Contest conducted by Marc Smith
As the 2025 annual competition reaches the mid-way point, contenders are jostling for places near the top of the leader-board. With the top eight places separated by only 9 points, there is all still to play for!
By the time you read this, the European Transnational Championships in Poznan, Poland will be into its second week. The first week was all about the Mixed Teams, and a number of panel members were in action. At the semi-final stage, we had panel members in three of the teams. Sadly, Sjoert Brink (left) was the only one of the five to make it to the final, where his team romped to victory by a score of 163-96.
In addition to Sjoert’s gold medal, four other members of our expert panel collected bronze medals, Cathy Baldysz, Pierre Schmidt, Joanna Zochowska and Simon de Wijs. Congratulations to them all.
In the Mixed BAM Teams, Michael Klukowski was in the winning team, and Zia Mahmood was in the team that finished second.
I hope to report more successes from the Open Teams and the Women’s Teams next month. Would anyone bet against a Brink double?
This month’s guest panelist is the solo winner of the April competition, Dr Morrie Klienplatz from Canada. Our second consecutive winner from the medical profession, Morrie is a clinical psychologist who has had a private practice in Windsor, Ontario for 45 years. He is a Grand Life Master. Playing with Stephen Cooper (who was profiled on the ranking page for March), he has won both the Canadian Seniors Championship and the Silver Ribbon Pairs at the 2008 NABC. Morrie was the leading Canadian in the 2024 Realbridge bidding contest.
Three of this month’s problems have been sent to me: Hand 1 by panelist Liz McGowan, and two from regular competition entrants, Hand 3 by Patrick Shields and Hand 8 by Paul Dubois. 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.
Readers who enjoy the type of problems presented in this competition, may also be interested in our latest book, Be a Difficult Bridge Opponent. Many of the techniques and strategies regularly discussed by the panel in this forum are examined and explained. There are also sections on how to make life more difficult for your opponents when you are declaring or defending. Available now from Amazon and all fine booksellers.
The panel produce a majority vote on only two hands in this set, and they are widely split on the rest. This should mean that there are multiple high-scoring options on some of the deals. Is that good news for competitors? Let’s find out…
The most popular action chosen by the competition entrants scores ‘10’ on three of the eight hands, and voting with the largest group of competitors this month scores a creditable 64/80 (down from the record high 71/80 in May). The average score this month is 53.42 (down from 61.41 on Set 25-5). Let’s see what the panel has to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2♣ |
10 |
10 |
33 |
|
2NT |
9 |
9 |
15 |
|
3♠ |
6 |
2 |
6 |
|
4♦ |
5 |
1 |
19 |
|
4♥ |
2 |
0 |
11 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
3♥ |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
3♣ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.18
For the panel, this was more or less a straight two-way choice between 2♣ and 2NT, and almost half of competitors pick up at least 9/10. When the deal occurred in the Lady Milne, both West players started with a 4♦ splinter and then had to decide whether to take another bid when opener retreated to 4♥. Neither did. Let’s start with the mavericks on the panel who chose to splinter…
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♦. Splinter. I want to bid as high as possible without hugely underselling my hand (too good for 4♥).
WENFEI WANG: 3♠. Splinter.
Liz makes a valid point.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♠. Not ideal, with a singleton ace, but it leaves partner room to cue-bid, which 4♦ does not. If she does cue in clubs, I can use RKC.
A number of players in the next group think a splinter is not enough…
MARTY BERGEN: 2NT. I'm too strong for a splinter.
ALAN MOULD: 2NT. This hand is way too strong for a splinter.
LARRY COHEN: 2NT. A splinter takes up too much space, and starting with 2♣ when I have 4+ trumps is not for me. Also, I would love to hear about club shortness.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2NT. This saves me deciding which splinter to make. Naturally I’m hoping partner has a singleton club. In general, you should use Jacoby when you want to be the boss (as here), and splinter when you want partner to take control.
P-O SUNDELIN: 2NT. Trump support, invitational plus.
Game-forcing here, P-O.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2NT. I’ll start with a heart raise and await developments.
ROB BRADY: 2NT. I'd like to hear about club shortness, so 2NT seems perfect.
I agree, that would be good, but what about other responses?
MATS NILSLAND: 2NT.
SALLY BROCK: 2NT. I would have thought most people’s methods would make this relatively easy to bid after a 2NT start.
Sally is probably right, that many expert partnerships will have sophisticated methods, such as minimum balanced hands start with a 3♣ response. However, in the standard Jacoby played by most pairs, opener jumps to 4♥ with a minimum hand without a shortage: something like Jxx/AKxxx/Jxx/Kx, for example. Are you bidding on over 4♥ with this West hand?
The more I think about this hand, the more convinced I am that the largest faction on the panel is right…
JILL MEYERS: 2♣. I would love to hear what partner's rebid is before I support hearts. There is no need to rush on this hand.
