Contest conducted by Marc Smith
We are now three-quarters of the way through the annual competition and, after this month, regular competition entrants will begin discarding their poorest scores. Now is the time to cement your place in the Top 20 as we head for the pointy end of the competition.
In a couple of weeks, a number of panelists will be heading off to Argentina for the world championships. We will not know the results by the time I write the October article but, the following month, I’ll be hoping to report that a number of panelists have won medals. Good luck and safe travels to all those heading to South America.
This month’s guest panelists are the co-winners of the July competition, Jon Cooke from England and Peter Teisen from Denmark. Jon has been a regular on the English tournament circuit for around 40 years. He says, “I enjoy the bidding challenges. This month I took a new approach of trying to pick the bid I thought the panel would choose rather than the one I thought was best, and it seems to have led to a better score!" Peter is a member of the Danish squad that will be competing in the Seniors Teams at the aforementioned world championships in Argentina in October.
A couple of this month’s hands have been submitted by regular competition entrants. Hand 2 comes from Simon Mostyn and Hand 4 from Venkatesh Ramaratnam. Thanks to both of them. If you have a hand that you think would produce an interesting panel discussion, please send me details.
A couple of hands in this set really divided the panel, and on only three deals did they produce a clear majority. With a number of close decisions, this rates to be a high-scoring month, with plenty of scores in the 70s, although a perfect 80/80 may prove illusive.
The most popular action chosen by competition entrants scores ‘10’ on six of the eight hands, and voting with the largest group of competitors this month scores an impressive 73/80 (the first time that figure has been in the 70s this year). The average score this month is 52.83 (up from 48.67 on Set 24-08). Enough from me. Let’s get to it…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
12 |
49 |
|
2NT |
9 |
11 |
17 |
|
3♣ |
5 |
1 |
24 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.63
This turned out to be a straight two-way choice for the panel, with only one dissenter, and almost half of competition entrants also agreed with the majority choice.
JILL MEYERS: 2NT. This looks like the best description of my hand.
ALAN MOULD: 2NT. Maybe partner has a stop.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2NT. A little lie... Let’s hope it’s the right one.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2NT. One flaw but, apart from that, a good way into the auction in terms of values and shape.
HANOI RONDON: 2NT. I hope partner helps with the diamond stopper if we remain in NT. Otherwise, I have stated my strength pretty well.
JOEY SILVER: 2NT. My lack of diamond stopper is compensated by my 18 HCP combined with my lack of any sensible alternative.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 2NT.
ANDY HUNG: 2NT. This is close enough to a stopper, particularly these days, when the pre-emptor will be lucky to have one honour in their suit in first seat at favourable.
LARRY COHEN: 2NT. Even if they have ♦AKQxxx, they might believe me.
Peter had no doubt…
PETER TEISEN: 2NT. Any other bid looks insane.
David offers his assessment of the alternatives.
DAVID BIRD: 2NT. Not perfect, obviously, but it offers partner a limit-bid springboard. I don't like 3♣ at all. I suppose you might survive a double, intending to rebid 3♣, rather than 2NT, if partner bids 2♥.
The doublers seem equally convinced in the merits of their choice.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Dbl. I don’t see any other options.
MARTY BERGEN: Dbl. Obviously, although very imperfect.
SIMON HULT: Dbl.
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. I might as well start with the most flexible bid if no other bid does my hand justice.
SJOERT BRINK: Dbl. I am strong enough to listen to how the bidding continues. 2NT would be my alternative, but I am a bit too strong and not enough stopper. Some people will argue that those combined is exactly 2NT but, for me, minus and minus is just more minus...
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. Horrible! But, they are at green, so South may not have such good diamonds. Even if diamonds were not a problem, I’m on the good side for 2NT (surely the only other possibility).
Some tell us what they plan to do next.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. I plan to bid 2NT next, if possible.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. Over 2♥, I will bid a natural 3♣, but over 2♠ I will continue with a 3♦ cue-bid.
Pierre and Joanna offer a comprehensive summation of the problem and, as things turn out (see below), Joanna’s inclination is spot on.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. If we don't pass (we are curious to see if it is some expert's choice), our options are limited do Double, 2NT or 3♣. I know that, at the table, I would bid 2NT. However, Joanna has convinced me that, if 3NT is our best spot, we might be playing from the wrong hand (for example, Ax in East's hand) and that Double, followed by 3♣ (not ideal) over 2♥ (or 3♦ over 2♠) is probably better.
Only a couple considered passing as an alternative.
P-O SUNDELIN: Dbl. Reluctantly. I might have passed with reversed vulnerabilities.
PAUL MARSTON: Dbl. I am too strong to go quietly, and this hand is not about clubs.
Jon finds himself flying solo with the only other viable choice.
JON COOKE: 3♣. Nothing is very satisfactory. At least bidding 3♣ may get partner to try 3NT with a card, a club honour and a big diamond. Double might work if partner has a five-card major, but could be silly opposite 4-4-2-3 (probably the most likely shape). Bidding NT wrong-sides if partner has ♦A-x, and sometimes they just cash the diamonds.
