TGIF October 2009: Scores
| 1. Matchpoints. None vul.
|
---
3
10 8 7 4 3
J 10 9 8 7 6 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
2
|
Pass
| |
|
3
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 14
| 100
|
|
4
| 3
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 20
|
|
4NT
| 0
| 10
|
|
4
| 0
| 0
|
|
Moderator: Partner bid to 3 on his own, but you have the worst possible hand: a void in his suit and almost no high-card values. The majority of the experts pass, but many don't like it.
August Boehm: Pass. I'm aiming at survival. If we are doubled, I'll haul out the unusual 3NT.
Jeff Meckstroth: 4. It doesn't feel right to be the dummy on this one.
Maurice Ormon: 4. Matchpoints, it's only one hand.
Eugene Chan: Pass. No reason to bid. Let somebody else be a hero.
Stuart Carr: Pass. If 4 comes back to me undoubled, I'll try 5.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. Partner probably has 3 hearts on this auction, which reduces the chances of a minor suit fit, which would be too speculative to look for in any case. The less encouragement given to partner the better.
Aidan Ballantyne: Pass. My hand did not improve.
Martin Henneberger: Pass. 4 or 4 could be a better spot, but how to stop on a dime by bidding now. The chances 4 gets passed are about zero, so I get out before the doubling starts.
Mike Hamilton: Pass. With fingers crossed. 3 and even 4 likely make and -100 against that scores well if we buy this. If not, I have neither defense nor support for partner, so over 3 doubled or 4, I’ll try no-trump, very unusual for the minors.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Pass. Wait until they double before I try a save.
Larry Meyer: Pass. Will run when doubled.
Mike Roberts: Pass. If doubled, I'll run to 4, but I think I'm best staying out of this one.
Perry Khakhar: Pass. I don't see why you should pre rescue. If it comes back to you doubled, may be you can consider it again. Any bid by you should be forward going and shows tolerance for spades.
Kees Schaafsma: Pass. Pard may play me for A J T 9 8 7 6 if I bid 4, too risky if it's raised.
Bob Todd: Pass. You're kidding.... right?
Paul Mcmullin: Pass. I'm supposed to look for a new disaster at the 4 level? When did partner ask me anything?
John Gillespie: Pass. Scheinwold's first rule of holes: When you're in one, stop digging.
Chris Buchanan: Pass. We aren't doubled yet.
David Gordon: Pass. No points, might not have a fit. Need to pass.
Bj Trelford: Pass. Is anything else possible? Am I invited to this party?? I don't think so!!!
Chris Diamond: Pass. What else? 4 over a double?
Tim Francis-Wright: Pass. They haven't doubled yet. If they do, I run.
Cliff Gillis: 4. I intend to bid 4N next if I need to.
Amiram Millet: 4. Indicating at least a minor game possibility.
Brian Zietman: Pass. If we get doubled I will escape (through the emergency exit!)
|
| 2. Matchpoints. Both vul.
| |
---
A J 5
Q J 6 4
A K 10 9 7 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
2
| 14
| 100
|
|
3
| 2
| 70
|
|
2
| 1
| 50
|
|
3
| 0
| 50
|
|
2
| 0
| 40
|
|
3
| 0
| 10
|
|
Moderator: Several panelists said they would bid 2 if partner had responded 1. After the 1 bid, they upgrade their hand and reverse.
Karen Walker: 3. 2 is a possibility, but 3 is a better description of this strength and the hand's main feature. It should lead to a simpler auction.
Lynn Deas: 2. I like my hand, especially because he bid 1. Bidding 2 gives room for partner to describe his hand. If had bid 1 instead of 1, I would have just rebid 2. The 1 bid improves my hand.
Maurice Ormon: 2. At least partner didn't bid spades.
Eugene Chan: 2. Not likely to be a popular choice but it is forcing. Partner will bid hearts again with 5+ hearts.
Stephen Vincent: 2. The strong club intermediates and good hearts make it just good enough to reverse.
