TGIF October 2007: Scores
| 1. Board-a-Match. Both vul.
|
A K Q 7 4
A Q 9 5
---
Q J 8 6
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
Pass
|
1
|
Dbl
| |
|
Pass
|
1
|
2
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 9
| 100
|
|
3
| 5
| 70
|
|
3
| 2
| 60
|
|
4
| 1
| 50
|
|
Dbl
| 1
| 50
|
|
2
| 0
| 20
|
|
2
| 0
| 20
|
|
3
| 0
| 0
|
|
4NT
| 0
| 0
|
|
Moderator: The panel chose five different calls, and all of them have good reasons on this interesting deal. Most panelists intended to insist on game and didn't want to give up on slam.
Mike Lawrence: 4. I fully expect West to bid 5, so my splinter bid should bring North into the picture.
Barry Rigal: 4. It is an overbid, but it's the best way to announce ownership of the deal and set up forcing passes. Slam is conceivable, if unlikely.
Karen Walker: 4. It will eat up a lot of space, but a second double or a 3 cuebid suggests doubt about the trump suit. The splinter seems the best way to confirm hearts and gets information about the possibility of slam. I expect him to cuebid the A or K.
Joel Martineau: 4. I'm a splintering fool.
Adam Melzak: 2. 2 kings make slam attractive, but 3+ losers also possible. 4 5 3 4 2 all alternatives.
Eugene Chan: Dbl. Might be our best plus score if partner converts. B-A-M = strange bidding :-)
Stephen Vincent: 4. Partner needs to have a perfect maximum for slam to be playable and even then it might be play awkwardly. Much more likely that 4 will go down than that 6 will make.
Gilbert Lambert: 4. I know pard could be broke, but I need so little to make game. On a good day we might make slam.
Aidan Ballantyne: 3. I'll find out more this way and may also tell more if I later bid 4 (though introducing spades over expected 3 may work well if pard has 3-cd heart suit). A direct 4 splinter is unlikely to be productive.
Martin Henneberger: 2. With 3-3 in the majors pard will bid 1 when forced with little values. If 2 gets passed we are high enough. Any continuation will get us to the right game.
Larry Meyer: 3. With no diamond wastage, want to be in game.
Aloke Paul: 3. Pard may not have many points in response to our takeout-double. If partner goes to 4 then I will ask for aces.
Dave Waterman: 2. This hand looks better than it is, unless partner has some spade length. He could have 3 hearts and 5 diamonds.
Mike Roberts: 4. I'm not going to go past 4 by myself. Partner will hopefully find a call with the round kings.
Perry Khakhar: 2. I think spades may play better than hearts since I cannot stand the tap. As little as J 3 2 6 4 3 2 5 4 3 2 K 2 will give us a great shot at making 4! If partner's hand is totally unsuitable with long hearts, I still would like to take my chances in 3.
Bj Trelford: 3. Good hand. forcing! I'll bid 4 next.
Chris Buchanan: 3. This is the wrong hand for a splinter. 3 is forcing and will most likely fetch 3 by partner. After that I plan to Q-bid 3 forcing it to game and if partner has the club control I am looking for, I will investigate more for slam.
Ross Jamieson: 3. To have a chance at slam, partner needs a pretty good hand that's not good enough to bid 2, but it can't hurt to ask.
Paul Mcmullin: 3. 4 might be better, but my partner usually holds 3 2 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 2 4 3 2 instead of the 3 2 K 4 3 2 5 4 3 2 K 3 2 needed for slam.
Chris Diamond: 3. Still possible for pard to have the club and heart kings: will try to find out.
Susan Julius: 4. Pard wasn't very enthusiastic, but with 3 losers, and a bit of luck, 4 is there.
Brian Zietman: 3. Partner is 0-7 so slam is unlikely but possible. I need more information hence the cue-bid.
|
| 2. Matchpoints. None vul.
| |
A 10
K J 7 6 5 4 2
4
A Q 9
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
Pass
|
1NT
(1)
|
2
| |
|
2
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
| (1) 15-17.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
3
| 15
| 100
|
|
Dbl
| 3
| 50
|
|
Pass
| 0
| 40
|
|
3
| 0
| 20
|
|
4
| 0
| 20
|
|
3
| 0
| 0
|
|
Moderator: The panel was unanimous in thinking that you should bid again. What call best describes your hand?
