Contest conducted by Marc Smith
Spring is in the air as we get the views of our esteemed panel on this month’s problems. By the time you read this, the Spring NABC in Saint Louis will just be underway. I hope to bring news next month of major successes by panel members.
This month’s guest panelist is the winners of both the December competition and of the 2025 annual competition. Based in Bengaluru, India, Venkatesh Ramaratnam took early retirement from the IT industry. He began playing 30+ years ago, and represented India in the World Junior Championships in the late 90s. He has subsequently won numerous national titles, and he has performed numerous roles including coach, commentator, director and administrator. Venkatesh scored a remarkable three perfect 80/80 scores in the 2025 competition.
A couple of this month’s hands were sent to me. Panelist Rob Brady contributed Hand 5, and regular competition entrant, Heath Watkins from Australia, submitted Hand 6. 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 produces a majority vote on only the last three hands in this set. The good news for competitors is that three or four of this month’s deals really split the panel, so almost everyone scores well on those. Even so, it looks like a tough set, with barely 5% of competition entrants scoring in the 70s.
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 61/80 (the same as in January). The average score this month is 54.32 (up from 51.60 on Set 26-01). Let’s see what the panel have to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♣ |
10 |
11 |
15 |
|
3♦ |
8 |
5 |
9 |
|
3♠ |
6 |
1 |
1 |
|
3♥ |
6 |
2 |
3 |
|
3♣ |
4 |
2 |
54 |
|
5♣ |
4 |
0 |
4 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
5 |
|
4♦ |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
4♠ |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
2♠ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 4.90
The panel is just short of a majority vote, but they still produce a clear favourite. Not a good start to the month for competition entrants, with more than half choosing what the panel mostly considers a huge underbid. Let’s start with the couple who support their view…
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. I definitely considered a 4♣ overbid to try to ensure that N/S didn't find their 9+ card heart fit.
ALAN MOULD: 3♣. A bit wet, but all I really have is one extra trump. In my own methods, I could bid 3♠ showing 2♠/5♣, but I won't inflict that on the readers!
Sally was the only one to choose that option, which makes sense if you do not play a forcing 1NT, as you will then have denied as many as three spades.
SALLY BROCK: 3♠. For me this shows a hand with a doubleton spade and a club fit.
What do the majority have to say for themselves?
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♣. This seems to be just about what the hand is worth.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♣. I think we have a good chance of making 5♣, so I invite.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♣. I play 3♠ shows this hand, but I doubt the panel does. Without that agreement I show my huge hand with a jump in clubs.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♣. 3♠ is an option if 1NT denies three spades. In that case, 3♠ now should be H-x in spades and 5+♣. I am bidding 4♣ because it seems likely partner is short in diamonds.
JILL MEYERS: 4♣. This shows a distributional hand. I have good spades and I know partner is short in diamonds. Most important, the opponents have at least nine hearts, and I am not going to let them find that out at the three-level
ROB BRADY: 4♣. Invitational. Doubling 2♦ could be the winning decision, but I'm not willing to risk getting +100 opposite something like AKxxx/Axx/--/Axxxx. We still have the chance to reach 4♠ and, on a bad day, partner might pass 4♣ with a doubleton diamond, which could be the winner.
MATS NILSLAND: 4♣.
CATHY BALDYZ: 4♣. I have perfect values opposite a partner with both black suits. I have a useful singleton in hearts, and partner doesn't rate to have too many diamonds, so the hands should fit well.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: 4♣. Playing 1NT semi-forcing, partner rates to hold 4+♣ (maybe five). The opponents have 9+♥, so partner surely has short diamonds. We could even be cold for slam opposite as little as AKxxx/Axx/--/Jxxxx. We don't have enough values for a cue bid, but I think we are too good to just bid 2♠ or 3♣. The jump to 4♣ seems about right.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♣. We don't like the semi-forcing 1NT. We like to be able to jump to 3♠ now to show an invitational hand with three-card support. When 1NT denies a spade fit, you can use the 3♠ bid to show H-x in spades and good/long club support, and the 3NT bid to show the same with short spades. 3♠ would then be a perfect description of our hand. Here, we want to show we have more than a simple raise... 2♣ here should not be a semi-balanced 17-count with only three clubs (unlikely after the 2♦ overcall). Slam (even a grand) is not out of the equation opposite something like AKxxx/Axx/--/Axxxx.
DAVID BIRD: 4♣. I think 3♦ should show more points and only four clubs.
The largest minority faction on the panel disagrees with that assessment…
JOEY SILVER: 3♦. My hand has become huge so, with slam thoughts on my mind, I show partner my big club fit and await his reply.
HANOI RONDON: 3♦. I have a great hand, and the cue bid shows that. This also leaves space for partner to rebid his spades if he is 6-4.
SARTAJ HANS: 3♦. I am intending to force to game in clubs unless partner repeats his spades, in which case I’ll raise. AKxxx/xxx/x/Axxx gives us play for game, and partner could easily have more.
