Bidding Quiz                                             31st January, 2007

 

                                                    Board 1      Dealer North       None Vul

 

                                                                 

If you do not play Support Doubles, then a Double in this situation shows extra values, let’s say something like 16+ HCP’s.

 

Pairs that do play Support Doubles have a choice to make and, by partnership agreement, may choose to treat this as a Support Double situation or not.  This is a common cause of misunderstanding, so whenever you are filling out a convention card and Partner says “Support Doubles?”, the suggested answer is another question “Yes, and are they on over a natural 1NT bid?”.

 

Note the word “natural” in the previous sentence.  If the 1NT is of the Sandwich variety (take-out, in other words) and if Support Doubles are being played, then they are very much on in this situation.

 

                                                    Board 3      Dealer South       E-W Vul

 

 

To balance or not to balance?  If we were not vulnerable it would be a pretty clear “Yes”, we think, but vulnerable perhaps caution is required.  We’d say that it is a pretty close choice.

 

OK, suppose that we do decide to balance, then how?  Yes, we bid 2NT.  This is not necessarily for the minors, a better description is “Two places to play”.

 

                                                    Board 7      Dealer South       Both Vul

 

 

North is squarely in the middle of her 1NT rebid range of 12-14, and if she were a good 13 she would no doubt accept the invitation.  This 13-count is most poor indeed, though … not a Ten in sight, not even a Nine, and no-5-card suit.  A clear Pass.

 

                                                    Board 10      Dealer East       Both Vul

 

 

How about 4NT here?  Surely that should be saying “pick-a-minor”, we don’t see much value in this being natural or Ace-asking.  Having said that, let’s also say that we don’t think that 4NT is the best bid here, even if Partner is on the same wavelength.  After all, Partner already has a shrewd idea that we are short in Hearts, and she further knows that if we had 3 Spades we would have supported Spades either now or earlier.  Therefore, we probably are at least 5-5 in the minors (with 6-4 we’d presumably bid the 6-card suit earlier).  So, our choice would be Double here, which has the added benefit of keeping Spades in the picture.  The Double is primarily take-out, of course.

 

So, what would a 4NT bid look like?  The same basic hand but with 1-2-5-5 or 1-1-6-5 distribution.  Or, maybe a 2-1-5-5 hand with only small Spades.

 

                                                    Board 14      Dealer East       None Vul

 

 

North’s “2/1 in competition” is not game-forcing, but it does show decent vales, say 10+ HCP’s, and we are forced to say something.  We have our typical minimum hand, and the three bids which will let us stay short of game are 2NT, 3♦, and 3♠.  The most descriptive bid is 3♥, of course, that’s where our values are, but this bid suffers from the defect of being forcing to game.  Yes, we could make the overbid of 3♥ anyway, opting for the descriptive overbid, but there does not seem much benefit to this, Partner would have doubled 2♣ if she held 4 Hearts.

 

So which of those three bids, 2NT, 3♦, and 3♠, is the least objectionable?  They all look ugly to us, but let’s eliminate 2NT first, that would be a wild gamble.  How about 3♦?  This might work, and may well be our best fit, but Partner will expect a 6-card suit or at least 5 good ones.  That leaves just 3♠ which would be our choice.  Our support is not pretty and we could be putting Partner in a perilous 5-2 fit at the 3-level, but the alternatives are even worse.

 

                                                    Board 18      Dealer East       N-S Vul

 

 

East’s 4♥ bid typically shows something in the 18-19 range, so West is sure that the hand belongs in slam.  After the Roman Key Card response, showing 1 or 4 Key Cards, it’s time to pick our slam.  Six or Seven?  Hearts or No Trump?

 

We know that 15 of Partner’s points are used up in those Key Cards, and at this point we can count 4 trump tricks plus AK in each of the side-suits.  That comes to 10, and playing in Hearts we can get to 11 with a ruff in one hand or the other.  We’d expect Partner to have a Queen somewhere to make up his 18-19, and that would allow us to count 12 tricks playing in Hearts.  Surely there’s another trick somewhere!  Partner might have the J♣, for example, or perhaps his Queen is in Spades, in which case our Jack is the 13^th trick.  Or maybe we can get two ruffs, either Clubs in our hand or Spades in Partner’s hand.  We’d bid 7♥ here.