Aidan Ballantyne: 3. Value bid that allows for partner's possible 3 NMF in which case I will seriously come alive. 2 is too much of an underbid. 2 is okay.
Martin Henneberger: 2. Because of my 3 card heart fragment and good clubs this hand easily qualifies for a reverse. Other bids take up too much room or misdescribe hand strength and support length. 2 leaves you very well placed for further action.
Mike Hamilton: 2. I’ll stretch to upgrade this hand to a reverse in support of hearts although I’m worried about the quality of my diamonds. That said, if partner has good hearts and an honour in each minor, we have a good play for game or slam.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 2. I can support hearts next, at which point partner will have a good approximation of my shape.
Larry Meyer: 2. Reverse to show strength and shape, will support hearts next round.
Judi Carter: 3. Splinter.
Mike Roberts: 2. Not quite enough for a reverse; if I did, I'd have to follow with 3, which is forcing. 2 is more encouraging than 2, and 3 will lose hearts too often.
Perry Khakhar: 2. It is very difficult to tell whether you have a good hand or a bad one! Make the minimum bid and see what happens.
Kees Schaafsma: 2. Seems automatic, next round I'll bid hearts.
Paul Mcmullin: 2. If there was ever a hand to 'reverse' on 15 HCP, this one is it.
Chris Buchanan: 2. A little light but my cards are well placed and I will be able to shape out my hand with the next bid.
David Gordon: 2. Upgrade to a reverse with the heart fragment and void. Third bid will be hearts.
Bj Trelford: 2. I wll support hearts next time. I think this hand is worth a reverse.
Chris Diamond: 2. Bid out your shape to get more info.
Tim Francis-Wright: 2. Calling this a reverse hand is not being too optimistic. I will support hearts next round.
Cliff Gillis: 2. My hand is much better with the fit found and have to force partner. 2 is not game forcing.
Amiram Millet: 2. Reversing on the way to the correct contract.
Brian Zietman: 3. Where have all the spades gone to?
|
| 3. Matchpoints. None vul.
| |
5
A 6 4 2
A Q 9 3
A K 4 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
2
| 11
| 100
|
|
2
| 5
| 60
|
|
2NT
| 0
| 60
|
|
3
| 1
| 60
|
|
Moderator: The majority of the experts bid 2. Compared with the previous problem, they don't upgrade their cards until a fit has been found.
Larry Cohen: 2. . . by process of elimination. No number of notrump works, and I'm not reversing with a potential misfit. This hand is worse than the one in problem 2. A fit is everything!
Steve Robinson: 2. . . even though this implies a five-card or longer diamond suit. If I bid 2, we may never find our 4-4 heart fit, and I'm not strong enough to bid 2NT.
Maurice Ormon: 2. Too early for NT.
Eugene Chan: 2. Nice hand but partner's bid has not improved my hand.
Aidan Ballantyne: 2. Good enough to reverse. May bid clubs next.
Martin Henneberger: 2. Well, easy bidding problem for my criteria. This hand is not able to reverse as that would show/guarantee a longer 1st bid suit. 2NT is out as that would show/guarantee 2+ spades. What's left is 2 showing 11-18 with the inabilty to jump shift.
Mike Hamilton: 2. No ideal rebid after the feared spade response. The smallest lie to tell with a 3-suited hand is the cheapest new-suit rebid.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 2. With a tentative misfit, this white lie is slightly more palatable than the 2NT overbid. A 2 underbid risks missing a club slam.
Larry Meyer: 2. Bid out my shape.
Mike Roberts: 2. I would have opened 1, and reversed into 2.
Perry Khakhar: 2. I would have opened 1 and reversed to 2. Since that option doesn't exist, this is the least evil of the 2 (not enough) or 3 (ridiculously too much).
Kees Schaafsma: 2. 2 loses hearts (see p4, July 2009). 2N is one lie to many (strength and spades).
Bob Todd: 2. 4441 hands are better underbid than overbid.