LARRY COHEN: 3♦. This auction is hard to imagine -- are there no hearts in this deck? It sounds like partner might be void in diamonds, and I can picture a club slam opposite as little as AKxxx/xxx/--/Axxxx, so I have to make a big move here.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♦. What a huge hand I have all of a sudden. I’d like to splinter 4♥, but I don’t want to play there…
There were some willing to risk a splinter, although only at the three-level…
WENFEI WANG: 3♥. Splinter, showing a good club fit.
PAUL MARSTON: 3♥. A splinter. This pretty much describes my hand.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♥. The splinter shows this exact hand (to me at least).
P-O. splinters too, in his partner’s shortage (although I suspect he misread the auction or meant to bid 4♣).
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 4♦.
I bid 3♦ at the table, presumably showing a good club raise. The auction continued 3♥-3♠-4♦-4♠-Pass. Partner had KJ9xx/KQx/x/AJxx, so 4♠ was the only game with any play. Getting there after a jump to 4♣ is perhaps not that easy, and 3♣ will surely end the auction.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♣ |
10 |
6 |
33 |
|
5♣ |
9 |
5 |
9 |
|
4♠ |
9 |
4 |
1 |
|
Pass |
8 |
7 |
50 |
|
3NT |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
4♥ |
4 |
0 |
5 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.48
The panel are not close to producing a majority decision on this one, with four different choices all attracting support. Although Pass just attracts the most votes for any single action, it is clearly not the view of the panel that defending is best, with the bidders outvoting passers 16-7, hence the marking. The view of the competition entrants is much clearer, with over half choosing to defend, so we’ll start with the panelists who support that view…
PAUL MARSTON: Pass. Partner's double is for penalties. I see no reason to disturb it.
LIZ McGOWAN: Pass. I cannot think of a reason to bid anything.
LARRY COHEN: Pass. Partner should have at least two spades for this. I have A-K-A for defense.
SALLY BROCK: Pass. I don’t think partner should be greatly unbalanced. Certainly not 4♥ or 4♦. 5♣ is quite a long way away, and we don’t appear to have a spade stopper.
DAVID BIRD: Pass. Partner's 2♣ was forcing to game, so he should have some defensive values. The double cannot be searching for 3NT, because I declined to bid that on the previous round.
Do we believe the opponents?
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: Pass. Partner has bid clubs twice, so he has at least six. Double in the balancing seat in a game-forcing auction is an effort to keep all options open, including 3NT and 3♠-doubled. If the opponents are in a nine-card fit (South's voluntary raise should show five), then we should bid 4♣, or even 4♠ (my initial thought - indicating no wastage/all working values). However, our second-round pass denied a primary club fit, long diamonds and extras values (no XX). I don’t think partner would be looking for 3NT opposite that if he had a singleton spade, so I think the opponents have got the auction wrong. Let’s try to take a penalty with no clear game making for our side.
Marty seems less convinced than some of the others.
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. I wish I could say I felt good about this.
If we are not passing, the next question to ask is, “Is 4♣ forcing?” Some don’t tell us…
WENFEI WANG: 4♣. Partner’s double is primarily asking for a spade stop. I don’t have one, so I show my partial club fit.
CATHY BALDYZ/BARNET SHENKIN: 4♣.
The rest clearly think it is…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♣. If he’s slamming, I will be happy to co-operate later.
ROB BRADY: 4♣. Partner's double isn't penalty, but an attempt to keep 3NT in the picture if I have a spade stop. His range of hands encompasses 2-3-2-6 with ♠A-x as well as 1-2-3-7 with fitting red suit honors. Opposite the balanced hands with a doubleton spade we want to pass, but opposite the shapely hands we want to bid. Fortunately, 5♣ is still a making spot opposite many of partner's hands, even those with a doubleton spade, such as xx/AKx/xx/KQJxxx, so I don't feel terrible about pulling. And for those who think 4♣ is non-forcing, the current year is 2026 not 1982: 2♣ was forcing to game.
ALAN MOULD: 4♣. I have a good hand opposite known spade shortage and 6+♣. I don't believe partner has four hearts - he would have bid them or doubled 2♠ last round.
The next group, presumably, do not think 4♣ would be forcing…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5♣. I have good cards for my partner.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 5♣. I would have bid 4♣ over 3♠.
JOEY SILVER: 5♣. Personally, I would have bid 4♣ over 3♠. Having not done that, I now have some catching up to do.
SARTAJ HANS: 5♣. In the style I like to play, this double is for takeout: probably a hand with seven clubs and a stiff spade. It is possible we will make only ten tricks, opposite something like x/Kxx/xx/KQxxxxx. (Is that really a FG 2♣ response? MS). I’ll bid game as partner might have a stray card (e.g ♥J/♥10) that makes it worthwhile.
JILL MEYERS: 5♣. I think partner is 1-3-3-6. We may be able to make 6♣, but I think I am a tad short of cue bidding. If partner has x/AKx/Qxx/KQJxxx, I hope she would bid again.
Disagreeing with that evaluation…
MATS NILSLAND: 4♠. I should have raised clubs over 3♠. Now I need to catch up to show I have a very suitable hand for slam.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♠. I’d probably have bid 4♣ over 3♠, but I can now catch up.
