|
Bidding Quiz 2nd August, 2006
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
In this auction, Partner’s Double is take-out, of course. What next?
How do you rate the East hand? That K♥ is basically useless, the play of this hand will be all about Spades and Diamonds. But, once we have downgraded our hand to a super 11-count, rather than a flawed 14-count, perhaps we’ll see things in a different light. What do we need from Partner to make game on this hand? Not very much! A singleton Club would be a good start, but even if we do have 2 Club losers to go with our presumed Heart loser, we still need little more than a decent trump holding and a winning Diamond finesse to make game. And that Diamond finesse is a big favorite to succeed, based on the bidding. Yes, bidding 4♠ here is rather aggressive, but 3♠ doesn’t seem enough. A close call, in our view.
Board 2 Dealer East N-S Vul
A quick return here to Negative Doubles 101. After Partner opens 1♣ and RHO overcalls 1♦ here are the ways in which we can introduce the majors into the auction: - a Negative Double shows both majors, typically 4-4 - therefore, with just one 4-card major, we must bid it directly.
The point here is that bidding 1♥ or 1♠ in this situation does not show a 5-card suit ... it shows 4 or more. However, if our RHO were to overcall Partner's minor suit opening with a bid of 1♥, then it's only logical that a Negative Double would show 4 Spades, and a 1♠ bid would show 5 or more.
Board 2 Dealer East N-S Vul
Another pesky preempt by North. We must surely show our Heart support, and here are our options: 3♥: Suppose that we do indeed bid 3♥ and South then bids 4♦ which gets passed back to us ... do we really want to pass this out? No, if Partner couldn't double 4♦ then we'd surely like to take our chances in 4♥. Dble: This is a possibility, but only if the partnership plays "Maximal Support Doubles". This commonly used convention applies at the three-level, when they are bidding and raising to one below our major. In that case, the Double is a game try, saying "I'm too good for a competitive 3♥, I want you to bid game if you have something extra". A Maximal Double is not such a terrible idea here, but Partner will no doubt expect us to have more HCPs and better defense ... if we double to show a good raise, then South bids 4♦ and Partner doubles (for penalty), we won't be feeling very comfortable, and, once again, we'll be inclined to bid 4♥. To put it another way, the Maximal Double does not describe our hand well, and does not give Partner a chance to contribute meaningfully to the subsequent auction. 4♦: Since we seem to be leaning towards going to game here, should we cue-bid along the way? No, that would be way over the top ... it would show a better hand, more high-card points, more defense ... and it would create a Forcing Pass situation, meaning that the opponents can no longer play in an undoubled contract. 4♥: Yes, that's our choice ... we have an offensive hand, we want to compete up to 4♥, and Partner should expect an offensive hand rather than a HCP powerhouse ... if Partner doubles them in 5♦ he does so in the knowledge that we are not loaded with defense.
Board 9 Dealer North E-W Vul
Partner has reversed, and we have a pretty good hand, clearly slam is not out of the question. After 2♥, we chose to bid 3♦ ... it's obviously game-forcing, and was intended as showing a decent hand, lacking direction. However, when Partner rebids her Hearts, she is presumably 5-6 and now we actually do have some direction ... we have an 8-card major fit. Thinking of a Heart slam now? Here are the Pros and Cons: - Pro: We have 13 HCP's and good controls opposite a reverse. - Pro: We have an 8-card major, and it looks like we might be able to use a Club ruff to get Partner's side-suit going. - Pro: Our high-card structure makes it clear that we'll lose no tricks outside his two suits. - Con: The K♠ and Q♦ are probably wasted cards ... the two Aces will account for Partner's short-suit losers, but those other two cards may well be useless. - Con: Partner has bid Clubs and Hearts, and we have zero HCP's in those two suits. Not good at all! - Con: If we have to get a Club ruff, our Hearts are so puny that we may well get over-ruffed.
Are we any the wiser? Maybe not. And, as if the slam-or-game question were not tough enough, there is also a good chance that 3NT or 6NT is the way to go ... for example, it's surely possible that Partner holds something like: ♠ -- ♥ AJ765 ♦ K7 ♣ AKQ652.
