret it, but Qx of spades tells me to go slow here.
Migry hits the nail squarely on the head.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: Pass. I don’t double, as I do not want partner to get excited in the minors.
NIGEL KEARNEY: Pass. I nearly have enough to double and follow up with 3♥, but we have too many of the wrong cards, despite the seven-card suit. It would be unlucky to miss a game if partner cannot act over 2♠.
The rest choose to bid their long suit immediately, and there was quality if not quantity supporting the competitors’ most popular choice.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. This is a non-problem.
JOEY SILVER: 3♥. Bidding a forcing 3♥ with this 8-count is risky, but passing with this seven-card heart suit is riskier.
This was my choice when first presented with the problem.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♥. My best guess.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♥. Seven-card suits are rare and must not be ignored. I'm not passing nor doubling, and 4♥ should be weaker than 3♥ followed by 4♥. The 4♥ bid may also cause North to misjudge whether or not to bid 4♠.
HANOI RONDON: 4♥. 3♥ here would show a stronger hand. Double doesn't work if partner has the minors, and passing is for cowards.
Barnet highlights the problem with the majority choice.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♥. I could try double and then 3♥, but it seems quite possible that I will not get the chance to complete my description of the hand. I don’t like 3♥.
Partner had A/K/KQ109xxx/K9xx and I am told that 4♥ was making, although 4♠ was a cheap save. As Alan revealed, at the table West (he) duly started with a double planning to bid hearts next time. However, when North raised spades, partner not unreasonably judged that, with values opposite, bidding on was right. Suffice it say that 5♦-doubled did not produce a plus score.
What about the alternatives? Maybe, passing would discourage East from further action. Facing a game-forcing 3♥, I suspect that East would be more worried about missing slam than going down at the five-level. Only a jump to 4♥ seems likely produce a plus score, either +620 if allowed to play there or, more likely, with partner warned, defending North’s spade sacrifice.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2♠ |
10 |
16 |
25 |
|
2♦ |
7 |
5 |
3 |
|
3♥ |
6 |
2 |
16 |
|
2♥ |
4 |
0 |
45 |
|
4♥ |
2 |
0 |
6 |
|
2NT |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.61
We finish with our third big majority vote from panelists. However, this was a tough hand for competitors, with close to half choosing a bid that received no support at all from the panel.
ALAN MOULD: 2♠. This seems normal to me.
MARTY BERGEN: 2♠. I love this very, very, very upgradable hand.
JILL MEYERS: 2♠. And very proud of this hand I am too.
PAUL MARSTON: 2♠. Describing my shape and strength.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2♠. This shows a good hand.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♠. Natural and a good hand.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2♠. Partner could easily have four spades chez moi. This must logically be forcing (in principle).
SIMON DE WIJS: 2♠. Natural and invitational. Partner can still have four spades.
P.-O. SUNDELIN/MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 2♠.
LARRY COHEN: 2♠. I know my students would ask me if this is a reverse.
Hanoi highlights a potential downside of 2♠ – what to do if partner just gives simple preference to hearts…
HANOI RONDON: 2♠. There is a chance that partner holds four spades. If he supports hearts at the three-level, I'll have a hard time passing.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 2♠. Good shape and honours in long suits makes this enough to invite game. 2♠ is the best way to start doing that. Partner might have four spades and, even if not, 2♠ followed by 3♥ will allow partner to assess how well his cards are working.
SALLY BROCK: 2♠. It’s a pretty good hand. I really just need something like ♠K-x-x-x in partner’s hand for game to be playable.
A couple of panelists mentioned the alternatives.
DAVID BIRD: 2♠. This shows the same values as 3♥, but describes my shape better. It seems to me that a 2♦ cue-bid should be game-forcing (and is therefore too much).
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♠.
No need to speed up - the taxi we ordered has not arrived yet. Most of the times, we show a 6-4 distribution (with only 5-4, a 2♦ cue-bid would be preferred). Joanna and myself have been extremely surprised that we both agreed easily on the eight situations in this set of hands. So, we are anxious to see our score: is it time for retirement?
It is always amusing to hear multiple panelists making comments such as ‘What else’ or ‘Clearcut’, whilst choosing different actions.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2♦. Another obvious answer.
For me, Christian is spot on in his analysis…
CHRISTIAN MARI: 2♦. This should show four spades and 5+ hearts in a good but not game-forcing hand.
WENFEI WANG: 2♦. This cue-bid is a one-round force and shows at least an opening bid. If partner bids 2♠, I will raise to 4♠, otherwise I will settle for 3♥ next.
