IAC Forums
Chew the Fat! => IAC & Master Solvers Club => Topic started by: Masse24 on November 12, 2019, 08:57:46 PM
-
JANUARY 2020 MSC
Deadline: December 10 at 9:00 a.m. (ET)
Submit your January responses here: The Bridge World - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB (https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/msc/mscentercontest.html)
BWS 2017 System: BWS 2017 (https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/readingroom/bws/bwscompletesystem.html)
BWS 2017 POLLS, CHANGES AND ADDITIONS: BWS 2017 - Polls, Changes, and Additions (https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/readingroom/bws/bwspolls2017.html)
- Bridge World Standard 2017 (BWS or BWS2017) is effective beginning with the January 2017 Master Solvers' Club problems. This page shows (1) the results of the panelist polls that were used to adjust the system; and (2) the changes in and the additions to Bridge World Standard 2001 (BWS2001) that were made.
In the listings of the questions and answers, an asterisk indicates the BWS2001 agreement; the proportion of the expert votes for each item, rounded to the nearest percent, is shown in brackets.
PROBLEM A: IMPs
North-South Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S J63 !H KQT8 !D AQJ76 !C K
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 1 !S |
| ??* | | | |
*BWS: after doubling, minimum equal-level conversions do not apply
What call do you make?
PROBLEM B: Matchpoints
Both Sides Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S 4 !H AKQJ85 !D K62 !C KQ6
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | Pass | Pass |
| 1 !H | Pass | 1 !S | Pass |
*BWS: 3NT = long, usually strong, suit
What call do you make?
PROBLEM C: IMPs
East-West vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S AQJ4 !H AKQJ96 !D 7 !C T3
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| 1 !H | 1 !S | Pass | Pass |
| ?? | | | |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM D: IMPs
Neither Side Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S QT76 !H Q9 !D T5 !C AJ962
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| Pass | Pass | 1 !H | Double |
| ?? | | | |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM E: IMPs
East-West Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S 863 !H AQ7 !D AKQ954 !C K
Which of these plans do you prefer?
(a) open 2 NT
(b) open 1 !D ;
then, after (Pass) - 1 !S - (Pass) - ??
(b1) 2 !H
(b2) 2 NT
(b3) 3 !D
(b4) 3 NT
PROBLEM F:Matchpoints
Neither vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S A94 !H A97532 !D 7653 !C —
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | 1 !C | 1 !D | 1 !S |
| ??* | | | |
*BWS: double = hearts with diamond tolerance
What call do you make?
PROBLEM G: Matchpoints
East-West Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S AQ2 !H Q932 !D KT654 !C 9
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | 1 !C | 1 !H |
| ??* | | | |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM H: IMPs
Both sides vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S QT2 !H — !D AQJ65 !C AJ632
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 2 !H |
| Dbl | 4 !H | All Pass | |
What is your opening lead?
Good luck everyone!
-
jan, 2020:
A:>> since ELC double and correct to diamonds is not allowed, I am 'trapping' on Jxx in spades :( --pass
B:>> the footnote says it all! trying to right-side 3NT with club jump-shift is fun if we are shooting? --3NT
C:>> what can possibly go wrong, if i rebid ..... --3 hearts
D:>> in life, i bid 1NT over a double withouth a thought of anything else -- but i may change my mind in a week or two..... --1 notrump
E:>> never pass up a chance to reverse into AQx suit in the MSC! an oldie but goodie for 60 years! -- 2 hearts
F:>> ifi t's goulash void-splinter raise of diamonds, but here, ride the tiger with a 2 heart advance -- 2 hearts
G:>> first guess is go for the throat at 1 heart, but when i sober up, will probably fall from grace -- pass
H:>> leading my trump void. if that is barred, then my good suit. -- diamond ace
-
Initial thoughts:
Problem A: 2 !D Too many HCPs to pass, not enough HCPs or tricks to try a Western cue type 3NT conversion. I do have a very nice diamond suit, and though it temporarily gives up on hearts, I may still get another chance to show them. This feels like a best description. At this time. My second choice is 1NT, which shows the points, generally the shape, but I feel the call is doubly flawed with stiff !C K and only a partial !S stop.
