|
Bidding Quiz 29th November, 2006
Board 3 Dealer South E-W Vul
Please see the write-up under Board 32, where we discuss four hands from this week (this one included), all with the common theme of responding to a Weak Two bid.
Board 3 Dealer South E-W Vul
South doesn’t have much of a suit for her Weak Two, but the vulnerability no doubt made the preempt irresistible. North’s 2NT is some form of asking bid, we’ll leave it open as to whether it asks for a Feature or is a variation of Ogust. But, whatever that 2NT means, the question becomes “How are the responses changed by that 3♣ interference?” It’s not a situation that comes up very often, but there are some general principles that will help guide us through this uncharted territory.
North’s 2NT bid is forcing to 3♠, so we can use this basic principle: Bidding immediately to the level to which we have forced shows weakness. In other words, a 3♠ bid here is a weakness bid.
How about Double? The obvious and natural interpretation is that South has unexpectedly good defense against 3♣, maybe something like: ♠ A98654 ♥ 874 ♦ 9 ♣ K76 It looks as if we have 3 defensive tricks against 3♣, assuming that we can arrange for a Diamond ruff (highly likely) so why not tell Partner the news?
What would Pass mean? Well, at least it’s more encouraging than a direct 3♠, basically a hand without clear direction.
How about 3♦ or 3♥? We don’t want to get too scientific here, but surely the obvious interpretation is some values in the bid suit and a decent hand. Yes, we’d say that was the sensible and natural treatment even if the 2NT bid was actually Ogust, and not a Feature-asking bid.
OK, that’s what we suggest in this rather uncommon situation. Now, what is our bid over that 3♣ bid? It’s not much of a hand, we’d bid 3♠ saying just that.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
Partner has shown 15-18 HCP’s, and North has doubled for penalty. In this situation, some pairs have all sorts of exotic “run-out” methods, but there’s a lot to be said for a simple approach, such as: - Pass shows a willingness to tough it out in 1NT doubled - The basic 1NT system is on (so 2♣ is Stayman, etc) - Redouble is conventional, a way of getting out in 2♣ or 2♦ … the 1NT bidder is required to bid 2♣ after which East passes or bids 2♦
Playing this method, East will obviously redouble, Partner will bid 2♣ and that will be the end of the E-W bidding. 2♣ gets out for down one, whereas 1NT doubled is almost too awful to contemplate.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
Our Double of 1NT typically shows 10+ HCP’s, and is very much a penalty Double. East’s Redouble was their method of running out to 2♣ or 2♦, and the question is “Can E-W be allowed to play in an undoubled contract? We suggest “No!”, so therefore North is in a Forcing Pass situation here … she can pass if she wishes, safe in the knowledge that South will take another call. A further suggestion is that N-S play this sequence as forcing to 2NT, an agreement which makes it easier for them to get into an investigative auction.
If those are indeed the partnership methods, North must choose between 2♥ and Pass. A pretty close choice, we think, take your pick.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
That Redouble was their way of escaping into two of a minor. Partner’s Pass of 2♣ was forcing, the basic premise being that the opponents cannot play undoubled, and if we play the hand we must bid at least to 2NT.
Bearing all that in mind, what is your call? We have two decisions here … Hearts or No Trump? … and game or part-score? We think that our 14-count is too good not to go to game. And we don’t see much to choose between 3NT or 4♥, except that 3NT will put the strong hand on opening lead. So, 3NT it is.
Board 6 Dealer East E-W Vul
That 2♣ was Michaels, now what when 3♣ gets back to you? This one’s pretty easy, the bid is Double, showing extras. If you and Partner subscribe to the Bad-Good theory, your Michaels bids are made on bad hands or good hands, and with the middling hands (say 11-15) you will overcall 1♠, hoping to get the Hearts in later. If that’s the case, your Double of 3♣ places you firmly in the Good range of Michaels hands.
Board 8 Dealer West None Vul
After the 1NT opening, it would be most feeble of West to sell out when non-vulnerable (and merely quite feeble if E-W were vulnerable). The real decision is not whether to bid, it’s whether to show a Spade one-suiter or a major two-suiter. It’s usually better to offer Partner a choice, so if our methods allowed us to show a major two-suiter, then that's what we would do. And, if we had no major two-suiter in our arsenal? Then we’d try 2♠, though with slightly more trepidation.
Board 8 Dealer West None Vul
North might reasonably have opened 1♣, planning a reverse of 2♥ if Partner were to respond 1♠. Anyway, after she chose to open 1NT, West refused to sell out and balanced his side into 2♠. Now, North finds herself in the balancing seat. Is this the time for action or for a timid Pass?
