TGIF January 2024: Scores
| 1. IMPs. N-S vul.
|
7 5
K J 6
K
A K Q J 10 4 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
3
|
Pass
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
5
| 10
| 100
|
|
Pass
| 5
| 80
|
|
Dbl
| 0
| 40
|
|
Moderator: The panel opted for double, citing all the things that could go right --- a multi-way shot.
August Boehm: Pass. Wrong spade length. The K is potentially more use on defense than offense. And adverse vulnerability all add up to three strikes and I'm out of this auction.
Jeff Meckstroth: 5. I think it will be tough for them to double. If partner is short in spades, it could be a double game swing.
Gabor Sandi: 5. Count on partner having 1 spade at most and having either one ace or the Q or maybe the Q. Down 1 doubled is better than 4 made by EW.
Nicholas Adamski: Pass. Probably wouldn't pass at any other vulnerability.
Christopher Diamond: 5. Obviously a risk. But they might take the save in 5 even if we are in trouble.
Stephen Vincent: 5. I don't think it's asking too much for partner to have a stiff spade and a red suit ace on this auction.
Michael Dimich: 5. I only need a red ace and queen to make 5.
Larry Meyer: Pass. 5 x-2 = -500 vs 4= = -420.
Earle Fergusson: 5. Hoping to buy an ace and a stiff spade. 4 may make.
Paul McMullin: Pass. Vul? At IMPs? What an I missing?
Hendrik Sharples: 5. Sounds like we are being pushed around.
Perry Khakhar: 5. RHO is unpassed. Either he is taking a sacrifice or we are. In any case, there is a good chance that it's our hand. Could easily be -1100! No idea.
Kf Tung: Pass. Let partner do something.
Bob Zeller: Pass. At better vulnerability I would try 5.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: Pass. Nope, not at this vulnerability.
Louk Verhees: 5. You can only pass or bid 5. If partner does not have short spades, you need 2 aces.
|
| 2. IMPs. None vul.
| |
A J 5
A Q J 10 7 4
8
A J 8
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
5
| 7
| 100
|
|
6
| 7
| 90
|
|
5NT
| 1
| 60
|
|
Dbl
| 0
| 60
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
5
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: An even split between 5 and 6, the bid of 5 getting the top score. Molson recognized the hand from her annals of bridge, partner holding: K Q x x - K x x K Q 10 x x x. The winning spot was 6.
Amber Lin: 5. Bidding after preempts is hard. The pros to 5 are that it shows my hearts and my strength. The cons: We might miss a better contract in clubs and my partner might not know when to bid 6 anyway. Side note: It is good to make an agreement about 4NT here. I play it as natural in my regular partnerships --- 4NT is to play over any 4m preempt or overcall.
Zachary Grossack: 6. Stupid preempts. Opponents can be so rude sometimes. Hopefully partner doesn't have too much wastage in diamonds. Second choice is double.
Nicholas Adamski: Dbl. Gives the most space for partner to define their hand. 4NT is a close second.
Christopher Diamond: 4. Obviously heavy and pard isn't moving missing this many aces. Any move pretty much commits to slam.
Stephen Vincent: 6. A punt but the preempt rules out delicate investigation.
Michael Dimich: 4. I am singing Swing Low Sweet Chariot.
Robert Sauve: 4NT. If 2 with the queen, I will ask for specific kings.
Larry Meyer: 5. Start the search for our slam.
Joel Forssell: 4NT. Keycard.
Earle Fergusson: 4NT. K Q are big cards to find out about.
Paul McMullin: 6. I'm not sure what 5 would be asking for!
Hendrik Sharples: 6. Impossible problem. 5 could be interpreted as needing a diamond control. Since I'm blind guessing I'll go for the gusto.
Perry Khakhar: 4. Can't tell whether a slam exists. So take a plus?
Kf Tung: 5. Invite.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 4NT. In my methods this is keycard for clubs. Will correct to hearts, otherwise 5 would be my preference.
Louk Verhees: Dbl. Tough one. Can bid double, 4 or 5 (a one suited slam try). I think too strong for 4. Double and see what pard does (even pass may be ok).
Bob Todd: 5. Pulling 5 or 6 to 6.
|
| 3. IMPs. Both vul.
| |
K 8 2
7 6
A 10 8 7 3
Q 8 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
1
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 10
| 100
|
|
2
| 3
| 70
|
|
2
| 2
| 60
|
|
Pass
| 0
| 40
|
|
2
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: The panel majority make a negative double, despite holding only 3 spades.
Daniel Korbel: 2. With short hearts, I will raise clubs. Sometimes partner has five or more, and when he has four, a 4-3 fit may play nicely. If we end up in a 3-3 fit, oops!
Josh Donn: Dbl. A potential 4-3 spade fit doesn't look too bad here. Being the one who is short in hearts, it is my job to get into the auction.
Larry Cohen: 2. I don't want to double in print since I just finished an ACBL series saying that double here promises four spades. This 9-count looks good enough to me to treat as 10+.
Nicholas Adamski: 1NT. I don't think it promises a stop at the 1-level.
