TGIF June 2010: Scores
| 1. Matchpoints. N-S vul.
|
A J 5 3 2
K Q 10 3 2
7
A J
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
2NT
(1)
|
Pass
|
5
| ? |
| (1) 6-10 high-card points, 5-5 in the minors.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 15
| 100
|
|
5
| 2
| 40
|
|
Pass
| 1
| 10
|
|
Moderator: Most of the panelists elect to make a takeout double, which, because of West's action, is clearly for the majors. They acknowledge that 5 would also be for the majors, but prefer to double because it involves partner in the decision.
Mel Colchamiro: 5. Their gadget has put them ahead of the field, so the rule that the five level belongs to the opponents is out the window.
Larry Cohen: Dbl. I just don't feel as if I have enough to insist on playing on the five level via 5.
Betty Ann Kennedy: Pass. If my hearts and spades were longer, I would take action. Because of partner's failure to bid over 2NT, I'll hope for a plus score.
Eugene Chan: 6. Not an auction likely to occur in my lifetime, so I will make it memorable. I will burst out laughing if partner bids 7!
Robin Hart: Dbl. Pard will probably leave the double in .. if he takes it out we have a good chance.
Stephen Vincent: Dbl. I'm trying to think of an alternative bid and can't come up with one.
Stephen Ottridge: 5. Cue bid for partner to pick hearts or spades.
Martin Henneberger: 5. Equivalent to a Michaels bid since West has shown both minors. This is level flexible as pard can judge the 5 or 6 level. Doubling will get passed too often when the right 7 count makes slam.
Ronald Kuiper: 5. This should ask partner to pick a major. I don't want to double and collect 100 or 300. Need very little from pard to make 5 of his best major.
Mike Hamilton: 6. We won’t get more than +500 defending, so we’ve been shut out of our game. The opponents’ bidding at this vulnerability marks partner with cards and at least one major. If slam goes down, let’s hope at least half the field is with us.
Kai Zhou: Dbl. I really like 6 although it is a bit too high. If pard bids 5, you could still retreat to 5 to show both majors.
Andrew Krywaniuk: Dbl. Not a great question for a bidding quiz. If other tables stop in 4/4 then we are probably already fixed and my next bid is irrelevant. The mastermind bid is pass, but this hand is worth a double on values.
Aidan Ballantyne: Dbl. It's take-out. Will correct 5 response to 5. Probably we will defend. Not getting pushed around.
Larry Meyer: Pass. Not bidding at the 5-level opposite a passed partner.
David Breton: Dbl. I'm showing values without committing to the 5 level. If I cuebid and all partner can do is bid 5 we could be down before we get the lead.
Yu Wang: Dbl. If pard bids 5, correct to 5 and let him choose between the majors.
Mike Roberts: 5. An overbid, and I hope partner won't burn me, but I need to get to the right strain.
Perry Khakhar: Dbl. Sometimes you have to stay fixed! Partner is a passed hand, and I can't imagine relying on the opponents' sanity for an 11 or 12 trick contract.
Bob Todd: 5. Pick a major.
David Gordon: 5. I am hoping pard does not think I am exposing a psyche but rather using the last available bid in unusual vs unusual style to suggest both majors.
John Gillespie: Dbl. If they have bid this to make, they just might.
Chris Buchanan: 5. Pick a major. Dbl is less attractive as the majors will likely only yield 1 or 2 tricks and the vulnerability is wrong for defending.
Brian Zietman: 5. Partner bid a major please.
Amiram Millet: Dbl. If partner can pass it might be best.
Chris Diamond: Dbl. Gotta do something, what else can I do?
Tim Francis-Wright: Dbl. Sure, we might make 5 of a major, but it's more prudent to double and defend.
Jack Brown: Dbl. 2-way bid: if pard has some shape they should be bidding a major.
|
| 2. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
A Q J 9 6 4
A 7 4 3
8
8 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
3
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 8
| 100
|
|
Pass
| 7
| 90
|
|
3
| 3
| 40
|
|
3
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: The panel is divided into two main groups: Pass and double. Lots of things can go wrong after double, but lots can go right too.
