|
Bidding Quiz 15th November, 2006
Board 2 Dealer North N-S Vul
♠ AT2 ♠ 84 ♥ Q6 ♥ KJ8732 ♦ KQJT73 ♦ A6 ♣ 84 ♣ 752
West North East South 1♠ Pass 2♠ ?? Pass ??
Here, we see both N-S hands, and try to figure out how they should get into the auction, or, indeed, if they should get into the auction.
Let’s look at the North hand first. Is this worth a vulnerable 3♦ bid? It’s somewhat minimum, and certainly not without danger, but we would be inclined to try 3♦ anyway. One deciding factor is that we have good trumps, which will make it harder for them to double us. Having said that we would not fault a Pass by North, either, it seems quite a close decision to us.
OK, now suppose that North does decide to try 3♦. What should South do? We’d say that her hand is good enough to bid 3♥ here: - She didn’t bid 2♠ over 1♠, so her hand is limited, Partner won’t expect the moon - Partner’s 3♦ bid could be considerably stronger than the one actually held, and game (most likely in Hearts) is still a possibility from South’s point of view - Bidding 3♥ is a constructive move, not an attempt to escape from a poor 3♦ contract. After South’s 3♥, North will pass in a flash, of course, not deeming game very likely opposite a hand that could not take action over 1♠.
Finally, let’s suppose that North does not risk 3♦, and 2♠ gets passed back to South. Should South balance with 3♥? Absolutely! The important thing here is not the number of HCP’s (Partner is known to have some based on the opponent’s bidding), it’s the number of Hearts. It’s reasonable to assume that the HCP’s are more or less evenly divided between the two sides, so with that in mind compare South’s actual hand with this hypothetical hand: ♠ 84 ♥ KJ873 ♦ A63 ♣ K75 In this second example South has an extra King but one less Heart. The extra King doesn’t really achieve much, it doesn’t do much to increase our side’s expectation of total points because more points for us just means correspondingly fewer for Partner. But the one fewer Heart certainly reduces our expectation of an 8- or 9-card fit. Our point is simply that the 8-point 6-Heart balance is considerably safer than an 11-point 5-Heart balance.
Board 7 Dealer South Both Vul
The plan here depends on the partnership methods: - If we are playing Support Doubles (and Redoubles): In this case we would Redouble, showing exactly 3-card support for Partner’s Hearts … failure to do so (and also failure to bid 2♥) would deny 3+ Hearts, with the potential loss of our 5-3 fit. If the auction permits, after showing 3 Hearts, we’ll bid Diamonds again, later. - If we are not playing Support Doubles (and Redoubles): In this case, we would rebid our Diamonds, which we can safely do without denying Hearts. Later, if we get the chance, we’ll bid Hearts.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
This one is a simple choice between 2♦ and a preemptive 3♦. If we bid 3♦, Partner will expect a 5th Diamond, which we have, and a weak hand, which we also have. Does this make it an open-and-shut case for 3♦? We don’t think so. North has two outside Queens, one in the opponent’s suit, and this is a bit more defense that we like for our preempts. Also, we have an unappealing shape, with not much offensive potential. Moderate offense coupled with defensive values is not a good formula for preempting. Our own plan would be to bid just 2♦, but later, if necessary to bid 3♦ based on our extra Diamond.
You’ll no doubt get some dissenting views on this one, many players are less fastidious about the purity of their preempts!
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
Nobody would argue with a Spade bid here, but how many of them? 1♠ or 2♠ or 3♠? In first or second seat, we’d try 1♠, it’s just too good for 2♠ in our opinion. In third seat, the chances are that this is the opponents’ hand, so we’d be more inclined to preempt. But bidding 2♠ does not seem enough, we’d try 3♠, the practical bid in the circumstances.
We called it “practical” advisedly. On the actual deal, 3♠ doubled would be down two for a zero, but it’s unlikely that North will be caught speeding, and in practice it will be the opponents who will buy the contract and go minus.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
East’s 2♣ was Fourth Suit Forcing, an artificial bid, played by this partnership as game-forcing. After 2♣, West has a difficult choice between raising Hearts and bidding No Trump. Neither is ideal, we’d prefer a Heart honor to bid 2♥, and a third Club to bid 2NT. Notwithstanding our feeble Hearts, we’d bid 2♥. Why? Well, if we raise Hearts we should get a chance, later in the auction, to bid 3NT, offering a choice of contracts. But, if we bid 2NT instead, and Partner raises to 3NT we won’t be able to show our Heart support.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
Our 2♣ bid (Fourth Suit Forcing) was game-forcing, so the Principle of Fast Arrival applies here. If, over 2♥, we had bid 4♥ directly, this would be a minimum hand without slam interest. Instead, our 3♥ bid showed one of these: - Either: A hand which has slam interest; - Or: A hand which is still not certain whether we belong in 3NT or 4♥.