HANOI RONDON: 4♠. Another hand, another cue bid. I might not have that many HCPs, but my controls are great for slam.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♠. Given my silence so far, I have to catch up and tell partner I have a very suitable hand in context.
A rather esoteric choice means that the French are flying solo on this one.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3NT. Partner probably would not double with a singleton spade, so opponents’ spades can easily be 4-4. When partner holds the ♥A, we need to play 3NT (xx/AJx/Jx/KQJ10xx) rather than 5♣. Partner has heard us pass twice, so we can't have both the ♣A and a spade stopper.
It is unclear to me what the passers think partner is supposed to do other than double with x/Axx/Qx/KJ10xxxx. Is he supposed to bid 4♣ facing what could easily be a singleton? You will make 5♣ simply by getting the clubs right (playing South for a singleton seems quite reasonable). The red-suit squeeze against South then produces an overtrick. Anyone who gets to slam will likely make. Defending 3♠-doubled does get a plus score, but it’s a measly +200.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
5♦ |
10 |
11 |
22 |
|
Pass |
8 |
4 |
7 |
|
4NT |
7 |
3 |
16 |
|
5♥ |
6 |
1 |
34 |
|
6♥ |
5 |
1 |
3 |
|
Dbl |
4 |
2 |
18 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.79
This is another hand with no majority vote from the panel, but a clear favourite. With 18-of-23 panelists making some move towards slam, both double and the competition entrants’ most popular choice (a competitive 5♥) are downgraded in the marking. Let’s start with the most pessimistic choices…
MARTY BERGEN: Dbl. With a very attractive opening lead and only the assurance of an eight-card fit, I'm not bidding at the five-level.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. We would have passed 4♥ if South had not bid. We have a good lead (the singleton club) and, although it's probably a forcing pass situation (not 100% evident), how can our partner judge if he has good cards for the five-level? That seems like three good reasons to double now.
SIMON DE WIJS: 5♥. I'm expecting something like a 2-4-3-4 12-14 with partner. With three hearts only, I would expect him to double 3♥. With something more suitable, he would cue bid, so slam is unlikely. I am still bidding 5♥ at this vulnerability, though.
Some seek partner’s opinion on whether to defend or to bid on…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. This is clearly a forcing pass. I will let my partner decide.
LARRY COHEN: Pass. I see no reason for me to make any decision at this point. If partner has two spades and doubles, we should be fine. If not, he likely will bid on.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: Pass. Notwithstanding North's 3♥ (showing a good raise), at these colours I play pass here as forcing. If pass was not forcing, I would double to show extras/convertible values (not strictly penalty). I really want to involve opener in the decision instead of bidding a unilateral 5♥.
…whilst Rob is using this route to make a slam try…
ROB BRADY: Pass. Bidding a red-on-white game should create a forcing pass situation. I am planning to pull a double to 5♥ to show the slam try. If partner doesn't double, I'll bid the slam, or cue bid on the way. I would like 5♣ and 5♦ bids here to be natural/slamish, but I am not comfortable trying this undiscussed. If I bid 5♦, partner might be concerned that I have no club control.
A couple rely on simple methods and take control…
WENFEI WANG: 4NT. RKCB for hearts.
SARTAJ HANS: 4NT. Onwards and upwards.
JOEY SILVER: 4NT. What I would really like to do is to cue bid 4♠ over South. Failing that, I will take control in a crowded auction, and let science be damned!
…and P-O thinks he already knows where he wants to go…
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 6♥. Lacking a good way to let partner decide if diamonds, 5♥ or slam is right, I take my best guess. Imagine xx/AJ10x/xx/AKxxx or x/AJ10x/Kxx/KQxxx.
The largest faction on the panel makes a slam try and leaves the final decision to partner…
SALLY BROCK: 5♦. Who knows?
Zia makes a point that we would all benefit from remembering…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5♦. There are worse things than describing one’s hand.
BARNET SHENKIN: 5♦. If partner has the right cards, we could have slam. Of course, we could be down in 5♥ too.
LIZ McGOWAN: 5♦. I trust my vulnerable partner more than my non-vulnerable opponents.
JILL MEYERS: 5♦. Partner will play me for a spade control and I hope she will look at her diamonds. Something like xx/AJxx/Kx/Axxxx would be nice.
PAUL MARSTON: 5♦. Showing the second suit. No lead connotations. I am still interested in slam.
DAVID BIRD: 5♦. I am worth 5♥, so I suppose I should bid 5♦ on the way in case this inspires partner. My singleton in partner's suit is not an advantage. A doubleton would be more use.
ALAN MOULD: 5♦. Surely this is normal? To help partner decide what to do if the villains bid 5♠. I just don't see you getting rich enough off 4♠ so I will take the push. This situation illustrates one of the downsides of playing short 1♣ openings - we still don't know if pard has real clubs (when defending becomes much more attractive).
MATS NILSLAND/CATHY BALDYZ: 5♦.
HANOI RONDON: 5♦. Slam is a possibility. Let's see if partner thinks so too.
ANDREW ROBSON: 5♦. A natural slam try, which seems about right. Though part of me wants to jump to 6♥, on the grounds they’ll probably save at these colours, and then I wouldn’t care whether I was making or not.
