TGIF May 2021: Scores
| 1. IMPs. Both vul.
|
7
Q 7 3
A Q J 5 2
A Q 5 4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
1
|
Dbl
|
Pass
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3NT
| 7
| 100
|
|
3
| 4
| 80
|
|
Pass
| 4
| 70
|
|
3
| 2
| 60
|
|
4
| 0
| 30
|
|
5
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Vulnerable at IMPs, the panel is lured towards 3NT.
Larry Cohen: 3NT. I have extras, hearts stopped, a source of tricks, vulnerable at IMPs. Need I say more? OK, I will. Picture: K 10 x x A x x x K x x x x.
Jill Meyers: Pass. I think partner could have a heavy mixed raise and we might need too much for 3NT.
Barry Rigal: 3. Yes, we are vulnerable and it is teams. Am I supposed to make a game try? If so, maybe 3 is best to show my values. Wait for partner to tell me about his major-suit holdings. 3NT on a spade lead might be very ugly. I plan to bid 3NT over 3, and over 3 . . . maybe 4. If partner bids 3NT, maybe I should bid 5?
Steve Robinson: 3. . . showing short spades and extra values. 3NT might not fetch if partner has: x x x x K x K x K J 10 x x. If partner bids 3, I'll bid 3NT, which will show my hand. 3 is not a Western cuebid because Western cuebid is a very bad convention.
Christopher Diamond: 3. Worth a try for 3NT. If he has no heart honour and some length, 5 is probably too high.
Larry Meyer: 3. Keep our options open for 3NT.
Michael Dimich: 3NT. Reasonably good shot for game.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Pass. I can see it now. If partner has A x x x J x x x x K x x x then 3NT is cold if the diamonds break. I'll pay off to that.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. While one hates to miss vulnerable games at IMPs, there is too much wrong with this hand to make it worthwhile trying.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Partner has extras and so do I. But this feels like a negative score. But it is IMPs, and we're red so . . .
Paul McMullin: Pass. Partner had stronger bids than 3. Let's try for a plus score!
Chris Buchanan: 3. Looking for a secondary stopper.
Hendrik Sharples: 3NT. 3NT is never the right answer on a bidding panel, but here I am.
Allan Simon: Pass. 3 is only mildly invitational and game seems unlikely.
David Gordon: 3NT. Queen empty third is skimpy but someone has to bid game.
Veljko Vujcic: 3. The cue gives a chance to learn more about hearts, both from pard's and the opponent's bidding (or passing).
Earle Fergusson: 3NT. Accepting invite, 9 tricks looks best.
Kf Tung: 3. Last train.
|
| 2. Matchpoints. N-S vul.
| |
A K Q 9 8
A J 7 4
10 3
A 9
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
2
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4NT
| 9
| 100
|
|
3
| 5
| 80
|
|
3NT
| 1
| 50
|
|
3
| 1
| 50
|
|
4
| 1
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: The majority bid 4NT, natural and quantitative.
Jeff Meckstroth: 4NT. Would like this to be quantitative. It would be in most partnerships.
Daniel Korbel: 3. I know it's a cop-out to cuebid 3. But I think my hand is just too strong to bid 4NT quantitative. I'll try to navigate from here. Best will be if partner rebids his clubs. I will keycard us to six or seven.
Ralph Buckley: 3NT. Partner should have some strength in diamonds.
Christopher Diamond: 3NT. Underbid. Worth 4NT if that is natural. I will read the system someday.
Larry Meyer: 3NT. Show game values with heart stopper, deny 6-card spade suit, and deny club support.
Michael Dimich: 4NT. Opposite a 3 game force 3NT is an underbid, and 3 implies more clubs. What's left is 4NT.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. Gotta show strength first.
Stephen Vincent: 3. The real problem will come later.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Sure feels like a 50 point deck! Extra values need to be shown, so here is a start. Hope partner isn't convinced I have true support, but I need to get a diamond cue from partner. See what he does next.
Paul McMullin: 3. Temporizing. What else does partner have to say?
Chris Buchanan: 3NT. Tough to show the total strength, but in matchpoints I will go conservative.
Hendrik Sharples: 3NT. 3NT is never the right answer on a bidding panel, but here I am.