West’s 3NT suggested an alternative contract. Now what? Our hand is too good just to sign-off in 4♥, but nor is it good enough to go barreling into slam. We think that West is worth one more try. We’d cue-bid 4♣, planning to give up on slam if Partner bids 4♥. But suppose that, over 4♣, Partner cue-bids 4♦. What then? Now we would bid 4♥, saying “I’ve done enough, Partner, it’s up to you now”. As it happens, Partner is going nowhere, which is just as well because 10 tricks is the limit of the hand.
Roman Key Card is not the solution to all slam investigations, sometimes cue-bidding works better, primarily because it invites Partner’s opinion. And opinions sometimes count for more than Aces or Key Cards.
Board 13 Dealer North Both Vul
Just in case it is relevant to the problem, let’s start by reviewing the No Trump ranges in the balancing seat (there’s a little bit of “fuzziness” in these ranges): - 11-15: Bid 1NT - 16-18: Double and rebid No Trump - 19-20: Bid 2NT - 21-22: Double and jump in No Trump
Now, back to the problem. Here are the possibilities: - Double: We don’t have the requisite 3-card (or better) Spade suit, but our hand is strong enough to override that defect. However, if we double, Partner will no doubt bid 1♠ and we won’t have an ideal follow-up … too good to rebid 1NT, not good enough to rebid 2NT. Nor do we like the idea of Doubling and then bidding Diamonds when our hand is so No Trumpish - 2NT: This is right on values, but we just know that Partner will transfer to Spades, and he will be most disappointed with our singleton! - Pass!: Somewhat bizarre, perhaps, but not unreasonable. We would be gambling that we cannot make game and that we can beat 1♥ by a couple of vulnerable undertricks. This gamble would not be sensible if they were not vulnerable, it’s the +200 we are after on this one. Nor would we make this gamble at a team game, the loss of a vulnerable game is too big a risk.
We rather like the Pass, although it’s certainly “out there”. If that is altogether too bizarre, then we suggest doubling and rebidding 1NT (over 1♠) … a slight underbid, but less risky that the direct 2NT bid.
Board 14 Dealer East None Vul
The modern style is for overcalls to have a slightly higher upper limit than in days of yore. Nowadays most experts are apt to overcall on hands with as many as 18 HCP’s, perhaps even a bit more under some circumstances. Is this a lead-in for us to suggest a 1♥ overcall by North, with his paltry 15 HCP’s? Actually, no! We like Double here, keeping the Spade suit in the picture … if South bids 2♣, we can bid 2♥, showing a strong hand with Hearts. Normally, this sequence would show a tad more in the way of HCP’s, perhaps, but the hand does have excellent playing strength. And, if Partner bids 1♠ we are good enough for a 3♠ invitation (just 2♠ would not be enough, even though this bid does show at least something extra for the Doubler).
Board 15 Dealer South N-S Vul
In first or second seat, playing 5-card majors, we’d open this 1♣. It might be tempting to open 1♥, but with Partner as an unpassed hand there’s no urgency to distort our hand for lead-directing purposes. However, in 3rd seat, with our minimum Opener opposite a passed hand, there’s a pretty good chance that Partner will be on opening lead, so we would say that the balance shifts in favor of the lead-directing 1♥.
Board 16 Dealer West E-W Vul
Some players don’t bother with Stayman when they have a square distribution on the grounds that their hand will produce no ruffs. True, but maybe it is Opener’s hand that can produce a ruff or two. We normally do use Stayman in this situation, but there is also a useful device available for those who have a morbid fear of playing in 4 of a major with square mirror distributions.
Let us suppose that you are interested in playing this gadget. First of all, you must discard your current meaning of the sequence: 1NT 3♦. If it’s something you cannot live without, then better move on to the next board. But, if you are still with us, 1NT 3♦ can be used to ask Partner to bid a 4-card major only if his hand is not square (with 3-4-3-3 or 4-3-3-3, Opener bids 3NT, bypassing the major). The 3♦ bidder’s hand will be square, and, hey presto, no more those square mirror fits!
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
West has a good 6-card Diamond suit and a truly pathetic 4-card Spade suit. Nonetheless, we would make a Negative Double here, showing 4 Spades (with or without Diamonds also), and here are the reasons: - With moderate hands, it’s important to explore the major suits first, because if we have an 8-card major fit that is more often than not going to be our best game. - Even if we thought our hand was strong enough for a 2♦ bid (we don’t!), it is certainly not strong enough to bid 2♦ and then introduce the Spades later.
However, with a stronger hand (say the actual one with the additional A♠), we have the luxury of bidding our strong suit first, because we are able to take a second call on the hand.