We like 5♥ here ... we don't know what it should mean in this sequence, and suspect you would get a number of different answers if you asked a panel of experts ... we would suggest that it should just be a general slam try, saying "Bid slam if you like your hand". Not an easy hand at all! Some problems don't have a right or wrong answer, they just have a bid that works on the actual hand.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
If Partner were not a passed hand here, we would advocate an overcall of 1♥ here, going the constructive route with our nice-looking hand and getting our longest suit into the auction. But here Partner's Pass suggests that this is their hand, so we'd prefer a bid which crowds their auction. We'd suggest 2NT here, the Unusual No Trump, showing the two lower unbid suits.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
We certainly wouldn't argue with an opening 1♠ bid here, but East decided to pass. That 2NT was conventional, showing a Heart-Diamond two-suiter, leaving East with these choices: 3♠: What this bid means will depend on the partnership methods but most tournament players would treat 3♠ as purely competitive, typically a 6-card suit and less than invitational values ... of course, this raises the question of why East wouldn't open such a hand with a Weak Two ... well, perhaps he didn't like the suit, or really only has 5 good ones, no doubt he had his reasons. Anyway, we don't think that 3♠ is a good choice here ... hand too good, suit too short. 3♦/3♥ As North has shown the red suits, both 3♦ and 3♥ are available as cue-bids ... one method of using these cue-bids is for the lower one (Diamonds) to show the lower other suit (in this case Club support) and for the higher one (Hearts) to show the higher other suit (Spades) ... please see the article on Unusual No Trump for more on this. Using this method, East might reasonably try 3♥ here. Dbl: This bid merely shows values, and the hand certainly qualifies for that.
We think that this is a close choice between Double and a cue-bid showing Spades ... if we were not a passed hand we would rate this an easy Double, considering the Spades to be not good enough to bid directly ... but as a passed hand, perhaps we can relax the Spade suit requirements a little, trading on the inference that we could not make a Weak Two bid earlier.
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
This is really a two-part question: (a) Do you open 1NT holding a 5-card major? We certainly do, others don't ... please see the article entitled "1NT with a 5-card Major?". (b) Is this hand too good to open 1NT? Assuming a 15-17 range, this hand is right at the top end with its 17 HCPs and 5-card suit. In our view it's awfully close, one way or the other, we'd opt for 1NT, but give us the T♥ and we would certainly rate it as too strong for 1NT. But some would reasonably upgrade this hand, opening 1♥ and planning to rebid 2NT over 1♠ or 1NT.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
Here are the choices: Dbl: Let's eliminate this one right away. We avoid take-out Doubles with hands that have less than 3 cards in the unbid major(s), unless we have a really strong hand, say 18 or 19+. This hand is not good enough for a short-major Double. Pass: This is certainly better than a Double, but that's its only redeeming quality. 2♣: Probably the most popular choice ... opening values, decent suit, what could be simpler? 1NT: This is our choice, we must confess ... for most partnerships this shows 15-18 HCPs, and at least one stopper in their suit. True, the singleton Spade is not ideal, but we consider that a small defect compared with the benefit of making a limited and descriptive bid.
Don't like that 1NT suggestion? Worried that Partner will transfer to Spades? Sure she might, but that's not necessarily a bad thing ... if she is weak, then the 5-1 (or 6-1) Spade fit might well be the best spot ... if she is stronger, we'll no doubt end up in 3NT with 5-1 Spades or 4♠ with 6-1 Spades, hopefully not untenable. The upside for bidding 1NT here is that it makes it easier for South to bid constructively ... for example, here is the Partner's actual hand: ♠ QT942 ♥ Q97 ♦ Q3 ♣ Q92 Opposite a 2♣ overcall, this hand can raise to 3♣, but that's the most she can do ... and if this hand does raise to 3♣, then North can hardly bid 3NT, she has no reason to expect such a suitable hand, she's more likely to be facing fewer HCPs and 4 Clubs. However, opposite a 1NT overcall, South transfers to Spades, then bids 2NT and the No Trump game is easily reached.