Problem B: 3NT I hate taking advice from the note, but it describes this hand. Solid hearts, strong hand, stoppers in the unbid suits, and right-siding the !D K. I cannot think of a more appropriate choice.
Problem C: 3 !H Best description. A sixth !H, solid suit and extra values. If I had a minor suit covered, I might try 3NT, but partner has room to cue bid to ask for a stop.
Problem D: 1NT 1 !S may be right, but I have cards to be led into, if partner rebids in diamonds, I am not ashamed of showing doubleton !H support. My second choice is actually redouble, because this hand is almost too good for a 1NT call.
Problem E: b4 All choices are reasonable, some more than others. I like reversing into !H on a theoretical level, but manufactured reverses almost always come back to haunt me in practice. Rebidding 2NT or 3NT right sides the hand, so I like both; 2NT is better on values, but 3NT is better on playing strength. 3 !D seems to be a slight underbid to me, and opening 2NT seems too much of a distortion to me.
Problem F: 2 !H I typically hate to crossbid partner, but with six hearts, controls in both of the opponents suits and a great fit for partner, we may have a sub-20 point slam. Give partner xx Kxx AKxxx xxx, and all we need is 2-2 in both red suits. Not saying we'd get there, but who knows where the auction ends in a double double-fit auction. With one of my regular f2f partners, this would be a 3 !H (fit showing jump) for me - eating room and guaranteeing fit. The note made double tempting, but xxxx is more than just diamond tolerance, and the sixth heart makes me want to show the suit rather than just imply it.
Problem G: 1NT 1NT is a bit heavy, but at the one level, it is a bit too hungry for trap pass. The vulnerability is right, but the level wrong.
Problem H: !D A I have to lead something. I would prefer not to setup two tricks for declarer, so the !D lets me see dummy without giving up too much.
-
A: 2 !D
I can imagine this going pretty well. If Lho bids 2 !S and this is passed back to me, I can double. If partner bids the likely 3 !C I can bid 3 !D, after my 2 !D he will not be confused by this.
B: 3NT
I guess that is pretty much what 3NT shows. A long good heart suit and a reasonable hope that I can take 9 tricks. If I wait until I am sure I can take 9 tricks I will be waiting too long.
C: 3 !H
I am always happy to be in agreement with others.
D: 1 !S
But I can go off on my own when needed!. Yes, there are probably for spades on my right but so what, the auction is not over, I have four spades, I have some values. If partner responds 2 !D I now bid 2 !H. Surely with three hearts I would have raised directly so this should be fine.
E: b4, open 1 !D and, over a 1 !S response, bid 3NT.
Again it seems like a good chance for 9 tricks.
F: X
It's true that I don't need six hearts for this double but I do want to show the diamonds. If I later bid my hearts that should clarify the situation: Good length in hearts but playing in diamonds is fine if partner doesn't like the heart idea.
G: 2 !D
BWS says this commits us to at least the level of 3 !C. That's ok. If partner bids 2 !S I will bid 2NT and pard can sign off in 3 !C or raise to 3NT or sign off in 3 !D, whatever he wants. I suppose I could think about passing and then passing a re-opening double if there is one.
H: !S 2
Any lead requires a prayer. Maybe partner has the !S J. Could be.
I am not signing the papers yet for any of these choices.
-
I like to start with the low-hanging fruit, the easy ones. ;)
PROBLEM B: 3NT
Like Jim, I hesitate to allow the *BWS blurb to influence me, but isn't this a textbook 3NT?
It scares me that we're all in lockstep on this one.
-
My earlier comment was:
"B: 3NT
I guess that is pretty much what 3NT shows. A long good heart suit and a reasonable hope that I can take 9 tricks. If I wait until I am sure I can take 9 tricks I will be waiting too long."
I think the issues is that you need to take 9 tricks and it's not hard to imagine a 1 !S response with a hand where you will not be taking 9 tricks. And partner will probably pass.
