TGIF February 2023: Scores
| 1. IMPs. E-W vul.
|
K 4 3
3
A K J 10 9 5
A 6 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
1
|
1
(1)
|
2
| ? |
| (1) At least five spades.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 13
| 100
|
|
3
| 1
| 70
|
|
3
| 1
| 70
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
3
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Knowing partner has at least five spades (a negative double would show specifically four), is there really any point to telling partner that you have three with a support double so that they, too, know about your eight-card fit?
Zachary Grossack: Dbl. Well, we'll start here, as support doubles still apply even though partner has shown five. The difference between an eight- and a nine-card fit is a very important one to distinguish! I will be forcing to at least game later, however.
Jake Grabow: 3. Tell me more.
Christopher Diamond: Dbl. Usually hate support doubles, but saves a lot of space here on a potential slam hand.
Larry Meyer: 3. 8-card trump fit, short in opponents' suit, and first or second round control in every suit is enough for a cue bid.
David Hooey: 4. Splinter on the way to 4.
Perry Khakhar: 3. We own the boss suit, so no rush. Let's see where this takes us!
Paul McMullin: 4. Splinter should also convey slam interest, right?
Hendrik Sharples: Dbl. Surely the panel plays support doubles?
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3. Strong invite, that's what it's worth.
Timothy Wright: 3. Let's give partner a chance to pattern out.
Allan Simon: 3. I expect the majority will go for 4, but if partner has a dog like Q x x x x Q x x x x Q x x I wouldn't want to hang him.
Earle Fergusson: 4. As little as A Q x x x makes for a playable slam.
Lars Erik Bergerud: Dbl. Support, still showing 3 trump I think. 3 general game force is uneconomical and I prefer to have 4 trumps for a splinter.
Kf Tung: 4. Splinter. Let partner explore for slam with A Q and Q.
|
| 2. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
A K J 3 2
8 5
---
A K Q 7 4 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
5NT
| 6
| 100
|
|
5
| 4
| 90
|
|
4
| 3
| 80
|
|
Dbl
| 2
| 60
|
|
4NT
| 0
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 50
|
|
6
| 0
| 40
|
|
Moderator: The plurality drive to slam with a 5NT bid. The rest take a more measured approach.
Steve Weinstein: 5NT. . . pick a slam, in this case showing clubs and a major. If I had both majors, I would bid 5. This isn't an unusual notrump showing the two lower unbid suits --- like if they had opened 1 --- because there isn't enough room to differentiate clubs and hearts vs clubs and spades.
August Boehm: Dbl. Double looks scary, but I can correct 4 to 4 showing two places to play. Meanwhile, 4 doubled may be an acceptable spot.
Steve Robinson: 4. Conservative or aggressive? I'm going conservative because there could easily be bad breaks.
Daniel Korbel: 5. I had a problem like this at the table: I bid 5 and it was a big winner. If my left-hand opponent bids 5, this will also leave me well placed to possibly bid 5. I expect to be in the minority.
Craig T. Wilson: Dbl. . . then bid.
Robert Sauve: Dbl. Bid 4 over 4.
Christopher Diamond: Dbl. 4 seems too unilateral. Does pulling 4 to 5 show this? Probably should, maybe with one less spade.
Larry Meyer: Dbl. Too strong to overcall. Let's hear what partner has to say.
Perry Khakhar: 5. Wow! Do preempts ever work! I can't see a way to get both my my suits in, so I will pick the better of the two.
Paul McMullin: Dbl. Should be takeout. Will correct 4 to 4.
Hendrik Sharples: 5. I'm assuming further competition.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Dbl. 5 is too much.
Timothy Wright: 4. The problem with 5 is that we could easily have 10 tricks in either clubs or spades.
Allan Simon: 4. Impossible problem, a pure guess.
Earle Fergusson: 5. 5 3/4 is better.
Lars Erik Bergerud: 5. Longest and strongest is often a good start. There may be an opportunity to bid 5 later. Alternatively you can double and correct to spades also showing clubs, but you really don't want to play against 4 doubled.
Kf Tung: 5. You may want to introduce the spades later.
|
| 3. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
A 8
K 9 7 6
A 10 4 3
A 5 4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
3
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3NT
| 7
| 100
|
|
Pass
| 6
| 90
|
|
Dbl
| 2
| 50
|
|
Moderator: How all-in are you going to be with your bare 15?
Larry Cohen: Pass. . . hopefully in tempo so that partner can take marginal action. As they say, dangerous to pass, dangerous to bid.
Jeff Meckstroth: Dbl. I hate to do it, but double seems like the best of the bad choices.
Janice Molson: 3NT. Only other choice is pass, and I can't go for 1100 by passing.
Christopher Diamond: Pass. Seems kind of empty for 3NT and I don't want to see a 4 bid. He can take action with likely club shortness.