JESSICA LARSSON: 2♦.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 2♦. A wide range of contracts could be right here. I feel like 2♥ would be an underbid. I would like to investigate game, but I will pass 2♥ if that is all he can bid. My alternative would be 3♥, but then partner won't know if club or spade values are significant.
A couple chose that alternative way to show similar values.
MUHAMMAD HUMAYUN KHAN: 3♥. Partner has indicated about 9-11 HCP, so an invitational jump in what is likely to be our best suit looks right.
JOEY SILVER: 3♥. At this form of scoring, where the plus score is king, I'll show my age by taking the low road and allowing my ox to make the final mistake.
This is a very tricky hand. Opposite as little as Jxx/10x/Axxx/xxxx you want to play in 4♥. At the table, partner had significantly more than that, Kxx/x/QJxx/K10xxx, but you still did not want to venture much beyond 2♥. Although heavily outnumbered, I am still not totally convinced that the 2♦ bidders do not have the best case.
The East hand would perhaps have made an interesting problem after 2♦. Would a majority just bid 2♥? Perhaps everyone is destined to get too high on this poorly-fitting combination.
Leading the panel this month are Jill Meyers and David Bird, both with perfect 80/80 scores. Alan Mould (78), Larry Cohen and Miguel Villas-Boas (both with 76) complete February’s podium.
Our thanks, as always, to all members of the panel, for devoting their time to educating and entertaining our readers. I look forward to seeing you all again next month. Marc
|
David BIRD |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
2♠ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
80 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
2♠ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
80 |
|
Alan MOULD |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
78 |
|
Larry COHEN |
3♦ |
7♠ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
76 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
3♦ |
7♠ |
3♥ |
2♠ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
76 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
75 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
4♥ |
6♦ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Pass |
2♠ |
74 |
|
Paul MARSTON |
4♥ |
6♦ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
2♠ |
74 |
|
Sophia BALDYSZ |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
Pass |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♦ |
73 |
|
Sally BROCK |
4♣ |
7♠ |
2♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Pass |
2♠ |
71 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
4♥ |
7♠ |
2♥ |
2♠ |
Pass |
3♥ |
4♥ |
2♠ |
70 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
4♣ |
5NT |
3♥ |
2♠ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
70 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
5♣ |
6♦ |
3♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♦ |
70 |
|
Christian MARI |
5♣ |
5NT |
2♥ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♦ |
69 |
|
P.-O. SUNDELIN |
5♣ |
7♠ |
2♠ |
2♠ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
69 |
|
Migry zur CAMPANILE |
4♥ |
6♦ |
3♥ |
3♥ |
Pass |
3♥ |
Pass |
2♠ |
68 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
2♠ |
Pass |
3♥ |
3♥ |
2♦ |
68 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
5♣ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
4♥ |
4♥ |
2♠ |
66 |
|
Nigel KEARNEY |
5♣ |
6♦ |
1NT |
2♠ |
4♥ |
2♥ |
Pass |
2♠ |
65 |
|
Jessica LARSSON |
5♣ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
Dbl |
2♦ |
65 |
|
M. HUMAYUN KHAN |
3♥ |
6♠ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
2♥ |
Pass |
3♥ |
64 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
3♦ |
7♠ |
3♥ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
4♥ |
2♠ |
64 |
|
Joey SILVER |
5♣ |
6♠ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
3♥ |
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOP SCORE |
3♦ |
6♦ |
2♥ |
4♥ |
4♥ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
|
|
HAND 1: |
3♦ 10 |
4♥ 9 |
4♣ 8 |
3♥/5♣ 7 |
3NT/4NT 3 |
|
HAND 2: |
6♦ 10 |
7♠ 8 |
5NT 7 |
6♠ 4 |
|
|
HAND 3: |
2♥ 10 |
3♥ 8 |
1NT 5 |
2♠ 4 |
|
|
HAND 4: |
2♠/4♥ 10 |
3♥ 8 |
2♥ 3 |
1NT/2NT 2 |
|
|
HAND 5: |
4♥ 10 |
Pass 6 |
Dbl 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 6: |
3♥ 10 |
4♥ 7 |
2♥ 6 |
2♦ 4 |
Dbl 2 |
|
HAND 7: |
Dbl 10 |
Pass/4♥ 7 |
3♥ 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 8: |
2♠ 10 |
2♦ 7 |
3♥ 6 |
2♥ 4 |
2NT/4♥ 2 |
|
HAND 1: |
6.53 |
|
HAND 2: |
6.74 |
|
HAND 3: |
7.58 |
|
HAND 4: |
7.32 |
|
HAND 5: |
7.71 |
|
HAND 6: |
7.24 |
|
HAND 7: |
7.22 |
|
HAND 8: |
5.76 |