3 !H is an alternative, it might well be the choice for some people, but is the glass half full or half empty? Part of my thinking is that even if 3NT can be beaten, "can be beaten" and "will be beaten" are different things. In the recent "robot nationals" or whatever that acbl thing is called I was in a 3NT that could have been beaten but the robots were on my side, so to speak.
I think that the editors mentioning that 3NT would show a long and strongish suit is simply meant to save us the time of checking it out. It is not a recommendation of any sort, it's just realism that some, presumably many, wish to consider this call with this meaning..
-
As far as alternatives go on problem B, I see several. 2 !C -- 3 !C -- 3 !H -- 3NT -- 4 !H
All possible. All viable. Possibly all receiving panel votes! Which makes it a good MSC problem.
But if you're not going to rebid 3NT on this hand, knowing the BWS definition, then why define the bid as such?
-
Hi,
I've submitted my answers to Bridge World for the first time. I've read the posts about how this works, but not quite sure if others will see my answers if I don't post them in the forum. I decided to answer all the questions without reading what anyone else had posted as to their answers.
Am I supposed to put my answers up before the contest ends? I don't mind if others see my answers.
Charlene (GG_Bridge)
-
OK just to show a different view. I choose for problems A and B:
*BWS: after doubling, minimum equal-level conversions do not apply
What call do you make?
That is crazy. So what does it mean when I double, then partner bids clubs and I bid diamonds? I don’t care, I am going to double regardless.
A. Double
*BWS: 3NT = long, usually strong, suit
What call do you make?
B. 4♥. In 3N the singleton ♠ is not good. I could easily lose 4 spades and minor suit ace. In 4♥ I don’t need partner to have any more than QJ♦,and if partner has both minor suit aces we are in the slam zone. Again I don't care about BWS. I think the 3N rebid should be limited to solid minor, Then there is a 2 trick difference between 3N and a minor suit game.
-
Hi,
I've submitted my answers to Bridge World for the first time. I've read the posts about how this works, but not quite sure if others will see my answers if I don't post them in the forum. I decided to answer all the questions without reading what anyone else had posted as to their answers.
Am I supposed to put my answers up before the contest ends? I don't mind if others see my answers.
Charlene (GG_Bridge)
Great, Charlene. Welcome to our little IAC MSC forum. :)
It's up to you how you want to handle this. If you don't mind others seeing your choices, by all means post to this forum. If you want privacy, then message or email your responses to Jim or to me.
To post here you can simply copy and paste the email response you received from The Bridge World. Also, feel free to chime in with your thoughts as to why you chose the way you did. Again, that's up to you.
GOOD LUCK!
-
Charlene,
For your answers to be public, post them on this thread before we score everyone's answers (which has to wait for BW publishing the scores). If you would like your answers/results to remain private, then you can send them to either Todd (Masse24) or myself; if you finish in the top three, we will give you another chance to have your result be public, but will respect your decision to remain private.
-
As far as alternatives go on problem B, I see several. 2 !C -- 3 !C -- 3 !H -- 3NT -- 4 !H
All possible. All viable. Possibly all receiving panel votes! Which makes it a good MSC problem.
But if you're not going to rebid 3NT on this hand, knowing the BWS definition, then why define the bid as such?
One reason would be to allow the option systemically, although other bids may be used if the bidder thinks it will lead to a better strain or final contract. With the same tools but sitting opposite different players I might choose different ways to bid the same hand.
-
B>> 3NT is MORE correct with an imaginary expert partner than with some live one. If it is doomed by his trash spade holding, he will know and take measures--he knows what your bid means. Same for slam hands. -- 3NT
C>> i suppose this is a game-try holding but i am a "glass-half-empty" guy about that. I am jumping to avoid the embarrassment of having opps somehow find 3 of a minor, and leaving that to pard to deal with having a totally wrong message about my hand. ---3 Hearts
E>> Where better to bid the "theoretically correct" reverse into AQX than in bidding contest? No regrets about further-bidding snafus! Besides, the panel has jumped at the chance to do it since i was eight. 2 Hearts
F>> I found easily that FIT JUMPS BY ADVANCER are ratified in BWS2017 system notes, so this becomes a no-brainer --- 3 hearts
I wonder if the panelists vote to get max scores or vote their true heart? I suppose it is their "job" to do the latter and leave the handicapping to us customers, yes?
a
-
I'll state my disclaimer upfront .. not familiar with the "Bridge World Standard 2017" conventions, so for this exercise, I just bid as I would normally -- we'll see if I crash and burn .. but certainly hope I will learn from the experience.