I confess that I was in the 2NT camp, but that would have been the only losing option at the table. Partner had xx/AJ10x/xx/KQxxx, so double or 3♣ would likely get you to the cold 5♣, whereas 2NT will surely end in 3NT-2. An unlikely Pass at least gets a plus score, with 2♦ probably going a couple down.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
6♥ |
10 |
6 |
5 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
5 |
12 |
|
4♦ |
8 |
1 |
3 |
|
3♦ |
8 |
0 |
3 |
|
2NT |
7 |
3 |
2 |
|
4♥ |
7 |
4 |
38 |
|
5♥ |
7 |
2 |
11 |
|
2♥ |
5 |
2 |
1 |
|
2♦ |
5 |
1 |
6 |
|
Redbl |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
3♥ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
5♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 5.86
Well, this one was a doozie, with our experts suggesting eight possible solutions, and the most popular attracting only a quarter of panelists. Competitors supported almost twice as many solutions, with the largest group choosing an option that attracted a small but illustrious group of panel members.
I was concerned at one point that 4♣ was going to be the most popular bid, as giving that choice top marks would seem to be unfair to competition entrants who read the system and found “All jumps below game in competitive auctions are fit showing”. The reason for advocating this blanket method is that it allows new and inexperienced partnerships to make use of fit-showing jumps without running into misunderstandings about when they are fit-showing and when they are splinters – they are always fit-showing. I awarded 4♣, 4♦ and a 3♦ fit jump all the same mark - and competitors who chose 4♣ can be grateful to those panelists who did not notice what the system said 😊
We begin with those who just raise hearts, starting with the sandbaggers…
SALLY BROCK: 2♥. This is not really in my nature! But it is too tempting. If I bid 4♥, surely that is a transfer to 4♠! Let’s take it slowly and hope it looks as if I’m being pushed wherever it is that I go!
SJOERT BRINK: 2♥. Let's try to get pushed up and doubled at some level. Obviously 4♣, 5♥, 4♥, all could work, but I think that when it looks like a save, I'll get doubled at a cheaper level...
Some opt for a constructive raise…
JON COOKE: 2NT. These hands are more about overall strategy than a single bid. Do we want to exploit our opposition or make some kind of theoretically optimal bid? I want to put myself in a position to ask for a club lead against a 6♠ ‘save’, and I want to find out how well our hands fit. Let’s start with 2NT, showing a good raise, and listen for a round.
ANDY HUNG: 2NT.
P-O SUNDELIN: 2NT. This seems to be a complete guess. A void-showing bid or just a pre-empt may easily help ..... someone. I am planning on showing near-eternal support from here on.
Is this the way to buy the hand, perhaps?
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♥. No tricks for me. I will bid 4♥ and 5♥ and hope to get to play there.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♥. To make 6♥ later look like a save.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♥. An underbid, but I intend to follow with 5♥, then 6♥ if forced. My other option is to go straight to 6♥, on the ‘Last Guess’ principle, and that's what I would do on some days.
BARNET SHENKIN: 4♥. I plan to keep bidding. Maybe I will bid 7♣ for the lead if the opponents bid 6♠.
Or just a little higher.?
WENFEI WANG: 5♥. If the opponent bid 5♠ and partner doesn’t double, I will then bid 6♥.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 5♥.
The largest group of panelists thought this was the time to go the whole hog…
PETER TEISEN: 6♥. Let the opponents take it from here.
PAUL MARSTON: 6♥. We will never work this out, so let's take a reasonable shot and give them the last guess.
Hanoi sums up the case for the pragmatic choice.
HANOI RONDON: 6♥. I have no idea which splinter is better, whether we have this slam or seven, or if the hand belongs to us or to them. So, I'll just bid what I would like to make and leave the opponents to sort it out.
DAVID BIRD: 6♥. This is a fair two-way punt: 6♥ may make, or it may get a seriously long way up North's nose. The system offers us fit-showing bids in diamonds. but it seems more important to pre-empt to the limit. Partner would be guessing at my strength after I bid diamonds at any level.
LARRY COHEN: 6♥. Abandoning science and bidding to where I might eventually compete anyway. Even opposite the wrong ace (say, Jxx/AKxxx/Qx/Axx) we might make this on the wrong lead.
Most of this group are intending to give the last guess to the opponents, except for one…
JOEY SILVER: 6♥. This hand is not for sale below 7♠! I intend to bid 7♣ over 6♠ to help my ox with the lead, should it come to that.
The rest make an attempt to work out who the hand belongs to before the auction reaches the stratosphere… some via a splinter (if available)…
MARTY BERGEN: 4♣. Points Schmoints!
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 4♣. I believe splinters are standard these days.
SIMON HULT: 4♣.
JILL MEYERS: 4♣. Splinter. I certainly have a lot of playing strength. If they bid 4♠, I will bid 5♦.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♣. Showing shortage and giving partner a possible lead against 6♠ or 7♠ doubled.
Only Pierre and Joanna tried to achieve that goal via a fit-showing raise (which was also my choice when first given the problem).
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♦. This is fit-showing, with at least ten cards in the red suits. Joanna prefers 2♣ (transfer) before bidding hearts as high as necessary, because 4♦ for us would normally show a better suit.
It’s hard to argue with Alan’s sentiment, although such freak hands do sometimes occur in real life too.