Jeff Meckstroth: 3. I'm definitely not passing, but double is OK.
Barry Rigal: 3. ... worth the risks.
Karen Walker: 3. I just can't see giving up at the two level with a five-loser hand.
Kai Zhou: 3. Only 5 losers, 3 should not be a problem.
Julien Levesque: 3. On an average- day 6 losers, on a very bad day 3 losers, but with position I'll make it an average one and bid 3. Pard is marked to have 3-5 hcp with West keeping it cool at 2.
Adam Melzak: 3. K J are well placed; also A Q; but defensively??
Eugene Chan: 3. Not sure why we did not bid 3 to begin with. Must have mis-sorted the hand.
Stephen Vincent: 3. Can't let them get away with 2 at pairs.
Gilbert Lambert: 3. May be I should have bid 3 the first time?
Eurydice Nours: 3. Why didn't South bid 3 the first place?
Aidan Ballantyne: 3. Not sure what I will do if they now bid 3, but doubling 2 instead of bidding 3 first makes that issue worse.
Martin Henneberger: 3. Competing further on this hand seems right...so 3 it is.
Jongseok Oh: 3. I think 3 is make or 1 down.
Larry Meyer: 4. If pard just has the black kings and Q x, probably cold for 5 .
Aloke Paul: 3. Realize partner has hardly any points. Just to push the opponent, risk is not that high.
Dave Waterman: Dbl. ... and bid 3 over 3 of a minor. It's unlikely partner will be able to pass the X, but why not leave the option open? You can't pass this hand at matchpoints.
Mike Roberts: 3. At IMPs, this is nuts, as we could easily be down 3 doubled. But at pairs, it's ok - maybe only down 1, maybe push them up, maybe I buy the king of clubs.
Perry Khakhar: Dbl. The double is a cooperative value bid. A nonforcing 2 puts some cards in partner's hand. If they are defensive, he can convert. If they are offensive, I don't mind playing in 3 or even 4. Let's get the hand strength across!
Bj Trelford: Dbl. 2? I would have bid 3. Over 3, I bid 3.
Chris Buchanan: Dbl. This shows a good 2 call and invites partner to either penalize or pull. I do not like passing and bidding this suit again is not attractive.
Ross Jamieson: 3. You can expect to make this in your own hand, with the AQ of trump almost certainly onside.
Paul Mcmullin: 3. Glad I'm not playing this... oh - wait...
Chris Diamond: 3. I may not get doubled if I am going down and I might just make it.
Bill Treble: Dbl. Enough defense to stand a leave by partner....a bit more flexible than 3.
Brian Zietman: 3. If they push me to 4 I may make it with a double.
|
| 3. IMPs. None vul.
| |
Q 2
K Q 10 8 2
A Q 5 3
4 2
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
| |
|
Pass
|
2
|
4
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 16
| 100
|
|
Pass
| 2
| 50
|
|
5
| 0
| 20
|
|
Dbl
| 0
| 20
|
|
Moderator: Does supporting partner at the four level show extra? On this deal, you have a great fit for partner who has made a game-forcing 2 bid. Most of the panel want to support partner to make the auction simpler.
Jeff Meckstroth: 4. Trumps speak.
Barry Rigal: 4. Failure to raise at once would deny four diamonds in my book.
Karen Walker: 4. I hope partner remembers to 'stretch-with-a-fit'.
Kai Zhou: 4. Support pard, although pass might be another option.
Julien Levesque: 4. To X or raise?? + 100/300 vs + 130/400 we raise our partner after the 2/1 bid of 2, if we do not have game pard will pass with soft clubs losers; go with the fit.
Adam Melzak: 4. 2 = g.f., so no need to suppress excellent support but leave room for 4 bid by pard.
Eugene Chan: 4. Was planning to raise to 3, hence 4. 5 would suggest a better hand.