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds - I would have doubled if not for that note, which I couldn't find a reason for in the "Standard 2017"
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Spade - 3 bidding choices .. am I too cautious not to bid NT? -- showing my spade stop, maybe North can bid diamonds or rebid hearts?
PROBLEM E: (b1) - I want my partner to bid again.
PROBLEM F: 2 Hearts - I want partner to know I have 5 hearts
PROBLEM G: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Diamond Ace - Feels like the lesser of evils?
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Babs Giesbrecht
Qualicum Beach BC
Canada
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Spade
PROBLEM E: (b1)
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Spade 2
-
Jock McQuade
Portland OR, U.S.A.
problem A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM E: (b1)
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
problem G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Diamond Ace
Problem A and G still give me the creeps; I especially would hope that in this imaginary world I would not be tempted to leave in a reopening double of 1H overcall-- but that is the only consistent second call pointed to by this first turn pass :(
-
A new year! A fresh start!
My initial January guesses:
PROBLEM A: Double. Although 1NT is right on values, it has two flaws: the stiff King and a dubious stopper. 2 !D is tempting, and although BWS does not recognize ELC here, I’m still doubling.
PROBLEM B: 3NT. Fits the definition. If we belong in hearts, partner will know and can correct.
PROBLEM C: 3 !H . Somewhat of a tossup between 2 !H and 3 !H . I’ll go with 3 !H to both convey the nature of my hand (keeping alive our slim shot at game) and to preempt the opps from finding their probable minor fit.
PROBLEM D: 1NT. No need to introduce the !S suit. This conveys more information than the alternatives.
PROBLEM E: 1 !D ; 2 !H . If I “fake” a reverse or jump-shift, I prefer that it be a minor. But I want to force, so I reluctantly reverse into a major. There is a degree of safety here since I have three spades. Partner will most assuredly not support hearts with only three (though I suppose there is an exception), so if he does support, I’ll know he has five spades and I can correct to our spade “fit.”
PROBLEM F: 3 !H . Fit jump. The !H is threadbare, but the extra, unexpected !H somewhat makes up for the lack of honors. Second choice is double.
PROBLEM G: 2NT. Tough choice. 2 !D a close second. This one was very difficult choice and I am not remotely confident.
PROBLEM H: !D A. Opening leads are tough. But I’ve got everything in !D except the King, and partner is doubling. This bodes well for not blowing a trick and carries the added bonus of getting a peek at dummy before taking further action.
No change of heart. Submitted the above choices.
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: Double
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM E: (b1)
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Diamond Ace
-
PROBLEM A: Double
So what does it mean when I double, then partner bids clubs and I bid diamonds? I don’t care, I am going to double regardless. Afterthought: OK It goes 1♠-(x)-3♠-(5♣) Would I be worried? Far less so than 1♠-(2♦) -3♠- and partner had ♠ x, ♥ Jxxx, ♦ xxx, ♣AQJxx and had to pass
PROBLEM B: 4♥
I just don’t like 3NT. If any BWS bid guaranteed a singleton spade and a good ♥ suit, then that would be the bid to go for. Sadly, not so. So, I go for 4♥ because partner may have an aceless hand and 1 trick in spades say ♠ Q10xx, ♥ xx, ♦ QJx, ♣Jxxx. 3NT is off if a spade is led and 4♥ is far safer. If partner is stronger say with both minor suit aces, we are in the slam zone.
PROBLEM C: 3♥
I am torn between 2♥ and 3♥.
Case for 2♥: Given that partner could not find a bid there are so many ways for there to be no game on. OTOH, west almost certainly has the K♠ for his overcall then partner almost certainly must have a minor suit ace for 4♥ to make. Would not partner with something like ♠xx. ♥ xx, ♦ Axxxx, ♣ Jxxx make a take-out double with this hand? OTOH with a quacky 6 count ♠ xx, ♥xx, ♦ QJxxx, ♣ QJxx 3♥ is likely to be too high.