ALAN MOULD: 2♦. This is a daft question in my view, in that it seriously depends on who you are playing against and just how naive you think they are. Unless you are playing against the kindergarten, no one believes 2♥ or 3♥ bids and being "pushed" anymore. You could try a flat-out psyche, like 1NT or 1♠ or something but, again, no one is going to be fooled when you later start bidding hearts at the five-level. Today I will try 2♦ and see if I can gauge whether or not we have any kind of double fit. Ask me tomorrow and I will bid something else. I suspect it doesn't much matter as I suspect it will come down to me guessing whether I can afford to bid 7♥ over 6♠, and risk them bidding 7♠.
Partner had xxx/AKJxx/Q/J9xx so 5♥ is just off two aces. Diamonds were 3-3 and hearts 1-1, so they could make only ten tricks in spades, but 5♠ was still cheap for them. Perhaps 4♥ and then 5♥ is the winning choice. Perhaps the immediate jump to 6♥ will talk them into taking the phantom save. I suspect, at the table, there would be few plus scores for whichever side ended up as declarer, so it may depend on how quickly you can get off the merry-go-round.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
11 |
51 |
|
4♥ |
9 |
11 |
8 |
|
Pass |
5 |
2 |
28 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
4♣ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.22
This is the second of three hands this month on which the panel are split mainly between only two options. With nearly two-thirds of competition entrants voting for one of those choice, this is another fairly high-scoring deal.
HANOI RONDON: 4♥. I intended to double and then show my suit, so that's exactly what I'll do.
JILL MEYERS: 4♥. They are psyching on my left. And, if they are not, I'll still take my chances.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4♥. With 3♥ surely physic by my opponent, I have to show hearts now.
ANDY HUNG: 4♥. Never believe the responder's suit when the opponents at favourable have pre-empted and responded in a new suit.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♥. All partnerships should agree that an opponent's new suit after their partner's pre-empt is a potential psyche.
SIMON HULT: 4♥.
DAVID BIRD: 4♥. Anything else risks a disaster in a round or two. My club shortage suggests that North is operating.
SALLY BROCK: 4♥. I can’t see how this can be other than natural. If I had some sort of spade/diamond two-suiter, I would have bid 4♦ in the first place (or 4NT now).
PETER TEISEN: 4♥. North’s bid is an obvious bluff. Any 2-suiter would not have doubled but bid otherwise over South’s 3♣, so 4♥ must be natural.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♥. This is natural (similar to 1♣-X-1♥-P-1NT-2♥).
JOEY SILVER: 4♥. Risking a modest plus for hopefully one more substantial.
They all think things should be clear for partner. The other half of the panel try to make sure there is no room for misunderstanding. I think they just edge the debate, and hence earn the extra point…
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. If I bid 4♥ now, it may be misunderstood. If I double now, then North will run, exposing the psyche and, when I then bid hearts, it will be clear.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Dbl. North will probably run to 4♣. When I then bid hearts, it will be obvious that it is natural and very strong.
ZIA MAHMOOD: Dbl. No one has the balls to pass this with a psyche so, when North bids 4♣, it should be clear that my later 4♥ bid is natural.
Jon sums up the logic for this half of the panel.
JON COOKE: Dbl. It looks like LHO has psyched, but it may not be obvious from partner’s side of the table. After my double, I expect North to run to 4♣, and I can then bid 4♥ next. Getting LHO to run will help partner work out what is happening.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl: Let's start by flushing out North's hoary old joke. Maybe I should just bid 3NT...
Now that would test partner’s powers of deduction, Alan.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. I think they’re psychic.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. For now. When North runs and I bid 4♥, I hope partner understands.
SJOERT BRINK: Dbl. I will double and then bid 4♥ next. Who knows, maybe we will reach our spade fit...
A couple considered the mathematics of passing.
PAUL MARSTON: Dbl. Next, I will bid 4♥. I am not willing to accept even a large number of 50s.
(That was the choice made at the table, and it was a large number of 50s too – EIGHT!)
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Obviously a baby psyche. Passing will yield about 300/350; that's about an 8-IMP loss compared to 4♥ (or 4♠) making. Given that we think we can make 4M, we have to smoke North out.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. Nice psyche by North (not 100% sure, but say 95%). Pass is definitely an option (are we sure to make a game ourselves?) but we prefer to go ahead, because of the vulnerability. When North runs to 4♣ and we then bid 4♥ (unless partner bids spades) the situation should be clear to everyone. Our one concern is that we might score more defending 3♥ than we can get from 5♣-doubled!
Only a couple agreed with what the Irish player did at the recent European Championships in Denmark.
P-O SUNDELIN: Pass. I give up. A double probably makes partner bid 4♦, and then 4♥ may not be understood.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Pass.
At the table, Boye Brogeland was happy to go eight down in 3♥ for -400 (and a 7-IMP gain against his teammates’ +680). East held AJx/xxx/Q109xx/xx, so it is a close call whether he bids on over 4♥, whichever route you take to get there. That partner’s decision is close is no surprise as slam is marginal, essentially needing to avoid a trump loser with Q-x-x-x missing, although there are some small residual chances if you have to lose a heart. At the table, twelve tricks were easy with South holding ♥Q-x.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
4NT |
10 |
13 |
24 |
|
5NT |
8 |
7 |
9 |
|
5♥ |
6 |
3 |
14 |
|
Dbl |
5 |
1 |
10 |
|
6♦ |
2 |
0 |
8 |
|
6♣ |
2 |
0 |
8 |
|
5♦ |
0 |
0 |
15 |
|
5♣ |
0 |
0 |
8 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 4.78
The panel produced a majority vote, although there was not complete unanimity about what the bid should mean. Almost a quarter of competition entrants agreed with the panel’s opinion, but the rest were spread over a large number of options. Let’s start with the minority choices.