Stephen Vincent: Pass. Too much of a strain to bid 4 with this minimum flat hand.
Gilbert Lambert: 5. Assuming I am showing that hand type without controls in the black suits.
Aidan Ballantyne: 4. This allows for a possible 4 bid by pard which I will pass.
Martin Henneberger: 4. Support with support? Is this a trick question?
Jongseok Oh: 4. Minimum hand, support diamonds.
Larry Meyer: 4. Support with support.
Aloke Paul: 4. Hoping if partner has points and five carder diamond suit will go to 5.
Dave Waterman: 4. rule # 1 = show a fit in competitive auctions, don't worry about strength. We have no agreement of meaning of 4 vs 5.
Mike Roberts: 4. Must show support. 5 is wrong, because partner could have heart support.
Perry Khakhar: 5. 5 may go down but in IMPs, there may be some protection. My bid shows no controls outside the 2 red suits and 2 quick club losers. Guess what I have?
Bj Trelford: Pass. No defence. I couldn't have a worse hand.
Chris Buchanan: 4. This all depends how low you play pass and pull. Bidding 4 immediately in my universe shows a weaker hand with a good fit.
Chris Diamond: 4. Can't hide this much support.
Bill Treble: Pass. Great diamond support but the hand is dog-eared so I won't support immediately.
Susan Julius: 4. We're in a game-going auction. I'd show support and see what pard bids next.
Brian Zietman: Pass. Leave the decision to partner.
|
| 4. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
Q
A Q J 3
A K J 10 8 2
10 5
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
4
|
Pass
|
Pass
| ? |
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
Dbl
| 13
| 100
|
|
5
| 2
| 60
|
|
4NT
| 2
| 50
|
|
Pass
| 1
| 10
|
|
Moderator: 5 could easily be the winning bid, whereas 4NT brings two suits in the auction, but tends to promise a fifth heart. The panel prefers double, offering three reasonable places to play: 4 doubled, 5 or 5.
Mike Lawrence: Dbl. ... for takeout, and pull 5 to 5.
Barry Rigal: Dbl. It might be right to defend even if partner has no trump tricks. Bidding 4NT is out because of the suit (length) disparity.
Kai Zhou: 5. ... a direct bid, double may end up with the contract 4 X which I do not quite like.
Julien Levesque: Dbl. Don't like it, but it's a lesser evil to show offshape takeout X.
Adam Melzak: Dbl. Hopefully bidding 5 over 5 wont hang you.
Stephen Vincent: Dbl. Most flexible bid. Will bid 5 over 5.
Gilbert Lambert: 5. Bidding what I have.
Patti Adams: 4NT. Take out, if partner bids clubs, I can correct to diamonds, and partner can pass or bid hearts, knowing that I had a red 2-suiter.
Aidan Ballantyne: Dbl. Play this as transferable values tending to take out. I'll bid 5 over pard's 5.
Martin Henneberger: 5. Agreements are huge here. Is double takeout and if so is an equal level conversion available over 5? I vote yes to both, but for the purposes of this bidding contest I'm bidding 5.
Larry Meyer: 5. With shortness in opponent's suit, feels right to bid.
Aloke Paul: 5. A defensive bid, risk is not that high. Hoping partner has some points.
Dave Waterman: Dbl. ... and then 5 over 5. A bit risky, but worth it to keep hearts in the picture. If partner bids 6, I will still convert.
Mike Roberts: 5. I'm unwilling to risk the double-game swing by passing, and I'll just bid my long suit.
Perry Khakhar: Dbl. DSIP double (do something intelligent partner!)? Everything else seems too unilateral.
Bj Trelford: Dbl. Partner might convert!
Chris Buchanan: 4NT. Takeout for at least 2 suits. Dbl here should be defensive values and more on the flat side.
Ross Jamieson: 4NT. Partner can pass double, so show a 2-suited hand and correct clubs to diamonds.
Jane Fyfe: 4NT. ... takeout. Will pass or correct.
Chris Diamond: Dbl. I hope X followed by 5 over 5 shows something like 6/4 in the reds.