Case for 3♥: Suppose partner has a singleton spade and a hand such as this: ♠ x, ♥ xx, ♦ Axxxx, ♣ xxxxx. Perhaps partner would pass with this hand after the 1♠ overcall and even with a trump lead, declarer can make 6♥ + 1♦ + 2♠ + ♠ ruff. A♠, Q♠ (covered by K) and ruffed. (East will have at least 2♠s.)
So I will go for 3♥ (just)
PROBLEM D. Redouble
Imagine partner has ♠ xx, ♥ AKJxx, ♦ KQJx, ♣ Qx. Then how would the bidding go if you responded:
(a)1NT 1♥-(x)-1NT-(p); 2♦-(p)-? You have no alternative but to give a preference response of 2♥ since partner could have an ace fewer. Say ♥ KJxxx when you would not want to be higher than 2♥.
(b) 1♠ 1♥-(x)-1♠-(p); 2♦-(p)-? Are you any better off with this response? On the positive side it is unlimited. Nevertheless, when it is your turn after partner rebids 2♦, you still have no alternative but to bid 2♥. You are slightly better off here than with (a) because partner knows that you have not yet limited your hand and with a trick better than a minimum opener and good hearts might make a try of 3♥, and then you can bid out your hand with 3NT giving partner choice of game.
c) Redouble. On the negative side it is 1 point short of the BWS requirement and this may cause partner to drive you into a poor game contract counting on you having at least 10HCP. On the positive side we will always get to game if there is one. If we examine more the possible downside, we can give partner a minimum opener:
♠ xx, ♥ KJxxx, ♦ KQJx, ♣ Qx and the bidding goes: 1♥-(x)- xx-(p); 2♦-(p)- 2♥-(p); ?
The 2♥ bid shows a minimum for the redouble (pass would be stronger) so partner will see that game is not on and will pass. So the negative possibility of redouble is small compared with the positive.
So for me 1NT is out and it is a choice between 1♠ or redouble. I favour redouble but am aware that I am going out on a limb seeing all the other votes. Still lets do it.
Of course there is a non BWS solution and that is after 1♥-(x)-1♠-(p); we rebid 2♣ gazzilli.
PROBLEM E: (b1)
Open 1♦, rebid 2♥. This conveys the strength and if partner raises my hearts then I ELC to 3♠ knowing partner has 5♠.
PROBLEM F: 3♥ fit jump
PROBLEM G: 1NT
1NT, 2NT, double and 2♦ spring to mind. But which? Consider partner having a balanced 12-14. If partner has 12, we would want to be in 1NT or in 2♦. If 13 maybe the same. If 14 we would probably want to be in 3N. The odds of getting 14 is nearly twice that of getting 12. So, game would appear unlikely. This appears to rule out 1NT or 2♦ particularly in MP pairs. What about double? We could find partner with ♠ KJ109, ♥ xx, ♦ AJx, ♣ Axxx where 4♠ is a wonderful contract and double is the only way to get there. OTOH we could find partner with something like ♠ Kxx, ♥ xx, ♦ Axx, ♣ KQxxx and what does partner do?
So I reluctantly go for 1NT.
PROBLEM H: 2♠
-
Submitted
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Jack Goody
Guildford
England
PROBLEM A: Double
PROBLEM B: 4 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: Redouble
PROBLEM E: (b1)
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Spade 2
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
Fredericksburg VA
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM E: (b4)
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Diamond Ace
A couple of changes - thank you to Blu for the research on F (I'd like to think I'd have found it as well, but I am willing to piggyback off of another since I mentioned the desire in my preliminaries). On G, I had felt like 1NT was a little heavy, so when I relooked at the problem I found that I gave the hand enough to be invitational based on the five diamonds and the !H 9, so I went with my second look rather than my first.
I am again designating Ken as a partner, and hope that we will concur more this go round than last.
-
puff puff, am i late?
