This is a hard month, in many ways . . . SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 2 Clubs
If I double first, I expect to hear hearts. Then what?
If I were playing Ghestem, I’d use it, bidding 2
to show the blacks. Lacking that, the best way to show my hand is to bid my suits. I’ll start with my longest suit and pray it does not get passed out. If I later introduce the spades, my partner will be better informed.
I expect double to be the runaway solver choice.
PROBLEM B: Double
Having only two spades is ugly, and a flaw. Change the club honor to the queen and Bob Hamman would be whispering in my ear, “3NT—do it!” But I’m not brave enough with only
Jx. A double seems flexible.
3
is a close second choice.
PROBLEM C: 2 Hearts
WTP?
PROBLEM D: 1 Notrump
Obviously intending to show a weak hand with two (or three like here) hearts. Since my HCP are in spades, it is less likely that LHO will compete in spades if I pass. The advantage of bidding something—even 1NT—is that it removes the one-level from the opponents arsenal. Coincidentally, so does the constructive 2
response. (Remember the “seemingly normal” 3
preempt from last month?) Sometimes, the risk involved with making a bid—
despite the system—is outweighed by the effect it has on the auction.
This is my "woop-woop" out there bid this month. Not too crazy, though.
PROBLEM E: 3 Hearts
I want to keep 3NT in the picture and also include partner in the decision. One way to do that would be to just bid it. I've seen other problems like this where the panel does it without blinking. "Stopper? We don't need no stinking stopper!"
At IMPs, I would be
far more inclined to take a rosy view and bid 4
, willing to bail out in 5
if we can’t find a slam. If I had a singleton somewhere this would be an easy 4
.
This looks like one of those hands where Kokish and Kit trot out 3NT.
PROBLEM F: 3 Notrump
Not going to splinter a stiff King. A wee bit too strong for 4S. I do have some defense, and this is preemptive. Seems a fair description.
We had a not completely dissimilar MSC hand a year ago. It was 6=6=0=1
KQJTxx
xxxxxx
-
x
This 3NT treatment was mentioned then, and, not surprisingly, not one panelist chose it. But the 2nd place bid (just behind the practical leap to 4
) was a Jacoby 2NT! I mention this only to raise the possibilty of a J2NT response now. I will not do it because the hand a year ago, while having only six HCP, had more potential. This hand has the requisite spade length for the preemptive aspect of the 3NT response with juuuuuuust enough defense on the side to fulfill the “some defense” definition of this jump. I’ve seen this treatment described and defined elsewhere (though I can’t recall where) and the hand looked almost exactly like this one.
I think there will be a fair number of panelists who dislike this treatment and will choose the straightforward leap to game.
But as I wrote above, 3NT is a fair description.
PROBLEM G: Pass
Going with pass. Reluctantly.
Double has merit.
PROBLEM H: Club 3
I hate lead problems.
The
A occurred to me, hoping for ruffs. But that seems too speculative.
I think the
A will be the popular solver choice, but I’m hoping the panel chooses the trump lead to cut down on ruffs by declarer, hoping to beat the contract with sheer power.
I hate lead problems. Did I say that?