HANOI RONDON: 2♣. Game is on, but slam depends on partner's holding in clubs. This is the way to find out.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 2♣. I prefer 2♣ to Jacoby or a splinter. Once we are in a game force, we can take our time and find out about partner's level of club support. Jacoby would only work better if partner shows a club shortage. Also, 2♣ may help partner if the opponents compete to a high level in one of the pointed suits.
DAVID BIRD: 2♣. Unless we tell partner about our club suit, it will not be possible for him to judge how high to go.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS/ZIA MAHMOOD/CATHY BALDYSZ/CHRISTIAN MARI: 2♣.
JOEY SILVER: 2♣. I start off by bidding my best suit, and await partner's reaction. There is no rush, as I can always show my heart support later. Meanwhile, I will be better placed to judge how many hearts I want to contract for.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♣. Opposite the right minimum hand, we can make a grand slam (eg Qx/AKxxx/Axxxx/x) or... maybe it’s a partscore deal only (eg KQx/Qxxxx/KQx/xx). The slow road seems more adequate than any kind of splinter or game forcing relay (such as 2NT). Let's hear what partner has to say.
Partner had xxx/AKQxx/xxx/Kx, so 6♥ was easy to make but harder to bid. The 2♣ bidders surely have the best chance of getting to the excellent slam.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♦ |
10 |
14 |
38 |
|
3♠ |
9 |
2 |
2 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
3 |
4 |
|
4NT |
8 |
2 |
37 |
|
3♥ |
6 |
1 |
2 |
|
4♦ |
6 |
0 |
2 |
|
6NT |
4 |
0 |
2 |
|
6♣ |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
9 |
|
5♣ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
5NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.64
A big majority vote from the panel, and more than a third of competitors agree with their choice. However, I think only two panel members looked deeply enough into the problem to come up with what seems to be to be the correct choice - one that perhaps more would have voted for it if they had thought of it. Let’s hear first from the majority…
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♦. Waiting.
ALAN MOULD: 3♦. Passing the time of day.
SALLY BROCK: 3♦. No need for heroics at this stage.
LARRY COHEN: 3♦. For starters. This leaves the most space for further exploration.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♦. "When in doubt, make the cheapest reasonable bid."
JOEY SILVER: 3♦. I have to start somewhere. So much to do, and limited space to do it in!
Mumble, mumble, mumble…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♦. Let’s start cue-bidding to try to reach a grand.
LIZ McGOWAN: 3♦. For now. To find out whether she has any values in hearts.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♦.
WENFEI WANG: 3♦. I’ll show something in diamonds, then agree clubs and check for key-cards.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♦. Values, just waiting to find out more. Most likely, I will commit to slam and we will try to find out if we can bid 6NT rather than 6♣.
DAVID BIRD: 3♦. It seems that we should keep on cue-bidding until partner can judge the final contract. Once he hears about the ♠A, as well as the red-suit cards, he can do the arithmetic.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♦. We cannot see why there is a question here, at least for those who play that 3♣ guarantees four cards in the suit. We have plenty of room to investigate the altitude of the final contract.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 3♦. I prefer that 3♣ show extras, but that is not specified in our system here, so I will temporize with 3♦. Over 3NT by partner, I’ll continue with 4♣.
I’m not sure that I understand why this is better than 3♦.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. Lead first, slam later.
Is he, perhaps, trying to encourage a diamond lead rather than a heart? Is it likely to matter on this hand?
A couple simply agree clubs immediately…
ROB BRADY: 4♣. 3♦ followed by 4♣ works equally well. We want to set clubs as trumps and bid keycard. Hearing about a heart control on the way would be a nice bonus. I think 4NT is quantitative over 3♣ but, even if it was RKC, I'd still prefer this route to learn about partner's red suit controls, or lack thereof.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 4♣.
JILL MEYERS: 4♣. For me, this is key-card. I am on my way to slam. Partner would not raise without a good hand, but would temporize.
The Swedish contingent both seem happy that 4NT is RKC for clubs… something for regular partnerships to discuss.
P-O SUNDELIN: 4NT.
MATS NILSLAND: 4NT.
Andrew and Hanoi both come up with the winning answer that was found at the table.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♠. I’m hoping that by bidding 3♠ and then 4NT, it will be double key-card or, at least, Blackwood for spades. That way, we’ll find out if partner has the ♠Q. The problem with bidding Blackwood for clubs is, after 5♥-5NT, partner has no room and won’t know what to do with, say, KQxxx/xx/xxx/AKx (which is a pretty-good 7NT).
HANOI RONDON: 3♠. Only by supporting spades we can find out about the ♠Q, which is the most important missing card for bidding the right grand at matchpoints.
