|
Bidding Quiz 9th May, 2007
Click here for print-formatted version of the Bidding Quiz
Board 3 Dealer South E-W Vul
What are your methods for inviting game here? Here’s one schema: - 2NT is artificial, asking Partner to describe his hand: 3♣ 3-card support, bad hand 3♦ 3-card support, good hand 3♥ 4-card support, bad hand 3♠ 4-card support, good hand - 3♥ is natural, showing at least 5 Hearts - Side-suit bids show values in the bid suit.
Other than the artificial 2NT responses, this is a simple and natural approach to game tries. For another example of “That 3-3-4-4 Thing”, see also Board 20.
Board 4 Dealer West Both Vul
Do you Pass or bid 3♣? The hand is shapeless and the vulnerability not ideal, but there is the reasonable prospect of a 9-card fit. Of course, the danger is that Partner might think that we actually have some values and might take another call. This auction is a good candidate for a Lebensohl-style or Good-Bad-style 2NT, a gadget which has come up with alarming frequency in recent Wednesday Games. Yes, the thought here is that perhaps 2NT here is best served as a relay to 3♣, a weak way of competing to the 3-level. 3♣ directly would therefore show some values (but non-forcing). Even without that treatment, we might bid 3♣ here, but we would be a lot more nervous.
Board 9 Dealer North E-W Vul
Here are the choices: - 4♠: Not a good bid in our view. True, we have 5 Spades and shortness, but we prefer this bid to be more preemptive in nature. This hand has altogether too much stuff outside, too much defense. - 4♥: Most pairs play this as a Splinter bid, showing shortness in Hearts, support for Spades, and enough for game. The hand is not strong enough, and anyway it’s not a good idea to splinter with a singleton King. - 3♠: Yes, that’s more like it, invitational values and (at least) 4-card support. Only, 9 HCP’s, with some dubious values (singleton King, doubleton Queen), but there is the compensation of the 5th trump, so quite good enough.
Board 11 Dealer South None Vul
What are your methods after North’s 2♥ reverse? One method is the so-called “Herbert responses” whereby the cheapest bid is artificial and weakness-showing, the only way for the partnership to stay out of game. 2♠ is completely artificial, and the bidding might subside in 2NT or 3♦, or even 3♣ if South has long Clubs. Bids other than 2♠ are natural, descriptive and game-forcing, presumably putting South in the top half of her 6-10 range.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
The Convention Library has a write-up on the subject of Super-Accepts, here’s another plug for our favorite method. Assuming that Opener has 4 cards in Partner’s major: - With a good hand, Opener responds 2NT - With a medium hand, Opener responds 3♠ - With a rotten hand, Opener is not obliged to super-accept, he can simply accept the transfer.
Why do we like this method? Because it gives away no gratuitous information to the opponents. Other methods such as those which show a doubleton side-suit very rarely help us reach the right contract, and frequently give the opponents information which can be put to good use on the opening lead and in the defense.
Board 14 Dealer East None Vul
We’d say that the West hand is just about good enough for an invitational sequence, so the question becomes “How do you and your Partner handle these 4-5 invitational hands?”. The most commonly used method is probably as follows: - With 5 Spades and 4 Hearts (as here), transfer to Hearts and bid 2♠ - With 5 Hearts and 4 Spades, bid Stayman, and after a 2♦ response bid 2♥.
Board 15 Dealer South N-S Vul
If your methods allow a Penalty Double here, would that be your choice? It’s not ours, the opponents are not vulnerable and it’s easy to see one of these bad things happening: - North takes her 7 obvious tricks, but that’s all for the defense, just +100 when a Spade part-score can be made - The defense takes 8 or 9 tricks but it’s not enough to compensate for the missed Spade game. - The Spades don’t even run and Declarer makes her contract!
No, we would prefer to get Spades into the auction, so next we have a two-part question: - How do you bid this playing Cappelletti? - How do you bid this playing DONT?
Playing Cappelletti, we’d suggest bidding 2♣ (unspecified one-suiter), then jumping to 3♠, showing a good hand (but not forcing). Of course, bidding 3♠ directly over 1NT would be preemptive.
Playing DONT, North has two ways of bidding 2♠. She can either bid 2♠ directly, or she can Double (unspecified one-suiter) and then bid 2♠. It seems logical for the direct 2♠ to be the weak bid (it’s more preemptive), and for the slow route to 2♠ to show the stronger hand.
Board 16 Dealer West E-W Vul
That pesky preempting has put us on the spot! We may have only 14 HCP’s but that void in their suit is very powerful indeed. We don’t have any sensible way of making a slam try, so we’d just bid 6♣ and hope for the best. It looks like the slam should have a play opposite all but the most pitiful of hands.
The bottom line? 6♣ turns out to be a poor contract. It was just unfortunate that Partner had a minimum (well, what else is new?), no 5th Club, nothing useful in Diamonds, and some Spade wastage. The good news is that the slam makes with the assistance of some superior Declarer play.
