|
Bidding Quiz 24th May , 2006
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
South has the values for game, and there is a known 8-card Heart fit, so why not simply bid 4♥? Two reasons … firstly, South is not sure that 4♥ is the best game contract, 3NT is still a possibility … secondly, South has a pretty good hand, and does not want to crowd the auction if it turns out that North has some extras.
A better bid here is 2♦, the Fourth Suit Forcing convention … it’s artificial and allows the partnership to explore the best game or slam. How forcing is it? The simple way is to play it as forcing to game, so much easier (and safer!) than having to memorize the non-game-forcing exceptions.
After bidding 2♦ to establish the force, South will support Hearts at his next turn, and can then pretty much leave it up to Partner to decide where the hand is going.
Board 2 Dealer East N-S Vul
What would you (or did you) bid opposite Partner’s 1♣ opening? It seems wrong to invite game with 2NT (showing 11-12) when we have three small Hearts, often that contract will play better from the other side. So, we’d bid 1♦, hoping that things became easier on the next round of bidding.
But, things don’t become easier, they become more difficult, if not to say impossible. After Partner’s 1♠, if we didn’t fancy bidding No Trump before, we can hardly bid it now, with Hearts as the only unbid suit … playing Fourth Suit as game-forcing, West has no satisfactory bid … he’s not quite good enough to force to game, and has the wrong hand type to rebid 2NT.
Even though West is not quite up to strength, we’d 4th Suit force anyway … it’s the best alternative in an awkward situation. Hopefully, Partner will be able to bid the No Trump ... and hopefully he'll be able to make it!
Board 3 Dealer South E-W Vul
North hardly wants to let Partner wallow in 1♣ on a potential 3-1 or 4-1 fit, so let’s eliminate Pass here. 1♦ or 1♥ are overbids which run the risk of getting us too high. 7-card suits often suggest a 3-level preempt, but that would be overstating the Diamonds somewhat! No, if we had a preemptive 2♦ bid available, that would be our choice.
And, if your methods preclude a weak 2♦ here? Pass or 1♦, you choose, both seem equally unpleasant.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
The choices are clear enough … Pass, or 1♠, or 2♠.
We like to preempt high and often when we are white versus red, but even so we do not like 2♠ here … an outside Ace and a void?
It’s certainly a nice-looking 9-count, and if you like the Rule of Twenty you’ll notice that it’s just a smidgen short of the magic number. But Partner would reasonably expect more from us in the way of defense, so our own preference would be to pass initially, planning to come in later.
Some might say that passing here is altogether too delicate … they would argue that either the hand is good enough to open 1♠, or else it is bad enough to open 2♠, with no middle ground. Not unreasonable at all, and playing that style, we would open 1♠.
Board 8 Dealer west None Vul
If you play Drury opposite a 3rd seat 1♥ or 1♠ opener, you might as well also play it opposite a 4th seat opener. Without Drury, North would make a 3♠ limit raise here, risking getting too high when Opener has a light opener. With Drury, North bids 2♣, to see if South’s opener is up to standard, and Opener rebids his major with a bad hand, and bids anything else to confirm a bona fide opening bid (technically, this is Reverse Drury).
Some partnerships also use 2♦ for Drury … usually, 2♣ is a 3-card raise, 2♦ is a 4-card raise. We like this treatment, knowledge of that extra trump is often useful, even though it does give up on the natural 2♦ bid.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
The choices here are Double (showing some values, but no clear direction), Pass, and 3♠. We’d go for 3♠, though the other choices are not far behind. We’d prefer to have a slightly stronger hand for the bid, and a 5th Spade would be nice, too … on the plus side, our Spade suit is quite meaty, and, if it turns out that we are in a 4-3 fit, the 3-card suit will be able to handle the Diamond force.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
The Law of Total Tricks certainly suggests bidding one more time … E-W have a 10-card fit, N-S presumably have an 8-card fit … that’s 18 total trumps, so the expectation is 18 total tricks … if N-S can make 9 of them, then 4♦ (even doubled) is a good save for down one … if N-S can only make 8, then 4♦ is making. We would find this logic compelling enough to bid 4♦ here.