BARNET SHENKIN: 5NT. Pick a slam.
HANOI RONDON: 5NT. Old reliable: pick a slam.
WENFEI WANG: 5NT. This seems to be the most obvious way to make partner pick a slam.
There were differing views on what to do next…
MARTY BERGEN: 5NT. Pick a slam. We could be cold for seven, but I will be content if we can get to our best small slam (and 4NT here should be takeout too).
ANDREW ROBSON: 5NT. Pick a slam. Partner is very likely to have an ace, so let’s just have him choose the (minor-suit) strain. 4NT then bid on is also possible, but I can't see how we can intelligently get to seven, so what's the point?
Some were more ambitious.
SIMON DE WIJS: 5NT. I will raise my partner’s choice. I don't see a way to find out, but I think the grand is likely to make.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5NT. A later 7♣ or 7NT seems likely.
A few offered alternative routes.
ANDY HUNG: 5♥. Will partner have the worst of the worst for me? I'll give him a bit of room to make some noise.
P-O SUNDELIN: 5♥.
PAUL MARSTON: 5♥. Let's sort out the trump suit. Gonna play six.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Dbl.
The majority were of one voice but two minds… firstly, those who think or hope that 4NT asks for key-cards…
JOEY SILVER: 4NT. I am not sure if this is Blackwood, but if I hear 5♥ I will assume partner has two aces and guess to bid 7♣.
SIMON HULT: 4NT.
SALLY BROCK: 4NT. I’m not sure whether this is RKCB or asking him to choose a minor. If he thinks it is RKCB and a grand is on, he will need to bid 5♥, so I’ll be able to tell. If he bids a minor, I’ll bid 5♥, and maybe he will bid a grand if he has two aces.
LARRY COHEN: 4NT. My partners don't pysche, so I am driving to at least a small slam. In my dreams, this is ace-asking so, if by some chance partner bids 5♥, I will bid seven something. Likely, partner will bid 5m and I will shrug and settle for a small slam.
The rest were clear that it is not Blackwood.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4NT. This is not keycard. We’ll follow with 5NT. As we don't bid 5♥, we can't be void in the suit. With two aces and the ♦Q, partner will know what we are looking for and we will end up playing 7NT. However, because of the risk of misunderstanding, we believe it's really worth considering a direct bid of 7NT. When partner opened Axxx/KJ/Q/J109xxx, that will be another bad board, that's all.
There was some support for 5NT as a grand slam try next…
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 4NT. Having found out which minor will be trumps, I will then continue with 5NT to show grand slam interest.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 4NT. I first establish which minor will be trumps with 4NT, and then 5NT should be inviting a grand slam.
Although perhaps it is RKCB…
PETER TEISEN: 4NT. Asking for minor-suit preference. (Surely, nobody plays Blackwood in this position.) After partner has revealed his choice of minor, 5NT should be RKCB, revealing whether we play six or seven.
But maybe 5♠ is better, denying a heart void…
SJOERT BRINK: 4NT. This should be minors. After partner’s preference, I will likely continue with 5♠, showing a grand slam try without first control in hearts.
Or 5♥…?
JILL MEYERS: 4NT. This shows long diamonds and three clubs (maybe four). If partner bids 5♣, I will continue with 5♥. We are going to be in some slam.
JON COOKE: 4NT. It is hard to bid this to a grand now. Partner is going to hate to cooperate with so little in the minors, even if he has the two major-suit aces. For now, 4NT offer minors. Let’s do that first to find our strain. Personally, I play 5♥ as keycard over a response of 5♦, which would be incredibly useful here, but sadly that’s not standard.
Plenty there for regular partnerships to discuss. Or, you could just plan to pick a level next, with various degrees of enthusiasm…
DAVID BIRD: 4NT. This may not help me much when it comes to assessing the right level, but what will? A pick-a-slam 5NT seems pointless. What response are you hoping for? Partner probably has some dismal minimum with jack-high clubs, so how can he cooperate?
ALAN MOULD: 4NT. Seriously?? I will find out which minor I am supposed to be playing in and then probably bid seven. Fortunately, I don't have to decide that yet.
Fortune favored the brave on this deal from a recent junior world championship. Partner held Axxx/AJ/x/J10xxxx so 7♣ was an easy make. 7NT would also have made (on a 3-3 spade break after a heart lead). At the table, our Indian correspondent who sent me the hand risked a double, heard partner bid 4♠, and continued 5NT-6♣-6♥-7♣ to reach the best contract.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♠ |
10 |
8 |
40 |
|
Pass |
9 |
7 |
17 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
5 |
1 |
|
3NT |
7 |
4 |
9 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
28 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.24
This is surely the toughest problem of this set, and perhaps of the year so far, with the panel almost split four ways. Perhaps the 4♣ bidders just edged the debate, but as I am still not sure I am any wiser as to what is the best bid, I simply scored it by weight of numbers, with everyone scoring fairly well. More than a third of competition entrants agree with the largest faction on the panel, but the next largest group (more than a quarter) voted for a choice that found no support at all on the panel. Let’s start with the most popular choice.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♠. There is no good bid.
