TGIF May 2016: Scores
| 1. IMPs. Both vul.
|
K Q 9 8 7
A 10 9 6
A
K Q 7
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
Pass
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4NT
| 9
| 100
|
|
4
| 5
| 80
|
|
3NT
| 2
| 70
|
|
4
| 2
| 70
|
|
5
| 0
| 50
|
|
6
| 0
| 40
|
|
Moderator: It's interesting how many different meanings there can be for a single bid. Most of the panelists were drawn to 4NT and 4, but not for the same reasons.
Larry Cohen: 4NT. I mean it as quantitative - since most experts would use 4 or 4 to ask for aces. But, if I hear what sounds like an answer to Blackwood, I'll cope.
Geoff Hampson: 3NT. We have more, but I think this is going to be the best spot facing most of partner's hands.
Steve Robinson: 4. Maybe partner can bid RKCB.
Kerri Sanborn: 4. I usually play 4NT here as quantitative, but this time I can't set or deny a trump suit first, so it should be key card in diamonds. It's easy to picture partner with an ace and K Q J x x x x, but I can't make the final decision with a stiff trump.
Eugene Chan: 6. With a favourite partner, I bid 4 (forcing) but for a bidding contest, a practical 6.
Kevin Contzen: 4. Minorwood.
Anssi Rantamaa: 4NT. KCB.
David Waterman: 4NT. It is just possible we are off 2 KC and the Q. If so, we play 5NT. Otherwise we will be in 6.
Larry Meyer: 4NT. If pard has two key cards and 7 diamonds to QJ10, then 6 is cold. Lacking two keys, settle for 5.
Martin Henneberger: 4NT. I don't like guessing. Rather than decide what our side can or cannot make I will bid a value showing 4NT. This is not keycard since there is no suit agreement. Partner should then be well placed to judge level and strain.
Chris Diamond: 4NT. I'd bid a cheaper version of Blackwood here if I knew if we played it. But 2 KC should give us a play for slam, without a 4 convolution.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 4. Slam will depend on keycards in the diamond suit. (No mention of minorwood in BBS.)
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 4. Time to make a slam-move, opposite a minimum with KQJxxx(x) slam is almost a lock.
Plarq Liu: 4. Fourth suit force. My hand is too strong to stop.
Hari Ajmani: 4NT. Key Card asking.
David Gordon: 4NT. Will bid 6 with 2 keys and 5 with 1 key.
Beverley Candlish: 4NT. . . to see is if there is a diamond slam.
Kf Tung: 4NT. Very good if this is key card asking. Otherwise partner can work out that you have 18 points, 6 tricks and looking for 6 or 6N.
Norman Tucker: 4NT. Let's look for slam; can with 30 hcp minimum.
Perry Khakhar: 4. If there is a slam, I am not sure whether in diamonds or NT. Initially, it would help to discover K in partner's hand. If I get a cue bid, I will see where we go from there.
Bob Todd: 4NT. I hope this is KC.
|
| 2. IMPs. None vul.
| |
7 2
K Q J 7 3 2
Q 3
A 4 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
Pass
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
|
3
| |
|
Pass
|
4
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 9
| 100
|
|
5
| 4
| 80
|
|
4
| 3
| 70
|
|
Pass
| 2
| 60
|
|
Moderator: The majority of the panel opt to play their 5-2 fit at the four-level instead of their 5-3 fit at the five-level.
Roger Lee: 5. We've already slightly overbid our heart holding and A 4 2 must be good enough to raise here. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to hear 6 from partner.
Allan Falk: 4. If partner has 5-5 in the blacks with no hearts, 4 has to have as much, or better, play as 5. If North is 6-6 in the blacks he can bid 4 over 4.
Barry Rigal: 4. I'd expect to be facing a void in hearts - and spades may be better than hearts . . . or not.
Richard Pavlicek: Pass. If it's forcing, I won't offer hearts a fourth time - I'd need the 10 for that. So I'd bid 5, not surprised to be down, but I can't rule out a slam with partner being unlimited.