Well, the Law of Total Tricks is not a great success on this hand. It turns out that there are, indeed, 18 total trumps, but there are only 17 total tricks, and that both 3♠ and 4♦ are down one. Oh, well!
Board 14 Dealer East None Vul
After West’s “Unusual 2NT” (showing the minors), as North, would you support Spades or introduce Hearts? We’d mention that 6-card Heart suit first, and then support Spades later … but we would be nervous that by the time the bidding got back to us, things would be at the 5-level.
Having decided to show our Hearts, the next question is “How?” One popular gadget in this situation is “Unusual vs Unusual”, of which there are different flavors … we favor the one which seems simplest to us … the 3♣ cue-bid always shows Hearts, the 3♦ cue-bid always shows Spades, and both cue-bids show at least invitational values. In this schema, we’d bid 3♣, of course (bidding 3♥ directly would show a weaker hand).
Board 14 Dealer East None Vul
West’s first bid showed the minors, North’s 3♣ was artificial, showing Hearts and a decent hand.
If you held the West hand, you no doubt bid 6♦, and discovered that it was a phantom sacrifice. Well, deepest sympathies and all that, we’d have done the same.
Board 15 Dealer South N-S Vul
North’s 2NT shows 20-21, so South can see that they are on the fringe of the slam zone. How should she plan the auction? Here are the possibilities: (a) Use Stayman, planning simply to play it in 4♥ or 3NT, depending on whether North has a Heart fit; (b) Use Stayman, planning to make a slam try later; (c) Bid 4NT (but only if the partnership has a way find a fit whenever Partner decides to accept … see Board 7, 17th May, 2006) (d) Simply bid 3NT, hoping that the abundance of points will be enough to make the same number of tricks as a 4-4 Heart fit.
We think that it’s a close decision. The T♣ looks as if it might be most useful in the play, but otherwise the hand is without plus features, and the potential Heart trump suit is very weak indeed. Our own choice would be to bid 3NT and leave it at that … but, if we were forced to make the (somewhat optimistic) slam try, we would bid 4NT, giving ourselves a chance to play in 6♣ or 6♥ whenever Partner accepts.
This is yet another in a long string of hands where our suggested bid works out badly. On the actual hand, slam turns out to be about 60% to make, and 100% when the play is over.
Board 16 Dealer West E-W Vul
Pretty much everybody plays Jacoby Transfers for the majors. Many also play Minor Suit Transfers, part of which is that it gives Opener the chance to say (in this case) “I like Clubs” or “I don’t like Clubs”. South has a reasonable hand, and it would no doubt be improved if Partner said “I like Clubs”. But, this whole preamble, we confess, has been nothing but a red herring! South’s hand is good enough to gut it out in 3NT regardless of North’s opinion of his Clubs. Just because we have a gadget available, does not mean that we have to use it indiscriminately!
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
Opposite that Weak Two, South is good enough to be thinking about slam, but she needs a suitable hand from Partner. How best to investigate slam? The options are: (a) Bid 2NT … if you play that 2NT asks for a feature (the method which worked so well on Board 2 last week), then 2NT here is not particularly useful, especially if Partner denies a feature … if you play that 2NT is some type of Ogust bid, you’ll be a bit better off, at least Partner will be able to express an opinion about her hand; (b) Bid 3♣ … even if you play this as natural and forcing, it doesn’t seem like a particularly useful solution to the problem … the hand will no doubt be played in Spades and 3♣ seems to be heading out in the wrong direction; (c) Roman Key Card … yes, that would be our choice, our plan is simple (though not foolproof!) … if Partner shows up with the two missing Key Cards, we’ll go to slam, otherwise we’ll subside in game … and we’ll miss those slams where North has a one Key Card perfecto, such as K♥ and a singleton Diamond. But there is a caveat, see below.
