TGIF June 2020: Scores
| 1. IMPs. E-W vul.
|
---
K 6 2
J 9 8 6 3 2
Q 10 6 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
Pass
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
2
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 9
| 100
|
|
4
| 3
| 70
|
|
5
| 3
| 70
|
|
3
| 2
| 50
|
|
4
| 2
| 50
|
|
Moderator: This month's guest panel are the members of the US junior teams. Enjoy!
Cornelius Duffie: 3. I'm on a finesse for seven opposite: x x x x A x A K 10 x x A J, so not forcing to game feels crazy. I could bid a direct 5, but that doesn't get us to slam when it's right, and maybe more importantly, I won't know what to do if the auction continues (5)-Pass-(Pass) to me.
Jonathan Yue: 4. This hand should qualify as a mixed raise if there was no interference. It is too strong for 3, which is a normal competitive raise. The strongest possible hand I can have (a limit raise) is covered by 3.
Marley Cedrone: 5. I choose 5 because we have a 9- or 10-card fit in diamonds. If it doesn't make, it's only minus 50 or 100 because we are not vulnerable. It looks like the opponents may have a very large spade fit, so they could be on for 4.
Brandon Ge: 4. I think 4 describes the hand better because it shows the shortness. Slam is entirely possible, and it seems pard has a very strong hand, something like x x x x A Q x A K x x A J.
Michael Haas: 3. The problem is how many diamonds to bid. I think that 3, although a misdescription of my shape, will give us the best opportunity to play in 3NT, make a diamond contract, or double 3 or 4.
David Waterman: 4. 3 might be a popular choice, but what do you do when partner doubles 4 or bids 3NT? You will be endplayed into bidding 5. Best to describe your hand type. Partner can have many hands where 5 has no play.
Christopher Diamond: 5. Pard might have a very good hand given the opponents' bidding. But they might have a making vulnerable save. Who knows? So we go high and fast.
Larry Meyer: 3. Show a limit raise in support of diamonds while leaving 3NT as an option.
Perry Khakhar: 3. It may be enterprising to look for a heart Moysian with a negative double. But, we may be putting a third seat opener in an awkward position. I'll take the low road.
Paul McMullin: Pass. Avoiding the temptation to preempt over their preempt.
Chris Buchanan: 5. Usually not a fan of preempting after a preempt but it seems right here.
Hendrik Sharples: 3. Although it's comparatively rare, I think there's a strong chance partner is 4-4-3-2.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 5. It's how high I'm prepared to go and gives them the guess.
Timothy Wright: 5. At these vulnerabilities, keeping them out of 4 is key.
Allan Simon: 3. I don't want to obstruct 3NT, which may be our only game.
Bob Todd: 3. My 6 count sure grew up. 3 won't slow them down but might help partner.
Kf Tung: 5. . . as a make or save.
|
| 2. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
Q 10 9 4
---
J 10 8 6 2
K Q J 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
1
|
1
|
Pass
|
1NT
| |
|
2
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 8
| 100
|
|
2
| 4
| 80
|
|
2
| 3
| 70
|
|
3
| 1
| 60
|
|
3
| 1
| 50
|
|
3
| 1
| 50
|
|
2NT
| 0
| 40
|
|
3NT
| 1
| 40
|
|
Moderator: Despite evidence to the contrary, junior players know exactly where to find the pass card in the bidding boxes. They are especially fond of it when converting partner's double to penalty.
Adam Kaplan: Pass. I have a great hand to defend and very little reason to think we can make game. Right-hand opponent will also be overruffing clubs, and LHO rates to be short in hearts, making declaring any contract unpleasant.
Emma Kolesnik: 2. I was very close between pass and 2. 2 is reasonable as well. I ultimately went with 2 as a safer call. We have at least an 8-card diamond fit and probably aren't missing a game.
Samuel Pahk: 2. I'm definitely bidding at this vulnerability in case partner has a really good hand and can invite game. With my probably useless clubs and lack of heart support, however, I do not want to overexcite partner with 3 or 3, and I don't want to risk bidding notrump. If we have game, it is likely to be 4 because of the misfit.
