♠ District 8 Solvers Forum -- June 2021

            by Karen Walker, Champaign IL

Participants from the web site Bridgewinners.com are our "virtual panelist". More than 50 readers -- the majority of whom are experienced players -- voted on each problem, and the plurality's choice is included as a panel vote. Each vote grid shows the percentage of Bridgewinners voters who chose each bid.

1.  Matchpoints, both vulnerable                 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠Q   ♥AK102   ♦AQ5   ♣KJ1086 ?

Here's the most straightforward analysis of this problem:

ROBINSON: 3NT. I have 19 high-card points and partner is supposed to have 6, so we belong in game.

This is based on the idea that West will have around 8-9 points for his weak two-bid. Adding in your 19 points, that leaves 12-13 points for East and North, so partner's half will be 6-7 points.

There's no guarantee, of course. The preempt has made you guess, and if your guess is that partner is on the low side of that average strength, this call could be the best strategy:

SPEAR:  Pass.  With a singleton spade, I'll take my plus score defending a vulnerable 2H.

BELL:  Pass. Any other action could end poorly, so I'm hoping for +200.

The plurality of the panel guessed the other way and went for the game bonus:

HINCKLEY: 3NT. In the balance, this hand is far too strong to bid 2NT or 3C. If a spade lead from West sets 3NT, let him find it!

STACK: 3NT. Bidding what we think we can make. If partner bids 4S, then we will probably make it. Good problem. Glad it is matchpoints with no one to answer to except partner.

KNIEST: 3NT. Probably best game contract. No reason to give info to opponents. If pard transfers to spades, so be it.

Your jump to 3NT doesn't promise a balanced hand, so playing transfers here would be a very unusual agreement. It's possible that partner will bid a natural 4S, but he won't do that with a 5-card suit. As STACK points out, if partner bids spades over 3NT, he'll have so many of them that your singleton queen will be adequate support.

If you're worried about partner insisting on spades with just a 5-card suit, these are the two bids that you need to avoid:

KESSLER: 2NT. Too many flaws for 3NT, If partner bids 3S over 2NT, we can bid 3NT. If we had bid 3NT initially and partner bid 4S, we'd have nowhere to go. If we miss a game at matchpoints, it is not earth-shattering.

BAKER: DBL. 3C is a gross underbid on power. 2NT invites partner to drop me in a 5-1 spade fit. Pass has some appeal -- partner is short in hearts and couldn't make a noise -- but I don't need much for game. I'll bid 2NT over 2S or 3NT over a positive noise. Over 2NT Lebensohl, ask me again in two months.

2NT suggests at least two spades in a balanced hand and Double suggests at least three spades, even if you bid notrump later. The other downside with 2NT -- and the ultra-conservative 3C overcall -- is the possibility that you'll be playing in a partscore. For your best shot at a good result on this board, I think you have to aim higher. Go for the game bonus or go for the +200 on defense, but don't settle for +120.

2. Matchpoints, EW vulnerable
 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠K652   ♥105   ♦K104   ♣10653 ?

It's a good bet that you haven't discussed this auction nor ever encountered it. It's obvious that partner is trying to show you a lot of playing strength, but how much? The panel majority thought they had enough to give partner some encouragement, although they didn't sound too confident.

POPKIN: 4C. Pard has at least 10 cards in the round suits, maybe more. While my kings are well placed, they don’t mesh so well with pard's hand. At matchpoints, going plus is important, but this still merits a bump to 4C.

KNIEST: 4C. I have some cards that might be useful, but jumping to game seems really pushy at matchpoints.

ROBINSON: 4C. I guess partner could have ♠x  ♥KQxxxx  ♦x  ♣AKQJx where 4C is the limit of the hand. My kings could easily be of no value. I'll raise just in case East is kidding.

Some Solvers mentioned that partner might be trying to expose a psychic 1NT overcall. Would East really do that at this vulnerability? It's possible, but if partner was loaded with high-card points, he probably would have chosen a double instead of 3C at his second turn.