On this deal from a World Seniors Pairs final, one West found a clever way of discovering all the information he needed. He bid 3♠ now and heard his partner raise to 4♠. When his partner bid 5♠ in response to RKCB and then showed the ♣K, he could count 13 tricks and bid 7NT. Partner had KQxxx/xx/xx/AKJx. If you set clubs as trumps, you cannot then find out about the ♠Q and probably settle for playing 7♣.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
14 |
24 |
|
5♦ |
8 |
5 |
39 |
|
4NT |
6 |
3 |
28 |
|
Pass |
5 |
0 |
8 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.60
Although the panel produce a substantial majority, I think this may be the toughest problem of the year so far. The competition entrants are just about split three ways, and I’m not sure that the largest group has not chosen the best bid. We’ll start with the majority on the panel, and soon see that they are not unified in their choice of what to do next…
MARTY BERGEN: Dbl. "When in doubt, select the most economical action."
JOEY SILVER: Dbl. Irving Litvack (a friend and ex-partner) would not approve. I am not sure if I do either, but I am stumped, and pray to The Great Shuffler that, since I am a good person, my call will work out.
MATS NILSLAND/CHRISTIAN MARI: Dbl.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. I don't see how starting with a double can be wrong. I will have to take a view over partner's 4♠ response. What's new, when they pre-empt like this?
Whilst David keeps his intentions hidden, some tell us what they intend to do when partner bids 4♠…
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Followed by 5♦ over 4♠.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. If partner bid 4♠, I will bid 5♦.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. I am prepared for anything partner chooses (I will bid 5♦ over 4♠).
A couple also explain why one of the alternatives is not so attractive.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. I shall bid 5♦ over 4♠ and hope. I don’t like 4NT, as that gets us to 5♣ when partner is 5-2-3-3.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. If I bid 4NT, my partner probably will bid 5♣ with 3-3 in minors, so I prefer double. Over 4♠, I will bid 5♦.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Partner doesn’t have to bid 4♠ but, if he does (as he mostly will I accept), we’ll have to guess (probably 5♦). I mean we can’t just pass 4♥, while 4NT will get us to a hopelessly wrong 5♣ when partner has something like 3-3 in the minors. I’d bid 4NT with my minors reversed.
Rob is alone in his future intent…
ROB BRADY: Dbl. Yuck! Process of elimination. We're too good to pass when slam could be laydown. 5♦ is too committal with a weak trump suit. 4NT is offshape and our minors are the wrong way around. So, Double it is. I expect this will often end the auction but, if partner bids 4♠, I'll leave him there (at least until someone doubles).
Our French Mixed champions highlight the problem with the route the majority plan on following…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. A tough one. Pass is not really an option, even though the alternatives are not so attractive: 4NT - with a risk to land in a 4-3 club fit? Double, followed by pass after 4♠ (??) or 5♦ (then showing a stronger hand)? At the end, our choice is double, but we may have another problem very soon.
Yes. Surely double and then 5♦ over 4♠ shows a hand too good to overcall 5♦, which this hand surely is not.
Alan sums up the problem with his typical Northern pragmatism.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. God knows. Anything could be right.
A small faction prefer 4NT.
JILL MEYERS: 4NT. A takeout for the minors. This could be wrong, but so could a 5♦ bid.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 4NT.
Morrie earns the ‘Optimist of the Month’ award…
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 4NT. I plan to bid 5♦ over 5♣. I'm little light for this, but 5♦ directly leaves partner guessing about whose hand this is. This might get us to 6♣ when that is right.
The rest choose what looks to me like the practical choice.
LIZ McGOWAN: 5♦. This could be wrong! But I am not going to sell out, and this seems less likely to cause a disaster than the alternatives.
HANOI RONDON: 5♦. I don't like passing and I don't like playing in a 4-2 spade fit after a double or in a 4-2 or 4-3 club fit after 4NT.
ZIA MAHMOOD/P-O SUNDELIN: 5♦.
SALLY BROCK: 5♦. Not ideal, but diamonds is our most likely fit. I can’t double with only two spades; and if I bid 4NT I won’t have a clue what to do if partner bids 5♣.
Fortunately, it turned out that there were only a few IMPs at stake on this deal from the English National Teams League. About half of the 42 West players bid 5♦, with the rest split between Pass, Double and 4NT. After 4NT or 5♦, most South players continued to 5♥. Having pushed the opponents up, how many East players then found the required spade lead from 109x/Jx/KJxxx/98x? Very few, of course. Some of those who passed did get a spade lead but, of course, at those tables it only saved the overtrick. Most of the swings occurred when West doubled and conceded either -590 or -690.