The Gordons: Dbl. We choose to double and think it's an easy bid. We are missing diamonds, but that suit is below the rank of our long suits.
August Boehm: 3. The doubleton club makes bidding a bit scary and reduces the chance that partner is trapping. We could still make a vulnerable game.
Allan Falk: Pass. The odds we have a game are very low. If I double and partner bids 3, that's a disaster. I'll avoid the disaster and leave the heroics to others.
Mike Lawrence: Pass. Your hand doesn't suggest partner has a club stack. It's best to concede this one.
Steve Robinson: Dbl. I double, just in case partner has clubs. If partner bids 3, I'll bid spades.
Michael Dimich: Pass. Your partner should never put you in a position where you will miss a vulnerable game versus non vulnerable opponents. Ergo they can't have enough to bid 3NT or make a negative double. Take your small plus if you have one.
Eugene Chan: Pass. It's not our hand. I have 11 hcps and partner can't bid. Plus we are red vs white.
Robin Hart: 3. Doesn't require much to make 3.
Martin Henneberger: Dbl. If I'm going to bid anything other than double anyways why not start with double? I can always correct back to spades should pard bid 3, and double caters to partner passing or bidding hearts. By far the most flexible action.
Ronald Kuiper: Dbl. Pard could be sitting on clubs and convert. Over 3 I will bid 3.
Mike Hamilton: 3. I expect partner to have a decent hand with heart values. I’m showing at least 5-4 in the majors and offering a choice. At this vulnerability, game prospects are too bright to risk a balancing double being passed for penalties.
Kai Zhou: Dbl. You want to be in game at IMPs, so even if your rebid of 3 later would show a way stronger hand than what you have now, I would not mind. :-)
Andrew Krywaniuk: Pass. My spidey-sense tells me to shut up before I get doubled.
Aidan Ballantyne: 3. Not one to make weird reopening doubles just to catch them. If we have game, it's not in hearts as partner would probably have made a neg double, so I ignore that suit.
Larry Meyer: 3. Show pard my second suit.
David Breton: Dbl. Either partner has a trap pass or they are making this comfortably. If partner can't pass I'll just rebid 3: I would be unlucky to go for 500 against opponents who wanted to play 3.
Yu Wang: Pass. Too many losers; if pard had 3 Kings or better, he probably would have acted.
Mike Roberts: Dbl. Partner could still have a penalty pass, even at these colours. I'll bid 3 over 3.
Perry Khakhar: 3. All I have is a good suit. So the best I can do if Partner has been trapped is suggest a spade contract. The heart suit is a moot point (no neg double). East didn't try 3NT, increasing the odds that Partner was trapped.
David Gordon: Pass. Let's see...pard did not bid 3 and did not dbl negatively. I could dbl and then pull the anticipated 3 bid to 3 but I think that shows a much better hand.
John Gillespie: Pass. Very unlikely pard has trapped.
Chris Buchanan: Pass. I'm done with this hand. Bidding again is like walking a mine field.
Brian Zietman: Dbl. Most flexible. Partner can leave it in, bid NT or a suit - all fine with me - and if he bids 4 I bid 4.
Amiram Millet: Dbl. Protecting. Maybe 3 is the limit.
Chris Diamond: Dbl. 3 options: dbl, 3 or pass. Dbl works when pard has a penalty pass or scattered values and can bid 3; 3 only works when pard is too weak and won't raise; pass works when both sides are going down 1. Choose the option with 2 winners.
Tim Francis-Wright: Dbl. Could partner have a mess of clubs? I say she could.
Jack Brown: Pass. If we can play 3 or 4, pard should have made a neg Dbl. Too risky to play pard for a trap pass.
|
| 3. IMPs. Both vul.
| |
A Q 7 5 4
A 8 5
10 2
A 7 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
3
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 10
| 100
|
|
3
| 8
| 90
|
|
3
| 0
| 0
|
|
Moderator: The experts are divided between passing with a trump holding of 10 2 or bidding a three-card suit. Either call is a lie. Which is the better lie?