David Waterman: Pass. Maybe we will be +300 instead of +620, but there are no guarantees 4 will make.
Christopher Diamond: Pass. Not happy with 1NT. It was a tough call. And using Reuben Advances I couldn't have made it. Now I'll just hope we have enough tricks to compensate for a full game if it's there. If I bid here I'll bid 2.
Larry Meyer: 2. Looking for a 4-4 spade fit.
Perry Khakhar: 3NT. 9 tricks may be easier in NT than 10 tricks in spades. Vulnerability suggests declaring rather than defending.
Paul McMullin: Pass. Three likely trump tricks, and good intermediates in the pointed suits. We should do well defending!
Chris Buchanan: Pass. I think we have a good chance at holding the opposition to 5 tricks or less here.
Hendrik Sharples: 2. Not enough stuff to defend with their likely 8 card fit. Trying to go plus here, as partner doesn't promise four spades.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Pass. Best chance for a plus score in my opinion. At least it doesn't pay the game-bonus if it makes (it might).
Timothy Wright: 2. I want to be able to run to 2 over 2.
Allan Simon: Pass. If I were certain partner had 4 spades, I would be tempted to try 3.
David Gordon: 2. I will make the bid I should have made first time around.
Kf Tung: 3NT. Your game prospect is in 3N, not 4. Partner has extra for his double over the 2.
|
| 3. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
A K 10 9 6 5
6
A K 5 4 3
Q
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
3
|
4
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 5
| 100
|
|
5NT
| 4
| 90
|
|
Pass
| 1
| 90
|
|
5
| 3
| 70
|
|
4NT
| 2
| 60
|
|
5
| 2
| 60
|
|
5
| 0
| 50
|
|
6
| 1
| 50
|
|
Dbl
| 1
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
6
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: A scattershot of options, the plurality go low with 4.
Zach Grossack: 5NT. My Q has polished itself into quite a precious card, along with the rest of the hand that already looks so pretty. The question now is twofold: Which strain and how high? I get to answer both rather intelligently with 5NT, avoiding the ambiguity of first-round heart control that comes with bidding 5.
Marley Cedrone: 5. It looks like we have a slam. I'm just not sure in what yet. The auction suggests the opponents have a 10-card heart hit, so it is likely that we also have a large fit. 5 here should force to slam and deny great club support.
Charlie Chen: 5. We are obviously in a game-forcing auction, and 5 shows I have diamonds and spades. Partner can pass or bid 5 and I will be happy with either. If I bid 4, partner might pass with x K x Q J x A K J 10 9 x x. Then we might not make 4 while 5 is cold.
Brandon Ge: 4NT. Unless the opponents are insane, they should have a 10-card fit. It seems from the bidding that pard has a strong hand with seven or eight clubs. He can't have three spades or he would have supported me, so he probably has one or two. So we can probably make slam in clubs.
Daniel Sonner: 4. I know I have quite a good-looking hand, but in this sort of auction --- where the opponents are preempting a lot --- distributions are often skewed and partner often stretches to get into the auction. I usually lean on the side of playing it safe, and without a sure fit with partner, I want to try to play in the lowest game possible.
David Waterman: 4. This is why people preempt. No perfect bid is available.
Christopher Diamond: Pass. We're in a force and I want to give him room to tell me something. What to do over a double is harder.
Larry Meyer: 5. Bid out my shape.
Perry Khakhar: 5. Although we are in forcing pass situation, the best way to describe our very good hand is to bid naturally. That should get the message across of a strong 2 suiter.
Paul McMullin: 5. I am strong enough to continue bidding my pattern (I HOPE that is what my bid means).
Chris Buchanan: 4. I'm very tempted to bid 5 here but 4 is a level lower.
Hendrik Sharples: 4. Good problem: no bid feels right.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 5. I think the hand is worth it, especially since partner also has (probably useful) values.
Timothy Wright: Dbl. We don't have a fit (unless it's in diamonds) and they are missing high cards.
