TGIF April 2016: Scores
| 1. IMPs. E-W vul.
|
9 7 6 4
K J 10
J 10 6
A 9 4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
Pass
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 6
| 100
|
|
3
| 5
| 90
|
|
3
| 3
| 80
|
|
4
| 2
| 80
|
|
5
| 1
| 60
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
Moderator: A lot of you are probably scratching your heads and wondering why on earth 3? When you hear what it means (see Falk's comment) you'll agree 3 is a very cool bid.
Mel Colchamiro: 3. My hand has become enormous opposite what seems like a stiff spade. Whatever partner's game for, I'm in.
Larry Cohen: 3. I wonder if anyone will mention a Bluhmer. I have to make some forward-going move, and I hope this is construed as that move and not a preference following a false preference.
Allan Falk: 3. This is the perfect hand for a Bluhmer: a jump in a suit I previously declined to rebid, which thus cannot show good or long spades. My bid actually shows terrible spades, but announces that I have surprisingly useful extra values for partner.
Geoff Hampson: 5. I think this is likely to be a good contract or close, and I have no real hope for more.
Richard Pavlicek: 4. Partner's bid should be shape-descriptive, though he doesn't necessarily have four hearts, so notrump is untenable. Even if partner has four hearts, 4 would probably require 3-3 trumps with the obvious spade tap, so I'll aim for the obvious.
Eugene Chan: 2NT. Would have responded 1NT initially instead of 1.
Anssi Rantamaa: 3. Spades are wide open in notrump.
David Waterman: 5. I have five cards that are working - pretty good for a simple preference. Even slam is in the picture, but if so probably on a finesse at best.
Chris Diamond: 3. I want to make an encouraging noise since my hand's now golden, unfortunately 5th suit forcing isn't available. NT is probably safe opposite a likely stiff since the opps are quiet, but I'm too good for that anyway. Wish 2NT was forcing and artificial.
Stephen Vincent: 4. Partner is presumably patterning out. My cards fit extremely well and it's time to show some signs of life.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 4. If partner is 0454 then my hand just got a whole lot better.
Larry Meyer: 3. Looks like pard has 5 diamonds, 4 clubs, and 3 hearts. This is IMPs, so choose the safest part score.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 2NT. Agreements? I am about max for my bidding.
Plarq Liu: 2NT. Partner is three suiter. I don't think I should suggest any suit with my hand.
Bob Todd: 3. I will raise whatever minor partner bids and pass 4.
David Gordon: 3NT. A max, and hide your spade stopper.
Beverley Candlish: 3. . . showing a better hand. Partner can choose between diamonds and clubs.
Kf Tung: 2NT. If you bid 3 and miss 3N pard will not be happy.
Perry Khakhar: 5. 30 point deck and partner has a good minimum hand. Game bonus time!
Nader Hanna: 2. This is a very good hand if we can play in partner's 5 card minor. Partner could be 1-3-(5-4) or 1-4-4-4. I think 2 should show uncertainty about the strain (and no spade stopper). Partner can clarify by bidding his 5 card minor or 2NT with no 5 card minor.
|
| 2. Matchpoints. N-S vul.
| |
J 8 7 4
A K 10 7 4
J
10 9 8
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
3
(1)
|
Pass
| ? |
| (1) Game forcing.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 10
| 100
|
|
3
| 5
| 80
|
|
3NT
| 1
| 70
|
|
3
| 1
| 70
|
|
4
| 0
| 50
|
|
Moderator: Most of the panel would prefer to have a sixth heart for their 3 bid.
Roger Lee: 3. It's normally not my choice to take a preference with a singleton, but if partner has long diamonds, the jack is a big card, plus it gives partner wiggle room.
Jeff Meckstroth: 3. I want partner to play notrump if he can bid it. He will think I have 6 hearts, but a 5-2 fit should be OK here.
Eugene Chan: 3. Heart suit certainly worth rebidding.
David Waterman: 3. The danger is losing 3NT, but we can hope partner bids 3 next.
Stephen Vincent: 3. Temporizing slightly but nothing else is terribly appealing.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. Give partner room to bid 3NT or show a partial spade stopper.
Larry Meyer: 3NT. Even a stiff 9 from pard will produce a likely spade stopper.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3NT. It resembles a stop in spades.
Plarq Liu: 3. Hide my spade suit. Repeat hearts for my minimum holding.
David Gordon: 3. If partner bid 3 then 3NT.
Beverley Candlish: 3NT. Even though I would prefer the stronger hand to be hidden, another bid suit by me would show more points. I don't like my singleton diamond or my weak spade suit.
Kf Tung: 3. Show 5 hearts and some interest in 3N. Pard may have 2254.
Perry Khakhar: 3. This hand belongs in 4 or 3NT (but not from my side). This bid will clarify where.
|
| 3. IMPs. None vul.
| |
J 6
A 10 3
6 5 4
A J 7 4 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
3
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
5
| 9
| 100
|
|
4
| 7
| 90
|
|
3NT
| 1
| 50
|
|
Pass
| 0
| 50
|
|
Moderator: The panelists bid clubs, but are split on the edge of game or no game.