Both West players heard this auction in the VuGraph match I saw from the Soloway KO Teams. One West doubled, the other bid 5♦. Partner had Qx/AJ10x/x/KQxxxx. 4♠-doubled made for -590 (South was 5-0-3-5) and 5♥-doubled made for +850, producing a 16-IMP swing.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3NT |
10 |
11 |
31 |
|
3♣ |
8 |
8 |
7 |
|
4♦ |
6 |
2 |
9 |
|
5♦ |
4 |
1 |
16 |
|
3♦ |
4 |
1 |
8 |
|
2NT |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
2♠ |
0 |
0 |
9 |
|
6♦ |
0 |
0 |
7 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
7 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.22
The panel were mostly divided between two choices. Whilst nearly a third of competitors pick up maximum marks, the rest are thinly spread across a number of choices, some of them wild in the extreme. Those heading for slam seem to have forgotten that partner responded 2♦ to our initial double, showing around 0-7 HCP. Yes, we have a good hand, but we showed that with double followed by a cue bid, and it is nowhere near good enough to even contemplate slam opposite partner’s maximum.
MARTY BERGEN: 3NT. The same bid I would have made over 1♦.
JOEY SILVER: 3NT. I need little from partner to make nine tricks in NT, so I will bid what I hope to make.
PAUL MARSTON: 3NT. I am unwilling to settle in 3♦, and I expect 3NT to be better than 5♦.
HANOI RONDON: 3NT. I think 3NT has as much chance of making as 5♦.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3NT. I don’t think slam is likely.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3NT. I would bid 2NT if it was forcing, but I am not prepared to risk him passing unless we have a specific agreement.
Some get to the crux of the problem by asking, “What has partner’s bidding shown?”
SALLY BROCK: 3NT. Even if he has no entry, the chances of the ♦K dropping singleton are reasonable. Does 2♥ show some values? I don’t know.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: 3NT. With my regular partner, we would play 2♥ here to show four hearts and longer diamonds but not necessarily extra values. (Advancer needs to jump or cue at three-level with extras). Even so, we should have decent play for 3NT. At worst, I’ll need stiff ♦K in our eleven-card fit.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3NT. Partner would respond to my takeout double in a major if she could, so this sequence does not show 4♥-5♦ and a bust. 2♥ is likely to show three cards to an honour. Maybe she has five diamonds, or good enough clubs to provide a second stopper.
ROB BRADY: 3NT. What do any of our bids mean? Is 3♣ natural or a further cue bid? Is 3♦ how we now show the power double? Should we have bid 3♦ on the previous round? 3NT seems practical, and could be our best game opposite say xx/Jxx/xxx/JTxxx (is this how partner would bid that hand?) At some point we need to put partner out of their misery and now seems appropriate.
Wenfei emphasizes that point… what are we hoping he will tell us if we make him bid again?
WENFEI WANG: 3NT. It’s hard to see what more I can find out more from partner.
Quite a few decide to try anyway…
JILL MEYERS: 3♣. I’'ll give this one more cue bid.
LARRY COHEN: 3♣. I might as well torture partner some more. Now that he has something (he didn't bid 2♦), it is just a question of 3NT, or 5/6♦. I am not stopping in a partscore.
ALAN MOULD: 3♣. Sometime I might get around to showing my six-card support.... Would 3♦ be forcing? It probably should be, but I wouldn't risk it at the table.
SARTAJ HANS: 3♣. I intend to continue with 3NT over partner's likely 3♦ bid.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♣. I’m not sure about the best contract, 3NT or 5♦.
And he is going to bid what to help with that decision?
DAVID BIRD: 3♣. The best game, or level, is not yet certain. Partner can hardly carry us past 3NT. If he says just 3♦, I can bid 3NT then.
MATS NILSLAND: 3♣. I am not sure if 3♦ would be forcing here, and I’m not willing to take the chance of him passing below game.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♣. I’ll waffle some more. Although, what are we expecting from partner? I think he has three decent hearts, four diamonds, and a non-minimum. I’m not sure what more he can tell me.
Quite!
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♦. I have no clue what we can make, but I will give up on 3NT and see what happens.
The French come up with yet another interpretation for partner’s bidding…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♦. Partner must have 6♦/4♥. With a weak 5-4, he would have responded 1♥. We will play 5/6♦ depending whether we hear a heart cue or not. If partner holds xxx/xxx/xxx/Jxxx and explains that he did not want to repeat his diamonds, we will have a serious discussion at dinner.
Exactly, with that hand he has to bid 1♦ and then 2♦ over our cue-bid, which is how you show a bust.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 5♦. I do not know if 4♦ would be forcing after his positive move? It’s an interesting question when and why he bid diamonds before hearts if his heart bid actually shows four hearts after my 2♣ cue. At that point, I could still hold any strong hand, including a 4-4-3-2 25-count.
Only Cathy is prepared to let partner out at the three-level…
CATHY BALDYZ: 3♦.
