|
Bidding Quiz 5th December, 2007
Click here for print-formatted version of the Bidding Quiz
Board 1 Dealer North None Vul
West’s Double was necessitated by being too strong for a 2♦ overcall, and now we are faced with a rebid problem: - Double? It was OK to make one off-shape Double, but there’s no need to make a second one, that would show genuine support for the unbid suits, and there are other strength-showing alternatives available. - 3NT? A bit much, we think, Partner will likely need something in Spades and Diamonds if 3NT is to be successful, on top of which 3NT is just a plain overbid. - 3♦? This would show a hand that was too good to overcall 2♦ originally. That means different things to different people, our own preference is that the upper range of our 2♦ is around 18 HCPs, so in that case 3♦ here is not an underbid, it shows around 19+ with long Diamonds. - 2NT? A direct 1NT overcall over 1♠ would have shown 15-18 HCP’s or thereabouts, so doubling first and then bidding No Trump shows around 19-20. Just what we have! It’s a close choice between 2NT and 3♦. On the actual hand the winner is 3♦ (making 4 for +130) as 2NT makes only 8 tricks for +120.
Board 2 Dealer West N-S Vul
After our light 3rd hand opening, is there any need even to think about taking another call? Perhaps. We are White vs Red and may well have a good sacrifice against their game. So we consider ourselves slightly tempted to bid 4♠ right away. Partner won’t know whether we are bidding to make or bidding as a sacrifice, but that won’t matter, his 3♠ put him out of the loop for the rest of the auction and we won’t be hearing from him again. Even so, we think 4♠ would be rather wild, considering that the opponents have yet to find a fit, and that we have some defense, and that our hand is so shapeless. So we’ll postpone that buccaneering 4♠ until we have a 6th Spade or some distribution.
Board 2 Dealer East N-S Vul
North was too good for a 2♥ overcall, and had to Double first. East’s 3♠ was preemptive. Now what? It looks as if 4♥ is the most likely N-S game, but North’s Hearts are not long enough to insist on Hearts. Compare these two auctions:
North East South West North East South West Pass Pass 1♠ Pass Pass 1♠ Dbl 3♠ Pass Pass Dbl 3♠ Pass Pass 4♥ Dbl Pass 4♦ Pass 4♥ The first auction shows a strong hand with long Hearts, at least 6 of them. The second auction also shows a strong hand, but only 5 Hearts, and at this point South would feel free to pull 4♥ with an unsuitable holding (let’s say a singleton or small doubleton). So, when 3♠ gets back to North, her bid is Double, a more flexible and less unilateral approach than just guessing to bid 4♥.
Board 8 This week there were four occasions where one of the players might have made a two-suited overcall. For a discussion of all four boards please see Board 26.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
North could pass here, eagerly awaiting a balancing Double from Partner, planning a Penalty Pass and expecting a big, juicy penalty. But that rarely seems to happen in real life, more usually one of these will occur: - East will bid 1NT or 1♠ or 2♣ first - East passes, South does indeed double, but West spoils things by rebidding 2♣ - East passes, South doubles, West passes, but then East has an escape suit (or can redouble for either Spades or Clubs)
In all three of the above scenarios there will probably not be a big, juicy penalty and in most of the scenarios, if North passes initially, she will have trouble showing values later in the auction. So our own choice here (possibly a minority view, by the way) would be to bid 1NT over 1♥, showing some values (about 6-10) and something in Hearts, and limiting our hand.
Board 10 Dealer East Both Vul
Anyone for a 2♠ bid here? Not so terrible, we suppose, but somewhat dangerous, there are some clear warning signs: - With our void in Partner’s Hearts and extreme length in LHO’s suit, this hand could well be a complete misfit - If Partner is short in Spades we’ll have nowhere to go - Even if Partner has a fit or at least tolerance for Spades, the hand could play rather poorly. We have an abundance of Diamond losers to look after and, with both West and North likely to be short, the defense will be in the overruffing position. - And, as if all that were not enough, we are vulnerable to boot. Plenty of reasons not to risk 2♠ we would say.
On the actual board, West had 4-card support, no less, which might suggest that East would have been better off bidding 2♠. Not so, West would compete to 3♠, and that would no doubt be doubled for down one and the dreaded -200.
Board 12 Dealer West N-S Vul
Let’s assume that 2♦ was game-forcing, and that 2♥ was “neutral”, not necessarily showing a 6th Heart. Here the choice are between 3♣ and 2NT and our own preference is for the latter, giving away the minimum amount of information to the opponents. Of course, not bidding 3♣ also gives the minimum amount of information to Partner. Is it possible that bidding 2NT will lead to a missed Club slam? Possible but rather unlikely, if Partner had 4 Clubs and a few extras she would have bid 3♣ on the previous round of bidding. So, this being matchpoints, why not head towards the most likely contract and keep the opponents in the dark?