Several panelists and Solvers offered examples of hands partner might hold, but most looked like what you'd expect for a simple 2C balance. With a passing partner and a strong hand on his left, North has to have something quite unusual to justify a jump to the 3-level. That's unlikely to be a 5-5 hand. I think he has to be at least 6-5 and I wouldn't be surprised if he's 6-6.

If you agree that partner has something stronger than a 2C bid, I don't see how you can pass 3C. The big vote for pass by Bridgewinners voters is especially surprising. They were joined by:

BAKER: Pass. Partner could have doubled to show a strong hand, so I'm expecting shape, which means at least one of my kings is worthless. I think clubs will probably play a trick better than hearts, but is it a 140/130 split (when 3H makes) or -50/+110?

HINCKLEY Pass. Even if partner has ♠x  ♥AKxxxx  ♦x  ♣AKxxx, we are not a favorite to make game. Being matchpoints, it's even easier to pass.

This could be the most practical advance:

BELL: 4H. Strange auction, but partner rates to be at least as extreme shape as 6-5-2-0, and I have a very helpful hand for someone who hasn’t made a bid yet.

Many panelists were actually hoping to get to 4H. The reason they instead chose to raise to 4C is explained by:

HELFGOTT: 4C. Partner can convert to 4H with long or strong hearts.

STACK: 4C. Giving a raise, but not sure this hand is worth it. Gives partner the chance to rebid the hearts if they are super. Certainly would not quarrel with a pass of 3C at matchpoints.

Our hand definitely has some pluses -- the club length, the two 10s, a king that will score if partner has a doubleton in diamonds or spades. That might not be enough for game if partner is on the light side or if suits break badly. Then again, it could be enough for slam. There's a pretty high upper limit for partner's hand, so I think it's important to at least offer a courtesy raise, explained succinctly by:

SPEAR: 4C. Partner's jump to 3C under the notrump overcall shows a lot of tricks. I'll give him a chance to bid game.

3.  Matchpoints, EW vulnerable      
 

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AK742   ♥Void   ♦Q1073   ♣K653 ?

Who would have thought that with partner opening in first chair, it might be right to not even invite game when we hold 12 points and 2.5 quick tricks? Three of our panelists decided that a pass of 2H was the best choice with this hand and several others considered it. Here's why:

SPEAR: Pass.  This may be our last plus score on a big misfit.

KESSLER: Pass. Plus scores at matchpoints are usually good, and on a good day, opponents will balance, since we haven't shown a misfit nor 12 points.

POPKIN: Pass. Chances of making game are not rosy and finding a fit is not a good shot. Matchpoints, maybe we can make 8 tricks in hearts. I’m getting really annoyed with this pard and the mind-bending problems. One more hand like this and I’m getting a substitute.

These days, that would be a robot. It's unlikely to create easier auctions for you, but the advantage is that you can yell at it without damaging partnership rapport.

In contrast to this pessimism, we have several panelists who are making a strong move toward game.

KNIEST: 3C. I certainly want 3NT to be declared by pard. Maybe I'll get a spade preference or a diamond rebid.

BELL: 3C. Bidding notrump now might encourage a leap to 4H.  I'm bidding clubs instead of diamonds in order to give partner an easy bid to ask for a stopper in the unbid suit.

STACK: 3C. Attempting to get a 3S preference from partner or more information on this possible misfit.  Since this is an opening bid, we must make a move toward game.

RABIDEAU: 3C. Pass is a close second choice.

Force or exit quickly for Larry. An invitation didn't make your list? The majority of the panel thought it wise to be conservative, but not unilateral. Their choice: 

BAKER: 2NT. Too strong to pass, despite the horrendous misfit. If partner's hearts are great, hopefully I have at least one entry. If they're lousy, partner should have some useful minor-suit cards for me.

WARD: 2NT. Downgrading because of the heart void.

ROBINSON: 2NT. This 12-count does not match with partner's hand so I'll go low and invite.

HINCKLEY 2NT.  The only reasonable invitation. I won't be surprised if passing 2H is the winner.

Marshall Lewis, a Bridgewinners voter who passed, offered this description of 2NT: "Give partner another chance to make another bid that makes you barf."