At the table, partner had about what Liz predicted, xxx/Axx/8xxx/Jxx. Nine tricks is your limit in diamonds, but 3NT makes, somewhat luckily, as North has all three missing diamonds but only a doubleton club.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
5NT |
10 |
9 |
20 |
|
Dbl |
9 |
10 |
31 |
|
5♠ |
7 |
4 |
29 |
|
6♦ |
5 |
0 |
4 |
|
5♥ |
3 |
0 |
12 |
|
6♠ |
3 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
6♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.39
This is very close, with the panel voting 13-10 in favour of bidding on. Having decided to bid on, do you put your eggs in the spade basket at the five-level, or commit to slam in the hope of finding the right denomination? On that question, the panel clearly come down in favour of making the guess with the biggest upside if they are right. The competition entrants are similarly split, with a third taking the sure plus score from defending, and nearly half bidding on. Amongst the competitors, though, more try to land on a dime at the five-level than take their chances in slam.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. Just showing values.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. I wish I were dead!
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. I dislike doubling with a void, but I can't get myself to commit our side to 11+ tricks with no sure way to find our best fit.
Jill tries to hedge her bets with a suggestion that partner might remove this double.
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. I would not double without transferable values.
But Barnet accepts the reality of the situation.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. I’d like to say that double is primarily for takeout, but I suspect it will end the auction most of the time… As for the alternatives, 5NT will get clubs into play as well as spades. 5♠ is unilateral, but might be exactly what we can make.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. It's a complete gamble to bid 5♠ or head for a slam. The black suits are moth-eaten and the breaks will be bad.
SARTAJ HANS/CATHY BALDYZ/MATS NILSLAND: Dbl.
The French succinctly sum up the situation…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. Any other bid would be a leap into the dark, which does not mean they could not be the winning choice this time, especially 5♠. That may be a disaster when partner has short spades, but great when he can raise to slam. However, how many times will partner raise? Would he, even with something like AQx/KJxxx/10x/Axx? In practice, collecting a few hundreds defending 5♦-doubled is OK for us.
The rest are more optimistic, with varying degrees of enthusiasm.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5♠. Screwed!
ANDREW ROBSON: 5♠. Very guessy, and I hate taking these one-way positions (double and 5NT are the more two+ way actions). But, hey ho, sometimes you gotta to do what you gotta do.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 5♠. Lacking methods to find out if any slam is best.
LIZ McGOWAN: 5♠. No room for science. I must be able to tolerate hearts if she hates spades.
And we finish with the ‘glass is half full’ brigade…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5NT. Pick a slam.
PAUL MARSTON: 5NT. Not an easy one. I expect 5NT is pick a slam.
MARTY BERGEN: 5NT. Pick a slam. I have always believed in "the magic of voids."
SALLY BROCK: 5NT. This is the only thing I can think of. If partner has clubs that’s OK. With both majors (in some way or other) he can always bid 6♦.
JOEY SILVER: 5NT. I want partner to pick a slam, preferably a black suit. Hopefully, we are on the same wavelength.
HANOI RONDON: 5NT. I'm going to be optimistic here. I hope there is a slam, and I think this is the best way to get to the right one.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: 5NT. Partner is likely to pass a five-level double with almost any hand. Our hand is too offensive, so the choice is to bid 5♠ or commit to slam. Let’s try to play in the right suit, even if it is a level too high. 5♠ could be both the wrong strain and the wrong level.
SIMON DE WIJS: 5NT. Pick a slam. Let's hope South has 10 HCP in diamonds. Then I feel we have a reasonable chance of making something.
Last word on this one goes to the man who knows the hand.
ROB BRADY: 5NT. I sent this one in, so apologies to the panel for that. 5NT shows the black suits. With a heart fit, we would just support partner. Rather than argue about the best technical bid, your tempo matters A LOT here. If you bid a slam confidently, the opponents will often take their cheap insurance with a save, whereas if you think think think, and then bid 5NT, they will usually let you rot. If I was marking the contest, Fast 5NT - 10, Dbl - 8, Slow 5NT - 6.
Don’t give them ideas, Rob. Marking some of these is difficult enough as it is 😊
At the table, partner had AQxx/K9xxx/x/Qxx. You get +300 defending 5♦-doubled. You might make 6♠ played from the West seat, as North has to find the club lead from A10xx to beat it. (South was 1-3-8-1). Your chances are obviously less good with the singleton on lead. If you bid 5NT, does partner bid 6♠ or 6♦?
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♥ |
10 |
13 |
17 |
|
3♠ |
7 |
4 |
21 |
|
4♦ |
7 |
2 |
8 |
|
4♠ |
5 |
1 |
7 |
|
3♦ |
4 |
2 |
23 |
|
2♠ |
4 |
1 |
10 |
|
5♦ |
4 |
0 |
1 |
|
3NT |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
2NT |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.46
This is the first of only three deals this month on which the panel produce a majority vote. When I put this set together, I was concerned that we would get an enormous majority on this one, so it is somewhat surprising to find that competition entrants have two choices that are more popular than the panel’s favourite. Indeed, the panel come up six different options, so let’s start with the minority choices, beginning with the winner of the ‘Pessimist of the Month’ award…
LIZ McGOWAN: 2♠. I suspect a misfit.
