|
Bidding Quiz 13th December, 2006
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
Here’s a familiar situation! South does not want to sell out to 2♦, but it’s not obvious where N-S belong. Partner could have 5 Spades (or 4 good ones), maybe with 4 Hearts also, or she might have Club support. The solution in these balancing situations, where two or three different suits are conceivably places to play, is often to double. The Double simply says “I want to compete, but I don’t know where, so you choose”
But here we would not double! We have 3 Spades, the most possible on this auction, so we’d bid 2♠. Could we miss a 4-4 Heart fit? Yes, but if we do then we will be in a 5-3 Spade fit which will be quite adequate. Could we belong in Clubs? Yes, but Partner is allowed to bid 3♣ if his Spades are not so hot.
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
West has a good hand here, both on offense and on defense and does not want to sell out to 2♠. It would be somewhat unilateral to compete to 3♦, as Partner might well have a good defensive hand against Spades and/or Clubs, so the bid which keeps things flexible is the Double. This gets Partner involved in the decision, and they do say that two heads are better than one.
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
In this situation, how many Spades does North need to bid 1♠? It used to be quite common for 1♠ here to promise a 5-card suit, and therefore for the Double to show 4 cards in one or other or both of the majors, but nowadays the more common (and, in our view, better) treatment is: - With both 4-card majors, we make a Negative Double - With one four-card major, we bid the suit. Needless to say, if that is our treatment, then North has an obvious 1♠ bid here.
However, suppose that we hold the same hand and the auction has started as follows: North East South West Pass Pass 1♣ 1♥ ?? Now, there is only one unbid major and the rules are pretty much universal: - Double with 4 Spades - Bid 1♠ with 5+ Spades
Now, let’s fast-forward the auction: North East South West Pass Pass 1♣ 1♦ 1♠ Pass 1NT 2♦ Pass Pass 2♠ Dbl ?? Partner has chosen to balance by raising our Spades, presumably she has three of them. West’s Double showed a good hand, leaving it up to his Partner to make the right decision. Should we pass or bid 3♣? We suppose that we would bid 3♣ but it could very easily be wrong … Partner could be 3-4-3-3, for example. On the other hand, it looks as if the hand might play better from Partner’s side, protecting her Diamond holding, and putting the strong hand on lead. All in all, a difficult decision in our view.
Board 3 Dealer South E-W Vul
We’ve had a few of these 4-5 minor-suited hands lately. Sometimes it is necessary to open these hands 1♦ (planning to rebid 2♣), but our own preference is not to do this if we have a reasonable alternative. Here are some possible strategies: - Open 1NT … right point count, but a bit “out there” with that singleton Heart (tempting, though!) - Open 1♣, planning to reverse to 2♦ if Partner bids 1♥ … no, this hand is not nearly strong enough - Open 1♣, planning to rebid 1NT if Partner bids 1♥ … no, this hand is too good - Open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ if Partner bids 1♥ … yes, this would be our choice, the suit reasonably good, though we wish it were better for this sequence. A close second choice would, indeed, be to open 1♦ and rebid 2♣.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
There’s a useful device against Weak Twos called Leaping Michaels, which can be used to show strong two-suiters, and for more on the subject please follow the link to an article on the subject. South’s hand is ideal for the convention, and she bids 4♣ showing Clubs and Spades, typically 5-5, and a good hand.
How good does the hand have to be? Well, the South hand certainly qualifies, and we would suggest that it has about a King to spare. In other words, take away one of those Kings and it would just about qualify for a 4♣ bid, take away any more than that and it would not qualify.
Board 5 Dealer North N-S Vul
South’s 4♣ was Leaping Michaels, showing Clubs and Spades, typically 5-5 with a good hand. White against Red, sooner or later, we must surely be prepared to bid to 5♥ at least, and it’s not inconceivable that the opponents have slam and a 7♥ sacrifice will be profitable. It’s not possible to know for sure how many Hearts should be bid by E-W, but one thing we do know is that we should get there quickly. Our own choice would be to bid 5♥ here, though 6♥ is somewhat tempting.
The important thing here is not to bid 4♥, then 5♥, this gives the opponents too much space. On the actual deal North had a poor hand but 5-card Spade support … if we bid only 4♥ she can bid 4♠ and then can leave things up to Partner … if we bid 5♥ directly, she will be loath to pass with such good Spade support and will no doubt stretch to bid 5♠, getting her side too high.