Sanya
PROBLEM A: 2D
PROBLEM B: 4H
PROBLEM C: 3H
PROBLEM D: XX
PROBLEM E: (b3)
PROBLEM F: X
PROBLEM G: 2NT
PROBLEM H: !S 2
And I hope none will mind me posting Hoki's answers as well, he sent them thru email, and now is away, I hope from next month on he will post his solutions directly here.
So solutions by Oliver Hoffmann (Hoki):
A/ Pass – and rely on being able to back in with a double if a 1NT response gets passed back to me or rely on partner balancing if 1S is passed around the table.
B/ 3H – surely the ‘book’ bid?
C/ 2H – and prepared to compete up to 3H.
D/ 1NT – since 2C in this sequence would be Drury with a three-card raise.
E/ b(3) – that is, boring (nothing fancy).
F/ 2H – and if I get no encouragement from partner and if I get another turn I’d support diamonds.
G/ 2D – standard, forcing for one round.
H/ DA – but I would have doubled again since I disagee with the pass over 4H.
-
Not too late by roughly a day. Nice to have you back and bringing a friend along with you to play.
Welcome Oliver, and good luck.
-
Happy Holidays to all
A. 2 S Michaels to show H and D : anything else may lose the H suit
B. 3 N 9 tricks are easier than 10 3 H may be the winning bid
C. 3 H my LHO rates to have a good hand, I am trying to make it harder for him to bid again
D. Rdbl I am a point short but 1 N and 1 S do not seem better
E. b3 3 D although I considered 2 N for a long time
F. 4 C (splinter) my p must have 5 decent Diamonds: I have first round control in 3 suits.
G. 2 N 11 hip I considered 1N but we are non vulnerable v. Vul at Matchpoints
H. Ace !D The K rates to be on my left anyway.... and now I can look at dummy
-
MASTER SOLVERS CLUB SOLUTIONS RECEIVED
Your solutions have been received. This copy is for your records.
SOLVER: Kenneth Berg
Sykesville MD
U.S.A.
Your Solutions for the January 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM D: 1 Spade
PROBLEM E: (b1)
PROBLEM F: Double
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Spade 2
Thoughts below:
A: 2 !D
I am comfortable with this. If Lho bids 2 !S and this is passed back to me, I can double. If partner then bids the likely 3 !C I can convert to 3 !D. After my 2 !D he will not be be thinking this is stronger than it is.
Of course there are many ways the auction might go after my 2 !D
B: 3NT
I guess that is pretty much what 3NT shows. A long good heart suit and a reasonable hope that I can take 9 tricks. If I wait until I am sure I can take 9 tricks I will be waiting too long.
C: 3 !H
Firstly, I am not going to try to catch Lho in a psych. Maybe he is, but usually he isn't. Still, this does raise the question of just what partner has for his Pass. With values and hearts he would have raised hearts. With values and both minors he would have made a negative double. It is not completely crazy to think that partner is really pretty broke and than the opponents can make 5m. So maybe passing this out in 1 !S is right. It's also possible that 3 !H will be doubled and off 300. Still. Bridge is a bidder's game. But another maxim is that Pass is the most underused card in the game. Which platitude do I go with? I bid 3 !H. Shoot me later.
D: 1 !S
Yes, there are probably four spades on my right but the auction is not over. I have four spades, I have some values, and 1 !S might be exactly what partner needs to hear to make him comfortable in rebidding 1NT. And 1NT might well be the right contract.
E: b1, open 1 !D and, over a 1 !S response, bid 2 !H.
This is a change from the b4 I chose before (pun unintended). It's very possible we belong in spades and the 2 !H rebid is much more likely to get us there than a 3NT rebid.
F: X
The double shows hearts along with support for diamonds. It doesn't show six hearts but I might well have a chance to clarify that later. Even at matchpoints it is sometimes right to play in a minor. For example, if partner ruffs a club playing in diamonds, it not only stops then from taking the club trick, it increases our trick total by one. If I ruff a club playing in hearts, it stops then from taking the trick but does not increase our trick total. And it weakens a trump suit that is a bit shaky.