Larry Meyer: 3NT. I have enough clubs to make an effective holdup play.
David Hooey: Pass. No suit, not good enough for a NT bid. If partner can balance, then I am ready for a shot at 4.
Perry Khakhar: Pass. Partner is at the table! Time to put down a good dummy for a change!
Paul McMullin: Pass. Far too flat to consider anything besides pass.
Hendrik Sharples: 3NT. On a blind guess I'll choose the guess that pays the most when I'm right.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3NT. Hope we have good agreements on the follow-up.
Timothy Wright: Pass. Not good enough for 3NT, and not shapely enough for a double. Maybe they have the same problem at the other table.
Allan Simon: Pass. A good rule over preempts: the hand with shape acts. If we have game, partner will act!
Earle Fergusson: Pass. Too much defense, not enough offense. Maybe pard has a shapely balance.
Lars Erik Bergerud: Pass. Low trick-potential for 3NT so I don't want to risk my neck here. Partner, often short in clubs, will keep it open if we belong in the auction. Double with only two spades is out of the question.
Kf Tung: Dbl. Let partner choose to defend, find a fit, or find 3N.
|
| 4. Matchpoints. E-W vul.
| |
A 9 7 6 5 4
---
Q J 8 5 4
6 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
2
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 10
| 100
|
|
4
| 4
| 80
|
|
3
| 0
| 50
|
|
3
| 1
| 40
|
|
Moderator: The majority splinter, despite the dearth of high cards.
Jill Meyers: 4. I have to tell partner I am short in hearts. This hand has so many possibilities!
Josh Donn: 4. Obviously I would be much weaker for this action, but anything else lets them bid 4 which seems like a tactical disaster.
Robert Sauve: 5. Take away their RKCB.
Christopher Diamond: 4. I'm a simple soul. Or maybe a simpleton. I think a case can be made for 5.
Larry Meyer: 4. Make the opps guess between pass, double, 5 level, or slam.
David Hooey: 4. No splinter, I don't want to give West the chance to double to show heart support.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Just enough to cue bid with extra length and the void. But I wouldn't quibble with a raise to 4.
Hendrik Sharples: 3. The goal is to play this hand, so I'll feign strength. If fit showing jumps are part of this structure, I would try 4 for the same reason.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 4. Don't want to drive them to slam, but thought about 5.
Timothy Wright: 3. Jumping to 4 could keep us out of a good slam.
Allan Simon: 4. I suspect we'll end up having to go to the 5-level to buy the contract.
Earle Fergusson: 4. If he has enough for slam he may be able to bid again.
Lars Erik Bergerud: 4. Wrong hand for a splinter: Zero defense and I don't want to convey slam interest. Too many variables and possible bad outcomes for 5.
Kf Tung: 4. A two-way bid: make or save.
|
| 5. IMPs. None vul.
| |
K Q 8 6
Q 9 8 5
9 8
10 8 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
1
|
Pass
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
Dbl
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 8
| 100
|
|
4
| 7
| 90
|
|
3
| 0
| 30
|
|
Pass
| 0
| 20
|
|
Rdbl
| 0
| 10
|
|
Moderator: An even split between the simple raise and a jump to game. Your answer will depend on what you expect from a balancing jump overcall.
Steve Weinstein: 4. My trumps are too good not to bid 4. When in doubt, go high when your trumps are amazing.
Kerri Sanborn: 3. An old-fashioned jump in fourth seat by an unpassed hand is regarded as intermediate: in other words, usually a six-card suit and 14+ to 17 points, give or take. I have nice support, but my Q is overkill. I think raising to three is enough. Put my Q in another suit, I would bid game.
Christopher Diamond: 4. Still a simpleton. Is that still weak in 4th? Something about a Law.
Larry Meyer: 4. Bid to the level of the fit.
David Hooey: 3. Not good enough for XX then 3.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Partner has an intermediate hand. (No Dbl and bid.) So I will raise with minimum raise. I'd like a plus here if possible.
Paul McMullin: Pass. Was 2 intermediate? I can bid 3 later.
Hendrik Sharples: 3. Should be invitational.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Pass. Depends on what 2 promises. In my agreements not enough to make game possible.
Timothy Wright: 3. 2 in balancing seat shows a decent hand; partner will appreciate my trumps, at least.
Allan Simon: 3. At the table I'd bid 3 to sow a bit of confusion, but I don't want a zero in the contest so put me down for the pedestrian 3.
Earle Fergusson: 3. We have 10 spades, but if we have 10 tricks pard will raise.
Lars Erik Bergerud: 3. Optimistic, but is 3 enough? Partner showed a decent opening with a decent 6+suit and responder seems to be broke. With four good trumps, the heart values and a doubleton could be worth gold, I have too much for a sedate 3.
Kf Tung: 3. Let the opponents guess. They cannot be right all the time.
|
|