Board 13 Dealer North Both Vul
Another two-step problem ... do we balance? ... if so, how? Notwithstanding the vulnerability, we would balance here, letting them play in 2♥ is altogether too feeble in our view ... they have 8 or 9 trumps and around half the points, why let them buy the contract so cheaply? If we do choose to take a call, the most obvious bid would appear to be Double. But we prefer 2♠ ... in the absence of an earlier overcall Partner should expect a 4-card suit in this situation ... if Partner has 3+ Spades, he can pass, and if he does not he will escape to a minor (via 2NT if he wants to offer a choice, or directly to 3♣ or 3♦ if he has a clear preference).
Obviously, this balancing action would be much safer if we were non-vulnerable ... as it is, we'll suffer the occasional -200, especially if the opponents are sometimes opportunistic enough to make a speculative Double. But the good news is that even if our balance puts our side on the ropes, we'll often survive when the opponents fail to double or else take the push to the 3-level.
Board 13 Dealer North Both Vul
South, with those 2 Aces and 9 HCPs, has a good hand for her 2♥ raise, but that does not mean that she should compete to 3♥ ... for such a bid she would need a 4th trump and/or shortness somewhere. No, the bid here is a Double ... it doesn't necessary show trump tricks (though it would be nice to have them), it just shows a decent hand with defensive values. Partner does not have to pass, she will no doubt pull to 3♥ if she has an offensively oriented hand.
On the actual hand, Double is certainly the winner, collecting 200 or 500.
Board 14 Dealer East None Vul
Normally, when we make a take-out Double, and then introduce a new suit, we are showing a very good hand, typically around 18 HCPs or thereabouts. But, some partnerships allow for one exception, which goes under the name of Equal Level Conversion … if the opponents open one of a major, and you double, and your Partner bids 2♣, then a bid of 2♦ does not show extras … typically, it shows 4 cards in the unbid major and 5 Diamonds. Anyway, playing ELC, such would be North’s plan, to convert 2♣ to 2♦.
Board 16 Dealer West E-W Vul
We have no strong views on which minor to open when we are 4-4 in Clubs and Diamonds. We tend to open the stronger one, just in case Partner ends up on opening lead. But there’s an exception to be made when opening 1♦ will solve a rebid problem. Does this mean that we recommend a 1♦ opener here, with a 2♣ rebid to follow if Partner makes the expected 1♠ response? There's nothing wrong with that approach, but it's not our own preference. We would be planning to rebid 1NT here, notwithstanding the Spade singleton, and as that is the case we'd open the hand 1♣, the bid most likely to encourage the right opening lead from Partner if we end up defending.
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
Your 3 choices are: (a) 1♠ … the plan would be to rebid Hearts a couple of times, if the auction permitted … the problem with this plan is that you would bid the hand much the same way with a considerably weaker hand; (b) Double … this will work superbly well if Partner bids a major, our hand is so good we may just jump to game directly … but, this won’t work out so well if Partner’s next bid is No Trump or Clubs, it will now be virtually impossible to uncover the winning 5-3 major fit (if there is one); (c) 2♦ … yes, this is our choice … force Partner to pick a major and then make a game try.
We recommend that Michaels be played in the either-or-style, by which we mean that it is either good or bad … the middling hands we bid naturally. If we open a "good" Michaels, then of course we'll be expecting to take another bid later in the auction.
Board 18 Dealer East N-SVul
Is there any doubt about what 4NT means here? Hopefully not! Yes, this should be to play, finding the right game to play has to take priority over slam bidding. No guarantees here, but surely it’s worth a shot at 4NT on this hand.