That was so funny that it almost convinced me to pass, but I just can't bring myself to take that deep of a position. Even if 2NT gets us too high, I won't have to apologize to partner for taking a solo flyer.

4. IMPs, both vulnerable    

What is your call as South holding:  ♠Q9743   ♥Void   ♦KJ9   ♣K8764 ?

It's an aceless 9 points opposite what is probably a minimum opener, but almost 90 percent of all voters chose to head for the 5-level.

STACK: 5C. Bid what you're looking at, which is great club support, great distribution and every reason to think the hand belongs to our side. We possibly have a 5-3 or even a 5-4 spade fit, but I'm not bidding 4S since partner would probably pass with a doubleton or singleton..

There is that nagging feeling that 5C is bypassing our possible 9-card spade fit. For that reason, I'm a bit surprised that a few more voters didn't go for the gusto and try 4S. The one Bridgewinners voter who did choose 4S is the most successful player on Bridgebase.com. Bold bids like this might explain why.

Two panelists and a good number of Solvers tried to solve this problem with a backdoor way to find spades:

KNIEST: Double. Shows values and shortness. Passing at IMPs seems ridiculous.

POPKIN: Double. Assuming we play double by pard would have been takeout, I’ll make the flexible call of double. Leaves all options open.

Is double the foolproof way to investigate all possible contracts? The 5C bidders saw some flaws with a double and offered good explanations of why they rejected it:

ROBINSON: 5C.  The only bid that makes sense on this hand. Double shows a more balanced hand. 4S shows better spades and pass is wimpy.

SPEAR: 5C. If I double instead, partner may make the wrong choice without knowing about our big club fit.

BAKER: 5C. Doubling to allow partner to show spade support is tempting, but I'm not sure I want to be in spades opposite a lot of the hands with which partner might do that, and I don't have as much defense as I'd like if partner passes the double.

KESSLER: 5C. If I had one fewer club, double would be more attractive, but double game swings are ugly. If LHO bids 5H and partner does not double, I would bid 6C.

One panelist was adamant that a double in this auction wasn't takeout at all:

HINCKLEY 5C. Double is not takeout, no matter how much you want it to be. And even if it was, there's too much chance of a penalty pass.

My first instinct was to bid 5C, too, but I couldn't get past the idea that I was allowing myself to be stampeded into an overbid I would never consider under other circumstances. Vulnerable and with a passed partner, West could be loaded with high cards for his 4H "preempt", so there's no inference that partner has anything more than a balanced minimum.

I finally decided I probably wouldn't bid 5C in an actual tournament. At the table, I'd be looking at that red pocket in the board and the cards in my hand, trying to estimate how many tricks they could contribute in a 5C contract. I'd also be thinking about my human teammates and the possibility of having to explain to them why I took a vulnerable phantom sacrifice. This panelist describes that reservation in three words:

WARD:  Pass. Not a hero.

In real life, playing real people, I'm pretty sure I'd come to the conclusion that the "ridiculous" pass was the percentage call, so that's my vote here, too. 

5. IMPs, NS vulnerable                   

What is your call as South holding:  ♠AKJ10975   ♥J8   ♦K4   ♣K4 ?

"No way the auction will end here!" are the famous last words of many a player who chose to walk his dog with a hand similar to this one. The strategy is to hide your full strength at your first turn, planning to bid more later and maybe even talk the opponents into doubling you.

Is that what the 1S bidders are doing here? Some repeated the dog walkers' mantra, suggesting that they expected another chance to bid. However, they didn't sound like they were intending 1S as a tactical underbid and they certainly weren't trying to get doubled.

HELFGOTT: 1S. No preempt is right, and with only 15 points, the auction will not die. No double for me.

BAKER: 1S. This isn't going to go all-pass, and if it does, I may not want to be in 4S anyway. A jump might keep West out of the auction, but it will mislead partner as to my strength. If North was dealer instead of East and had passed, then I'd try 3S or 4S.

ROBINSON: 1S. I have too many losers to jump to 4S. If it's our hand, partner will bid.