A little more optimistic.
SALLY BROCK: 3♠. Far from perfect, but this seems the best of a bad job.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 3♠. Unfortunately, any diamond contract could be right - or wrong.
Only Larry even mentioned passing.
LARRY COHEN: 3♠. It is tempting to pass, but that could be disastrous opposite something like xx/x/KJxxx/KQxxx.
SARTAJ HANS: 3♠. I am tempted to bid 4♠, but I am worried about club wastage and weak spades. Thus, a slight underbid.
Perhaps Pierre’s partner needed a bathroom break, so he had to become declarer?
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♠. We don't want to introduce such a bad diamond suit into the dialog.
There was also some support for agreeing one of partner’s suits, some more timidly than others…
WENFEI WANG: 3♦. Partner’s double suggests both minors, so I show support.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. I hope partner can keep this alive.
Well, yeah!
PAUL MARSTON: 4♦. I have got to announce the fit. Surely this is forcing.
CATHY BALDYZ: 4♦.
The rest preferred to keep both suits in the picture…
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. I have the values, but this is not the right hand for 4♦ as it is unclear that is the right strain.
ALAN MOULD: 3♥. I cannot think of anything more intelligent.
I think we can all agree on that, Alan.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♥. I’ll start by forcing to game. I will bid 4♦ over 4♣.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: 3♥. We have game values with slam potential and three features to show (good 6♠, 4♦ and ♥ stoppers). I intend to commit to at least 4♠/5♦.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♥. Okay back to taking two+ way positions. Let’s make sure we play the right strain, even if perhaps too high.
Simon sums up the feeling of the majority…
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♥. Let’s go high, and make sure we get to the right fit. I will raise 3♠ or bid 4♦ over 4♣.
BARNET SHENKIN/MATS NILSLAND: 3♥.
JOEY SILVER: 3♥. Not wishing to eliminate spades as a place to play, I start with the ubiquitous cue bid. I am willing to play either pointed suit in game or slam.
ROB BRADY: 3♥. I am not sure if 4♠ or 5♦ is the best game (or whether we have a slam). Partner should tell us more with their next bid.
HANOI RONDON: 3♥. A strong hand and two denominations are available. Let's hear from partner before committing to one suit or even deciding the level.
DAVID BIRD: 3♥. I will show slam potential and hope to find a fit. If partner cannot steel himself to pick up the 3♠ card, we should be able to play in diamonds.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♥. Of course, this won't work out well if partner has a hand such as x/Jx/Kxx/AJxxxxx.
Marty wasn’t that far off. Partner had ---/xx/Axxx/AJ109xxx, so you want to play in 5♦ (although Heath, a regular competition entrant from Australia, reports that 6♦ could be made on a fortunate lay of the cards). Of course, there is no need to stretch to a poor slam when some pairs will be going down in a number of spades, or languishing in 3♦. The 3♥ and 4♦ bidders seem to be on their way to the best contract.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
13 |
39 |
|
5♦ |
9 |
10 |
38 |
|
4NT |
3 |
0 |
18 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
6♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.94
The panel see only two options, and over three-quarters of competitors agree. This was the most popular choice, but only just…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. This is a Nepresso bid to us. (meaning “What else?”) Are we wrong?
PAUL MARSTON: Dbl. Maximum flexibility. Better than guessing to bid a unilateral 5♦.
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. I am not putting all my eggs in one basket and bidding 5♦. Double is the most descriptive bid and covers several bases.
SARTAJ HANS: Dbl. I don't want to unilaterally act at the five level on a marginal suit, especially opposite a passed hand.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. Let’s bring in all suits.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: Dbl. Double here shows convertible values (a mix of offense/defense) and (like Problem 5) partner will pass on most semi-balanced hands. If, instead, we choose to bid, do we bid 4NT (two places to play) or just 5♦? With neither side vulnerable, South might be pushing his luck, so defending could easily be right.
Joey is headed for Humpty Dumpty Land, where bids mean what we want them to mean…
JOEY SILVER: Dbl. The more penalty orientated this double is, the more likely I should be bidding 5♦ or 4NT. Not being able to make up my mind which one to bid, I double and hope that partner sees it as a takeout-orientated action.
A couple of the doublers are not convinced…
ZIA MAHMOOD: Dbl. I am unhappy with my bidding, as usual.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. Can you please, Marc, tell the opponents to get out of my face and stop pre-empting! I cannot realistically see another alternative – 5♦ is just a shot in the dark. I have written down -690 before.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. This may be dangerous if my partner bids 5♥, but I have to give him a chance to punish 4♠ if that is what he wants to do.
The rest prefer to take their chance on offence, and a few explain why the third choice is not a good idea on this shape.
DAVID BIRD: 5♦. 4NT with 6-4 in the minors would be no good. Partner might respond 5♣ on 4-3-3-3 shape... Nor am I willing to head for a slam, with holes in every suit.
ROB BRADY: 5♦. I hope the 4NT bidders are okay playing in a 4-2 fit when partner is 4522. Double could be the winner but, at IMPs, I'd rather push for the game bonus than try to scrape up four tricks on defense. Partner won't be pulling the double too often, as they should be passing with most balanced hands.