.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2NT |
10 |
5 |
8 |
|
3♥ |
10 |
3 |
31 |
|
2♠ |
9 |
6 |
18 |
|
3♠ |
6 |
4 |
22 |
|
Pass |
6 |
4 |
8 |
|
4♠ |
2 |
0 |
8 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.48
The first question is whether we should pass and play for penalties, and the panel vote 18-4 against that idea. The next question is how many spades to bid. The largest (although still relatively small) faction says that 2♠ is enough. Those choosing an invitational raise are split between doing so via 2NT or 3♥ but, with a combined 8 votes, they are effectively the largest group on the panel, hence the marking. Let’s start with those who play for penalties…
JOEY SILVER: Pass. My choices are 2.5♠ or pass and, being from the colonies, I put on my fur hat, show my trapper origins, and try for a heart game. Plus scores do very well at this form of scoring.
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. Prospects seem better on defense.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Pass.
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. Let’s go all-in. Very weird with ♠Q-10-x-x, but it feels like we can nip 2♥-doubled by a trick, and our heart cards are probably worthless in a spade contract.
For the spade bidders, we start with the conservatives…
LIZ McGOWAN: 2♠. It is tempting to wait for a re-opening double, but it may never come. My vulnerable opponent has bid a weakish suit, so she will have compensating distribution, and thus we may not get all that rich after all. If they venture 3♥, I can double that for penalties.
David makes a valid point regarding the form of scoring.
DAVID BIRD: 2♠. It's not attractive to aim for 2♥-doubled when I have four-card spade support. Nor should I stretch to reach borderline games at matchpoints.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2♠. I won’t play for penalties with four spades. 2♠ is conservative, but the auction isn’t necessarily over yet.
ROB BRADY: 2♠. With so many spades, it would be foolish to chase a penalty. I hear Larry over my shoulder talking about the Law. So, we must bid and, with most of our values in the opponent's suit, I'll go low. If partner has a suitable hand that will make game, like AKxxx/x/Kxx/AQxx, I expect him to make a try, and we will get there.
LARRY COHEN: 2♠. If partner passes, it is not likely we have missed a game. Over any game try from partner, I can try 3NT next.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♠. Even at matchpoints, our goal is not to look for a penalty at the two-level with such a good spade fit. As we have a lot of losers, 2♠ is enough for the time being.
The largest group of the panel thought the hand was worth a game invite…
SALLY BROCK: 2NT. For me, this is an invitational or better four-card spade raise.
P-O SUNDELIN: 2NT. Invitational or better with 4+ spades.
ALAN MOULD: 2NT. Showing a limit raise or better. If you want me to play for penalties with four-card spade support, forget it.
HANOI RONDON: 2NT. I have good support for spades. I'm sorry to have to get to the three-level, but Mr. Drury never solved this situation.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 2NT. Showing a limit raise or better. With so much support for partner, I won't risk playing for +200 by passing. If partner makes a game try in a minor I'll try 3NT.
Others did the same via a cue-bid.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. Just worth an invitational raise.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♥. Invitational. I do not have good points, but I have to show my hand.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♥. Mixed raise.
Despite Jill’s contention, I think most players these days would call this a pre-emptive raise.
JILL MEYERS: 3♠. A mixed raise.
WENFEI WANG: 3♠. Not invitational.
MATS NILSLAND/CHRISTIAN MARI: 3♠.
David and I have been pouring over world championship books, looking for deals for a new book on Matchpoints. This one from a World Open Pairs final caught my eye. Partner had KJ9xx/x/AJ9xx/Qx, so even 3♠ was too high with the ♦K offside. At one table, West found the winning 2♠ bid. The auction continued P-P-X-XX-3♣-P-3♦ and now West began doubling. Par on the board is actually 3♣ making, but it was hard for South, with a 1-6-4-2 shape, to know to pass. 3♥-X goes one down only, but +200 is an excellent score. And, yes, the passers probably would have conceded -670 defending 2♥-doubled, although -110 was not a good matchpoint score either, as it loses even to those pairs going one down in 3♠.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
5♦ |
10 |
9 |
25 |
|
5♣ |
9 |
7 |
24 |
|
4♦ |
8 |
5 |
34 |
|
4NT |
7 |
1 |
1 |
|
6♦ |
4 |
0 |
<1 |
|
4♠ |
3 |
0 |
<1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
13 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
4 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.45
The most important question for regular partnerships to discuss is whether 4♦ is forcing here. Some partnerships will have the agreement that 4m is usually forcing, except when you have made an attempt to play 3NT and found no stopper, which seems to be the case here.
For Liz, it is clearly non-forcing…
LIZ McGOWAN: 4♦. I suspect we have three top losers, but if partner has the ♥A she may bid on.
…whereas…
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♦. I think this should be forcing. We could have a slam in clubs if partner has the right hand, so I’ll hope not to see a green pass card from partner.
…and the rest who chose that bid don’t tell us.
JOEY SILVER: 4♦. I have done enough bidding up to now, so time to support partner. If not now, when?
Yes, but at what level, Joey?
ZIA MAHMOOD/MATS NILSLAND: 4♦.