SPEAR: 1S. Too good to preempt any number of spades. Wrong hand type to double before bidding spades.

This hand has enough playing strength to bid more, but with constructive values, the majority saw no reason to bid to the maximum level all at once. Even more important, they didn't know what that level was. With this type of hand, it's often wise to start low and listen to more of the auction before you make a final decision.

Some panelists didn't want to wait to show the extra-long suit:

KNIEST: 4S. Seems like the right number.

RABIDEAU: 4S. If I double and bid spades, will partner know that a minor-suit ace and 2 or 3 small spades are enough for game? -500 is also possible.

Did Larry just talk himself out of 4S? With two outside tricks, I think 4S sends the wrong message and could talk partner into a phantom sacrifice or out of a good penalty double. There would be a stronger argument for the jump if your suit were hearts, but with spades, there's no real worry about being outbid.

Others decided to show their strength first. They started with a takeout double, which is pretty much the opposite of the jump to 4S.

WARD: Double. 3NT is still the target here.

STACK: Double. Every time I do this with this type of hand, my LHO bids 1S. But I will persist with this excellent hand and bid an appropriate number of spades at my next opportunity.

These "big double" auctions can be awkward, and not just for the reason Don mentions. It's often difficult for partner to figure out exactly what type of strength you're showing. If you double and then freely bid spades, is it a 20-count with a 5-card suit that needs support? Or is it this 15-count with a suit that can play opposite a void? With a hand like this one, I prefer to get my suit into the auction, collect more information and show the extra strength later.

6. Matchpoints, none vulnerable   

What is your call as South holding:  ♠63  ♥A652   ♦KJ9   ♣AJ52 ?

Another "surprise" bid from partner. What sort of hand would pass the 1S overcall but now be worth trying for a 3-level contract? Here's one theory:

HINCKLEY: Pass. Partner has a penalty double of 1S and since he didn't double, likely short hearts. Partner may find 2NT is more difficult to make than 2S!

KNIEST: Pass, Pard has a spade trap. He could've bid 3NT and didn't and I have nothing extra.

In similar auctions, the standard way for partner to show that he had a trap-pass of the opponent's first suit would be to double their runout suit. An example:
 

West	North	East	South
			1C
1S	Pass	Pass	DBL
2H	DBL

Partner's double here typically shows decent high-card values with a trump stack in their first suit and at least a doubleton in their second suit. The auction in our problem is a bit different, so maybe that meaning doesn't apply. However, it's still difficult to come up with a hand that wanted to double 1S and is too short in hearts to double 2H, but even with that heart weakness, now wants to play notrump.

The rest of the panel interpreted 2NT as some sort of minor-suit takeout. The 3C bidders assumed that partner was showing equal length in the minors, so they bid their longer one. The rest of the panel thought it more likely that partner had longer diamonds.

BAKER: 3D. 2NT cannot possibly be natural, so what is it? Probably two places to play, meaning diamonds with fair support for clubs. If partner has 4 clubs, that suit probably plays better (using diamonds for pitches). But if it's 5 diamonds and 3 clubs, diamonds is definitely better.

ROBINSON: 3D. This depends on your meaning of 2NT in competition. I like 2NT as a takeout bid and shows diamonds and clubs with longer diamonds. If I thought 2NT was natural, I would pass it.

KESSLER: 3D.  Must be longer diamonds with club support.

SPEAR: 3D.  Failure to bid notrump naturally on the last round means that partner wants to balance here with either 3D or 3C instead of defending 2H.

RABIDEAU: 3D. Sounds like partner has something like 5 or 6 diamonds and 4 clubs.

STACK: 3D. I believe that partner does not have four clubs since there was no raise the first round. Partner is trying to compete with something like 5-3 in the minors.

I agree that partner probably has longer diamonds, as with equal length in the minors, he could just support clubs. A possible hand might be  ♠9854  ♥3  ♦A10873  ♣Q93. That's enough to give us a good play for 3D, but even if we come up short, it should be a better score than defending 2H.

 ♠  Panelist votes & June scores 

 ©  Karen Walker