Board 17 Dealer North None Vul
Anybody for a 1♠ bid here? There’s nothing inherently wrong with bidding a 4-card major in this situation, but maybe not here: - We have a weak hand, so we may well end up defending a Heart contract by West. If that is the case, we would like a bit more lead-directional benefit from a 1♠ bid. - We have support for Partner’s Clubs! - 2♣ is both descriptive and limiting, both of which are fine qualities indeed.
True, once in a while, by bidding 2♣, N-S will miss a 4-4 Spade fit, but the number of times that that happens will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions when a limited raise puts Partner in position to compete to the right level in Clubs.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
What are the choices? We can think of just three: - 2♠: This hand is altogether too good for that. It’s not the 17 HCP’s that make it too good so much as the excellent playing strength. - 3♠: When we jump over their preempt we are showing a good hand, something similar in strength to the actual hand. But 3♠ is not a good idea here, the Spades are not good enough for the bid, and there is that 4-card Heart suit which could lost in the shuffle. - Double: Yes, that’s our bid. If Partner bids Clubs we’ll introduce our Spade suit, showing a good hand at the same time.
Board 19 Dealer South E-W Vul
Normally, when Partner balances like that, his goal is merely to push them up one level higher. It’s unusual for the Partner of the balancer to take an extra call, Partner’s balance could have been made on all sorts of atrocities, and to a large extent he has already bid his hand for us. West might be forgiven here for trying 3♠ with that 6-card support.
But, that’s not the point of the question. This one is not so much a Bidding Quiz entry as it is an exercise in deduction. The question is: Can you deduce, with some degree of certainty, the exact distribution of all 4 hands after this brief but informative auction? This may seem like a tall order but we think it can be done.
Here are some obvious deductions to start with: - South has only 3 Hearts (because of that 3♦ bid) and at least 5 Diamonds - East has only 4 Spades (he clearly has a decent hand, and failed to overcall 1♠ earlier)
So, this much we know: North ?-?-?-? West East 6-4-1-2 4-?-?-? South ?-3-?-?
Next, let’s look at the Hearts. Can Partner have a singleton? No, surely with values and shortness he would have found a bid on the first round. So, Partner has two Hearts, and we can progress to: North ?-4-?-? West East 6-4-1-2 4-2-?-? South ?-3-?-?
How about the Spades? Can South have two of them? We don’t think so, she’s hardly likely to bid 3♦ with 2-3-5-3, and if she had 2-3-6-2 we’d expect a 2♦ rebid instead of a 2♥ raise. Now we have reached: North 2-4-?-? West East 6-4-1-2 4-2-?-? South 1-3-?-?
How about the Club suit? We don’t think that Partner has 4 of them, he failed to make a Takeout Double earlier. So, we’d bet that Partner is 4-2-4-3, and that the layout is as follows: North 2-4-3-4 West East 6-4-1-2 4-2-4-3 South 1-3-5-4
Are there any possible variations? Here are some possibilities: - Could South be 0-3-5-5? No, surely that would be a 2♣ rebid. So, if we trust South’s bidding we can be pretty sure of 1-3-5-4. - Could East be 4-2-5-2? Yes, that is a possibility, that would give North 2-4-2-5.
Well, we almost got the precise distribution of all 4 hands!
Board 20 Dealer West Both Vul
Here we show you both hands and ask you the question “Which of the N-S protagonists overbid their hand and was responsible for landing their side in the abominable 6♥ contract?”
North South ♠ 9732 ♠ A865 ♥ AQT6 ♥ K852 ♦ AKJ ♦ Q4 ♣ 82 ♣ AKQ
West North East South Pass 1♦ Pass 1♥ Pass 2♥ Pass 2NT Pass 3♠ Pass 6♥ Pass Pass Pass
South’s 2NT bid was conventional asking Partner to describe her hand further, and the response said “4 trumps, good hand” (see also Board 3).
There are really just two bids to consider in answer to the question “How did N-S get so high?” Was 3♠ the culprit? Or was it 6♥? Cast your votes now.
Let’s start with North. Yes, she has 14 HCP’s, and yes, that is at the top end of her HCP range for a 2♥ bid. But what a mediocre 14-count it is! AKJ is a terrible waste of HCP’s, how much better the hand would be if a low Spade became a low Diamond. That would make 6♥ a great contract. And if two low Spades became low Diamonds then 7♥ would be a fine contract! But maybe with that hand South would have at least been tempted to rebid 3♥. So, Ms North, we think you overbid when you said you had a “good hand”.
But, in fairness to North, we should say that South also overbid. And for the same reasons! Look at that AKQ tripleton! That’s a huge amount of fire-power wasted on just three tricks. So much better if one of those Spades became a low Club (again this is enough to make the slam a good one).
The moral of the story is pretty clear. High-card strength in short suits is usually a detriment.
Boards 23 and 26 Board 23 Board 26 ♠ K64 ♠ 86 ♥ 85 ♥ KQT62 ♦ Q98 ♦ QJ72 ♣ KQT95 ♣ Q5
South West North East East South West North Pass 1♥ Pass 1♠ Pass Pass Pass 1♠ ?? ??