 

7♥ is indeed a good contract, Partner’s hand is ♠ A4  ♥ AQ54  ♦ KJ7  ♣ Q42.  There are 11 top tricks, with two Spade ruffs taking us to 13.  No finesses required.  Those who most optimistically bid 7NT were unfairly rewarded when the Spade finesse works and the J♣ is tripleton.  Hardly seems fair, does it?

 

 

                                                    Board 20      Dealer West       Both Vul

 

 

After our transfer to Spades, North made a so-called “super accept”, by virtue of having 4 cards in our major.  Let’s assume that the methods in use are as follows:

-         With a crummy square hand, don’t bother to super-accept

-         With a decent or good hand, bid 3♠ directly

-         With a maximum hand, bid 2NT

This method has the benefit of disclosing nothing to the opponents, some of the other methods in use provide gratuitous information to the opponents.

 

Anyway, the above probably comes under the heading of “too much information”, because our hand is going to 4♠ regardless of the inner workings of our supper-accept methods.  The point here is that, playing super-accepts, it’s useful to have a “re-transfer” agreement … here 3♥ repeats the transfer, and makes sure that the strong hand ends up as Declarer.  It’s easy to re-transfer without thinking in these situations, but we are not obliged to make Partner the Declarer.  If we are holding a hand such as ♠ QJ832  ♥ KJ9  ♦ K4  ♣ K53 clearly we would want our hand to be protected from the opening lead.

 

 

                                                    Board 22      Dealer North       N-S Vul

 

 

We don’t see any alternative to 2NT here.  It’s a slight overbid, but at least we have the unbid suit stopped!  But we haven’t exactly described our hand very well, have we?  At this point in the proceedings we have overstated our HCP’s, bid a suit with 4 small cards, and concealed a strong 6-card suit!

 

We think the real culprit is that 1♠ bid.  Perhaps it would be better to by-pass it with a response of 1NT, and follow that up with 3♣, showing exactly what we have.  Well, almost, there is the downside that we will miss a 4-4 Spade fit occasionally, but those occasions will be outnumbered by the more comfortable auctions we’ll find ourselves in most of the time.

 

                                                    Board 23      Dealer South       Both Vul

 

                                   

Some players do not bother with Stayman when they hold a square hand opposite a 1NT opening, asserting that there is no good reason to when they have no ruffing values.  Not a good argument, because more often than not Opener will have a ruffing value.  For example, give Partner a random collection such as ♠ A832  ♥ Q832  ♦ AQ6  ♣ A5, and we would certainly want to be in 4♠ … it’s a better contract than 3NT, and even if they both make it will score better.

 

However, there are occasions when the 4-4 major fit is not the place to be, and one such example is when the two hands have square mirror distributions.  There is a useful device available for avoiding this … we discussed this one back in November, as follows:

            “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 of those square mirror fits!”

 

 

                                                    Board 24      Dealer West       None Vul

 

 

After Partner’s 1♠ response, would you have rebid that 6-card Diamond suit, or raised Partner with 3-card support?  We prefer West’s actual choice of 2♠, the Spades are so good, and the Diamonds so weak.  But that’s no reason to give up on the Diamonds completely, and when South balances with a Double, we can complete the description of our hand by throwing in a 3♦ bid, maybe the Double will have pushed us into a better spot.  And even if Partner goes back to Spades, 3♦ might keep them out of a Club fit.

 

 

                                                    Board 25      Dealer North       E-W Vul

 

 

What are the choices here?

-         2♣?     If you don’t play this as game-forcing, then look no further!  You bid 2♣,  then rebid 3♣, and be content that you have described your hand quite well.  So, the rest of this section is for those who do play 2♣ as game-forcing, and who therefore must find an alternative. 

-         1NT?   This shows something in the 6-10 HCP range and it denies a 4-card major, so in that regard it qualifies.  But do we really want to bid 1NT with a void in Spades?  If we are to play this one in No Trump we’d much prefer that Partner played the hand to protect her major suit holdings.

-         1♥?      Yes, this bizarre-looking bid seems like the best choice to us.  Far from appealing, just less unappealing than the alternatives.