Board 13 Dealer North Both Vul
In recent weeks we’ve had a few hands where a 4-card overcall was advocated. Is this another such case? It’s tempting, we have some values, we have length in RHO’s suit (so Partner will be in the overruffing position), and we can overcall Spades at the one-level. Nonetheless, we would not indulge, the suit is not particularly good. When we overcall a 4-card suit, we must be prepared to labor in 4-3 fits occasionally, and that does not usually work out very well when the trump suit is also weak. We’d prefer to save the 4-card overcall for more robust suits, even just upgrading the suit to KJTx would be enough.
Board 14 This week there were four occasions where one of the players might have made a two-suited overcall. For a discussion of all four boards please see Board 26.
Board 16 Dealer West E-W Vul
How did this one get into the Bidding Quiz? Yes, it’s a clear Pass. Bidding 1♦ or 2♦ would be wrong at any vulnerability, and, when Red against White, altogether too awful even to contemplate.
Board 18 Dealer East N-S Vul
Would you open this hand 2♣? In terms of playing strength it certainly qualifies, there are only 3 losers. But opening 2♣ and then rebidding 3♣ often leads to a crowded auction, the bidding could easily reach 3NT without that 5-card Spade suit being mentioned. So, whenever possible, when our longest suit is a minor, we prefer to open one of that minor in preference to 2♣. Consider these two auction beginnings, for example: 1♣ 1♥ 2♣ 2♦ 2♠ 3♣ Both auctions are game-forcing, but the first one has got three suits into the auction, and on the next round opener will bid 3♠ showing 5-6 in the black suits. In the second auction the bidding is already at the three-level, only one suit has been bid naturally, and Opener has no practical way to show a 5-card Spade suit.
Is there a risk that, if we open 1♣, we might play it there? That seems highly unlikely considering our extreme distribution and our relatively modest point count, the chances are that someone around the table will find something to say. Contrast the hand in this problem with North’s hand on Board 24: ♠ AKQJ6 ♥ 762 ♦ AQ8 ♣ AK Although this hand has less playing strength (4 losers) here we would open 2♣, because with our increased point-count of 23, and our bland distribution, there is a stronger chance that the hand will be passed out.
Board 19 This week there were four occasions where one of the players might have made a two-suited overcall. For a discussion of all four boards please see Board 26.
Board 24 Dealer West None Vul
South’s 2♦ was “waiting”, those Hearts being unbiddable at that point because both the hand and the suit are too weak. And, now that Partner has shown Spades, we’d give up on that mangy suit and support Partner. The real question is how to support Spades and the options are: - 4♠: As N-S are in a game-forcing auction, 4♠ is generally played as the weakest way to support Spades, it’s the so-called Principle of Fast Arrival. Bidding 4♠ here shows at least 3 Spades. How weak is 4♠? That’s a matter for partnership agreement, we like to play that it denies a first- or second-round control in any suit. So, that singleton Diamond would disqualify this hand from a 4♠ bid. - 3♠: Forcing, of course, and more encouraging than 4♠. Could be any hand with a first- or second-round control, as weak as xxx, xxx, xxx, Kxxx, or even xxx, xxxx, x, xxxxx. - 4♦: This jump would be a splinter raise, showing shortness. Not a bad choice, except that we’d prefer to have a 4th trump for the bid.
Board 24 Dealer West None Vul
South’s 3♠ is more encouraging for slam than a direct 4♠. Clearly, North is not good enough for Roman Key Card, and also unsuitable for that considering the three Heart losers. So, would you cue-bid over 3♠? Not a good idea, in our opinion. North may well have 23 HCP’s but, in terms of playing strength, her hand is quite minimum, with 4 losers no less. If South’s hand is good enough to cover three of them, then it is South that needs to be making the slam move. We would simply bid 4♠, warning Partner that, as 2♣ openers go, ours is quite minimum.
Board 25 Dealer North E-W Vul
West could try for a 5-3 Heart fit via a New Minor Forcing sequence but, considering the extra points and playing strength, No Trump might well garner the same number of tricks as a 5-3 Heart fit. The combined HCP’s are in the 28-30 range, not quite enough to be bidding slam, and somewhat in excess of what is needed to make game. For such hands, the ruff in the short hand is often not needed to produce an extra trick.
On the actual deal, East does indeed have 3 Hearts, but 12 tricks materialize in both 3NT and 4♥. But see also Board 29 for a less happy ending to the same story.
Boards 8, 14, 19 and 26
The common theme on these boards is that in each case one or other of the protagonists had the chance to make a two-suited overcall.