Allan Simon: 3. If partner is short in hearts, we belong in a black suit, probably in slam. Example, x x x A K x x K J 10 x x x.
David Gordon: 3NT. A bit heavy but it's matchpoints.
Veljko Vujcic: 4NT. . . if it's quantitative. If not, then 3.
Earle Fergusson: 3NT. Game before slam.
Kf Tung: 3. Good hand, slam interest. Will show A x later.
|
| 3. Matchpoints. None vul.
| |
A Q 7 6 2
K 4 3
Q 8 7 4
4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
Pass
|
2NT
|
Pass
|
3
(1)
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
|
4
| |
|
Dbl
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
| (1) Transfer to spades.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4NT
| 7
| 100
|
|
4
| 4
| 80
|
|
Pass
| 4
| 60
|
|
4
| 0
| 50
|
|
Rdbl
| 2
| 50
|
|
Moderator: With partner uncooperative, the plurality retreat to 4NT. Some pursue a supertop with Pass/Rdbl, while others cater to partner's 5-card heart suit with 4.
Steve Weinstein: 4NT. I would expect partner to bid 4 with a fit and redouble with good diamonds. 4NT seems likely to be our best spot, even if we have a spade fit.
August Boehm: 4. The K J may be sufficient support. Partner's pass over the double does not deny a diamond control because redouble would be business.
Larry Cohen: Rdbl. I'm thankful that the computers do the scoring these days!
Mel Colchamiro: Pass. Partner didn't bid 4 over the double, so there doesn't appear that we have an eight-card fit, except in diamonds, which means slam is unlikely. The only other choice as I see it is redouble, but I haven't discussed this with any of my recent partners. 4NT to play is too far out for me.
Ralph Buckley: Rdbl. Escape. Hope partner pulls it to either hearts or spades.
Robert Sauve: 4. Don't like my 4 bid. Pass denies first round control of diamonds.
Christopher Diamond: 4. One more kick of the can. Should be a shape, honour-showing slam try.
Larry Meyer: 4. Show game values with 5-3-4-1 shape.
Michael Dimich: 4NT. Hopefully greedy West got us to a superior NT game rather than 4 after a diamond lead.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Rdbl. Perhaps we miss out on a 5-3 heart fit, but I'd like to give us the option of 4-xx.
Stephen Vincent: 4. Unusual that you get a chance to pattern out over a 2NT opening. Hopefully partner's on the same wavelength.
Perry Khakhar: 4. Feels like partner may be 2-5-3-3! I'm going to shape out and show the extras I have.
Paul McMullin: 4. Surely 4 then 4 showed more than a direct bid of 4; if partner is excited, he can move forward.
Chris Buchanan: 4. I will map out. Partner may be 2-5-3-3.
Hendrik Sharples: Rdbl. Someone's going to bleed, hope it's the opponents.
Leonid Bossis: 4NT. Sign off.
Allan Simon: Pass. Let's roll the dice! I expect partner has 2 spades and 3 diamonds. 510 will beat the 460s and will West to stay out of our auctions.
David Gordon: 4. Cuebid our side card.
Earle Fergusson: 4. Too much slam potential.
Kf Tung: 4. Show your distribution, and let partner decide.
|
| 4. IMPs. E-W vul.
| |
A J 9
J 7 5 4 3 2
A 7
J 7
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
2
| 6
| 100
|
|
2
| 4
| 90
|
|
2NT
| 3
| 80
|
|
2
| 2
| 70
|
|
2
| 1
| 50
|
|
3
| 1
| 50
|
|
1NT
| 0
| 30
|
|
3
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Unfortunately, Bridge Bulletin Standard doesn't include XYZ, which would be a handy convention here. The top vote is for 2, a heavy raise with only 3 trumps.
Jeff Meckstroth: 2. It's not really worth bidding an invitational 3.
Barry Rigal: 2. It's worth the overbid to make sure we get to our best strain. Far harder at matchpoints. I have sneaking sympathy for a raise to 2 at this vulnerability.