 

Having said that, some 2/1 pairs play 1♦ 3♣ as an invitational bid … not a bad treatment, it plugs a gap in the system, and would be the perfect choice for this particular hand.

 

 

                                                    Board 26      Dealer East       Both Vul

 

                          

We don’t have any qualms about opening a hand 1NT when we have a 5-card major, such a practice solves a lot of rebid problems, please see our article on the subject.  Furthermore, if we were to swap the red suits, we would not say that this hand is too strong to open 1NT.  True, it’s a maximum with a 5-card suit, but there are no filers, and for us at least it would be fine.

 

However, on the actual hand, the combination of having a 5-card major and maximum values make it unsuitable for a 1NT opening in our opinion, we’ll miss too many 4♥ games.  To see this thought in action we only have to look at Partner’s hand on the actual deal: ♠ T9  ♥ T954  ♦ K93  ♣ AT54.  This is a balanced 7-count which would not dream of making a move opposite a 1NT opening, and yet 4♥ is a fine contract.  With this in mind, holding the North hand, we prefer a 1♥ opening bid.

 

 

                                                    Board 27      Dealer South       None Vul

 

 

Let’s answer a different balancing question first.  Would you balance with the same hand, after this auction?

            South   West    North   East 

                        Pass    Pass    1♠

            Pass    2♠        Pass    Pass

            ??

We admit that we would, the opponents have at least an 8-card fit, we are non-vulnerable, and we have something in each of the unbid suits.

 

Now back to the actual auction.  Here the opponents may well not have a real fit, West’s 2♠ bid is more than likely to have been a preference bid made on a doubleton.  This may well be one of those hands where there are nothing but 7-card fits around the table, which would mean that competing to the 3-level would be a serious overbid.  The point is simple enough, when they have a fit we balance more freely than when they don’t.

 

Would we balance in the original situation?  Probably not, though it is certainly tempting even given the auction’s warning signs.

 

                                                    Board 29      Dealer North       Both Vul

 

 

With that 4-loser hand, East is good value for a jump shift to 3♥, and the main question here is “Does 3♥ promise a 5-card suit?”  Playing standard methods it doesn’t, otherwise Declarer would be stuck for a rebid when he has a really strong 5-4 hand, but there is a useful gadget which adds clarity to the situation.  We know it as the “Power Relay”, but perhaps it also goes by other names.  The way it works is that, after a major suit opening and a Forcing 1NT response, Opener’s rebid of 2NT says “I have jump shift values, and a 4-card second suit somewhere”.  It naturally follows that 1♠ 1NT, 3♥, for example, guarantees that the second suit has 5 cards.  Please follow the link on this for more information on this useful gadget.

 

 

                                                    Board 30      Dealer East       None Vul

 

 

Anyone for Garbage Stayman with the West hand?  We would certainly be tempted and this might be the ensuing auction:

            West    North   East     South

                                    1NT     Pass

            2♣       Dbl      2♦        3♣

            Pass    Pass    Pass

West is planning to get out in Partner’s better major.  The Double provokes a 3♣ bid by South and that is a contract which has all the hallmarks of down one.  So, Garbage Stayman would be a resounding success on this board.  Instead of being -100 in 1NT, E-W will likely end up +110 in 2♠, or +50 defending 3♣.

 

We rather like using Garbage Stayman in these situations, but to be honest it’s something of a gamble either way, in the various simulations that have been performed on the subject it appears to be close to an even money situation.

 

                                                    Board 32      Dealer West       E-W Vul

 

 

After West’s 2♠ bid, East has hopes of slam.  Time for another gadget, this time it’s a treatment for 2NT here, which can be used to ask Partner to describe his hand … the Ogust-like responses are:

            3♣       3-card support, bad hand

            3♦        3-card support, good hand

            3♥        4-card support, bad hand

            3♠        4-card support, good hand

With a good hand and something else to say, Partner can go beyond 3♠ to make a descriptive bid, and on the actual deal he’ll bid 4♥, showing shortness in Hearts.  With massive wastage in Hearts, East will sign off in 4♠.

 

© BES, Inc

All Rights Reserved