On both these Boards, the featured hand is vulnerable. Both hands are 10-counts, both have decent 5-card suits and the question is the same. Is the hand worth a two-level overcall? We don’t think that either hand really qualifies, and the only reason we might throw in a bid is if we think that the lead-directional value is worth the risk of a less than sound overcall.
Of course, lead-directing overcalls only provide benefits when Partner is going to be on lead. On Board 26 we’d predict a Spade contract by North, so no lead direction required! On Board 23, it’s not so clear who will be on lead, but there is a reasonable probability that it might be Partner. So, perhaps a 2♣ overcall is worth the risk. Nonetheless, a dangerous bid with that ugly distribution.
Board 25 Dealer North E-W Vul
Partner does not have Spades on this auction. So, what does a 3♠ bid show here? Does it say “I have Spades, if you’ve got the Clubs then bid 3NT”? Or does it say “I don’t have the Spades”? There’s a logical answer to this, at least to us, but first we must back-track and consider some other situations. Let’s start with this one:
West North East South Pass 1♣ Pass 1♦ Pass 3♣ Pass ?? In this auction, there are two unbid suits, both of which have been denied by East. What do you bid holding: ♠ 832 ♥ A92 ♦ QT932 ♣ Q4. When we are angling for No Trump, and there are two suits in question, standard practice is to bid the suit that we have. So a 3♥ bid is called for here, telling Partner that we have the values for game and something in Hearts.
West North East South Pass 1♣ 2♣ Dbl 2♥ 3♣ Pass ?? In this auction, South showed the majors, and again there are two unbid suits which can be bid below 3NT. As before, we bid the one we have, hoping that Partner has the other one and can bid 3NT.
So much for when there are two suits in question. How about when there is just one suit to worry about? As in the following auction …
West North East South Pass 1♣ 1♠ Dbl 2♠ 3♣ Pass ?? Sure, nobody has bid Diamonds, but, for the purposes of No Trump bidding, all we care about is the suit that they have bid and raised. If West had a robust Spade holding no doubt he would bid 3NT himself. But, when he has the values for game and an unsuitable Spade holding, he bids 3♠, hoping that Partner can oblige with 3NT.
So far, so good. When there are two suits in question, we cue-bid the one we have. When there is only one suit in question, we cue-bid the suit if we don’t have it, and bid 3NT if we do have it. OK, finally we are ready for the actual Wednesday Game problem! As you will recall:
♠ J8 ♥ AK92 ♦ 642 ♣ A843
West North East South Pass 1♦ Pass 1♥ Pass 3♦ Pass ??
Here we have a little twist! There are two unbid suits, but only one available cue-bid. What does a 3♠ bid here say? - Is it “I’ve got the Spades, have you got the Clubs? - Or is it “Bid 3NT if you have the Spades under control?”
Our own take on this would be that, as there is only one cue-bid available, it seems more intuitive that it should ask. In other words: - 3♠ says “Have you got Spades?” - 3NT says “I have Spades, hopefully between us we have the Clubs under control”
Board 26 Please see Board 23. Board 27 Dealer South None Vul
An awkward situation! We have a terrific hand opposite Partner’s opening bid and it seems reasonable to assume that we belong in 3NT or a slam of some sort. One problem is that Partner may have a minimum or may have extras, her hand strength remains something of a mystery.
We really don’t think that the North hand is good enough to go charging into a 4NT Ace-asking sequence. On the other hand it is way too good simply to sign off in 3NT. Oh, how nice it would be if North could make a 4NT “value bid”! Yes, it’s possible, but only if the partnership has another way of invoking Roman Key Card. There are indeed such methods out there, namely Minorwood and Redwood, for which we commend you to the Convention Library. And, if such methods are indeed available, we would say that the 4NT value bid is just about perfect for this hand.
Board 30 Dealer East None Vul
A simple choice here. An immediate 3NT (2NT would be a huge underbid)? Or a Double followed by 3NT? Yes, the latter is the way to go, that’s how we show a big balanced hand. Bidding 3NT directly obviously shows a very good hand, but it should be more based on tricks than on HCP’s. Maybe something like: ♠ A9 ♥ KJ2 ♦ J8 ♣ AKQ765
Board 32 Dealer West E-W Vul
Golly, what a difficult problem! In fact one with no good answer! Let’s assume that West’s Pass over 3♠ showed some values (say a King or more). Now we freely admit that we do not know what is the right bid for East, we merely present the problem as a test of your methods. The question is “What does 4NT mean in this situation?”. We can think of three possibilities: - 4NT is natural, to play. No, that’s our least favorite. - 4NT shows a two-suiter and initiates a scrambling sequence in search of the right strain. - 4NT is Ace-Asking (not Key Card, there’s no suit been bid).
We’d go for the last option. Next question. If 4NT is Ace-asking, and you happen to play 1430 when using Key Card, then what are your responses? 5♣ is 1 or 4? Or 5♣ is 0 or 3? Or even 0 or 4? Something to discuss.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