Bill Treble: 4NT. Close one--5 will probably not get us to slam when it's there while 4NT might.
Susan Julius: 4NT. ... beautiful diamonds but would hate to miss a possible heart game.
Brian Zietman: 4NT. If partner bids 5, I bid 5 to show a 2-suiter in diamonds and hearts.
|
| 5. IMPs. N-S vul.
| |
J
9 8 5 4
7 4 3
A J 10 5 4
|
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| |
|
1
(1)
|
1
|
3
|
Pass
| |
|
Pass
|
Dbl
|
Pass
| ? |
| (1) Four or more diamonds.
|
Your call?
| Bid | Votes | Award
|
|
4
| 9
| 100
|
|
4
| 6
| 60
|
|
3
| 3
| 50
|
|
4
| 0
| 20
|
|
5
| 0
| 20
|
|
3
| 0
| 10
|
|
Pass
| 0
| 0
|
|
Moderator: When partner reopens with a takeout double, do you bid your four-card major or your five-card minor? Half the panel are afraid partner only has three-card heart support and bid 4.
Mike Lawrence: 4. ... a safety play. Pass, 4 and 4 are all possible, but 4 gives the best chance of a plus score even if it's a small plus.
Jeff Meckstroth: 4. I don't want to be in hearts unless partner has four, and I don't see any guarantee of that.
Barry Rigal: 4. I think we are most likely to play clubs because of the ruffs coming with trumps honors in 4.
The Sutherlins: 4. Pass is out of the question at IMPs. Partner is slightly more likely to have three hearts than four since he did not double initially. 4 is enough.
Karen Walker: 4. I'm going for safety at IMPs. In hearts, I'll be forced to ruff with partner's trump honors and could easily lose control.
Kai Zhou: 4. ... tough bid, but I want to be in game and I believe pard should at most have 1 diamond.
Julien Levesque: 4. The shape looks right , those 3 diamonds are a wealth of knowledge to have vs a stiff. The hand rates to make on a crossruff.
Adam Melzak: 3. Ouch, don't like this bid or 4 or pass. Seems like least of evils.
Eugene Chan: 4. 4 game is possible. So is winning a lottery. Don't relish having to trump losing diamonds with dummy's high trumps. In case we end up defending, I would much rather partner lead clubs instead of hearts.
Stephen Vincent: 4. Partner should be a goodish 6-3-1-3 or something similar. Too risky to pass at IMPs.
Gilbert Lambert: 5. I am not broke here. It would be nice to have 4 to show this hand type (weak hearts and 5 clubs).
Aidan Ballantyne: 4. Torture pard given previous pass over 3. An overbid which probably allows us to reach best strain, probably too high. 2nd choice is underbid of 4.
Martin Henneberger: 4. Partner might not be able to bid game if I bid 3. I'm going for the game bonus. Guessing to not bid game is worse than bidding it, and the opps might not stand the pressure and sack for us!
Jongseok Oh: 4. If my partner had 4 hearts, he would bid double. So, 4 is enough.
Larry Meyer: 3. Since opponents didn't bid hearts, seems like pard has them.
Aloke Paul: Pass. Hoping Spade lead will come and provide me with some trump tricks.
Dave Waterman: 4. ... and either pass 4, or bid 5 over 4. A slight overbid to ensure we end up in the correct strain. Pass is too extreme.
Mike Roberts: 4. This is a big hand. If partner bids 4, great, if partner bids 4 I'll go back to 5. A K x x x A K x x 10 9 x x makes game very likely.
Perry Khakhar: 5. I hate my hearts. Also partner CANNOT have 4 hearts for this auction. It is IMPS and vulnerable, so (over)bid the most likely game.
Bj Trelford: 3. Cheapest bid I can make. Over 3 I bid 4.
Chris Buchanan: 3. As much as I like the club suit, I like the 3-level more.
Chris Diamond: 4. Press for the most likely vulnerable game at IMPS.
Bill Treble: 4. ... the coward's bid.
Brian Zietman: 4. Partner has a maximun single diamond and his double show me he has some support for the other 2 suits.
|
|