LARRY COHEN: 3♠. Yes, I'd like better spades, but no other call fits here.
Some think passing is the alternative.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 3♠. I am too strong to pass.
ANDY HUNG: 3♠. Not ideal, but partner might not be able to save me if I pass.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♠. If I pass now and my partner doubles, I will pass again? The problem is that we may be cold for 7♠ with 3♥-doubled going down only three of four, so I prefer to bid 3♠.
COOKE: 3♠. Another really tough problem. We have enough defence to guarantee a plus score, yet we are also likely to make game, or even slam, if we have a fit. I’m just going to bid 3♠ and hope partner makes a try with ♠A-K-x-x and a singleton heart.
Hanoi’s alternative was 3NT…
HANOI RONDON: 3♠. Bidding 3NT probably means we will miss a spade fit. Although 3♠ misses the chance of playing 3NT, that might not be a bad thing given our rather large hole in the diamond department.
…and Andrew raises the possibility of getting imaginative.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♠. A creative 4♣ non-leaping Michaels could hit the jackpot, but I think 3♠ is normal. The chances are that partner will have a spade fit, given that he has very few hearts.
So, what is the case for 3NT rather than spades?
MARTY BERGEN: 3NT. My usual positive action on these auctions, but definitely, definitely not a happy one.
SALLY BROCK: 3NT. This could (obviously) be ridiculous, but it’s my best guess. There seems to be a common theme this month!
Calling it judgement rather than guesswork at least makes it sound as if we might know what we are doing, Sally 😊
WENFEI WANG: 3NT. I don’t like to bid 3♠, as partner may raise to 4♠ with just two small.
Pierre did some analysis on the deal and tells us what the percentages say.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3NT. Marc, we are already exhausted after the first four deals. Why such a torture? We decided to bid 3NT (rather than Double, 3♠ or Pass) before submitting the hand to DealMasterPro (South's hand being easy to specify). The rate of success of 3NT is 65%, and the same for 4♠ (when one makes, the other one makes also most of the time). As 3♥ is down three or four on average, we can note that Pass (let them play... and, from time to time, East will have enough to balance) is a reasonable option, unless you feel able to bid a slam. (6♠ can be made on 30% of the boards, and 6♣ on 20%).
I didn’t originally consider this option, but you can decide for yourself if they have a good case…
P-O SUNDELIN: 4♣. I strongly considered a pass, but I’ll show 5-5 in the black suits if that is our system.
PETER TEISEN: 4♣. Non-Leaping Michaels, forcing and showing 5-5 with clubs and spades. Second choice would be 3NT.
Simon makes a strong point in favour of this option.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♣. At first, I doubled, but now I think that is too scary, so I'll settle for showing a black-suit two-suiter with this hand. At least I will not be going down in 3♠ when we can make 6♣.
SJOERT BRINK: 4♣. I would bid either 4♣ (non-leaping Michaels) or 4♥ (spades and minor), depending on our agreements. The problem is that there is no good solution. Pass, 3♠, 3NT, all have both advantages and disadvantages. Describing my hand as both black suits seems to be the best option, unless the optimum contract turns out to be either 3NT or defending 3♥-doubled. Life is tough!
DAVID BIRD: 4♣. Passing seems out of the question. If you pick up +250 for five down, while six of a black suit is cold, you will get a weird glance from across the table. I have only four clubs for this Michaels bid, yes, but the clubs are as near to a five-carder as you can get.
Although out-numbered almost 2-to-1 by the bidders, the next faction is the second-largest on the panel, and a number of other panelists also mentioned it as an option, hence the marking.
JOEY SILVER: Pass. I expect partner to look for any excuse to act with heart shortness. If he passes, chances are fair to good we are in our best spot.
ALAN MOULD: Pass. I haven't the faintest idea which of Pass, 3♠ or 3NT is right. Presumably, the panel will tell me.
I’m not sure they did this time, Alan. We’re all still fairly much in the dark.
JILL MEYERS: Pass. This is not enough for 3♠. Partner is short in hearts. Let her reopen if she has values, and then we can decide.
ZIA MAHMOOD: Pass. I Pass and hope that partner can double back in.
SIMON HULT: Pass.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Pass.
Only one panelist thought this was an easy problem…
PAUL MARSTON: Pass. This is clear for me. My decision comes on the next round, if there is one.
When the deal occurred at the table, partner had KJxx/x/10xxx/Qxxx. Clubs were 3-2, so there was no ruff available against 6♠. However, there was a spade ruff against 6♣. Anyone who passed hoping partner would reopen with a double at least went plus, which is more than can be said for those who tried their luck in 3NT. As Sjoert observed, it can sometimes be a really tough game.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Pass |
10 |
17 |
45 |
|
Dbl |
7 |
7 |
31 |
|
3NT |
3 |
0 |
13 |
|
4♣ |
3 |
0 |
10 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.36
This was the most straightforward deal of this set. A simple two-way choice for the panel, it produced the month’s largest majority vote. Close to half of competitors scored a maximum, with half of the rest following the example of the rest of the panel. Essentially, it was a question of do you or don’t you…
ALAN MOULD: Pass. This is not close in my view.