I think Andrew has the right idea…
ANDREW ROBSON: 5♦. I think 4♣ is more of a diamond game try than a natural bid. We could be off three cashers but it’s vulnerable at IMPs, so…
Rob takes the pragmatic choice in an undiscussed situation – a good lesson, I think.
ROB BRADY: 5♦. Partner denied a spade stopper, so I'll bid game even if it could go down with three major-suit losers off the top. I am hoping for a hand like xx/Ax/KQxxxxx/Ax, where the heart goes on my clubs. I think 4♦ should be forcing here, with partner showing extras and our hand cue-bidding, but I'm too afraid to make that bid undiscussed.
So, how do we evaluate our hand? P-O bids 5♦ because he thinks he is minimum.
P-O SUNDELIN: 5♦. Assuming we are now forced to game, I try to deny further interest.
Whilst David and others jump to game as they think the hand is too good for a non-forcing 4♦.
DAVID BIRD: 5♦. My 3♠ did not agree diamonds; it was seeking a spade stopper. I therefore read partner for 6-4 in the minors. With healthy diamonds, he does not need a strong hand to compete with 3♦, so I don't see that 4♦ would be forcing.
WENFEI WANG: 5♦. I hope we can make 5♦.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 5♦.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5♦. I have a good passed hand for my partner
And a couple wonder about slam but cannot see a way to investigate.
ALAN MOULD: 5♦. We probably have a slam on, but I cannot think of a rational way to bid it other than psyching a 4♠ cue. But, it is also feels like we may have two low spades each.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 5♦. It would be nice if 4NT were a sort of last train here, but I don't think that would be clear. 4♠ ought to show a control. 6♣ might be cold, but 5♣ wouldn't get us there.
Marty thinks this is the way to make a slam try…
MARTY BERGEN: 5♣. It sounds like partner is very short in hearts. I already promised diamond support with my passed-hand cue-bid.
HANOI RONDON: 5♣. I have great clubs and we might get to slam this way.
SALLY BROCK: 5♣. I am not quite sure what’s going on, but I am a passed hand so I can’t really have any more than this. It sounds as if partner is short in hearts.
Others are simply offering an alternative game.
SIMON DE WIJS: 5♣. If partner is interested in game opposite my passed hand, we are going to game. I am bidding 5♣ in case partner has four clubs as, in that case, we can test trumps before sniffing out ♦Q.
LARRY COHEN: 5♣. I suppose partner might be 6-4, in which case I am happy here. If not, and he corrects to 5♦, I am surely worth my game acceptance.
CHRISTIAN MARI: 5♣.
JILL MEYERS: 5♣. All my cards are in my partner's suits, so I am bidding game.
The French offer an alternative way to show a maximum, and it makes sense, for what else can it mean by a passed hand?
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4NT. This is the only situation where a minor fit bid at the four-level is not forcing - we tried to play 3NT and we couldn't. But we have way too much for a discouraging 4♦ bid, especially in our partnership, where 3♦ shows a good hand (2NT would be used with minimum opening values). 4NT conveys a clear message when we did not open in first seat.
On this deal from the Lady Milne Trophy, the Northen Ireland West passed 3♦. Partner had AJ/x/KQ10xxxx/Axx so 6♦ was cold. In the other room, North jumped to 4♠ rather than cue-bidding, so East bid 5♦ and gained 10 IMPs despite missing a cold slam. In his podcast discussing this month’s deals, Rob constructed this exact hand as a possibility for East, but he then concluded that partner would bid 3NT over 3♠, and perhaps he is right. Plenty for regular partnerships to discuss, and the comments of Andrew, Marty and Pierre/Joanna are all worth considering.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4♠ |
10 |
8 |
20 |
|
5NT |
9 |
2 |
1 |
|
4NT |
8 |
7 |
6 |
|
4♣ |
7 |
2 |
29 |
|
4♦ |
7 |
1 |
9 |
|
6♣ |
5 |
1 |
3 |
|
6♦ |
5 |
1 |
2 |
|
5♣ |
0 |
0 |
13 |
|
5♦ |
0 |
0 |
8 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.48
For competitors, this is the lowest-scoring deal of the set (and I suspect that quite a few of the largest faction got lucky as they intended to make a non-forcing 4♣ bid). There is little agreement on the panel, who come up with seven different solutions. This situation provides plenty of questions for regular partnerships to discuss. What, specifically, does 4♠ say? What is 4NT? (What would you bid on a good hand with heart support?) Are 4♣/4♦ forcing? Let’s see if the panel can answer at least some of those questions.
Although it attracted only a couple of supporters, this seems like a practical solution to the problem…
BARNET SHENKIN: 5NT. Two places to play.
ROB BRADY: 5NT. Pick a slam, a practical choice. What is 4♠? Is that a slam try with hearts or just a good hand? What about 4NT? I think that should be RKCB for hearts.
Just how do you agree partner’s suit? The next group do not think it is with 4NT…
JILL MEYERS: 4NT. This says I have enough to bid game and I have both minors.
