IAC Forums
Chew the Fat! => IAC & Master Solvers Club => Topic started by: Masse24 on December 22, 2019, 03:10:24 AM
-
FEBRUARY 2020 MSC
Deadline: January 10 at 9:00 a.m. (ET)
Submit your February 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.
IAC Forum MSC Scores (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1whamPj4_SDF3cbYUdGL9dpMX23tpwzUJzUvNoVmip_w/edit?usp=sharing)
* * *
PROBLEM A: IMPs
North-South Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S AKJ973 !H — !D 972 !C AKT8
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| 1 !S | Pass | 1NT | 2 !D |
| ??* | | | |
*BWS: Double = Takeout
What call do you make?
PROBLEM B: IMPs
East-West Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S AK5 !H 2 !D AK9642 !C A43
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| 1 !D | Pass | 1 !H | Pass |
| ?? | | | |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM C: IMPs
Both sides vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S 2 !H AQ42 !D AKJ !C Q7532
Which of these plans do you prefer?
(a) 1 !C - (Pass) - 1 !S - (Pass) -?
(a1) 1 NT (a2) 2 !D (a3) 2 !H (a4) 2 NT
(b) 1 !D (c) 1 !H (d) 1 NT
PROBLEM D: Matchpoints
Both Sides Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S — !H AQT5 !D J873 !C AQJ63
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 1 !H |
| ?? | | | |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM E: Matchpoints
Neither side Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S J !H AT754 !D 642 !C A963
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | 1 !S | Pass |
| 1NT | Pass | 2 !D | Pass |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM F:Matchpoints
East-West Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S Aj83 !H 53 !D Q63 !C A932
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | 1 !D | Pass | 1 !H |
| Pass | 1 !S | Dbl* | Pass |
*BWS: Strong hand – length in diamonds
What call do you make?
PROBLEM G: IMPs
Neither Side Vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S AKJ5 !H 9 !D Q8 !C AKT843
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | 1 !S | Pass | 1NT |
| 2 !C | 2 !H | Pass | Pass |
What call do you make?
PROBLEM H: IMPs
East-West vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S T54 !H Q987 !D T76 !C J73
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 1 !D |
| Pass | 1 !S | Pass | 2NT |
| Pass | 6NT | All Pass | |
What is your opening lead?
Good luck everyone!
-
I'll get the ball rolling with a problem that to me is a no-brainer. [Added] Upon further review, I shouldn't call it a no-brainer. There are several bad choices--and no good ones.
PROBLEM C:
I choose (a3) which is to open 1 !C and reverse to 2 !H . As distasteful as the !C suit is for a hand I intend to reverse with, the other choices do not appeal to me. Generally, for marginal reverses, I prefer that my strength be in my long suits, which is a better description of the hand. So this is a mild distortion (one lie). However, it's a good description of my general strength, it conveys my shape accurately, and gives us the best chance of finding the right strain.
My second choice would be to open 1 !C and rebid 2NT (two lies).
[Added] It's IMPs and we're vulnerable. That alone suggests aggression, so 1 !C - 1 !S - 1NT (showing 12-14) would be criminal.
What about 1 !C - 1 !S - 2 !D ? It's still a reverse. Why manufacture a reverse into a three card suit (sometimes necessary) when there is a perfectly good four card suit? I do not understand this as a possible answer.
The reverse to 2 !H ? Discussed above. Currently the runaway winner of those who have submitted--and for good reason.
What about 1 !C - 1 !S - 2NT? Initially my second choice. Still is. But I am taking a much closer look at this. It obviously falls outside the shape requirements because of the stiff. But the range is very close. The KnR for this hand is 17.05 (http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=3+aq42+akj+q7532), so it's close to the 18 a 2NT rebid promises. This one is looking more and more attractive to me:
1) I know spades are covered, or at least hope they are.
2) The point range is close. Very close.
3) The club suit looks more no-trumpy once partner responded with one spade.
4) Half my strength is in a short suit, which is code for "bid notrump."
Opening 1 !D ? Why? What's the point? I don't get this one either.
Open 1 !H? Not for me, but this one actually has merit. Maybe in third seat, but not first.
Finally, what about opening 1NT? Okay, it's in range, 15-17. But a stiff 2? Nope.
Still one day to decide. But I am teetering on the edge on this one. It's close
Happy New Year!
-
Firstly, "AMEN" to Masse24's every thought on problem C.
Secondly, it seems that a LOT of my simple-minded first thoughts will probably be my final answer! Like all 7 of the bidding problems! This has never happened.
A:>> 2 spades. not stretching to jump with diamond xxx.
B:>> 3!D In 1980 I inherited a giant stack of Bridge Worlds, and soon noticed this version of their Death Hand coming up every other month or so. I got my 3 regular pards to agree that 2!S rebid showed THIS HAND more or less [ie: strength in spades in a jump-rebid hand]. and we seldom regretted it. But we cant bid that in the MSC can we.
C:>> (a3) see masse's above
D:>> pass This hand GOES WITH problem F , doesn't it
E:>> 2NT good nine pretending to be eleven.