Eugene Chan: 5. Probably a near unanimous choice.
David Waterman: 5. 4 is misguided, especially at IMPs.
Larry Meyer: 4. Hoping we are in our 6-2 fit, but even 5-2 at the 4-level may be better than 5-3 at the 5-level.
Martin Henneberger: 4. I think 4 here has a lot of merit as a probe for the right game. As it stands partner has given me a choice in the black suits and I will attempt to play at a lower level by bidding 4.
Chris Diamond: 4. Considered 4 as a waiting type bid, but somehow this always bites back. So the cheapest game I can see.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 4. Opposite a likely heart void it is prudent to stay low. Partner rates to have 6 spades on this auction.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 5. All I have to offer, the A. Partner should be able to discern my 6322.
Plarq Liu: 5. It's worth a shot.
David Gordon: 4. 3 denies three spades.
Beverley Candlish: Pass. It is obvious that North doesn't have any hearts at all. North is asking South to choose between spades and clubs.
Kf Tung: 5. Finally you got a fit.
Norman Tucker: 4. Worth a try.
Perry Khakhar: 5. This hand sucks! I will show true preference and see if that is the right spot.
Bob Todd: 4. Waiting.
|
| 3. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
A K 10 9 7 4
Q 9 2
8 6
5 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
|
3
| |
|
Pass
|
4
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 14
| 100
|
|
5
| 1
| 80
|
|
4
| 2
| 60
|
|
5
| 1
| 50
|
|
Moderator: An advancing partnership would do well to discuss the nuances of an auction like this.
Steve Weinstein: Pass. I am very sorry if 4 wasn't natural.
Eugene Chan: Pass. Sounds like we have found our best game.
Kevin Contzen: 5. Partner is looking for slam so I can't drop the ball with a pass.
Anssi Rantamaa: Pass. Maybe we can play a Moysian fit if partner has four hearts. 5 could be a stretch.
David Waterman: 4. My hand feels strong for this auction, but I did open vulnerable - I am denying a diamond card, a club control, so partner should have a pretty good idea of what I have.
Larry Meyer: 5. Pard's new suit at the 4-level has to show at least 5 cards, and his new suit forces me to bid.
Martin Henneberger: Pass. If bids can be natural then they are. Here partner has shown the red suits with longer diamonds and a good hand. They are most likely 5-6 in the reds. I have an easy pass now as we appear to have found our landing spot.
Chris Diamond: Pass. As far as I know, it's natural, a non forcing game bid and I have a pretty good hand for it.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Pass. Difficult to move towards slam with the A K probably wasted.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 5. My partner should have a 5-6 red hand for bidding 4. I have a positive hand for 5-3 hearts, but no club control.
Plarq Liu: Pass. Not forcing.
David Gordon: Pass. You might have some tap protection from clubs.
Beverley Candlish: 5. . . to show a preference. You may have a slam so have to keep the bidding open.
Kf Tung: 4. Sorry, partner will not like your clubs.
Norman Tucker: Pass. That's a wrap!
Perry Khakhar: Pass. Partner appears to have a good 5-6. If my king was in any other suit, I would try for slam. But a reluctant pass seems most prudent here.
|
| 4. IMPs. Both vul.
| |
K 7
6 5 4
A 10 7 3 2
9 8 4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
2
|
Pass
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 11
| 100
|
|
3
| 3
| 70
|
|
4
| 2
| 70
|
|
4
| 1
| 60
|
|
Pass
| 1
| 60
|
|
3NT
| 0
| 50
|
|
Moderator: Today, the cuebid means 'forward going' or 'unsure of where we are going'.
Don Stack: 3. We have two big cards for partner, and we will take our preference to 3 in perfect tempo if that is possible. Suits may not be breaking well, so being conservative and trying for a plus score will hopefully pay off.
Mike Lawrence: 3. I am not sure where we're going. My hand is too good to pass or to bid 3. But not so good that I want to bid a game.
Jeff Meckstroth: Pass. I might have the right stuff but there's no safety in bidding.