Barry Rigal: Pass. I pass and follow the law of total tricks, wherever it leads. At this vulnerability, partner likely has a 2-4-3-4 hand with about 9 points.
Kerri Sanborn: 3. I suppose pass could be right, but it's such a big position to take.
Brad Theurer: Pass. I don't like to pass at IMPs with nothing in trumps, but I have no known fit, good defense, and partner has a decent hand after acting on the three level.
The Sutherlins: 3. This is the best of the bad. Even if it's a 4-3 fit, it may work out nicely with the tap in the short hand.
Michael Dimich: 3. Partner could have 5 hearts, if not you will be taking the tap in the short trump holding.
Eugene Chan: 3. Tempting to play in a moysian. But if I try 3, partner will probably raise to 4. Ugly!
Stephen Vincent: Pass. The 3.5 quick tricks and no apparent fit suggest passing.
Martin Henneberger: Pass. I usually am against passing these hands as pard could have 5 or 6 hearts without the values to game force, however there are no guarantees of any fit and I'm staring at potentially 4 defensive tricks with pard showing values. Reluctantly this time I pass.
Ronald Kuiper: 3. 3 probably can be set, but no way I'll risk it. 4-3 heart fit is guaranteed. I don't like any bid here, but least of all evils.
Mike Hamilton: Pass. An 8-card fit is in doubt and East rates to hold cards that will make game our way risky. I have 3 defensive tricks facing a partner supporting play at the 4-level. We might not win any trump tricks, but we should take the rest.
Kai Zhou: 3. At least you still have a chance to play in the 5-3 heart fit.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3. Easy pass at matchpoints. At IMPs I'm still very tempted to pass, but I'll try 3 as 3-way insurance.
Aidan Ballantyne: 3. Best of a bad lot. I take out the take-out doubles. Pard can have a 5-card heart suit. Popular vote will be pass because that seems to be flavor of the last few years. Wish I could play money against those players.
Larry Meyer: 3. With a minimum hand, make a minimum bid.
David Breton: Pass. Without a fit we may not have game. But with 3 aces in my hand we should collect at least 200 and probably more since dummy's values rate to be wasted.
Yu Wang: 3. Less evil a bid than 3 or 3NT.
Mike Roberts: 3. Passing at IMPs is crazy. I hope I can do this in tempo.
Perry Khakhar: 3. Moysian might play okay! I don't like rebidding this 5 card spade suit, if there is a suitable option.
Merv Adey: 3. I think 3 iis going down, but not enough to risk it..call me a wimp.
David Gordon: 3. It is not a perfect world.
John Gillespie: 3. A bit of pump protection and crossed fingers.
Chris Buchanan: 3. Worst case scenario is partner raises to 4 which should still play well even on a 4-3.
Brian Zietman: 3. Is there any other bid?
Amiram Millet: 3. Don't want to lose 3NT and looking forward.
Chris Diamond: 3. No right answer again. Choose the bid that saves space.
Tim Francis-Wright: 3. Ugh. At least the chances of a 3-3 fit are fairly small. (Partner would probably try 3NT if she has 3 hearts and a diamond stop.)
Jack Brown: Pass. No fit, Aces & spaces and maybe K in slot. The hand is made for defending.
|
| 4. Matchpoints. None vul.
| |
Q J 8 7 5
K
K 6 4
J 9 7 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1
|
Pass
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
1NT
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Pass
| 12
| 100
|
|
2
| 3
| 30
|
|
2
| 3
| 30
|
|
Moderator: Does a 1NT rebid promise two spades? Is this collection worth a probe for game?
Betty Ann Kennedy: 2. I'm willing to move forward with this hand pattern.
Karen Walker: Pass. Your values are way too soft to invite, and there's no reason to insist on spades, especially because my partners occasionally have a singleton for this auction. That stiff K looks more like a notrump card than a ruffing value.