F:>> 2!S note informs us that pard may very well have hand D, so I have no excuse to dog it now, and no need to GUESS which major he is lame in,either.
G:>> double
H:>> 4th-down heart.
-
Initial thoughts:
Problem A: 3 !C This is a really nice 6-4 which includes 15 HCPs and a void. The only problem is the void is not in the opponent’s suit. Other possibilities for me include 2 !S, 3 b!S and pass (to see what partner might have to say. Of those, pass scares me the most because I think we still need to compete on this hand.
Problem B: 3 !D I hate this sort of holding, do not want to rebid 2NT with a stiff in partner’s suit, afraid that we are missing a laydown 3NT if I rebid 3 !D and it goes floating away because partner did not have the spades covered and did not have enough heart length to rebid. Particularly with aces and kings, I feel this is too rich for a 3 !D, but not anxious to jump shift into a 3-card suit. I feel stuck.
Problem C: a(3) It almost feels like a 4-4-4-1 hand because the diamonds are so beefy and the clubs so anemic. Still, length is length, and I almost have the points to justify, so I will not distort my shape.
Problem D: 2 !C Can’t double, don’t want to treat this as a trap pass, and too strong to ignore.
Problem E: Pass Another MSC hand I hate. I am torn between pass, 2NT and 2 !H. All are flawed. At least with diamonds no one has doubled for penalty yet. I am hoping for a 4-3/5-3 fit; there may be something better, but there is risk attached. When I smell a misfit, I try to escape early.
Problem F: 2NT Although the vulnerability is right, the level is not for passing a penalty double. I suspect that there may be a cross ruff for 7-8 tricks. I’m not sure what BWS considers to be “a strong hand” on this auction, so I will just invite. I think partner is short in spades, and has something undisclosed in hearts, so I think we are safe in 2NT and have potential to be making 3NT.
Problem G: Dbl Another bid I am not happy with, but I do have the requisite !H shortness. If partner does not have a penalty pass, perhaps there will be a cue bid and I will show my spade stop, or enough diamonds that I will not be displeased that I passed. Double is more flexible than rebidding my clubs, or cue bidding hearts; let’s bring partner into the discussion.
Problem H: !H 7 I don’t like any of my options all that well. Should I try my long suit, or try to figure out which shorter suit will hit gold? I hate leading my long suit without some promise of a later entry, but this time there are multiple cards that might pan out as being useful in partner’s hand.
Some of these I feel more certain of than others to make my ballot before the 10th.
-
FEBRUARY GUESSES:
PROBLEM A: 3 !C . Too much to pass and wait. I prefer 3 !C because it communicates that I have extras, shows nine of my cards rather than the six a spade rebid accomplishes, and denies four hearts. A pretty fair description of my hand.
PROBLEM B: 1 !S . This hand is big. Far too strong to make a non-forcing 3 !D rebid, where I may languish should partner choose to pass. The only forcing rebid, 3 !C , feels wrong with only three cards. With a long, strong major to retreat to I would feel more comfortable with a “fake-suit” jump-shift. Not here. So I am left with an esoteric but temporizing 1 !S . It has a huge problem; it’s not forcing! I see this as a transfer of sorts, delaying the pain of a decision until next round of bidding. I hope there is a next round of bidding.
PROBLEM C: (a3) 1 !C | 2 !H . As distasteful as the !C suit is for a hand I intend to reverse with, the other choices do not appeal to me. Generally, for marginal reverses, I prefer that my strength be in my long suits, which is a better description of the hand. So this is a mild distortion (one lie). However, it's a good description of my general strength, it conveys my shape accurately, and gives us the best chance of finding the right strain.
My second choice would be to open 1 !C and rebid 2NT (two lies).
PROBLEM D: 2 !C . Bid what I have. Not treating this as a two-suiter. With a !S void the auction is not over, so I should get another opportunity to introduce my !H suit, if appropriate.
PROBLEM E: 2 !H . Yes, I’m short a heart. I’m open to suggestions.
Second choice is Pass (yuck!).
PROBLEM F: 2NT. Really just a guess. East has few values and is short in diamonds. Partner and East have a minimum of eight hearts between them, maybe more, so partner hopefully has hearts stopped.
[Added] Because opener must have at least four diamonds (he did not support responder), East probably has at most a stiff diamond. East probably also has almost no values. Maybe 5 HCP or so? Something like !S xxx !H KQxxx !D x !C xxxx ? Do we have game?
I think Pass will be a popular solver choice as well as a viable choice for the BWS panel. But I think I stick with my 2NT.
Hardest of the set so far. This one may change . . .
PROBLEM G: 3 !C . Partner has very little, only a few HCP. For this reason a double, while seemingly flexible, is not on my radar. I’ll bid what I have, more clubs.
Second choice (I think it’s close) is pass.
PROBLEM H: !S T. [Added] See my comments downthread. I'm now set on a spade lead. I like the ten best. Small (the 4) is also okay. But I like the ten.
Second choice: !H 7. No particular reason. This looks quite normal, standard, and boring.