Kerri Sanborn: 2. This is a very good hand for the XYZ convention. In an auction where we bid three suits at the one level, XYZ enables responder to use 2 to ask partner to bid 2, followed next by some invitational bid; 2 is like fourth-suit game forcing, frequently artificial. I would like to bid 2, then 2, but in standard, a jump to 3 seems highly inappropriate with this suit. I'm left only with poor choices: 1NT, 2NT, 2, 3, 2 and 3 are all flawed.
Brad Bart: 2. Strain before level.
Robert Sauve: 1NT. Heart texture is bad. Hope pard will take a heart preference.
Christopher Diamond: 2. Bit of a stretch for a GF but not by much and it might clarify things.
Larry Meyer: 3. With such a terrible suit, I do not have enough for 4th suit forcing.
Michael Dimich: 2. Fantasy wish is partner now patterning out with 3.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. The simple value bid. Quantity over quality.
Stephen Vincent: 2NT. Can't bring myself to bid 3 on those hearts.
Perry Khakhar: 2. No XYZ, and hand sucks to 4th suit force. Suit is too ugly for 3, so show better than a weak jump shift. Underbid seems better than the alternatives.
Paul McMullin: 3. Should show a six card suit with invitational values.
Chris Buchanan: 2. I like 2 to show 9-11 and invitational but that is hardly standard, but I will do it here anyways.
Hendrik Sharples: 2. We may not get to the right level, but we will get to the right strain.
Allan Simon: 2. Assuming we don't play XYZ (Why not? It's pretty standard by now), I'll invoke 4th suit forcing. The strength is right for 2NT or 3, but those bids are distortions. Partner's next bid should help me decide on the strain.
David Gordon: 2. Force to game in either hearts or NT.
Earle Fergusson: 2. A slight push to maximize the chance for best strain.
Kf Tung: 2NT. Not a game forcing hand, but it is better than 1N.
|
| 5. IMPs. Both vul.
| |
K Q
5 4
A 10 5 3 2
K Q 10 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
Pass
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
1
|
1
|
3
(1)
|
Pass
| |
|
Pass
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
| (1) Preemptive raise.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 5
| 100
|
|
4
| 4
| 90
|
|
4
| 4
| 80
|
|
4
| 1
| 80
|
|
3
| 3
| 70
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: Declare or defend? The majority of the panel reached for more than +150/+170 either by committing to game, or by passing the double. They were rewarded in the scoring.
Zachary Grossack: 3. Partner will probably expect a third spade, but the honors are going to be so helpful. I couldn't imagine taking any other action. This also leaves 3NT in the game --- partner can offer that with: A x x x x K x x x x A x x.
Daniel Korbel: Pass. If partner was an unpassed hand, I would think 4, asking for help with strain, would be obvious. Here, I doubt that we can make 4 or 5 very often. We may well make 4 opposite something like: A J 10 x x x x J 9 x A x x. In any case, I expect to defeat 3 almost all the time and don't want to guess what to do.
Janice Molson: 4. If partner wasn't a passed hand, I would bid 4. I don't like 3, even with K Q. I guess I will bid 4.
Josh Donn: 4. 3 and 4 both jump out, but I think we have too much game potential. Why not offer a choice? If I didn't do this, I would simply bid 4 and hope it's decent.
Christopher Diamond: 3. So if we're using support doubles this should show a decent doubleton. This used to be a sound opening bid, guess it's extras these days. I might have opened 1NT. But my doubleton heart is still bad.
Larry Meyer: 3. K Q is enough to show support.
Michael Dimich: 3. K Q is a lot better then x x x. The thought of 3-x making is an anathema.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. Best not to stretch to 4 when partner is limited.
Perry Khakhar: 4. Hope my support is ok.
Paul McMullin: 4. Not willing to defend 3-x and not willing to rebid the ragged diamonds.
Chris Buchanan: 4. Tell me more partner.
Hendrik Sharples: 4. Can't think of another bid that makes sense.
Allan Simon: 3. Partner knows it's IMPs. I have only slightly more than a minimum opener.
David Gordon: 4. Follow up with a 4 bid if partner corrects to 4.
Earle Fergusson: 3. Not passing, this is as good as any.
Kf Tung: 4. Give partner 5 tricks, and he makes 4.
|
|