The Coopers: 2. We don't like to leave partner in 1NT with an unbalanced hand, even with all these high cards. We don't favor the modern style of rebidding 1NT with a singleton spade, and that makes a 2 call more attractive.
Eugene Chan: 2. I am full value for New Minor. Spade suit is decent. Anything less is cowardly.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. Seems like a comfortable spot.
Gilbert Lambert: 2. I don't like it!
Martin Henneberger: 2. 2-way new minor is the modern treatment now and we can all see why with this hand type. However in standard sayc bidding contest I'm still bidding 2. I hope subsequent bids are nonforcing-invitational.
Ronald Kuiper: 2. Describe my hand: 5 spades, unbalanced, 10+ HCP.
Mike Hamilton: 2. This gives partner room to rebid diamonds, show hearts, or offer delayed spade support. When I next support diamonds, I will have shown a singleton heart and suggested 5 spades.
Kai Zhou: 2. Lower road if no good potential fit. In MP, if you lose game, it is just a bad day.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 2. Hope partner will correct to 2 with 3-card support.
Aidan Ballantyne: 2. Stretch to make a NMF as partner may rebid 2 in which case we will play that strain.
Larry Meyer: Pass. Game seems unlikely.
David Breton: Pass. At IMPs I'd try NMF and make a try opposite support and sign off otherwise. At matchpoints I'd rather stay low rather then look for an unlikely game.
Yu Wang: 2. New minor forcing. It's better to play in spades than NT.
Mike Roberts: Pass. +120 is too likely to look for another strain at pairs. I'd bid 2 at IMPs.
Perry Khakhar: Pass. Soft values, slow tricks, etc. Chances for a game are non-existent. May as well look for an extra 10 for NT.
David Gordon: 2. In between an invite and not. If 2 is new minor or 2-way new minor I will say that I felt my hand was invitational and if 2 is not forcing then I will say my hand was not good enough to invite. I have all my post hand argument ammunition covered.
Paul Mcmullin: Pass. Partner has at most 14, I've got a very soft 10; I don't think we have game, and I have no reason to believe that a 5-3 spade fit will play a trick better than NT.
John Gillespie: Pass. Some of this junk is working.
Chris Buchanan: Pass. Game is too far away and with the soft intermediate honors I like to play NT.
Brian Zietman: 2. New minor forcing or checkback Stayman or natural - take your pick.
Amiram Millet: 2. Asking for partner's advice.
Chris Diamond: Pass. May or may not be the right strain, but my HCP may insure a plus.
Tim Francis-Wright: Pass. This is the new minor forcing death hand. If we really play it as invitational, we can't use 2 to look for a spade fit or to pattern out like beginners would get to do.
Jack Brown: Pass. May miss 8 card spade fit but in MPs will take chances in NT.
Susan Julius: 2. NMF.
|
| 5. Matchpoints. Both vul.
| |
K
A K 6 5 4
Q 6 3
K J 10 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
1NT
|
Pass
|
2
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
Pass
|
3
| |
|
Pass
|
3
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3NT
| 7
| 100
|
|
4NT
| 6
| 80
|
|
4
| 3
| 30
|
|
4
| 1
| 10
|
|
6
| 1
| 10
|
|
Moderator: Is 3 a cuebid looking for a slam, or is it looking for the best game? The panel is divided.
August Boehm: 3NT. I have tolerance for notrump with something in diamonds so I opt for 3NT. How is partner supposed to bid with A Q J 2 Q 3 9 7 5 A Q 7 4?
Betty Ann Kennedy: 6. Partner's 3 bid shows a maximum with a club fit.
Mike Lawrence: 4NT. I'm not sure what 3 is, but I choose 4NT, which shows a quantitative raise.
Steve Robinson: 3NT. I've already shown hearts and clubs, and partner has denied three hearts. This is not a good-fitting hand.