WENFEI WANG: 4NT. This show both minors, 6-4+.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4NT. To establish the minor. I will raise to six.
Liz earns ‘Comment of the Month’ award for honesty…
LIZ McGOWAN: 4NT. "My bids mean exactly what I want them to mean, no more and no less." Surely this shows 6-4 in the minors and a good hand?
CHRISTIAN MARI: 4NT. Showing 5♦/4♣, 5♦/4♥ or 0-4-5-4, all strong hands. No fit, so not Blackwood.
MATS NILSLAND: 4NT.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4NT. This shows a good six-four. I’m not sure what 4♠ should mean here, so I’m not going to make that murky bid.
So, what did those who opted for Andrew’s ‘murky’ choice have to say for themselves?
MARTY BERGEN: 4♠. This is my cheapest forcing bid enroute to slam.
ALAN MOULD: 4♠. I cannot think of anything clever.
DAVID BIRD: 4♠. The slam green light shines brightly, and I will convey the good news.
LARRY COHEN: 4♠. I am not sure where I am going, but can't imagine starting with anything less.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♠. Let’s land in the right minor.
Simon at least thinks he knows that it means…
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♠. Game-forcing with diamonds. I’d rather have better diamonds, but 4NT feels too murky for me.
Pierre and Joanna offer a third alternative meaning for 4NT…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♠. Unfortunately, 4NT would be natural, so we don't have another bid available to show a strong hand.
Morrie at least has a plan…
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 4♠. This is kind of a bookend to Hand 5. I'm hoping partner will bid 4NT to get more information. Over 5♣ I'll raise to 6♣. Over 5♥, I'll bid 5NT.
Sally makes a valid point that certainly makes it easier to bid the hand…
SALLY BROCK: 4♣. I think a negative double of a three-level bid higher than the one opened should be forcing to game.
Although they don’t comment, Cathy and P-O seem to agree…
CATHY BALDYSZ: 4♣.
P-O SUNDELIN: 4♦.
And we finish with a couple of solo efforts…
JOEY SILVER: 6♣. I am more worried about reaching our best fit, than missing a grand in this jammed auction. Of course, any successful slam should score well at this form of scoring.
Expecting 5-5 or 6-5, will partner not pass 6♣ with Qx/AQx in the minors?
HANOI RONDON: 6♦. I can't see how to show my hand at this point so I'll just shoot to the slam I think I have.
On this deal from a World Mixed Pairs final, partner had Q/109xxxx/J10x/AQx. Diamonds behaved (Q-x onside) so 6♦ was the top spot, and made 13 if they did not cash their ace at trick one. Hearts were 3-2, so hearts makes 11 tricks and, at matchpoints, that’s the best spot if you are stopping in game.
What do you think partner will bid over 4♠? 5♦? 5♥? A forcing 4♣ and 5NT seem certain to reach the top spot. 4NT too, if partner is on the same wavelength, although I think Rob’s suggestion that it should be RKC for hearts is a legitimate alternative. How else would you bid something like x/AQxx/AKxxxx/Ax after this start to the auction?
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♦ |
10 |
8 |
14 |
|
2♦ |
9 |
7 |
21 |
|
1♦ |
8 |
6 |
46 |
|
4♦ |
5 |
1 |
1 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
9 |
|
1♥ |
0 |
0 |
8 |
|
5♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.20
This was an apparently simple question of ‘How many diamonds?’ The panel are widely divided, but the competitors produce their largest vote of the month, with almost half deciding that the 1-level is high enough for them. Let’s hear the debate, in ascending order.
ALAN MOULD: 1♦. Has someone taken all of the spades out of this deck? The only rational explanation is that partner has that animal Marc doesn't think exists - a hand too strong for an overcall.
LIZ McGOWAN: 1♦. I don't think partner guarantees diamond support. Indeed, she could have a monster spade hand, so I shall not muddy the waters.
P-O SUNDELIN: 1♦.
WENFEI WANG: 1♦. It looks like partner has a good hand with spades.
HANOI RONDON: 1♦. It's my best suit. What else?
ROB BRADY: 1♦. Where are all the spades? If the opponents have them, I'm going to feel very silly in a minute, but I'll try to suggest a save later. If partner has a power double with spades, I'd like to keep the auction low so we don't get burned. South shouldn't be redoubling with a good major suit so I'll take my chances on the latter hand type.
Going up…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♦. Where are the spades? 544? Or, does partner have a strong double with spades? So, 2♦ is ok.
DAVID BIRD: 2♦. I would need better diamonds to bid any higher.
ZIA MAHMOOD/MATS NILSLAND/BARNET SHENKIN: 2♦.
SALLY BROCK: 2♦. Maybe I should bid 3♦, but it is possible partner has a good hand without much in diamonds.