Board 8 Dealer West None Vul
In this Two Over One auction, does 2♠ show a 6th Spade? That all depends on the partnership bidding style, here are two schools of thought: - Yes, 2♠ (usually) shows a 6th Spade, and with only 5 Spades opener will usually find another rebid; - No, 2♠ does not show a 6th Spade … for such partnerships, a rebid at the 3-level shows extras, so rebidding 2♠ here is “neutral” and may be made with only 5 Spades and no other convenient bid.
So, back to West’s rebid. We would bid 2♠ whichever method we were using! We cannot rebid 2NT with nothing in the unbid suits, it hardly seems right to bid that crummy Diamond suit even it it does not show extras. So we’d rebid 2♠, even if Partner does expect us to have a 6th Spade, it seems like the best description of the hand.
Board 8 Dealer West None Vul
East’s 2♥ was game-forcing in the E-W system, leaving East with a simple choice of rebid: - 3♥, showing a 6th Heart - 2NT, showing 12-14 and stops in the unbid suits.
We don’t like 3♥ here at all, it might create an awkward problem for Partner … what is he supposed to do without Heart support and only one minor suit stopped? 2NT keeps the options open, Partner can always give belated Heart support, if appropriate, on the next round of bidding.
Board 9 Dealer North E-W Vul
Playing a 2/1 Game Forcing system, is the West hand worth a 2♦ bid? Much depends on the partnership style of opening bids. If E-W are playing a fairly aggressive style where virtually all 12-counts and shapely 11-counts are opened, then perhaps this hand is not quite up to snuff for a 2/1 game force. But even then it’s a close decision, after all the hand does have a couple of useful Tens. Anyway, we would try 1NT here, planning to rebid 2NT if Partner then bids 2♥.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
South has only 14 HCP’s opposite a Partner who could make no more than a single raise, but there’s more to hand evaluation than HCP’s. On the Losing Trick Count, South has but 5 losers, calculated as follows: - Spades: No losers, of course - Hearts: Two losers (we are missing the Ace and Queen) - Diamonds: One loser (missing the Ace) - Clubs: Two losers (missing the Ace and King)
Where does a 5-loser hand fit into the general scheme of things? Well, a 4-loser hand is usually enough to go to game with opposite a Partner who has made any kind of voluntary noise, so surely this 5-loser collection is worth one more bid.
Our own choice would be a simple 3♥, a general game try. True we could bid 3♦ but it’s not obvious if that will be particularly helpful information to Partner, it’s more likely to help the defenders in our view.
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
A recurring theme in recent weeks has been hands where the decision is whether or not to preempt. Here are West’s choices: - 3♠: Most tournament partnerships play this bid as preemptive (typically with 4 Spades) but we don’t think that West has a hand which is preemptive in nature … he has two potential defensive tricks, more than Partner will reasonably expect, and the danger is that Partner might take a phantom sacrifice as a result of our misleading bid. - 4♠: Also generally played as preemptive, usually with a 5th Spade … this suffers from the same defect as 3♠, namely too much defense. - 2♠: The plan here would be to compete later to 3♠, if necessary (and, yes, it surely will be necessary, the opponents are unlikely to let us play in our 10-card fit at the 2-level) - 3♣: This would be our choice … it’s offensively about equivalent to a limit raise (the extra Spade compensates for the lack of HCP’s) … and we have the defensive values that Partner would reasonably expect for our bid.
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
First, let’s look at this uncontested auction: East West 1♠ 2♥ 2♠ 4♠ If West’s 2♥ is game-forcing, then most partnerships play West’s 4♠ as discouraging (for slam), the so-called Principle of Fast Arrival … E-W have forced to game so leaping to game is weaker that bidding more slowly (3♠ here, for example). The same principle applies to the Problem auction.
Partner’s 3♣ bid shows game-invitational values with Spade support. What is the difference now between 3♠ and Pass? West’s 3♣ essentially committed us to 3♠, so using the same Fast Arrival principle our own preference is as follows: - 3♠ shows a bad hand and is South’s most discouraging action - Pass is encouraging, showing decent values. - Other bids show better hands
Board 15 Dealer South N-S Vul
The continuum of No Trump ranges goes like this: 12-14: Open one of a suit and rebid 1NT 15-17: Open 1NT 18-19: Open one of a suit and make a jump rebid of 2NT 20-21: Open 2NT 22-24: Open 2♣ and rebid 2NT
On this particular hand we would rebid 3NT. Where does this fit into the aforementioned gradation of No Trump ranges? Actually, it doesn’t fit in anywhere! Here we have but 18 HCP’s but our double jump to 3NT is not based on HCP’s it’s based on a source of tricks, namely a (hopefully) running minor suit. The ideal hand for such a bid contains a stopper in the two unbid suits and a very strong and long suit. This one certainly qualifies.