Allan Simon: 5. Almost certain vulnerable slam somewhere. I hope my natural bid paints a good picture and partner can make the right decision.
David Gordon: 5. Let's show the second suit.
Kf Tung: 5. You have good spades, good diamonds and want to try a slam.
|
| 4. Matchpoints. None vul.
| |
K J 5 2
Q J 10 8 5 2
---
A Q 8
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 16
| 100
|
|
4
| 3
| 60
|
|
4
| 0
| 60
|
|
2
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: A strong majority choose 3.
Michael Xu: 4. This hand is too strong to bid below game. Thirteen points with a diamond void (+5), good trump support and working heart cards that are a source of tricks. If partner has diamond wastage, then so be it. 4 makes the opening lead harder, especially important with that club holding.
Kayden Ge: 3. I would like to be in game, but it's not a necessity. My void is worth much more when we found a fit. 4 would be a better description, but partner could take me too seriously and we could end up too high. I would be disappointed if partner passed, but that's his decision.
Ralph Buckley: 4. Splinter.
David Waterman: 3. This looks like an underbid, but if he has weak spades and diamond values the hand will play poorly. No diamond bid from either opponent.
Christopher Diamond: 3. Might just bash 4 at IMPs (if it was agreed to be shape not power).
Larry Meyer: 4. Splinter to show good 4-card support and diamond shortness.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Best way to show my playing strength without single handedly committing to game.
Paul McMullin: 3. Would 3 have been a mini-splinter?
Chris Buchanan: 2. Close to 3 here but my heart suit is not good enough.
Hendrik Sharples: 3. . . or 3 if that's a mini-splinter.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3. Yeah, he can have wasted values in diamonds, but opposite the right points slam is possible.
Timothy Wright: 4. There are too many minimum responding hands where game has plenty of chances.
Allan Simon: 2. Enough for now. I am concerned partner might get too excited if I jump raise and he has diamond wastage.
Kf Tung: 3. Your diamond void and 4 spades will be good cards for partner.
|
| 5. IMPs. E-W vul.
| |
A Q
K Q 10 8 7 4
A K J 5 2
---
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
Pass
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 8
| 100
|
|
Dbl
| 6
| 80
|
|
4NT
| 4
| 60
|
|
5
| 1
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: Another preempt, another uncomfortable decision. 4 earns top marks among the unhappy choices.
Brent Xiao: 4. Don't really know what else I can do here. I won't try to explore for slam because I can't really expect partner to cover enough losers, and even then, I don't know if I have a good trump suit. My opponents are vulnerable, so this 4 bid probably isn't messing around. I don't really expect a raise to 5, though if they do, I have a tough choice. But I think I would have to double.
Michael Haas: 4NT. Partner will pick between red suits at the five level. If I had spades and a red suit, I would bid 4NT and correct the wrong red suit to 5.
Finn Kolesnik: Dbl. The decision here is whether I am closer to a slam invite or a 4 bid. To me, a slam invite looks clear. I am expecting a 4 response from partner, which I can correct to 5.
David Waterman: 4. What else?
Christopher Diamond: 4NT. . . a very unusual NT? Could be misunderstood I guess but the preempt was vulnerable so I'm much less likely to hold a natural 4NT.
Larry Meyer: 5NT. Asking pard to pick a slam.
Perry Khakhar: 4. I don’t think that there is any safety in bidding 4NT (unusual?) or 5. We may be snookered into doing the best we could at this level.
Paul McMullin: Dbl. Surely Dbl is take out; I am raising any red suit to slam, bidding 5 over 4.
Chris Buchanan: 4NT. Two suited takeout.
Hendrik Sharples: 4. Maybe I'll get another chance to bid; maybe this is plenty high.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 4. Partner passed. We might have the right cards, but game before slam.
Timothy Wright: Dbl. It's too likely that 4NT (undefined in the system) would be misinterpreted as natural.
Allan Simon: 4. A complete guess. I'm making the chicken bid, with the faint hope LHO bids 5.
David Gordon: 4NT. Two suited (but not majors).
Kf Tung: 4. May miss a slam, but 5 level is not secure.
|
|