Christopher Diamond: Dbl. Moysians build character.
Stephen Vincent: 2. Other bids are even worse.
Michael Dimich: Dbl. I have to say something now rather than later in case West bids 2 and it's passed to me.
Larry Meyer: 2. Show a sign of life.
Earle Fergusson: Dbl. Can't pass or bid 2, so I'll tell her I had a diamond in with my spades.
Paul McMullin: Pass. Another club would make bidding 2 reasonable; here I pass and see what happens.
Hendrik Sharples: Dbl. Sorry pard, had a heart in with my spades.
Perry Khakhar: Pass. Sometimes you don't have any bid. But sometimes you do have a partner!
Kf Tung: Dbl. Reserve 1N for partner.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 2. It's now or never. Alternative is to wait by passing but that might lead to having to bid at a higher level.
Louk Verhees: Dbl. I normally play 1 denies 4+ spades, which is much better. 2 is gross, so double it is.
|
| 4. Matchpoints. N-S vul.
| |
---
K J 8 7 5
A Q 10 7 3
9 7 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
1
|
2
|
3
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 10
| 100
|
|
Pass
| 5
| 80
|
|
5
| 0
| 50
|
|
4
| 0
| 40
|
|
Dbl
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: The panel majority bid 4, unperturbed by the fact they opened a 10-count.
Roger Lee: 4. This hand would be a disappointment in 3NT anyway, so I'll support with support.
Zachary Grossack: Pass. A pesky problem as I have quite a lovely hand. But with 10 points and bad clubs, I don't want to overstate the value of my hand. Partner will likely be able to deduce my spade shortness from their own spade holding (remember, the opponents aren't often lying to each other). When they bid like this, they most often have at least nine spades. Partner looks at their spades and can roughly figure out my holding. They can reopen with a hand too good to pass out 3.
Nicholas Adamski: Dbl. Supportish takeoutish double.
Christopher Diamond: 4. Clubs not strong enough for an immediate cue bid.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. Partner, holding quite a few spades, should be able to deduce the nature of my hand.
Michael Dimich: Pass. Good shape but limited high cards so pump the brakes.
Robert Sauve: Pass. Partner is the captain. I'm not proud of my opener.
Larry Meyer: 4. Continue with the initial plan of showing both my suits.
Earle Fergusson: 4. A fair compromise between pass and 4. We are not in a forcing pass situation.
Paul McMullin: 4. I wish I had started with a pass. In for a penny, in for a pound!
Perry Khakhar: Pass. Nothing good can come from any bid here. I probably wouldn't open the hand. It is too awkward on follow-ups as witness here.
Kf Tung: Dbl. Show your 3 clubs.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 4. I expect 3-4 spades and 5+ clubs in partner's hand. But we need to compete even though I opened light.
Louk Verhees: 4. Another tough one. Bidding again on 10 HCP (good shape), is a stretch, but might be right thing.
|
| 5. Matchpoints. E-W vul.
| |
A K J 10
J 7 6
J 10 7
J 6 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
2
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
2NT
| 7
| 100
|
|
3
| 4
| 80
|
|
2
| 4
| 70
|
|
4
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Bridge Bulletin Standard uses Lebensohl after an opponent's weak two-bid.
Steve Weinstein: 3. Our trumps are too good to bid just 2.
Steve Robinson: 2. A jump to 3 shows 11 points, which I don't have. The lack of a raise by East means that partner has more than one heart, which decreases our trick-taking potential. 2NT (lebensohl) followed by 3 does not describe this hand.
Barry Rigal: 2NT. A direct 3 shows five spades and an invite and via 2NT is invite with four spades. Not sure which I have but I'd guess 2NT, then 3 is about right.
Nicholas Adamski: 3. 4 spades with extra points. Not enough to do anything crazy though.
Aban S Gerrie: 2NT. Lebensohl, followed by 3.
Christopher Diamond: 3. Ugly but 10 working HCP is too good for 2 and not quite enough for game.
Stephen Vincent: 3. The shape is uninspiring but the spades are good.
Michael Dimich: 2. Great trumps but lousy shape. The outside unsupported jacks may as well be spots.
Robert Sauve: 3. Don't like my distribution.
Larry Meyer: 3. Not enough to commit to game --- 3 of my jacks are worthless.
Earle Fergusson: 3. The value bid.
Paul McMullin: 2. Flat quackish 11 count --- I am not excited yet.
Hendrik Sharples: 3. Plus 40 jacks.
Perry Khakhar: 3. I think that when we have an optional bid, we shouldn't jump to 4. Partner may have a different hand than easily visualized.
Kf Tung: 3. Partner can describe his hand further as required.
Ig Nieuwenhuis: 3. Even though it has points this is a bad hand. All minor finesses rate to be wrong. However, partner did double with little in spades and presumably short hearts. I want to leave room in the extraordinary case he has a strong hand with minors.
Louk Verhees: 2. Go low or high. Treat this as 5-card invite or 2 is ok for me too.
Bob Todd: 4. My extras aren't very extra.
|
|