Paul Mcmullin: 2. Reverse to show strength, will complete pattern with 3 over 2 or 2NT.
John Gillespie: 2. Will bid 2 over pard's 2 preference to show extras with short spades.
Chris Buchanan: 2. Not enough for a jump shift. Again this sets up my options for future bids.
David Gordon: 2. Not good enough for a jump shift and not right for a reverse. If partner does not pass you are in great shape.
Bj Trelford: 2NT. Best of the lies.
Chris Diamond: 2. Similar to problem 2. Wait with 2. 2 too space consuming.
Tim Francis-Wright: 2. Yes, this is not forcing, but if partner passes, she's usually right.
Cliff Gillis: 2. Why did I open 1? 2 is such an underbid, I'm ashamed but partner rarely passes.
Amiram Millet: 2. Can still be very strong.
Brian Zietman: 2. I hate 4441 hands but I suppose I must reverse here.
|
| 4. IMPs. Both vul.
| |
K 8 4 2
Q J 5 4
Q 7 6 5 2
---
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
Pass
|
Pass
| |
|
3
|
Dbl
|
5
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 8
| 100
|
|
5
| 2
| 70
|
|
6
| 2
| 50
|
|
Pass
| 5
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
5
| 0
| 30
|
|
6
| 0
| 30
|
|
Moderator: Is pass forcing? There is no universal agreement from the panel, some of whom conclude that pass/double is 'chicken'.
Barry Rigal: Pass. . . which is unequivocally forcing facing a passed hand on my right. A better question is if I pass and partner doubles, would I pull it. I'm glad you didn't ask.
Mel Colchamiro: Dbl. I think double is the best of a bad lot. 5 might be called the worst (because it's the most committal), 6 might be called the investor, and Pass might be called the chicken.
The Gordons: 5. We would like to double for takeout with the presumption that East is preempting and the hand belongs to N/S. I don't think we have that agreement, so we have to contest the auction with our five-bagger.
Betty Ann Kennedy: 6. This is very aggressive, I'll admit. A value-showing double is a very close second.
Jeff Meckstroth: Pass. If partner can double again, then I will act.
Jill Meyers: Dbl. This is the toughest problem this month. I don't love it, but I double. This is responsive, and partner should pull with a long suit.
Steve Robinson: 6. Might as well get to the best strain. Double shows values, but partner can never expect me to be void in clubs.
The Sutherlins: 5. Double could result in a minus score. Bidding 6 will get us to the right suit, but possibly at the wrong level. We like bidding 5 - the middle ground.
Maurice Ormon: Dbl. Pre-empts work. Who knows where we belong?
Eugene Chan: Dbl. Take our plus. Congratulate opponents for good pre-emption if we miss better game or slam.
Stephen Vincent: Dbl. While I'd like to play in a suit, I don't know which one and don't feel able to commit the hand to the 6-level, especially with those poor intermediates. Partner's still there and may be able to diagnose extreme club shortage in my hand.
Aidan Ballantyne: 6. All in. In my practiced partnerships I play pass as encouraging and forcing, double is weak. Not sure what the system is so I will avoid Dbl or Pass.
Martin Henneberger: 5. I wish I could bid 5, but I can't, and double at this level would be perfect if shows this hand type. However the 5 level double here is unclear as to the agreement. Therefore I'm bidding my long suit in imps rather than guess a 4-3 potential disaster.
Mike Hamilton: 5NT. The opponents don’t rate to hold an ace outside clubs. My hand and this bidding suggest partner has a powerful hand and my honours will fit very well under his aces and kings.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 5. I'd rather be stuck in a possible 5-2 than a 4-3 at this level.
Larry Meyer: Dbl. Co-operative, showing some values, asking pard to use his judgement.
Mike Roberts: 5. The best move is to double, then pull all the pass cards from partner's bid box.
Perry Khakhar: 6. Clearly, with a 30 point deck, we must have a play for a slam some where! Let partner choose, as he may have a somewhat imbalanced take out.
Kees Schaafsma: Pass. Forcing, I trust.