LARRY COHEN: 5♦. I already doubled with a void on #5. I can't bear to do that again. 4NT is out, as I'd have to pass 5♣ and partner might be 3-3 or even 2-2 in the minors.
HANOI RONDON: 5♦. It's tough to decide the contract without consulting partner, but doubling will end with us defending far too often and 4NT might get us into a Moysian fit in clubs instead of a nine-card diamond fit.
LIZ McGOWAN: 5♦. I can’t bear to pass, and anything else may end in even more tears.
Marty about sums up how I’m sure we all feel…
MARTY BERGEN: 5♦. One of the reasons I LOVE to start the auction with a pre-empt is that I HATE it so much when I have a good hand and an opponent starts the auction with a pre-empt.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 5♦.
ANDREW ROBSON: 5♦. Another one-wayer. What sort of sadists have set this month’s problems…
I just pass them on, Andrew 😊
SALLY BROCK: 5♦. For me, a double of a 4♠ opening is more balanced.
SIMON DE WIJS: 5♦. I always seem to be disappointed when I double with this kind of hand, `so I will go for playing in my suit.
I had the East hand at the table, and I saw no reason to bid opposite partner’s double with Kxx/KJxxx/Jxx/Q10. Declarer had an eight-card suit and dummy had two entries (the ♦A and ♣K), so that was -590. 5♦ certainly makes, and 5♥ probably does too, although teammates took the cheap save in 5♠-doubled for -100, so our apologies for spoiling their good board.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♣ |
10 |
14 |
69 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
3 |
8 |
|
3♠ |
7 |
2 |
1 |
|
4NT |
7 |
2 |
1 |
|
2NT |
6 |
2 |
7 |
|
5♣ |
4 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
12 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.14
This hand produces the largest panel majority of the month and the largest competitors’ vote, with over two-thirds scoring a 10. Even so, it still somewhat irks me to give 3♣ top marks, as I think those supporting other options have the best of the debate.
One question that is only barely addressed by the panel is the meaning of 2NT in this auction. A couple opted for that choice, suggesting it offered a choice of minors. There was also a mention that it should be Lebenoshl here, which is my view. Even then, though, is 3♣ really enough? If we had any more, would we not have made a responsive double on the previous round? That’s enough from me – let’s hear what the experts have to say…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♣. This looks like another Nespresso bid. Wrong again?
JILL MEYERS: 3♣. Bidding what I have.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♣. This is enough with a void in my partner’s suit.
DAVID BIRD: 3♣. As on Hand 3, shortage in partner's suit is no bonus. I would rather be 2-2 in the red suits.
ALAN MOULD: 3♣. 5m is still a long way away, and I ain't defending 2♠-doubled with this mighty trump holding.
LARRY COHEN: 3♣. Same thought as in #7. I am afraid to offer partner a choice of minors, so I might as well bid my five-carder here. There is too much potential handling to look for game, particularly as partner is most likely 1-6-3-3.
SARTAJ HANS: 3♣. Partner may not have that much for this balancing action.
Echoing Sartaj’s thoughts, Marty sums up the case for the conservative choice…
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. Only 3♣. Knowing that partner has 0-1 spade, I definitely would have doubled 2♠ on the previous round. On this auction, I believe that, regardless of vulnerability, any time he has shortage in their suit, he should always balance. So, I do not believe that his auction denies a minimum overcall.
CATHY BALDYZ/BARNET SHENKIN/MATS NILSLAND: 3♣.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♣. It’s a great bad hand, but unless there’s a ninth trump, I doubt we’ll have eleven tricks.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♣. I am stronger than I might be, but I hate the heart void. If she converts to diamonds, I shall raise.
Sally addresses the question of 2NT before joining the majority.
SALLY BROCK: 3♣. I could bid 2NT to give partner a choice of minors, but I think I want to play 3♣ more. Partner is more likely to pass 3♣ with some hand with lots of hearts than he is to bid a minor on a 1-6-3-3 shape if I bid 2NT.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2NT. Scramble and pray.
Hanoi offers what seems like a sensible plan.
A
HANOI RONDON: 2NT. I can play in either minor. If partner chooses clubs, I’ll make a game invite.
Some simply invite in their long suit.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♣. This feels about right.
P.-O. SUNDELIN: 4♣.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♣. I have to show some sign of life. Game could easily be lay down.
Whereas some are prepared to simply drive to game.
ROB BRADY: 3♠. We should be playing Lebensohl here but, even so, our hand is still too good for a value-showing 3♣. If I had any more, I would have made a responsive double on the previous round. I'm willing to force this hand to 5♣/5♦, and even a slam isn't out of the question, opposite something like --/Axxxxx/AKQx/Axx.
VENKATESH RAMARATNAM: 3♠. For me, partner's double shows more than just short spades. I expect (5431/6331/6430/rarely 5440) with some extras. We have all working values and close to maximum in the context of our earlier pass. 3♠ should also suggest a hand playable in more than one strain as I could have jumped to 4m with a one-suited hand.