ZIA MAHMOOD: Pass. A plus seems likely defending. Partner’s bid is protective, so there is no reason to get excited.
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. On these auctions, when partner has 0-1 cards in their suit, I want him to double even if very light.
ANDY HUNG: Pass. Partner will double again if he has more than a minimum.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. My partner has a singleton or void in spades, and if he has a good hand he will double again.
CATHY BALDYSZ/P-O SUNDELIN/SIMON HULT/BARNET SHENKIN: Pass.
LARRY COHEN: Pass. I am delighted that partner pushed them up a level (had he passed, we'd be defending 2♠). I don't punish my partners for pre-balancing with something like x/Kxxx/Axxx/KJxx.
A couple briefly considered 3NT as an alternative.
SJOERT BRINK: Pass. When the opponents open and bid, 3NT isn't generally an option (bad breaks, not enough points, etc etc). So, basically, pass looks like the only sensible action here.
JON COOKE: Pass. I have only one spade stop, and finesses in the red suits are into the opening bidder, so I don’t fancy 3NT. Let’s go plus defending.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Pass. The next problem may be what to bid if partner doubles again.
Joey has the answer to that one too…
JOEY SILVER: Pass. Chances are that partner, with a decent hand and spade shortness, will act again. I will pass again should I see or hear another Double. No one can accuse me of overbidding on this hand. I guess age has caught up with me.
A few panelists tell us what they think the main alternative would mean for them…
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Pass. There are probably 17 (9+8) total tricks, sometimes 18, so there is no reason to bid. At matchpoints, Joanna would double (showing points and some spades but not 100% penalty).
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. I would play double as ‘cards’, not penalties here, but I don't really want partner to bid if he has a normal hand. 3NT needs a lot opposite, and 4♣ seems to be a nothing bid, so I'll pass and collect about +100.
JILL MEYERS: Pass. I am not strong enough for 3NT, and I do not have enough clubs for 4♣. I think a double of 3♠ would be interpreted as responsive, not penalty.
A third of the panel thought the hand was worth action, although they do not all in agreement as to what their choice means.
PETER TEISEN: Dbl. Points and not four hearts.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. Takeout, game try.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. Partner should have a well-packed three-suiter vulnerable. Passing seems too timid.
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. I am not sure exactly what it means, but I’m not sure that I care. For me, it denies four hearts.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Not penalty, obviously. I expect partner to bid his longest minor over this, but maybe he will surprise me.
Only a couple of panelists intended their double for penalties.
PAUL MARSTON: Dbl. These boys can play for twice the price.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. I don't think they can make nine tricks. I'm leading a heart and expecting five or six tricks in defence.
Just about all actions would have scored well here. Partner held ---/A10xx/AKxx/KJxxx, so the responsive double, which was my choice at the table, got us to the making 5♣. 3NT also has nine easy tricks. If you pass now, partner will surely double again when 3♠ comes back to him, so you are likely to collect +500 if you follow Joey’s lead and pass for penalties at that stage.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♠ |
10 |
13 |
33 |
|
4♣ |
7 |
5 |
31 |
|
4♦ |
7 |
2 |
3 |
|
4♠ |
6 |
3 |
20 |
|
2♠ |
4 |
1 |
6 |
|
2♦ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
2♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.12
This hand is purely a question of valuation. The panel produces a majority choice, and a third of competitors agree with them. We start with the majority.
ALAN MOULD: 3♠. This is what it is worth. Partner obviously has enough for game and, if he makes a slam try, I can fully co-operate.
WENFEI WANG: 3♠. This shows an unbalanced hand and around 14-16 HCP, which is about what I have.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♠.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♠. Anything higher will attract the wrong impression.
A couple thought they were very close to more…
HANOI RONDON: 3♠. If I could bid 3.5♠, I'd be much happier. However, partner is very likely to bid again, so I'll take the low road.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♠. If my hearts were K-x-x, I'd bid 4♣.
JON COOKE: 3♠. With neither a heart control nor the ace of my main suit, I am not quite worth 4♣.
ANDREW ROBSON: 3♠. In a way, I'm worth more but, if partner passes, he probably has some 4-3-1-5 full of club values. I imagine we have some method over 3♠ (eg 3NT asking for shortage), and that will suit us fine.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 3♠. without agreement I am scared to make another bid.
It sounds as if Giorgio might have been tempted by 4♦ if he was sure that partner would understand it to show this hand type.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♠. I don’t have enough to bid 4♣.
P-O SUNDELIN: 3♠. Might peaking help? Again, showing a void will help partner if he has KJxxx/Kx/Ax/xxxx but it will steer them to the right lead opposite KJxxx/xxx/xx/AKx.
Jill perhaps considered bidding less…
JILL MEYERS: 3♠. A little short on HCP perhaps, but I have great trumps and very good diamonds.
That left Sally flying solo with a strategic underbid.
SALLY BROCK: 2♠. For me, to bid 4♠ shows lots of points, and I’m also afraid that partner will expect more for 4♣. So. I’ll try ‘walking the dog’. I am working on the assumption that, at Love All, someone will bid again. Hopefully, I will then be able to describe my hand better. When I bid 4♣ on the next round, partner should get the message. It might not work, but it seems like a plan!!