Jill Meyers: 4. Partner has a distributional hand. It may not be rich in high-card points, but we are vulnerable at IMPs and I am taking my chances.
Eugene Chan: Pass. Partner's inability to re-open with a double has solved one problem: what to do after partner doubles. No game in sight. Pass!
David Waterman: 4. There are other bids that would be great if I could be sure partner was on the same page. But make the practical call.
Larry Meyer: 3. Tends to show decent 2-card support. With 3-card support, I probably would have supported earlier.
Martin Henneberger: 3. I wish I could bid more but I need to give partner some rope here. They could have a good 2 suiter or marginal competitive values. Taking a false preference keeps the auction alive while potentially shutting out the opponents from finding a heart fit.
Chris Diamond: 3. Probably worth more but he might be diamond void. I might have bid 2 last round.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. If there is a game here, it would likely be in spades. Since it's IMPs I'll take one more shot.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3. . . and then 4 if he does not bid 3NT, as 2 must promise significant extra values or shape.
Plarq Liu: 3. Reluctant choice.
David Gordon: 3. Show some life.
Beverley Candlish: 3. Not much to offer. Take a preference in the major suit.
Kf Tung: Pass. Misfit! Partner does not have a strong hand!
Norman Tucker: 3. Let's stop here unless you are loaded.
Perry Khakhar: 3. 3NT? 4? 5? Not knowing the best place, I will show my diamond stoppers and see what partner has in mind.
|
| 5. Matchpoints. Both vul.
| |
---
10 9 8 5 4 3 2
---
A J 10 5 4 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 9
| 100
|
|
2
| 4
| 80
|
|
4
| 4
| 80
|
|
3
| 1
| 70
|
|
1
| 0
| 50
|
|
Moderator: This deal comes from The Common Game, where the percentage of freak deals seems to run unusually high.
Mel Colchamiro: 3. . . and then I bid as many clubs as I have to bid. 1 is possible, as is 2 and then many clubs. Pass just ain't me, and 3 probably ain't the panel. I expect a score of 30 or lower.
Daniel Korbel: 4. Who knows? There's a pretty good likelihood I will bid 5 all by myself if the opponents bid 4.
Allan Falk: 2. . . and if they compete, 5 if necessary. If someone knows a 100% foolproof way to bid this hand, I'm listening. I'm also skeptical like you couldn't imagine.
August Boehm: Pass. My hand is indescribable for now, but if the opponents bid the pointed suits, boy, do I have an unusual notrump! Probably all plans will involve guesswork. Holding a freak, I've found it best to listen.
Eugene Chan: Pass. No crystal ball and I am vulnerable. I detest opening weak twos with seven card suits and I am not allowed to open 2. Pass will never be criticized.
Kevin Contzen: Pass. With this two suiter, I can push my way in later if it seems advisable.
David Waterman: Pass. There is no right answer, of course.
Larry Meyer: Pass. No opening bid can describe this hand. With this much shape having been dealt, this hand will not get passed out - I will have a chance to describe my hand later.
Martin Henneberger: Pass. There will be many styles and opinions for this problem. I am from the school that feels this hand can be best described later by starting with pass.
Chris Diamond: Pass. No hurry to dig my hole first vulnerable, even if I knew which hole to dig.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 4. They'll probably accept the transfer, but who knows what partner's got.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Pass. But I have to admit I have 'system' to enter later.
Plarq Liu: 3. I think this is the most balanced choice.
David Gordon: Pass. Deny a good hand and then bid a lot.
Beverley Candlish: 1. Opponents will most certainly up the bidding to spades and/or diamonds. Go slow to see if partner can help you out.
Kf Tung: Pass. . . and then you will get a good score if they double you later in hearts or clubs.
Norman Tucker: Pass. I'll show details when asked. I don't like this collection unless partner opens in one my suits.
Perry Khakhar: Pass. I want 4NT as any two suiter! Since we can't always have what we want, pass seems best.
Bob Todd: Pass. I hope to catch up later. Nothing describes this hand.
|
|