G: 2 !D
BWS says this commits us to at least the level of 3 !C. That's ok. If partner bids 2 !S I will bid 2NT and pard can do what he thinks best.
H: !S 2
Any lead requires a prayer. Maybe partner has the !S J. Could be. As is usual in these lead problems, I can make a case for almost anything.
-
Wladislaus Dragwlya
Castrum Sex
Romania
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM D: Redouble
PROBLEM E: (b4)
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Spade 2
-
Some additional observations on PROBLEM E.
PROBLEM E: IMPs
East-West Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S 863 !H AQ7 !D AKQ954 !C K
Which of these plans do you prefer?
(a) open 2 NT
(b) open 1 !D ;
then, after (Pass) - 1 !S - (Pass) - ??
(b1) 2 !H
(b2) 2 NT
(b3) 3 !D
(b4) 3 NT
This is another variation on The Bridge World "Death Hand." Six cards in my suit, three cards in partner's suit, extra values. Usually, the other three card suit is the other minor, and the recent trend in panel votes (I've seen it three times in 24 months) seems to be toward staying low. This one is a bit different in that it's a two-part question and our three card suit is a major being dangled in front of us as an option, something I may have done once in my life. I simply don't do it.
Not that this changes my choice--this time--to reverse into a three card major. Simply an observation in the similarity with other "Bridge World Death Hands" we have seen in the MSC.
Lots of information on The Bridge World "Death Hand" on the internet for those who wish to research it. I spent an afternoon a year ago digging into some of the mentions.
-
---------
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds 70
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump 100
PROBLEM C: 3 Hearts 100
PROBLEM D: 1 Spade 60
PROBLEM E: (b1) 100
PROBLEM F: Double 80
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds 80
PROBLEM H: Spade 2 60
I had made a scoring error Jim caught (and it even brought the score up!). Thanks!
650
-
Another Bridge World Honor Roll result for Todd. Congratulations!
| NAME | BW-SCORE | RANK | MPs |
| Masse24 | 740 | 1 | 30 |
| Blubayou | 680 | 2 | 15 |
| GG_Bridge | 680 | 2 | 15 |
| Jcreech | 670 | 4 | 1 |
| KenBerg | 650 | 5 | 1 |
| ToasterLn | 650 | 5 | 1 |
| WackoJack | 620 | 7 | 1 |
| BabsG | 620 | 7 | 1 |
| DrAculea | 610 | 9 | 1 |
| Curls77 | 610 | 9 | 1 |
| Hoki | 590 | 11 | 1 |
| . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . |
|
-
Can some kind person explain or point me to some text in the Bridge convention document as to why "minimum equal-level conversions do not apply". I took that as a prohibition of the double bid. Is it because you have no tolerance for clubs if they bid that suit?
-
Equal-level conversion doubles (ELCD) is a specialized conventional treatment. Essentially, it comes up when the double is of a major, and the responder to the double bids clubs. It allows the conversion of clubs to diamonds to show a minimum hand with 5+ diamonds and 4 of the other major. This involves partnership agreement.
To say that ELCD does not apply, indicates that following a double, the conversion of clubs to diamonds DOES show extra strength - in other words, long-standing undiscussed understandings apply. So in the context of the problem,
PROBLEM A: IMPs
North-South Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S J63 !H KQT8 !D AQJ76 !C K
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 1 !S |
| ??* | | | |
*BWS: after doubling, minimum equal-level conversions do not apply
What call do you make?
if you considered your hand to be minimum, you should not double because pulling to diamonds would show extras.
-
thanks for that excellent explanation ..
C
-
January solutions.
The Director for January was David Berkowitz
Snippets from the panel:
PROBLEM A: Double. The runaway majority choice.
Rodwell summarized his thinking with, “Double. I very much prefer minimum equal-level conversions only from clubs to diamonds. I’ll need to bid diamonds over clubs, overbidding a bit, but there is too much heart potential to be happy overcalling two diamonds. I almost prefer one notrump to two diamonds.”
And . . .
John Carruthers, “Double. Despite the footnote. Dangerous, agreed, but just a little length in a red suit opposite will offer some protection against disaster.”