The Coopers: 4. We think partner's 3 bid says he likes clubs, has the A, is slammish and doesn't have the A. Our 4 cuebid highlights the diamond problem. Note that a 4NT bid by partner over 4 would show a place to play rather than be Blackwood.
The Joyces: 4NT. We play 4NT as quantitative and expressing doubt as to strain.
The Sutherlins: 4. Partner has a cuebid in support of clubs, and we may have a slam, so we need to go past 3NT. Maybe partner can cuebid 4.
Michael Dimich: 3NT. Partner loves clubs but doesn't have a diamond control. J x (x) or 10 x x would be a bonus.
Eugene Chan: 3NT. 3 should deny 3 hearts and confirm slam interest in clubs. It also denies the A. Unless opener takes another call, we are not missing a slam.
Robin Hart: 3NT. I can't see a 5-card suit to run.
Stephen Vincent: 3NT. Awkward. Partner presumably has a club fit but we are off the A at a minimum.
Martin Henneberger: 4NT. In my opinion when responder shows two suits, opener agrees the major at the 3 level, bids next step (3 here) to agree clubs and bids 3 to show 5-card spades in case responder is 3-5-1-4. That being my theory, I have a quantitative invite.
Ronald Kuiper: 3NT. 3 highly suggests pard has no diamond control. I don't have one so will sign off. 3 was a slam try, so if pard has K he can give it another go.
Mike Hamilton: 4NT. My 3 confirms hearts and shows extra values. Partner’s 3 is a positive response to that, say 17 HCP and 4-4 majors. If I’m wrong, off 3 aces in my own hand, a KCB inquiry could successfully avoid slam or lead to counting 13 tricks.
Kai Zhou: 4NT. I am not sure what 3 says about his hand, definitely not good diamonds, even if there might be no fit, but I like my potential. 4NT doesn't really sound quantitative, but cannot really find a better one.
Andrew Krywaniuk: 3NT. If 3 denies a high diamond honour then we are already high enough.
Aidan Ballantyne: 3NT. I've done enough. Our spades may be wasted somewhat. I play 3 slam interest, not choice of games. It's more practical to play that treatment as it's more useful for finding the right level.
Larry Meyer: 5. Pard showed good club support and a spade control, but denied controls in diamonds and hearts.
David Breton: 4. I think 3 means: I accept your game try and I am starting a cue bid sequence. With no diamond control I sign off in game.
Yu Wang: 4. Slam try is obvious, hope pard senses the danger in diamond suit.
Mike Roberts: 4. 3 is a cuebid for clubs, I assume. I need to know about diamond control - after 4 I'll bid 6 over 4, pass over 4 (A Q J x Q J 2 2 2 A Q x x), and pass over 5.
Perry Khakhar: 3NT. 3 should be a cue bid for clubs. That would suggest a problem in the diamond suit. Time to bail out! Maybe Partner has other ideas and he will bid on. But my 3NT should suggest a lack of 1st or 2nd round diamond control.
Merv Adey: 4. I could have bid 4 a round earlier with a one way hand. Partner should bid again.
David Gordon: 3NT. The 3 bid should be an advance cue bid in support of clubs. If pard cannot show the K over 3NT then we have arrived. (The A was denied over 3.)
Paul Mcmullin: 4. Is 4 gerber? Is 5 gerber? Is 4NT quantitative? is 4NT blackwood? Are we missing 2 aces for slam?
John Gillespie: 4. Pattern out or cuebid? We'll discuss it later.
Chris Buchanan: 3NT. No Q? That helps me decide how high I want to go.
Brian Zietman: 6NT. At matchpoints have to take a stab at 6NT.
Amiram Millet: 3NT. If partner is looking for a slam, he'll go on.
Chris Diamond: 3NT. Pard fits clubs, but I'm not adventuring away from 3NT at MP's without a very good reason and I don't see one.
Jack Brown: 4NT. Should be quantitative. Pard has a decent picture of your shape and can place the contract.
Janet Dunbar: 6. Making assumption that 3 is cuebid in support of clubs, so we are off A and will hope that partner has the K.
|
|