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
Would you bid 2♥ or Double here? We know that a Double could lose a 5-3 Heart fit, but we would double anyway, the Hearts really are awfully weak, better to give Partner a choice of two suits.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
What does your opening 3NT bid show? Some play that it is 25-27 HCP’s or thereabouts, but we would recommend that hands like that are best described by going via a 2♣ opening. If so, then 3NT can be used as the Gambling 3NT, a bid which shows a running minor suit, usually a 7-card suit. It's customary, in first or second seat, for the Gambling 3NT to deny any stoppers in the other suits, but in 3rd or 4th seat a stopper is permissible. So, if we were playing the Gambling 3NT, that would be our choice here, and on the actual deal that is the winner ... Partner has the perfect hand and 9 or 10 tricks are possible on a combined 22 HCP's.
Suppose that we did not have the Gambling 3NT at our disposal? 1♦ is obviously quite reasonable, but in third seat, White versus Red, it's awfully tempting to preempt with 3♦ or 4♦ and neither of these bids will work nearly as well a 3NT opening.
Board 19 Dealer South E-W Vul
This is clearly a hand which belongs in 3NT or 4♥, let’s first look at a couple of bids which do not meet the requirements of the hand: - 3NT: No, that gives up the 5-3 Heart fit - 3♥: No, this is doubly flawed … firstly, the bid is not even forcing … secondly, it overstates the strength of the Heart suit (should be 6 for this sequence)
What’s the solution? Yes, as we have encountered a few times in recent weeks, this is a good opportunity for New Minor Forcing, a convention that works equally well when Opener rebids her minor, as it does when Opener rebids 1NT.
Board 20 Dealer West Both Vul
Some players would blench at the mere thought of opening 2♥ with this hand, and we must say that it does have a rather high Blenching Quotient: - We are vulnerable, always a good reason for extra caution - We have a rotten suit - We have precious few HCP’s - We have a void (it’s a small minus, but another potential surprise for our Partner as he attempts to take charge of the remainder of the auction)
If your style is to pass this hand we wouldn’t argue, if fact you will probably be in the majority. Perhaps we should not admit to this so freely in public, but we confess that we would bid 2♥ here, because for us it contains the two main ingredients of a preempt: - Good offense (we’d say that the Diamond holding, the void, and the 6-4 shape are all plusses in this regard) - Poor defense … in fact, it’s virtually non-existent.
Board 23 Dealer South Both Vul
This hand has the right shape for a Michaels bid, but is it the right strength? Many partnerships (ourselves included) play that Michaels bids are either good or bad, but not somewhere in between. We’d say that this is firmly in no-man’s-land, so we’d bid a simple 2♥.
Board 25 Dealer North E-W Vul
At this point South can smell the possibility of game, but it’s not clear whether that game (if there indeed is a game) should be in No Trump or Diamonds. We wouldn’t jump the gun here, we’d bid 3♥, showing something in Hearts and keeping the options open. If Partner has something in Clubs she can bid 3♠, saying “Bid 3NT if you have Spades stopped”.
Playing IMP’s we wouldn’t mess around, we’d bid 5♦ directly over 3♦, we really wouldn’t care too much is 3NT was +430 whereas 5♦ was only +400 or +420.
Board 29 Dealer North Both Vul
Partner has made a vulnerable two-level overcall, and must have a decent hand. We also have a decent hand and game might well be in our future. If we have game, then where is it? - 3NT: Unlikely, those three small Spades are most discouraging … Partner has but two, maybe fewer … one stop may not be enough, and it would be a bit much to expect two stops from Partner - 5♣: Not out of the question, but 11 tricks is so much harder than 10! - 4♥: Yes, surely that’s our most likely game … Partner is not supposed to throw in vulnerable two-level overcalls on rotten 5-card suits, he must have at least 6 or a good 5
We would try 3♥ here. Sure, we wish we had another Heart, but we don’t and the alternatives are worse. Not 3♠, that seems misdirected (towards No Trump) and may well get us too high. Not 3♣, the suit is not good enough. A Responsive Double is a possibility, planning to bid 3♥ if Partner chooses Diamonds … but that’s not a wonderful plan, either, if they bid 3♠ we’ll be wondering about 4♥, and why we didn’t bid 3♥ earlier.
Board 29 Dealer North Both Vul
We would double here, but the bid could have one of two meanings: - If we are playing Maximal Doubles, then we would double as a game try - If we are not playing Maximal Doubles, then we would double to show extra values.
Our own preference would be to have the Maximal Double as a partnership agreement, but in reality the Double means much the same either way.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