Daniel Korbel: 5. I see no reason not to make the value bid when I have three low diamonds and a nice-looking hand. We could even get to slam.
Steve Robinson: 4. Partner made a takeout double, so I'm bidding my best suit. I see no need to mastermind by bidding 3NT hoping that the opponents don't run the diamond suit.
Eugene Chan: 4. . . might be an underbid but it is nevertheless a bid at the 4-level.
Anssi Rantamaa: 3. Maybe we can play a Moysian fit if partner has 4 hearts. 5 could be a stretch.
David Waterman: 5. Sure, 3NT or 4 could work - but I will make the value bid.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. For want of anything better.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 5. An overbid perhaps, but I need to show my values somehow.
Larry Meyer: 5. Cannot bid only 4 with a 10-count, plus can likely ruff out my diamond losers in the hand with the shorter trumps.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 5. If we have a game this is the most likely.
Plarq Liu: 3NT. My hand is flat, and I have no diamond stopper.
David Gordon: 5. A 4-3 heart Moyse will not play well.
Kf Tung: 4. This hand belongs to you and a game is on the horizon. Bid 4 and then pard can choose pass, 4, 4 or 5.
Perry Khakhar: 5. Should have a reasonable chance!
|
| 4. Matchpoints. Both vul.
| |
J 10 5 3
Q J 9 8 3 2
A K 3
---
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Dbl
|
1
| |
|
3
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 7
| 100
|
|
3
| 3
| 80
|
|
4
| 4
| 80
|
|
Dbl
| 2
| 60
|
|
4
| 1
| 50
|
|
3
| 0
| 40
|
|
Moderator: A wide variety of options are represented in this problem.
Barry Rigal: 3. I cannot double with a void, and I'm hoping partner can come back with 4 as a choice of games. If partner bids 4, I might just pass, I suppose.
Kerri Sanborn: 4. This just isn't right for a reopening double: too much offense and too little defense. Hopefully I'll get the picture across of a good hand with more than one place to play.
Geoff Hampson: Dbl. Double keeps the most options in play, and partner shouldn't leave it in without very strong clubs.
Gene Benedict: 3. Because partner could have a singleton honour or a worthless doubleton, you need to rebid a strong six-card major. Rebidding this suit at the three level vulnerable is encouraging but not forcing.
Eugene Chan: 4. Whatever happenned to RDBL? Belated cuebid will have everyone trying to guess your hand.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Dbl. If partner pulls the double then I can just bid game anyway.
Larry Meyer: 3. Too strong to pass, so show my short but chunky support for pard's suit.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Dbl. Partner should bid (I hope).
Plarq Liu: Dbl. Ask partner to bid something.
Paul Mcmullin: 4. Why not redouble the double earlier?
Beverley Candlish: Dbl. By the bidding, it looks like a misfit hand. I would double and give my partner the opportunity to set the contract.
Kf Tung: Dbl. Without the 3 bid your side probably will land on a thin 3N or 4. Now 4 is more likely but you can give partner a choice for +200 or +500.
Perry Khakhar: 3. In case partner can give me heart preference. 5 should have a pretty good shot opposite this dummy, but if partner has Honour doubleton, 4 is best. If partner wishes to play 3NT, with 2 stoppers, I will pass.
|
| 5. IMPs. E-W vul.
| |
A K
10 9 8 6 5 4 3
A 8 6 3
---
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
3
|
Pass
|
5
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
6
| 6
| 100
|
|
5
| 6
| 90
|
|
6
| 2
| 80
|
|
5NT
| 1
| 60
|
|
Dbl
| 1
| 60
|
|
5
| 1
| 50
|
|
Moderator: Though the pluraity of the panelists bid diamonds, the edge goes to 6 because the majority of the panel make a move towards slam.
Larry Cohen: 6. I am willing to play a red-suit slam. This hand is awesome. Partner would even know to bid seven with something like A K and K Q x x x, which he could easily have.
The Sutherlins: 6. East does not hold a lot. He passed 1, yet apparently has good club support. The chance that partner has heart control seems strong. We may be on for 5, 6 or 7. We guess to take the middle road.
August Boehm: 5. Based on the vulnerability, I'm guessing that partner is weak in clubs. One upside is that partner may be able to bid a laydown 6, using the same inference that my high-card points lie outside of clubs.
Eugene Chan: 5. Looks like partner has a real suit so might as well try for game. Vul E/W opps are not leaping to 5 expecting to be set a telephone number.
Stephen Vincent: 6. Might make: might push them into a sacrifice at the vulnerability.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 5. It would be better if we played support doubles higher than 2.
Larry Meyer: Dbl. Pard, it is our hand - would you like to declare or defend?
Plarq Liu: 5. Save!
David Gordon: 5. All you can do, I think.
Beverley Candlish: 5. . . because I'm nonvul. It is too risky to double their 5 contract.
Kf Tung: 5. Eleven red cards and you have at least one fit. Partner cannot bid 3 over 3, so 5 is enough. He may, still, find 6 with A K and K Q.
Perry Khakhar: Dbl. Any plus score should be worth striving for. Preempts work, and 5 of anything is unsafe our way!
|
|
