Initial Guesses:
PROBLEM A: 2
. Several choices are possible.
• 1NT with a flat 10 is right on values but lacking the (usually) promised stopper is flawed.
• A double is flexible, and although rare, a negative double, even with only three hearts, should include this shape as possible when no better response is possible.
• 2
is also possible. As a passed hand I’m limited to 12 at most but show a minimum of 10. I have 10, but the hand is so flat it’s more like 9—plus, it’s my belief that a 2
bid should show 5+ card suit.
• That leaves 2
(support with support) which is only mildly flawed. I would prefer a fourth
but you can’t have everything.
PROBLEM B: Dbl . Every time I pay heed to the little *BWS blurbs I regret it. I don’t quite get the 4NT = “takeout” choice of terminology. It feels like more of an “Unusual” 4NT to me. Looking at both minors, “Unusual” 4NT looks like a good description, at least shape-wise. Regardless, at Matchpoints 4NT is a bit rich for me.
No, I can’t make myself bid 3NT.
Additional thoughts: Over 2
partner had the opportunity to bid 3
to show a two-suited hand with
and a minor. (Yes, it’s Michaels-See Aug. 2018 MSC.) With a strong single-suited
hand partner could have overcalled 3
or 4
(both strong) so he does not have that hand. Therefore, partner almost surely has the classic three-suited takeout. Also, with LHO showing six
and RHO showing three, the location of two hearts is unknown. Does partner have them?
Finally, WHERE ARE THE SPADES? I have a hard time believing they are 4-4-4 around the table. I fully understand partner not overcalling with 2
with only five spades, especially if the suit has gaps. So I think that to be most likely. Partner’s layout is possibly/probably 5=1 (43).
Bidding either of my minors at 4-level is the weakest move I can make. At the moment that’s where I’m leaning.
[Added]:
Changed my mind on this one. I'm still worried that 4NT is too much. And I feel strongly that partner probably has five spades. So 4-3 in the minors is also likely. To convey the message that either minor is fine, I double (responsive), then pull partner's 3 to 4 , asking partner to pass or correct. With appropriate extras partner can bid game. This one "feels" right.PROBLEM C: 2
. Coin flip with 1NT. While 1NT narrows my point range, 2
shows a suit and good lead director. If partner invites with 2NT I’ll bid game.
PROBLEM D: 3
. Shows nine of my cards, rather than just six. I hate this call and may change this one.
[Added]:
I'll stick with 3 (for the reason stated above) which is what I would bid at the table. It's descriptive, so should not fare poorly. But I fear that double may be the winning call here. PROBLEM E: 2NT. [Added]:
Jack-third is a stopper in 2019, yes? Changed my mind here. Going low. Admittedly timid when vulnerable at IMPs. 2
.
Flexible. 1 could be up to 17 or a bad 18. Queen-third in is nice help for what presumably (hopefully?) is a five-card suit. PROBLEM F: Pass. [Added]
This was a coin flip to begin with. It landed on tails.2 . BAM scoring. Who knows? Anything could be right, even Pass, which is my second choice.PROBLEM G: 3
. Although a stiff, the
K is a great filler for partner’s suit. While tempting to bid game, partner could have as little as ATxxxx or AJxxxx. Partner has already shown his range, so this invite should request he bid game if at the top of that range.
[Added]:
I keep contemplating some level of NoTrump (Prefer 2NT), but worry about entries. So I think I'll stick with the mildly esoteric raise with a stiff.PROBLEM H:
T. Alternatively, the
Jack. No strong feelings. I could be convinced otherwise.
A couple of these I have zero confidence in, so may change one or two after I look again.