We would bid 3♣ here, here are the plus and minus factors: Plusses: We have a 5-card suit We only have 2 Spades We are not vulnerable They are not vulnerable (yes, this is a plus for bidding 3♣ because even if their 2♠ is a poor contract going down 2, we’ll still score only +100) Minuses: 3♣ is a complete stab in the dark and could be an utter disaster. Even if it’s not a disaster, maybe 2♠ and 3♣ are both going down.
Those minuses are quite significant and not to be sneezed at, but we’d consider them outweighed by all the little plus factors. Even so, 3♣ is only for the strong-hearted and those with understanding partners!
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
What does 4♦ mean here? Yes, it’s a Splinter bid … shortness in their suit, Spade support, and enough for game. But we would say that this hand is not suitable for that, just not enough trumps … normally we have 4 of them for a Splinter, holding only 3 may not be enough for us to take advantage of the ruffs on the board, especially when all 3 of them are honors. So, we’d suggest 3♦ instead, showing Spade support and invitational values or better.
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
How do you and your Partner stop short of game after Opener reverses? Here is one increasingly popular method: - If the 4th suit is available at the two-level (as it is in the featured auction), then this is an artificial weakness bid, and the only way to stop short of game. - If the 4th suit is not available at the two-level (as in 1♣ 1♠, 2♥), then 2NT is the weakness bid and the auction may stop short of game (indeed, 2NT may be passed, unlike the aforementioned 4th suit bid) - A rebid of Responder’s major (2♠ here) is “neutral”, could be good or bad, and forcing for just one round - All other sequences are game-forcing
What does this mean here? Well, the 4th suit is available, so 2NT is not passable. That would be our choice, it seems like the most descriptive bid, we wouldn’t waste our time rebidding that poor Spade suit.
Board 13 Dealer North Both Vul
In case you were wondering, we put lot of thought into these hands, and for the especially difficult ones we consult a number of sources. In most cases we reach a consensus on what is right, or at least reasonable, and we then report accordingly. Professor Oddbid is one of our sources, he’s famous (some would say notorious) for finding bids that would not occur to 99% of bridge players. However, his bids are always based on logic (however obscure it might be), and quite often they even work out rather well.
Suppose your methods are that 3♠ and 4♠ are both preempts and that 2♥ is reserved for raises which are more constructive in nature, say a limit raise or better. If that’s the case, you’d get votes for 4♠ (by virtue of the 10-card trump fit), but perhaps it is more prudent to bid just 3♠, given the vulnerability, and the outside high cards.
Enter Professor Oddbid! He hates to preempt with all those outside values, so even though he holds a paltry 6-count, he makes a limit raise of 2♥! Yes, really! He reckons that the extra trump and the doubletons give him some extra offense, and that preempting with KQxx in the opponent’s suit is quite beyond the pale. We did warn you, his bid is not one that would occur to everybody!
Was Oddbid a winner on this one? Actually all bids get N-S to 4♠ (making 5), so the jury is still out on our eccentric friend.
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
Surely the opponents can make 12 tricks in something, and a grand slam will be there unless Partner has a side-suit trick. It’s hard to believe that we are not going to sacrifice in 6♥ eventually (maybe even 7♥) so the real question is how to get there. Here are some strategies for your consideration: Walking the Dog: The plan here would be to make an understated leap to 4♥, and then to bid 5♥ later, then 6♥, trying all the while to look like someone who is being dragged kicking and screaming into the stratosphere. The goal is to get doubled at a relatively low level. But this gives E-W way too much opportunity for the exchange of information, and is only recommended if your opponents have the IQ’s of backward clams. Pussyfooting: This strategy would involve a preempt of 5♥, in the optimistic (but surely vain) hope that the opponents will double you out at the 5-level, thereby minimizing your penalty. An excellent strategy if the opponents are mice. Something Tricky: There are all sorts of deceptive ploys at your disposal, such as fake Blackwood, or a deceptive lead-directing bid, but they won’t fool any self-respecting West and will just give the opponents extra options in the auction. Smashmouth: Just bid 6♥, which is surely where you were prepared to go anyway. Take away their space, and apply maximum pressure.
Yes, we like the smashmouth approach. Not that we are averse to chicanery and duplicity, far from it. We just don’t think that this is the right hand for it.
Board 21 Dealer North N-S Vul
What does 2♠ mean here? Clearly it is not preemptive, if we think they can make something big we can just pass. No, 2♠ is used to show a decent hand with a 6-card Spade suit. How decent? We’d suggest a hand which, given the chance, would have opened 1♠ and then rebid 2♠. Let’s face it, we would balance with 5 Spades and paltry values, so it has to be a good idea to use that otherwise useless jump to show a better hand. But not too good. If the hand were a little better, we would double first and then bid Spades.