The rest were all more gung-ho...
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♠. I have enough playing-strength to bid game, but not enough to splinter.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 4♠.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♠. We play this as showing 6-4 with good suits, but not as good a hand as bidding 4♦. We won't blame those who bid only 3♠ (probably Joanna's choice at the table) to keep more space open, in case partner has a slammish hand.
And a few went the whole hog.
LARRY COHEN: 4♣. A lot of upgrading, but worth it. Picture ♠Kxxxx and not much else, and we still have play for 4♠.
SJOERT BRINK: 4♣. My first thought was 4♠, but it might be important to show my void on the way...
ANDY HUNG: 4♣. 3♠ might get passed out and 4♠ hinders slam exploration (our void being a key feature), so I'm prepared to make the slight overbid to show my hand.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♣. I am bidding game in spades. It makes sense to show why.
It surely cannot be an overbid if Mr Conservative himself is in the camp.
DAVID BIRD: 4♣. This seems the most obvious bid of the set. No-one can object on values, when I have a four-loser hand.
A couple preferred to show the other main feature of their hand.
PETER TEISEN: 4♦. Showing 4+ spades and 6+ diamonds, forcing to game.
JOEY SILVER: 4♦. In the colonies, this bid shows a decent 6-4 in the pointed suits. Hopefully, they play it the same way in the Mother Country.
At the table, Michal Klukowski also rebid 4♦. Partner had KJxx/KJ10/109x/K10x, so most roads would seem to lead to 4♠. However, you can never tell: in the Spingold match where the hand occurred, +420 was worth 12 IMPs, as East mysteriously went five down in 3NT at the other table!
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
11 |
7 |
|
4♠ |
8 |
6 |
9 |
|
4♦ |
7 |
1 |
22 |
|
3♠ |
6 |
3 |
35 |
|
Pass |
6 |
3 |
26 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.62
No majority from the panel, but a clear favorite nonetheless. More than half of competition entrants vote with the quarter of the panel who take a conservative approach. Let’s start with that faction of the panel…
MARTY BERGEN: Pass. This is a LOTT pass. I want my partners to overcall with excellent suits, even with modest strength.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Pass.
PETER TEISEN: Pass. I am not punishing partner for his lead-directing bid.
And, a little more ambitious.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♠. You never know… This may be ok, although I don’t want my partners to make this bid when I have protected.
JON COOKE: 3♠. This one is really close. Once in a while, partner has some freak that lets him raise 3♠, so let’s do that. My main expectation is that we lose a spade, two hearts and a club, and they lose two diamonds, a spade and a club. Either of us could lose one more but once in a while partner, with a freak, bids game and swings it.
JILL MEYERS: 3♠. Partner is bidding vulnerable in a live auction. I am tempted to bid 4♠, but I don't want to punish her for bidding on AKxxxx and out.
At the other end of the scale, a quarter of the panel thinks the hand is worth game.
PAUL MARSTON: 4♠. Nothing is clear, so I am grabbing the spot that pays the best odds if I am right.
HANOI RONDON: 4♠. We're vulnerable. I trust my partner to be making a reasonable bid, so I’ll take a shot at game with my well-placed values.
JOEY SILVER: 4♠. This hand is worth more than a competitive 3♠. It is worth a game try, so I will make one!
P-O SUNDELIN: 4♠. I am imagining AQ10xxx/x/10xx/Qxx with South holding something like Kxx/AKxx/Qxx/AJ10.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 4♠. If I knew partner was on the same wavelength, I would prefer 4♦, as I surely cannot bid that naturally without some spade support.
Larry did take that option…
LARRY COHEN: 4♦. Partner could have passed and then balanced with 2♠, so I expect values and this might lead us somewhere. Unfortunately, that somewhere might be a minus score when nobody can make anything.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 4♠. IMP's, vulnerable, not guilty, Your Honour. 3♠ seems chicken to us (sorry if it's a winner this time, partner). Double is nebulous (what are you asking for?)
Let’s see if the rest of the panel can answer that question.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. Card-showing.
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. Just showing points.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. This seems completely normal to me.
BARNET SHENKIN/SIMON HULT: Dbl.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. I want to show signs of life without overstating my spade support.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. With a good spade suit, partner will bid 2♠ on a wide range of hands, from around 8 HCP to 15. I cannot guess how high to go in spades now, particularly as he might have only a five-card suit. I will have to resort to the standard solution on such tricky hands.
ANDY HUNG: Dbl. We could still have a potential game opposite something like AQ10xxx/Axx/x/xxx, so let's try.
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. Who knows? This is surely not for penalties. I will bid 4♦ next and leave the rest to partner. I know we might be much too high, but I feel I have to do something.
Sjoert and Andrew seem to me to be on the right page…
SJOERT BRINK: Dbl. Showing a good hand and inviting partner to bid 4♠.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Cards, not penalties. The other option is 4♦, but I'm not sure that necessarily shows spade tolerance (what would you do with seven sold diamonds and out?) Double implies spade tolerance and values, which is what I have. Indeed, some may even consider double to be a game try in spades, which is a logical interpretation, but one that needs agreement.
