I'm working on it, but i am stuck with the first one.
An observation on problem A:
Tpdd notes "Plus, in this auction, Leaping Michaels should apply"
I wasn't sure so I checked BWS.
I first found, under special situation defenses, Against a natural preempt:
(c) A strength-showing jump in a new suit is natural, except when the jump is to four of a minor, which is forcing and shows that minor and the unbid major.
But this auction did not start with a pereempt.
Later, under "actions in the sandwich position"
When the opponents raise a one-bid to two, there are no special system agreements other than those listed here:
(a) a cue-bid shows majors over a minor, unbid major plus unspecified minor over a major;
So, if I understand correctly, BWS plays (2
) - 4
as hearts and diamonds but after (1
) - Pass - (2
) then 2
shows hearts and a minor. Presumably jumping to 4
is natural.
Of course a pair need not play BWS but one thing this thread can do is to prompt partners to discuss whether they do or do not play Leaping Michaels in this position. I am sure there are arguments for and against, so it's just a matter of choosing. Or, in the case of a BWS quiz, accepting whatever BWS says, as long as it is clear.
Back to problem A.
With the right cards in partner's hand we might make 6
, otoh with bad luck we could go down in 4
. Moreover, I have no idea how many tricks they can take playing in spades or maybe clubs. It's tempting to go with the old joke: "What do you call a seven card suit?" "Trump".
How about 4
: At the table, I often, maybe too often, take the view that it is impossible to discover all that I need to know so I will simply take an action that has a decent chance of being right.
But before doing that, I need to ask myself what I will do next, assuming there is a next.
Lho bids 4
, passed back to me. I bid 5
? I think I must.
Lho bids 4
, partner doubles, passed back to me. I pull? Yes, again I think I must. I hope pard did not mull the X so long that I am forbidden to pull.
Lho doubles, partner passes, Rho pulls the double to 4
. I dunno, probably I sit for this.
I could try a risk 3
. Risky because chances are good that I will make 4. But with this much shape they will (famous last words) probably contest with 3
. Then I bid 4
, after which I can let partner make all further choices.
3
seems to risky, 5
seems to unilateral, 3
doesn't do justice to the fact that the hearts are so much better than the diamonds.
So at the table I am pretty sure that I would just bid 4
and I am thinking of sticking with that for the contest as well.
Joe: I like to acknowledge what I believe I would have done at the table, but I see this quiz format as a chance to think through whether I really, upon reflection, think my initial instincts are good. In hand A I would be unsure at the table but probably bid 4
, and after thinking about it I am still unsure but probably I will still bid 4
.
I'll move on to B this afternoon.
This can all be time consuming so it has been years since I have done quizzes like this. But I do think that they are useful, and I especially like having the interchange of thoughts.