LARRY COHEN: 2♦. I've always played jumps as weak here, and have found them to be very effective. The reason I am not bidding more (like 3♦) is that it is possible that partner has "the big double" in spades -- and he will not be happy if I bid 3♦.
And, the largest faction on the panel…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♦. For us, this is an automatic pre-empt after this start.
JILL MEYERS: 3♦. Nice and pre-emptive.
JOEY SILVER: 3♦. Hopefully, this will do more damage to the villains than to partner, but it is the bid that best describes the nature of my hand.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♦. Although partner may have a big spade hand, I'm delighted to pre-empt.
SIMON DE WIJS: 3♦. Weak with long diamonds. We will see how they will find their spade (or how partner will squirm with his good spades).
CHRISTIAN MARI/CATHY BALDYSZ: 3♦.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 3♦. Second choice 4♦. They are very likely to have a spade fit, and they could be making anything from 3♠ to a grand. Partner will know what to do given my information.
And, ploughing a lone furrow on this one…
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♦. Bidding to my limit, as usual.
At the table, partner had Axxx/xx/KJxx/AKx. On a good day, you will get doubled in 4♦ for +510 but, if not, 5♦ is still a good save against 4♠. If the opponents end in 4♥, you will need to find your spade ruff(s) to go plus. Fortune certainly favoured the brave on this one.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
6♥ |
10 |
8 |
22 |
|
5♣ |
9 |
6 |
11 |
|
5♥ |
9 |
5 |
9 |
|
4NT |
8 |
1 |
13 |
|
6NT |
7 |
1 |
1 |
|
5NT |
5 |
1 |
1 |
|
4♥ |
3 |
1 |
41 |
|
7♥ |
3 |
0 |
<1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.39
Another hand on which there is little agreement from the panel. The only thing on which nearly everyone agrees is that the competition entrants’ most popular choice (over a third of competitors) is wrong. Let’s start with those who bid hearts…
JILL MEYERS: 4♥. Isn't this what this bid shows?
NO!!! Suppose partner has bid 4♣ with this not unexpected hand, Axxx/Qxxx/Axx/xx, he will surely pass 4♥ and you are cold for 13 tricks. Having started with a takeout double of 3♣, would you not now bid 4♥ with a 4-4-4-1 12-count? I think Jill just had a blind spot here.
Is this closer to what the hand is worth?
BARNET SHENKIN: 5♥. Partner may be weak with 5-5 Majors, or may have some other strong hand, or he could just want to play game in a Major. I started by bidding 4♥ but talked myself into 5♥.
ROB BRADY: 5♥. When I doubled on the first round (any 4♥ bidders directly?) my plan was to show my heart suit later, so I'll do it here. Why not 6♥? Partner hasn't promised a fit. They could be 4-2-5-2 and were looking for spades before putting the contract in diamonds. Or we might be off the top two diamonds. Or there might be a ruff coming. Or trumps split badly. It's often right to go low when the opponents pre-empt.
SIMON DE WIJS/MATS NILSLAND: 5♥.
ANDREW ROBSON: 5♥. I think this is simply quantitative, so about right on values. I have a small concern partner has something like 4♠/5♦ and not 4-4 in the majors, but I hope partner would just jump to 4♠ with that.
Whilst the largest faction on the panel simply bid what they think they can make…
SALLY BROCK: 6♥. I can’t think of a way to bid this scientifically, so I’ll just take a punt.
JOEY SILVER: 6♥. God knows! I certainly don't.
It sounds like you and Mouldie should have a game together, Joey 😊
LIZ McGOWAN: 6♥. Partner does not promise a great hand, probably just the same length in both majors. I can’t think of a way to ask for diamond control, so fingers crossed they do not cash two diamonds on the go.
P-O SUNDELIN/CATHY BALDYSZ/CHRISTIAN MARI: 6♥.
HANOI RONDON: 6♥. Again, I bid the slam I think we can make.
DAVID BIRD: 6♥. This seems a sensible move. You can rarely cover all the bases when the opponents have pre-empted.
Then there are the scientists…
MARTY BERGEN: 5♣. I have too much to make a non-forcing bid.
Wenfei has higher ambitions…
WENFEI WANG: 5♣. I am so surprised that partner bid 4♣. I am now looking for a grand slam.
ALAN MOULD: 5♣. This, then 6♥ next probably.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5♣. Then 6♥ over diamonds.
Dr. MORRIE KLEINPLATZ: 5♣. Over 5♥ I'll bid 6♣. Over 5♦ or 5♠ I'll bid 6♥. Partner will know what to do with two aces.
LARRY COHEN: 5♣. This hand is way too strong for 4♥.
Miguel effectively bids slam, but isn’t prepared to give up on more…
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4NT. I ask for aces. It he has two I will bid 7♥, and if only one, then 6♥.
The French have an eye on the form of scoring…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 6NT. That's wild, but as we will end there anyway...