After a Weak Two opening, it’s a good idea to play 4♣ as Roman Key Card, giving the partnership a chance to stay at the 4-level when the Weak Two bidder makes his customary disappointing Key Card response. Here, this gadget works like an absolute charm … over 4♣, North shows just one Key Card, and the final contract is the safe 4♠, and not the perilous 5♠.
In response to that 4♣ Key Card ask, you could just use the standard 1430 responses, but opposite a Weak Two (or other preempts) you may want to tinker with them, and use 01122 instead, as in: 4♦ 0 Key Cards 4♥ 1 Key Card without the Queen of trumps 4♠ 1 Key Card with 4NT 2 Key Cards without 5♣ 2 Key Cards with These responses presume that you would never open a Weak Two with 3 Key Cards, which we are sure is the case.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
In first or second seat, holding the West cards, you would not dream of opening 4♠, the hand is just too good, you’d prefer to reserve that bid for a hand with 7 solid or 8 maybe-not-so-solid Spades and not much else. In other words, an opening 4♠ is a preempt, pure and simple. But, in 3rd seat, with Partner having passed, West can see that slam is unlikely (though not completely out of the question). He can also see that 4♠ is almost certainly where the hand belongs, so why not bid it directly and hopefully put North under pressure?
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
After 4♠, North is under extreme pressure! She can hardly pass, even slam is possible from her point of view, so what are her choices? It used to be that, over a 4♠ preempt, Double was for penalty, and 4NT was a 3-suited take-out. But, nowadays, the style is for Double to be card-showing, and for 4NT to be a two-suiter. In that scenario, you could make an argument for 4NT or 5♥, both are reasonable, neither is perfect.
More rotten advice from us … as it happens, if North takes action, the final contract will be 5♥, unsportingly doubled by East, for -1400. But North will be quick to point out in the post-mortem that if South were a good Partner she’d have held the East cards, in which case N-S would be cold for slam!
Board 18 Dealer South E-W Vul
Would you open in 4th chair with the East hand? It doesn’t quite measure up in terms of Cansino points (HCPs plus Spades), having only 14 instead of the recommended 15 … and the hand is Aceless … and 2 of the points are a singleton Queen … but, despite all these negatives, it’s hard to pass up on the chance to bid a 6-card major, so we would open anyway.
Board 19 Dealer South E-W Vul
That 2♣ bid was Drury, showing a 3-card limit raise in Clubs.
Only 9 HCPs, and we sure wish we had a 4th Spade, but, non-vulnerable, with shortness in their suit it certainly seems right to balance with a Double here. True, there is the real risk that Partner is 3-4-3-3, but those 3-3 fits have been known to bring in a surprising number of tricks!
Board 20 Dealer West Both Vul
Yes, here’s another slam decision. Partner is typically 18-19 and balanced for that 4♠ bid, which gives us a combined 29-30 and a 9-card fit. We would make a slam try, and suggest a 5♣ bid here, showing a Club card and asking Partner’s general opinion about slam. We don’t like using Roman Key Card Blackwood here, we suspect that we have enough Key Cards between us, and would prefer to know whether Partner likes his hand.
Board 21 Dealer North N-S Vul
You may wish to skip this write-up until you have been fortified by a strengthening cocktail, because we are about to stumble through some of the complex issues of Walsh-style and Fourth Suit Forcing. Consider yourself warned.
First of all, what is Walsh-style bidding? Your Partner opens 1♣, and you hold 4 (or maybe more) Diamonds, and a 4-card major. Which one do you bid? Up-the-liners bid 1♦, of course … but a Walshite bids 1♦ only when he has a decent hand, and with lesser values he bids the major directly. The Walsh style has become so common that it is no longer even alertable.
Secondly, that 1♠ bid is not Fourth Suit Forcing for most partnerships … 2♠ would be the artificial Fourth Suit Forcing bid … 1♠ is natural (and, also forcing, by virtue of being a new suit by Responder).