Board 19 Dealer South E-W Vul
Back on Board 13, South had a balancing problem, and now its North's turn. The opponents appear to have an 8-card fit, because West's Redouble showed 3-card support, and East's 2♠ bid suggests at least 5. Does this mean that we should balance? We have the vulnerability in our favor, and probably just over half the points, but the fact of the matter is that we simply have nowhere to go. Partner seems likely to hold 2 Spades, and to be at least 4-4 in Hearts and Clubs ... as a passed hand, over 1♠, he could have bid 1NT with a distributional hand, so there is a strong possibility that she is exactly 2-4-3-4, in which case balancing will result in us playing in a 4-3 fit at the 3-level. No, sometimes you just have to go quietly and defend a low-level contract ... but at least your partnership can rely on its superior defensive skills to salvage a few matchpoints.
Board 24 Dealer West None Vul
West’s 2♥ bid could be made with quite a strong hand (as we already saw on Board 21), therefore it behooves East to keep the auction open when he has 7 or 8 working points and 4-card Heart support. It follows that, if you must stretch to 3♥ on that type of hand, you must also stretch to 4♥ on the actual 11-count that you hold here. Clearly, 3♥ would be overworked if it were used for hands in the whopping range of 7-12, so we take a little bit of pressure off the top end by bidding game with the actual hand.
Board 26 Dealer East Both Vul
4NT was Roman Key Card Blackwood (agreeing Hearts), and Partner’s 5♥ bid showed 2 Key Cards without the Queen of Trumps. What next?
Partner presumably has 6 Hearts, so, if we can pick up the trump suit, we can count 12 tricks, and that’s just counting 8 points for Partner … it doesn’t seem too much to expect Partner to have the K♣ or Q♦ or 4 Spades (including the Jack) in order to make up his opening bid, and any one of those cards will be our 13th trick. Even so, bidding a grand slam which depends on picking up Qxxx (or, even worse, maybe QJxx), is somewhat hazardous, especially when there is an (outside) chance that we’ll only have 12 tricks, and will also need the Club finesse. So, we would settle for the small slam.
Next question … Hearts or No Trump? It’s highly unlikely that No Trump will not play the same as Hearts, so our guess on this hand is to bid 6NT.
Board 27 Dealer South None Vul
Those question marks under the North column are intended to indicate that North might actually have a bidding problem on this hand. Clearly a misprint, some might say. Not so. We should at least consider bidding 1♥ here. It’s probably our one and only chance to get that useful-looking 5-card major into the auction. Let us not underestimate the value of those Heart fillers. And being non-vulnerable, we have extra protection against going down a couple when Partner takes us too literally and competes to the 3-level for down two, mercifully undoubled we hope.
Having said all that, we do have 3 Diamonds, so, if the hand is passed out, we are unlikely to be in a terrible spot. Yes, we actually would pass with this hand, but give us fewer Diamonds and we think that the odds tilt in favor of bidding 1♥.
Board 27 Dealer South None Vul
In the direct seat this would be an easy 1NT overcall, but in the balancing seat it's customary to lower the requirements for this bid, primarily to make it easier for the balancing side to crawl back into the auction. A typical balancing 1NT range would be 10-14 or 11-15, or thereabouts, and this 16-pointer is just too good. So Double is the only choice here.
Let's not to forget to extend the logic into the later auction. For example, suppose that we do indeed double, and that Partner now bids 1♥ or 1♠. What next? The answer is that we must bid 1NT, showing a hand that was too good to balance with 1NT originally, let's say 16-18. The logic is consistent, whether we are in the direct seat or the balancing seat: In the direct seat: Bid 1NT with 15-18 Double then bid NT with 18-19 (a hand too good for 1NT originally) In the balancing seat: Bid 1NT with 11-15 (or some such range) Double then bid NT with 16-18 (a hand too good for 1NT originally)
Board 29 Dealer North Both Vul
Yes, it’s a choice between 4♠ and Pass. And 4♠ is the clear winner! True, we only have 8 HCPs opposite a simple take-out Double, but we have to stretch a little when the opponents crowd our auction. And it’s not just any old 8 HCPs, our values all appear to be working, and there is also that lovely Club singleton. Full value for a 4♠ bid!
Board 31 Dealer South N-S Vul
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