When the hand occurred in The Spingold, Joe Grue jumped to 4♠. Partner had KQxxxx/xx/x/AQxx so game needed no more than a 3-2 trump break. Partner clearly can do no more than overcall 2♠. Whether he would raise a competitive 3♠ is questionable, but it seems likely that he would bid game opposite a game-try double.
After finishing on the podium last month, Miguel Villas-Boas goes one better and leads the panel with 77/80. Close behind him are Giorgio Duboin and Simon Hult (both with 76/80) and Barnet Shenkin with 75/80.
As always, our thanks to all members of the panel for devoting their time to entertain and educate our readers. I’ll close this month by wishing good luck to everyone heading for the world championships in Argentina in a couple of weeks. I look forward to reporting that members of our illustrious panel leave Buenos Aires weighed down with medals.
Thanks, and I look forward to seeing you all again next month. Marc.
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
Dbl |
4♣ |
4♥ |
4NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
77 |
|
Giorgio DUBOIN |
Dbl |
4♣ |
Dbl |
4NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
4♠ |
76 |
|
Simon HULT |
Dbl |
4♣ |
4♥ |
4NT |
Pass |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
76 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
Dbl |
4♥ |
Dbl |
5NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
75 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
2NT |
4♥ |
Dbl |
5NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
74 |
|
Larry COHEN |
2NT |
6♥ |
Dbl |
4NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
4♣ |
4♦ |
73 |
|
Alan MOULD |
2NT |
2♦ |
Dbl |
4NT |
Pass |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
73 |
|
Joey SILVER |
2NT |
6♥ |
4♥ |
4NT |
Pass |
Pass |
4♦ |
4♠ |
72 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
2NT |
4♣ |
4♥ |
4NT |
Pass |
Pass |
3♠ |
3♠ |
71 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
2NT |
6♥ |
4♥ |
5NT |
3♠ |
Dbl |
3♠ |
4♠ |
71 |
|
David BIRD |
2NT |
6♥ |
4♥ |
4NT |
4♣ |
Dbl |
4♣ |
Dbl |
70 |
|
Sjoert BRINK |
Dbl |
2♥ |
Dbl |
4NT |
4♣ |
Pass |
4♣ |
Dbl |
70 |
|
Andy HUNG |
2NT |
2NT |
4♥ |
5♥ |
3♠ |
Pass |
4♣ |
Dbl |
69 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
2NT |
4♥ |
Dbl |
5NT |
Pass |
Pass |
3♠ |
3♠ |
69 |
|
Pierre SCHMIDT and Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
Dbl |
4♦ |
Dbl |
4NT |
3NT |
Pass |
4♠ |
4♠ |
69 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
Dbl |
5♥ |
Dbl |
5NT |
3NT |
Dbl |
3♠ |
Dbl |
69 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
Dbl |
4♣ |
4♥ |
5NT |
3NT |
Pass |
3♠ |
Pass |
68 |
|
Jon COOKE |
3♣ |
2NT |
Dbl |
4NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
3♠ |
68 |
|
Paul MARSTON |
Dbl |
6♥ |
Dbl |
5♥ |
Pass |
Dbl |
4♣ |
4♠ |
67 |
|
Peter TEISEN |
2NT |
6♥ |
4♥ |
4NT |
4♣ |
Dbl |
4♦ |
Pass |
66 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
Dbl |
4♥ |
4♥ |
5NT |
4♣ |
Dbl |
4♠ |
Dbl |
65 |
|
P.O. SUNDELIN |
Dbl |
2NT |
Pass |
5♥ |
4♣ |
Pass |
3♠ |
4♠ |
64 |
|
Sally BROCK |
Dbl |
2♥ |
4♥ |
4NT |
3NT |
Dbl |
2♠ |
Dbl |
62 |
|
Cathy BALDYSZ |
2NT |
5♥ |
Pass |
Dbl |
Pass |
Pass |
4♠ |
Pass |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOP SCORE |
Dbl |
6♥ |
Dbl |
4NT |
3♠ |
Pass |
3♠ |
Dbl |
|
|
HAND 1: |
Dbl 10 |
2NT 9 |
3♣ 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 2: |
6♥ 10 |
3♦/4♣/4♦ 8 |
2NT/4♥/5♥ 7 |
2♦/2♥ 5 |
|
|
HAND 3: |
Dbl 10 |
4♥ 9 |
Pass 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 4: |
4NT 10 |
5NT 8 |
5♥ 6 |
Dbl 5 |
6♣/6♦ 2 |
|
HAND 5: |
3♠ 10 |
Pass 9 |
4♣ 8 |
3NT 7 |
|
|
HAND 6: |
Pass 10 |
Dbl 7 |
4♣/3NT 3 |
|
|
|
HAND 7: |
3♠ 10 |
4♣/4♦ 7 |
4♠ 6 |
2♠ 4 |
|
|
HAND 8: |
Dbl 10 |
4♠ 8 |
4♦ 7 |
3♠/Pass 6 |
|
|
HAND 1: |
7.63 |
|
HAND 2: |
5.86 |
|
HAND 3: |
7.22 |
|
HAND 4: |
4.78 |
|
HAND 5: |
6.24 |
|
HAND 6: |
7.36 |
|
HAND 7: |
7.12 |
|
HAND 8: |
6.62 |