Even with that brief and inadequate grounding in Walsh-style and Fourth Suit Forcing, one can see how the above auction can have two completely different meanings: Up-the-Line Bidding: If this is the style being employed, then that 1♠ shows about 5+ HCPs, and has no upper limit … alas, up-the-line bidding has dug a deep hole for Opener on this hand, he has no satisfactory call at this point, being too good for 1NT, not good enough for 2NT. What’s the solution? Open 1NT or play Walsh! If neither appeals, then make your best guess between 1NT or 2♠ or 2NT, all of them flawed, of course. Walsh-Style Bidding: With this approach, where Responder must have some values to bid 1♦ when holding 4 Spades, the auction is simpler … at his third turn, Opener jumps to 2NT, showing extras (and therefore forcing to game), and the partnership can explore the best game or slam at their leisure.
Board 22 Dealer East E-W Vul
Let’s put ourselves in the North chair, after Partner has responded 1♥. Partner is a passed hand, so we can forget about game. There are two schools of thought here … one says “Raise to 2♥ anyway, it’ll preempt the opponents” … the other says “Pass!”. The trouble with raising to 2♥ is evidenced on this deal … if North raises to 2♥, South would be quite justified in trying for game with her chunky 11-count, and that will get N-S too high. We prefer Pass for that very reason … but raising to 2♥ here also has its advocates, so you choose.
Board 26 Dealer East Both Vul
When they double Partner’s transfer bid, the most common method is probably as follows: Pass Only 2 cards in Partner’s major (now Partner can Redouble as a re-transfer) 2♥ 3-card support Rdbl Big Diamond holding, suggesting 2♦ redoubled as a place to play. Other Other bids would be Super-Accepts.
However, it’s been almost 10 years since we elected to play in their suit redoubled (and on that occasion we went down 2 for -1000!), so surely there is a better use for the Redouble. One method that is popular on the tournament circuit is to use the Redouble to show a good hand with 3-card support … and the 2♥ bid to show not-so-good 3-card support. And what’s the benefit of this? If Responder has an invitational hand he won’t need to invite if Partner bids 2♥, and the partnership can stay at the two-level. Any downside? Not to speak of … true, the weak hand will play the contract at the 2-level (at higher levels, re-transfers are available, if required), but that is not necessarily a bad thing, considering the lead-directing Double.
Applying this new technology to East’s hand, what would you bid over the Double? The choice is between 2♥ and Redouble, of course. East may have only 15 HCPs, but every single high card is gilt-edged, and there is that useful-looking doubleton in their suit … all things considered, we’d say this was worth a Redouble! This upwards evaluation by East gets the partnership to the good 4♥ in a hurry.
Board 26 Dealer East Both Vul
East’s Redouble showed 3-card Heart support and a good hand. Of course we’ll bid game here, and we can go one of two ways … bid 4♥ directly, putting the Diamond doubler on lead … or bid 4♦, which is a re-transfer. It’s not obvious which hand would be better off as Declarer, but at least the re-transfer feature gives us the choice.
Board 29 Dealer None Both Vul
West’s 2♣ creates a game-forcing auction, and his 3♠ gives East space for a below-game cue-bid. East has a good hand and certainly wants to encourage slam with a cue-bid. What would be your choice? Not 4♣! It would be most misleading if East were to cue-bid his void in Partner’s suit here, West would imagine that he was facing a fitting Club honor … instead, we prefer a 4♦ cue-bid, showing the A♦ or K♦ and denying a high Club.
Board 30 Dealer East None Vul
North’s 2♣ was natural, and the question is whether or not to double. The opponents are in a 6-card fit (at best), and E-W have the balance of the points, so it surely looks as if 2♣ will be down by a couple of tricks. But, surely the opponents have a better place to play … doubling will just give them an opportunity to find that better place. We suggest a Pass here, taking our plus score.
On the actual hand, any West who doubled merely chased the opponents into a making 2♥ contract.
Board 31 Dealer South N-S Vul
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