A distant second was 2 !D .
Both Jack and I got this one, not a popular answer among the IAC gang.
PROBLEM B: 3NT. Not quite the majority I expected, although 3NT was the winning selection.
Kit Woolsey echoed my thinking with, “Three notrump. Driving this hand to game can’t be terrible, even at matchpoints. Since there is a bid that describes the hand-type perfectly, why not use it?”
I found myself nodding in agreement with Berkowitz’ warning following the 3NT bidders’ comments. He states, “The trouble with the three-notrump call is that it screams for a spade lead.” Good visualization!
The other game-force bids [3 !H is an underbid and underbids rarely win the cheese in a bidding contest] were a 3 !C jump-shift and no-nonsense jump to game with 4 !H .
Regarding 4 !H Michael Rosenberg explained: “Four hearts. Short a heart, but long on values, so should be okay. I guess three clubs would also be okay if partner made allowance for this hand type. (I prefer it to guarantee at least four clubs.) Three notrump might be a better contract or not—no way to be sure—but bidding three notrump might induce a spade lead, exactly what I don’t want. Three hearts feels like a clear undercooking—could bid that without the heart queen, maybe without the heart king. Two notrump would be both undercooked and misdirected.” Although in the minority, Rosenberg’s detailed analysis is spot-on.
PROBLEM C: 3 !H . A majority.
Most of our participants also chose this, so I’ll not linger on the reasoning.
2 !H was the second place vote-getter. Bobby Wolff, who chose 2 !H , thought (at least initially) along the same lines that I did, but he went low anyway, while I chose 3 !H . Wolff: “Two hearts. Yes, I know that the opponents may now outbid us in a suit that figures to fit better than spades . . . .
Interestingly, there were a few mentions of Pass as an alternative, but only one panelist chose that route.
PROBLEM D: Redouble. A close call over 1NT.
I must admit to counting beans here, thinking the hand short of the values required for redouble (I chose 1NT). Several panelists even mentioned it was short of the values for redouble. But that is often what makes a good MSC problem: right on shape or some other aspect, short values or expected length.
I did like the flexibility of redouble, as did four of our participants. Kudos to our redoublers: Wackojack, Draculea, Curls77, and Toasterln.
PROBLEM E: 1 !D ; 2 !H . Another majority.
Larry Cohen summarized his thinking: “1 !D ; 2 !H . Not thrilled with having only three hearts, but showing strength with the red suits most closely describes the hand.”
Berkowitz added: “Holding only three heats is no problem, because we will always reach spades should partner raise hearts.”
PROBLEM F: 2 !H . Almost a majority. There were only three options chosen by the panel; 2 !H , Double, and 3 !H .
The “slow” 2 !H won the day.
• Woolsey: “Two hearts. Go slowly.”
• Cohen: “Two hearts. The fun has just begun.”
• Rodwell: “Two hearts. See what develops.”
Hoki and GG_Bridge were our only participants to nail this problem.
PROBLEM G: 2NT. This was close. 2 !D was only one vote back and Pass! close behind that.
Woolsey: “Two Notrump. The right value bid. Our most likely game is three notrump, and if partner is minimal and passes, two notrump is probably right.”
Zia: “Two notrump. I would like to bid two diamonds, but then I would need to bid three notrump over three clubs.”
PROBLEM H: !D A. The runway winner, garnering a majority. Why?
Michael Rosenberg summed it up best with: “Diamond Ace. A gamble on the diamond king’s being somewhere other than in declarer’s hand. I hope that the sight of dummy will help me know what to do next.”
And Cohen, only somewhat jokingly: “Diamond Ace. To see what I should have led.”
The !S 2 and !C Ace were next in receiving panel votes. And although the !D Ace was the majority choice, there were quite a few panelist who agreed with the pure guesswork involved with opening leads. So if you got this one right . . . GOOD GUESS!
-
Thank you Todd for a nice summary.
-
690 for me..
A. 2d 70
B. 3h 70
C..3h 100
D. P 70
E. b1 100
F. X 80
G.2n 100
H.dA 100
----------
690