I won’t tell you partner’s hand, as we may see that in a future month.
Our panel is led this month by David Bird, with an excellent 78/80. Close behind is Alan Mould with 76/80, and the podium for this set is completed by a three-way tie on 75/80 between Larry Cohen, Miguel Villas-Boas and our guest panelist, Dr. Morrie Kleinplatz. Special congratulations to Morrie on an impressive performance.
As usual, our thanks go to all members of our esteemed expert panel, who take the time to submit their bids and comments to both entertain and educate our readers.
I hope to see you all back here next month. Thanks. Marc.
|
David BIRD |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
5♦ |
4♠ |
2♦ |
6♥ |
78 |
|
Alan MOULD |
2NT |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2NT |
5♦ |
4♠ |
1♦ |
5♣ |
76 |
|
Larry COHEN |
2NT |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
5♣ |
4♠ |
2♦ |
5♣ |
75 |
|
Morrie KLEINPLATZ |
2♣ |
3♦ |
4NT |
2NT |
5♦ |
4♠ |
3♦ |
5♣ |
75 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
3♥ |
5♦ |
4NT |
2♦ |
4NT |
75 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
4NT |
4♠ |
3♦ |
6NT |
74 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
2NT |
3♦ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♣ |
4♠ |
3♦ |
5♣ |
73 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
4♦ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
3♥ |
5♣ |
4♠ |
3♦ |
5♥ |
73 |
|
Christian MARI |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
5♣ |
4NT |
3♦ |
6♥ |
73 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
2NT |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
4♦ |
5NT |
2♦ |
5♥ |
73 |
|
Rob BRADY |
2NT |
4♣ |
Dbl |
2♠ |
5♦ |
5NT |
1♦ |
5♥ |
72 |
|
Sally BROCK |
2NT |
3♦ |
5♦ |
2NT |
5♣ |
4♣ |
2♦ |
6♥ |
72 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
2♣ |
3♥ |
5♦ |
3♥ |
4♦ |
4♠ |
2♦ |
5♣ |
70 |
|
P-O SUNDELIN |
2NT |
4NT |
5♦ |
2NT |
5♦ |
4♦ |
1♦ |
6♥ |
70 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
2♣ |
3♠ |
5♦ |
2NT |
5♣ |
6♦ |
1♦ |
6♥ |
69 |
|
Joey SILVER |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
Pass |
4♦ |
6♣ |
3♦ |
6♥ |
69 |
|
Cathy BALDYSZ |
2♣ |
4♣ |
4NT |
Pass |
5♦ |
4♣ |
3♦ |
6♥ |
67 |
|
Liz McGOWAN |
3♠ |
3♦ |
5♦ |
2♠ |
4♦ |
4NT |
1♦ |
6♥ |
67 |
|
Mats NILSLAND |
2NT |
4NT |
Dbl |
3♠ |
4♦ |
4NT |
2♦ |
5♥ |
67 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
3♠ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
5♦ |
4NT |
1♦ |
5♣ |
67 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
2NT |
3♠ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♦ |
4NT |
4♦ |
5♥ |
66 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
2♣ |
4♣ |
4NT |
3♠ |
5♣ |
4NT |
3♦ |
4♥ |
60 |
|
TOP SCORE |
2♣ |
3♦ |
Dbl |
2NT/3♥ |
5♦ |
4♠ |
3♦ |
6♥ |
|
|
HAND 1: |
2♣ 10 |
2NT 9 |
3♠ 6 |
4♦ 5 |
4♥ 2 |
|
|
HAND 2: |
3♦ 10 |
3♠ 9 |
4♣/4NT 8 |
3♥/4♦ 6 |
6NT 4 |
6♣ 2 |
|
HAND 3: |
Dbl 10 |
5♦ 8 |
4NT 6 |
Pass 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 4: |
2NT/3♥ 10 |
2♠ 9 |
3♠/Pass 6 |
4♠ 2 |
|
|
|
HAND 5: |
5♦ 10 |
5♣ 9 |
4♦ 8 |
4NT 7 |
6♦ 4 |
4♠ 3 |
|
HAND 6: |
4♠ 10 |
5NT 9 |
4NT 8 |
4♣/4♦ 7 |
6♣/6♦ 5 |
|
|
HAND 7: |
3♦ 10 |
2♦ 9 |
1♦ 8 |
4♦ 5 |
Pass 2 |
|
|
HAND 8: |
6♥ 10 |
5♥/5♣ 9 |
4NT 8 |
6NT 7 |
5NT 5 |
4♥/7♥ 3 |
|
HAND 1: |
6.18 |
|
HAND 2: |
7.64 |
|
HAND 3: |
7.60 |
|
HAND 4: |
7.48 |
|
HAND 5: |
7.45 |
|
HAND 6: |
5.48 |
|
HAND 7: |
7.20 |
|
HAND 8: |
6.39 |
