My
Bridge World arrived so I've added some panel opinions below.
The director for October was Kit Woolsey.
A few snippets from the panel:
PROBLEM A: Pass was the majority panel choice. Our IAC forum solvers were pretty much in line with the panel vote for Pass. Danny Kleinman stated it best with, “Not expecting to be able to run clubs, I don’t like my prospects for nine tricks quickly enough to make three notrump; so, with two ace I’ll hope for a moderate penalty, trusting North to have ample high cards.”
Kit summarized with, “One of the problems with bidding anything is that even if there is a better spot than defending against three diamonds doubled, we might not find it. That is often a good reason to pass a takeout double of a preempt when there is no attractive alternative.”
PROBLEM B: 5
. This was a landslide majority. Kit started off with, “The obvious five-diamond bid speaks for itself,” later asking, “What’s the problem?”
Darn it! Not so “obvious” to me.
Kit’s words pretty much summarized everyone else’s. But Bobby Wolff quipped, “I love two-suiters, especially when both suits are only one.” Yup! 😊
PROBLEM C: 2NT. Although 2NT was the plurality panel choice (as well as the IAC forum), there was plenty of dissention on this one. Kit states, “Yes, the singleton club is the big flaw. A five-four heart fit can be located, and three-notrump might be better than a five-three heart fit. However, if West leads a club and partner doesn’t have the suit well-stopped, nothing will save the notrumpers.”
PROBLEM D: 2
. The runaway panel choice, receiving 19 of 27 votes.
I went with 1NT after long contemplation. A flip of the coin, which did not pan out as planned.
Kit: “It is true that South has a great heart holding for notrump. Otherwise though, there is nothing about the hand that looks like notrump. A singleton. A broken six-card suit that will take time and entries to establish. If this is a part-score deal, diamonds figures to play a lot better than notrump.”
PROBLEM E: 2
. Universally considered a
game-force, which was part of our forum discussion. Maybe I'm wrong but, I'm not sure that everyone on our forum understood the GF nature of this bid, so this was a good "what means what" moment.
Kit: Opining about 2
, “I don’t get it, isn’t that game-forcing?” (Kit obviously disagreed with the GF strength evaluation by bidding 2NT).
Karen McCallum: “A slight overbid (game-forcing), but this is our best shot at reaching the right strain.
Zia: “Confucius: better to overbid a little than underbid a lot.”
There were several other 2
bidders who slipped in comments alluding to the fact that it was a mild overbid, but the flexibility (also expressed by some of our forum) made up for the mild over-evaluation.
PROBLEM F: Double | Double. A wide variance on this one, which makes sense since it was a two-parter.
Kokish (with Bramley, Berkowitz, and Robinson) believed the Double | Double route to be the most flexible. Kit disagreed stating, “Double then double may seem more flexible, but that is an illusion. Unless partner happens to have an unlikely spade stack, how will he know whether or not to pass? . . . Bidding five diamonds may leave only two options, but these are likely to be the right ones.”
PROBLEM G: 3
. Kit summarized with, “If the choice were between pass and five clubs, I would agree that bidding is the percentage action. But there are other options. As long as South makes a forcing bid, five clubs won’t run away. (Exactly!) Three-notrump or even five diamonds might be the best game. Probing does little damage. . . . It must be better to try to find the best game . . . .
PROBLEM H: LOW
. A low
received 10 panel votes, a low
received 9. Close – hence the close scores of 100 and 90 respectively.
There was wide agreement that dummy showed a 4=3=1=5 with roughly 16 HCP.
Although there were a few who chose the
King, Karen McCallum voiced the negatives for that lead best with, “Partner probably has five hearts but not enough strength to establish and run the suit, even if the hearts are strong.” Kokish, however, had other ideas, choosing the
K with the following, “Likely to be productive to lead North’s five-card suit rather than to guess which black suit card will
not concede a trick.” Good point!
That's all folks! Attempting to reproduce all the panel responses would take forever, however, if you have a question about a particular problem and how the panel voted, just ask.