Board 22 Dealer East E-W Vul
We are not big on flimsy two-level overcalls with 5-card suits and shapeless hands, but it’s a good idea to stretch things a little when the opponents have bid and raised. North is in the so-called “pre-balancing” position, and can take the pressure off Partner by bidding with the right hand-type, and worrying a little less than usual about the hand-strength.
Board 24 Dealer West None Vul
Assuming that 2♥ is game-forcing, we could safely bid 3♥ here, showing a 6th Heart. But that’s a lot of bidding space to consume with such a moderate suit. We’d suggest a 3♣ bid here, the bid which gives the partnership the best chance of choosing correctly between 3NT and 4♥. It’s not exactly a New Minor Forcing bid as we encountered back on Board 20, because the auction has already established a force. But, even though this particular bid shows something in the bid suit, its intent is not dissimilar to New Minor Forcing.
Board 26 Dealer East Both Vul
In this situation, most partnerships play that 1♠ is natural and forcing, and that 2♠ is artificial (Fourth Suit Forcing), so, in that scenario, 2♠ is certainly an option.
How about 3NT? That would be our choice. We have a tad more than game-going values, at least in terms of HCP’s, but our distribution is square, so we’d just go to game and keep things simple.
Board 29 Dealer North Both Vul
Please see the write-up under Board 32, where we discuss four hands from this week (this one included), all with the common theme of responding to a Weak Two bid.
Board 31 Dealer South N-S Vul
Please see the write-up under Board 32, where we discuss four hands from this week (this one included), all with the common theme of responding to a Weak Two bid.
Boards 3, 29, 21, 32
This week we had four instances where a Weak Two was opened opposite a hand with some values and adequate trump support, and in each case the question was whether or not to invite game. We’ll assume that the partnership methods are that 2NT is some kind of inquiry (perhaps Ogust or Feature, it doesn’t matter which), and that raising the Weak Two suit to the three-level is merely furthering the preempt.
Before we look at the 4 hands, let’s remind ourselves that, opposite a Weak Two, the key factor in whether or not to invite (or bid) game is controls. If we count an Ace as two controls and a King as one control, then the usual minimum for inviting is 4, and even that is marginal. We can also count side-suit shortness in with our controls (one for a singleton, two for a void), but in that case we need adequate trump length (at least three) if we are to score some ruffs in Dummy.
Board 29 ♠ Q96 ♥ A432 ♦ A52 ♣ QT4 Partner opens 2♥. We have 4 controls, but not much else. Those 4 trumps are something of an illusion, because there are no ruffing values. And at least one of those Queens will be wasted. Give Partner KQxxxx of Hearts and an outside Ace, for example. That’s a pretty good Weak Two, but probably not enough to make game opposite our hand … we can count 6 trumps, our A♦, and Partner’s Ace for 8 tricks … perhaps our Queen opposite Partner’s side-suit Ace will work together for a 9th trick, but that’s likely to be all she wrote. Game is definitely a long shot on this one. Does that mean we should pass with this one? No, we have a 10-card fit, it’s inconceivable that the opponents will let us play this at the two-level. So, we must raise to 3♥, making it that much more difficult for the opponents to get into the auction.
Board 3 ♠ 942 ♥ AQJ4 ♦ KT85 ♣ K7 Partner opens 2♠. We have 4 controls and a couple of plus factors. There’s the potential for extra Heart tricks, and the possibility of a Club ruff. We’d say that this one is just about worth an invitation.
Board 32 ♠ Q9 ♥ KQT84 ♦ Q2 ♣ KQ74 Partner opens 2♠. Lots of points but only two controls. Perhaps we can add one on for the Q♠, but those three side-suit Queens will not achieve much for Partner. How much better our hand would be if two of those Queens were combined into a single Ace, giving us: ♠ Q9 ♥ KQT84 ♦ A2 ♣ K974 This hand would be an easy invite, with adequate controls and two working Queens. But, back to the original hand. If we are not going to invite, should we at least further the preempt with a 3♠ bid? We wouldn’t. We only have an 8-card fit, no need to venture to the 3-level voluntarily. And as our side probably has the majority of the points, there’s a good chance that the opponents won’t be able to get into the auction even if we pass.
Board 31 ♠ K9 ♥ A9642 ♦ KT9 ♣ KJ8 Partner opens 2♠. We have 5 controls and a clear invitation. Can we make it an absolute rule that we’ll always invite (at least) when we have 5 controls? Here’s the worst 5-control hand we can think of: ♠ 32 ♥ AK2 ♦ K432 ♣ K432 Well, inviting with that would be a stretch, we have to subtract something for the small doubleton in trumps. So let’s just say that we almost always invite with 5 controls!
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