Paul Mcmullin: 6. Surely partner has more than two non-club aces and a red K, and he could have LOTS more; I've got what he needs.
Chris Buchanan: Pass. Is pass forcing? I like as such but I am unsure if this is standard so I choose to take a zero score on principle.
David Gordon: 5. I think partner will pass a dble too often so I bid.
Bj Trelford: 6. In for a penny.... in for a pound! Too much for me to pass. Double is penalty and I am not interested in that. At least this way partner can pick the suit.
Chris Diamond: Dbl. I refuse to guess strain or drive to slam with quacks so show cards. Pard will probably pass because I hold the void, but what can you do?
Tim Francis-Wright: 5. The experts all like to claim that double is responsive here, but really it shows some defense against clubs. I can't show both suits without forcing to slam, so I'll bid hearts and let partner run if she needs to.
Cliff Gillis: Dbl. Partner can interpret this as he likes. I'm happy if he bids or passes, ball is in his court.
Amiram Millet: Dbl. Responsive Double.
Brian Zietman: 6. Choose your slam partner.
|
| 5. Matchpoints. N-S vul.
| |
K 10 3
K 9 8 7 6
J 5 3
6 3
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
1NT
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 14
| 100
|
|
2
| 3
| 60
|
|
Dbl
| 0
| 40
|
|
2
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Players usually try not to let their opponents play 1NT when the high-card points are fairly evenly divided. It's a hard contract to defend, and the opening lead often gives up a trick. In this case, however, you don't have a convenient bid and the majority of the panel pass.
Allan Falk: Pass. I can't think of any reason to do anything else but pass at these colors. We have no known fit of longer than seven cards. I don't see the point of this hand.
The Coopers: 2. The points are likely evenly divided, and pass seems like a loser, although we would do that at IMPs. Partner can return to 2 with three-card support. He also knows we are playing matchpoints.
Maurice Ormon: Dbl. Have to compete don't we?
Eugene Chan: Dbl. Bidding contest unclear about West's 1NT. But regardless of strong or Sandwich NT, I am still doubling. It is matchpoints!
Stephen Vincent: 2. With misgivings and based on the general principle that one doesn't get rich at matchpoints by letting them play 1NT.
Aidan Ballantyne: 2. Just to avoid defending.
Martin Henneberger: Pass. Easy pass. Why would I want to go minus 100-500 by bidding? Regardless of the meaning of 1NT I have a clear position to defend.
Mike Hamilton: Pass. The no-trump bid wasn’t alerted so it should be natural. Partner should have a sound opening but we probably have a 4-3 diamond fit at best. If he leads a red suit, we have a chance to beat the hand and go plus when 2 wasn’t making.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 2. West's 1NT wasn't alerted, so I assume natural. With a roadmap of where the points are, hopefully pard can make this.
Larry Meyer: 2. Don't want to sell out to 1NT.
Mike Roberts: Pass. A trump lead is marked against 2, and it feels like I'm converting -90 to -100.
Perry Khakhar: Dbl. I hope that it isn't an unusual, or sandwich NT! Otherwise we have awakened them to get to the 2 contract.
Kees Schaafsma: Pass. Anything else is speculation.
Bob Todd: Dbl. I'm hoping somebody bids.
Merv Adey: 2. Prediction: I will come last in this poll...
Paul Mcmullin: 2. Passing can't be right, and I'm not strong enough for much else.
Chris Buchanan: Pass. Is this a trick questiion?
David Gordon: Pass. Sounds like there is no fit and values are about equal.
Bj Trelford: 2. Letting them make 1NT will not be good for our side. 50% + chance partner has 5 diamonds.
Chris Diamond: Pass. No reason they can't make 1NT or we can make anything. (Is a double by pard support or penalty?)
Tim Francis-Wright: 2. Partner has at least 4 diamonds here and often has more.
Amiram Millet: 2. Pass might be correct here.
Brian Zietman: 2. If partner can't double 1NT then nor can I.
|
|