After the Negative Double, the auction unfolds thusly: West North East South Pass 1♥ 2♣ Dbl 3♣ Pass Pass ?? Yes, we bid 3♦, definitely non-forcing, showing pretty much the type of hand that we have … 4 Spades, good Diamonds, moderate values.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
Pass would certainly be reasonable, and probably the majority choice. We rather like 2♠ here, a bid which shows our modest values quite well, notwithstanding the fact that we are a Spade short.
Advocates of the Law of Total Tricks will cringe at that 2♠ bid with just two-card support. They’ll say that it will cause North to over-estimate the number of trumps her side has, and consequently she is likely to over-compete. They have a point, of course, but we remain unrepentant. We like the competitive and lead-directional benefits of 2♠ and we’ll just take our chances on the risk of Partner’s over-competing. And 2♠ does have the major benefit of saying “Yes, I have something, but not very much”, and it’s always nice to be able to show our values and limit our hand.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
This looks like a clear-cut 4♦ bid to us. Just as South was flouting the Law of Total Tricks with her 2♠ raise (see previous entry), so should West be affording more respect for the Law! His reasoning might be something like this: - Partner surely has 4 Diamonds, so we have a 10-card fit - The opponents have an 8-card fit, maybe even 9 - Assuming that they have an 8-card fit, that’s 18 trumps and 18 tricks … if they can make 9 of them, we are down one in 4♦, a worthwhile sacrifice, even if doubled (non-vulnerable). The bad news would be if they have 10 tricks, we have 8, and they double us in 4♦, but the other scenarios seem more probable. - Assuming that they have a 9-card fit, that’s 19 tricks, and now the only downside to bidding 4♦ is that, once in a while, the opponents will get pushed into a making 4♠. A simpler way of looking at things is to say “We have 10 trumps, what the heck, let’s compete to the 4-level”!
Board 19 Dealer South E-W Vul
We don’t know about you, but we would open 3♦ with that South hand. At favorable vulnerability, we like to kick it up a notch in our preempts. Here, that good Diamond suit almost looks like a 7-card suit, anyway, so why not? Of course, aggressive preempting sometimes pushes the opponents into contracts that they otherwise would not reach … and sometimes these contracts make! Nonetheless we do believe that harassing and chivying our vulnerable opponents is, on balance, a winning strategy.
On the actual deal, 3♦ is the winner, giving E-W nothing but losing options: - They can pass it out, and if they are at the top of their defensive game, they’ll nip it a trick but still get a bad score. If their defense is not top-notch, 3♦ will make. - East can compete to 4♣ but that’s too high and it could get even worse if West, not unreasonably, takes a call over 4♣.
2♦ would have made things altogether too simple for E-W. East would weigh in with a 3♣ call, and West does not have quite enough to participate in the proceedings. So, an easy ride to 3♣ making 3.
Board 20 Dealer West Both Vul
We suspect that if you gave this problem to an expert bidding panel, you would get votes for three different actions. We further suspect that that many of these experts would not be entirely happy with their choice, confirming that this truly is an awkward problem. OK, here are the three actions, each of them flawed in one way or another: - 1NT: On the plus side, this hand describes our overall strength well (and that is a big plus, we love auctions where one partner or the other has limited their hand, it’s always so nice to be able to say “This is what I’ve got, I’ll leave the rest up to my esteemed Partner”). On the minus side, Kx of their suit is far from ideal for a No Trump overcall, and we also have a 5-card Heart suit which may get lost in the shuffle. - 2♥: We certainly have the values for a 2♥ bid, and it’s usually a good idea to get our major into the auction. On the other hand, we only have 5 Hearts (Partner might reasonably expect 6 or at least 5 more chunky ones), and we have some extra values which we might find hard to convey later in the auction. - Double: If you see a problem in a Bidding Quiz, and Double is one of the options, then it’s a pretty safe bet that you will not be ridiculed for selecting that bid. In these situations, Double is a wonderful “pass-the-buck” strategy, and if Partner happens to guess wrong later in the auction, then at least you have a fighting chance in the post-mortem … after all, your Double gave Partner some options, it was just too bad that she chose the wrong one!
Does any of the above make us any the wiser? Probably not! We’d probably Double, planning to pass Partner’s 2♦, and to invite if she bids 1NT or 2♣ or 2♥.
Board 27 Dealer South None Vul
North’s 2♥ shows some values but is not game-forcing. A minimum point count might be a good 10, or thereabouts. As happens in these almost-game-forcing auctions, it behooves the other Partner to go to game with extra, and that’s exactly what South should do here. True, it’s only 14 HCP’s, but look at those Spade pushers! So, let’s not bid 2NT (which might get passed out), let’s go directly to 3NT.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