Board 8 (None Vul) ♠ J ♥ J6543 ♦ AT983 ♣ T5 South West North East Pass Pass 1♠ ?? Anyone for a 2♠ Michaels call, showing Hearts and a minor? Not a good idea, it seems highly unlikely that such a bid will achieve anything. Partner is a passed hand, the opponents are probably headed for 4♠, and, at equal vulnerability, it seems unlikely that we have a worthwhile save at the 5-level. We wouldn’t bother to bid here, why help out the opponents by giving them free information?
Board 14 (None Vul) ♠ K9532 ♥ J8543 ♦ 3 ♣ 96 West North East South Pass 1♦ ?? Again, Partner is a passed hand and the opponents clearly have the values for game. If that game is 3NT we may have a profitable sacrifice in 4♥ or 4♠, and even if that is not the case, Partner may well be able to crowd their auction with a 3♥ or 3♦ bid. Note that, on Board 8, one of the reasons a Michaels bid was likely to be futile was that West probably already knew that his side belonged in 4♠, so interfering in their auction would not achieve much. But here, on Board 14, the opponents probably need to investigate whether the best game (or slam) is No Trump or a minor suit, and getting in there could be obstructive to those efforts.
Board 19 (E-W Vul) ♠ 8 ♥ AQ543 ♦ AT876 ♣ 63 West North East South 1♣ ?? 2NT here would show Hearts and Diamonds (the two lower unbid suits), but it would not be a good idea: - West has no reason to think that his side should be competing to the 3-level - 2NT is primarily a destructive bid, where as this West hand should be bidding constructively (all the more so as Partner is an unpassed hand) - The vulnerability is unfavorable All in all, to bid 2NT here just because we happen to have the right distribution would be poor indeed, and a simple 1♥ is called for.
Board 26 (Both Vul) ♠ K5 ♥ AKT98 ♦ J ♣ 98532 North East South West 1♠ Pass 1NT ?? Yes, 2♠ here would still be Michaels, in this case showing Hearts and a minor. It would also be misguided, and here’s why: - North has an intermediate hand, and most partnerships prefer that their Michaels bids are weak or strong, not somewhere in between - Bidding 2♠ would commit N-S to the 3-level, somewhat dangerous at this vulnerability. - Above all else, North wants a Heart opening lead from Partner and the best way to get that is to bid Hearts directly. So we’d simply bid 2♥ here, giving up on competing for the part-score in Clubs.
Board 27 Dealer South None Vul
East has just about enough for game, and has yet to do justice to his 6-card Spade suit, but there is no Spade bid here that is suitable. 2♠ is weak, 3♠ is invitational, and 4♠ would require a substantially stronger suit. The solution is 3♣, a New Minor Forcing type of bid, creating a force and giving the partnership the chance to investigate the best game.
Here are three auctions where this variation of New Minor Forcing is useful: 1♥ 1♠ 1♦ 1♠ 1♣ 1♠ 2♥ 3♣ 2♦ 3♣ 2♣ 2♦ In the first two auctions, the “new minor” is bid at the three-level, and it’s practical to play that as game-forcing. In the third example, the new minor is at the two-level, and that one is played as “invitational or better”.
Board 29 Dealer North Both Vul
Some players routinely eschew Stayman when they are 4-3-3-3 or 3-4-3-3, reasoning that such a hand has no ruffing potential and might as well be played in No Trump. The flaw in that logic is that, although we don’t have a ruffing value, there is a good chance that Partner does have one. So, our own tendency is to use Stayman even when flat.
Having said that, our hand is strong and only just short of making a slam try. As we saw on Board 25, when we get into that almost-slam zone it’s quite often better to play it in No Trump at matchpoints, the hand often makes 11 or 12 tricks in No Trump or in the major. With that in mind, our choice here would be to bid 3NT directly, a tactic which has the additional benefit of telling the opening leader nothing about our hand.
On Board 25, in similar circumstances, we saw that 3NT was indeed the winner. How about here? It all depends on the opening lead. If East leads a Diamond (it is his best suit) then 3NT makes the same 12 tricks as 4♥. But, on any other lead, it will come down to a Diamond finesse. If the finesse works, No Trump and Hearts both score 12 tricks, if, as on the actual hand, the finesse loses, the Heart contract is the winner, +680 versus +660.
Board 31 Dealer South N-S Vul
Being non-vulnerable with a few values opposite a bidding Partner, East hates to sell out to 2♠. The best way to compete here is with a Double. East has Club tolerance and support for the unbid suits and will be comfortable with whichever 3-level contract Partner chooses.
© BES, Inc All Rights Reserved | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home Hand Analyses Bidding Quizzes Play Problems System Library | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