JOEY SILVER: 4NT. A little pushy, but it does solve the issue of our best strain, while getting us to a vulnerable game. I will be content if East is the only doubler in this auction.
WENFEI WANG: 4NT. Minors. With equal length, he will choose clubs, so he will have at least four-card support if he bids diamonds.
Partner had 10/KJxxx/AQx/Axxx so 3♣ ends the auction. 5♣ is an easy make and even 6♣ playable, so the 3♠ and 4NT bidders will collect their vulnerable game bonus, and those who invited with 4♣ are still in with a chance.
Scotland’s Barnet Shenkin leads the panel this month with 79/80. The podium is completed by Sweden and Brazil respectively, with Mats Nilsland (76/80) and Miguel Villas-Boas (75/80).
A special mention to this month’s guest panelist, Venkatesh Ranaratnam, who returned a very creditable 73/80, which will do no harm to his bid to retain the annual competition title he won in 2025.
Good luck to both panel members and regular readers playing in the Spring NABC in Saint Louis.
Our thanks to all members of the panel for your time and effort. Your contribution is much appreciated.
See you next month. Marc
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
4♣ |
4♣ |
5♦ |
3NT |
Dbl |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
79 |
|
Mats NILSLAND |
4♣ |
4♠ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
76 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
4♣ |
5♣ |
Pass |
3♣ |
5NT |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
75 |
|
David BIRD |
4♣ |
Pass |
5♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♥ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
74 |
|
Rob BRADY |
4♣ |
4♣ |
Pass |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
5♦ |
3♠ |
74 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
4♣ |
4♣ |
5♦ |
3NT |
5♠ |
3♥ |
Dbl |
2NT |
73 |
|
Venkatesh RANARATNAM |
4♣ |
Pass |
Pass |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
73 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
3♦ |
4♠ |
5♦ |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
5♦ |
2NT |
72 |
|
Alan MOULD |
3♣ |
4♣ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
71 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
3♦ |
4♠ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
5♠ |
3♥ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
71 |
|
Joey SILVER |
3♦ |
5♣ |
4NT |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
Dbl |
4NT |
71 |
|
Cathy BALDYSZ |
4♣ |
4♣ |
5♦ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
4♦ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
70 |
|
Sally BROCK |
3♠ |
Pass |
5♦ |
3NT |
5NT |
3♠ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
70 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
4♣ |
5♣ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♦ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
70 |
|
Paul MARSTON |
3♥ |
Pass |
5♦ |
3NT |
5NT |
4♦ |
Dbl |
4♣ |
69 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
4♣ |
4♠ |
5♥ |
4♦ |
5NT |
3♥ |
5♦ |
4♣ |
68 |
|
Sartaj HANS |
3♦ |
5♣ |
4NT |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
68 |
|
Larry COHEN |
3♦ |
Pass |
Pass |
3♣ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
67 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
3♣ |
Pass |
Dbl |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
65 |
|
Liz McGOWAN |
3♥ |
Pass |
5♦ |
3NT |
5♠ |
2♠ |
5♦ |
3♣ |
64 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
3♥ |
4♣ |
4NT |
3NT |
Dbl |
3♦ |
Dbl |
4NT |
63 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
4♣ |
3NT |
Dbl |
4♦ |
Dbl |
4♠ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
58 |
|
P.-O. SUNDELIN |
4♦ |
5♣ |
6♥ |
5♦ |
5♠ |
3♠ |
5♦ |
4♣ |
51 |
|
TOP SCORE |
4♣ |
4♣ |
5♦ |
3NT |
5NT |
3♥ |
Dbl |
3♣ |
|
HAND 1: |
4♣ 10 |
3♦ 8 |
3♥/3♠ 6 |
3♣/5♣ 4 |
Pass/4♦/4♠ 2 |
|
|
HAND 2: |
4♣ 10 |
5♣/4♠ 9 |
Pass 8 |
3NT/4♥ 4 |
||
|
HAND 3: |
5♦ 10 |
Pass 8 |
4NT 7 |
5♥ 6 |
6♥ 5 |
Dbl 4 |
|
HAND 4: |
3NT 10 |
3♣ 8 |
4♦ 6 |
3♦/5♦ 4 |
2NT 2 |
|
|
HAND 5: |
5NT 10 |
Dbl 9 |
5♠ 7 |
6♦ 5 |
5♥/6♠ 3 |
|
|
HAND 6: |
3♥ 10 |
3♠/4♦ 7 |
4♠ 5 |
2♠/3♦/5♦ 4 |
3NT 2 |
|
|
HAND 7: |
Dbl 10 |
5♦ 9 |
4NT 3 |
Pass 2 |
||
|
HAND 8: |
3♣ 10 |
4♣ 8 |
3♠/4NT 7 |
2NT 6 |
5♣ 4 |
|
HAND 1: |
4.90 |
|
HAND 2: |
8.48 |
|
HAND 3: |
6.79 |
|
HAND 4: |
5.22 |
|
HAND 5: |
7.39 |
|
HAND 6: |
5.46 |
|
HAND 7: |
7.94 |
|
HAND 8: |
8.14 |