Second Third choice is the !C J.
Still some time before I must commit. I feel good enough about most of these to just go with it, but a couple (like the lead problem) are a complete guess and I may change my mind.
-
FEBRUARY GUESSES:
Yes - "guess" is the right word and I could easily be swayed to changing any of my guesses. There is hardly a single problem that can be solved by referring to the books.
PROBLEM A: 3 !C because it communicates .. extras, shows nine of my cards ..
If partner's values are in hearts I'm happy to stop at the two level. It's only a 15-count and if partner has only six there is no guarantee that we're going to be safe at the three level.
PROBLEM B: 1 !S .
My choice of 3♦ allows us to bow out if partner responded on a subminimum hand and five hearts, in which case we could be playing 1♠ on a 3-3 fit.
PROBLEM C: (a3) 1 !C | 2 !H .
Me too - but I might have been tempted by an option that was not even available, namely rebidding 2♣.
PROBLEM D: 2 !C .
Agree.
PROBLEM E: 2 !H . Yes, I’m short a heart. I’m open to suggestions.
Agree.
PROBLEM F: 2NT. Really just a guess. East has few values and is short in diamonds. Partner and East have a minimum of eight hearts between them, maybe more, so partner hopefully has hearts stopped.
1NT - but same reasoning.
PROBLEM G: 3 !C .
Agree - except that I don't think it's that close.
PROBLEM H: !H 7. No particular reason. This looks quite normal, standard, and boring.
All good reasons for not choosing a heart. I hate lead problems, especially at IMPs because
huge swings could result from an unlucky choice. I'm too scared to admit what my answer is
but am willing to gloat later if it turns out to be the winner. :D
-
Thank you Hoki for sharing your thoughts.
I was disappointed with your response to Problem H.
All good reasons for not choosing a heart. I hate lead problems, especially at IMPs because
huge swings could result from an unlucky choice. I'm too scared to admit what my answer is
but am willing to gloat later if it turns out to be the winner. :D
I really would like to know what your choice is, and why you would make that selection. I am with both you and Todd that the !H 7 is "normal, standard and boring," but am at a loss for a better choice. Even if I disagree with your choice and reasoning, it may help me re-evaluate other possibilities. Please reconsider your decision to not share this one time.
-
I have been busy and just opened the Jan BW today. I will get moving on it. But I did note the above discussion about H.
I think that a small heart is anything but boring. I don't know if a heart lead is right or not but often the recommended lead against 6NT is a passive lead. Against a small slam in a suit active, against 6NT passive.
I suppose the hands are pretty flat. Dummy will hit with four or maybe five spades, but at most three hearts: If dummy had four hearts then, if he had five spades he probably would have checked back. With a flat 15 count and five spades and three hearts he might, emphasis on might, just bid 6NT w/o checking back. With 5-4 I expect him to check back. With 4-4 I assume his first bid would be 1H. So it is impossible that dummy will hit with four hearts. If the hearts are AJx opposite Kxx this heart lead will not be good. It's true that if the AJx are in the dummy then he can take the finesse anyway, but still I have given him one less ting to worry about, and if the AJx are in his hand he will kiss me.
A reasonable guess is that there are 18 points on my right,15 on my left. Could be a little more, and maybe someone is an optimist and it is a little less. But pard seems to have about four points. Even if he has the heart K it is not so clear that I have done a good thing with this heart lead. Maybe my 9 will then be of use, maybe not.
And yes, I could lead the !H 9. If the T is on the dummy and pard has the J, that will be nice. But usually this ill not work well, I think.
Often we must decide on active or passive. Often passive is recommended against 6NT. Is this an exception? Maybe. Also maybe not.
I generally find lead problems very difficult. This is true here. Leading a club might give away nothing. Maybe pard has T9xx. Maybe T8xx suffices.
-
Here we go again .. I almost didn't submit these publicly when I read everyone else's thoughts (which is why I send in my answers before reading the comments)
PROBLEM A: 4 Spades - Just feels right.
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump - I'll take a chance and show my strength.
PROBLEM C: (a3) - Partner could still have 4 hearts, and 1NT understates my hand, 2NT overstates ..
PROBLEM D: 2 Notrump - I know I only have 4 hearts, but if I bid Clubs and partner comes back with spades - I'm stuck. My hearts are good, so I'll risk it.
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts - Partner could only have 3D, so it's better to risk a 5/2 fit in hearts.
PROBLEM F: 3 Clubs - Only bid I have.
PROBLEM G: Pass - This looks like a hand where I've gotten in trouble in the past by rebidding my clubs, only to find that partner has 1 club no points, and one opp has 5 clubs.
PROBLEM H: Heart 7
-
PROBLEM H: IMPs
East-West vulnerable
You, South, hold:
!S T54 !H Q987 !D T76 !C J73
| SOUTH | WEST | NORTH | EAST |
| — | — | — | 1 !D |
| Pass | 1 !S | Pass | 2NT |
| Pass | 6NT | All Pass | |
What is your opening lead?
I can easily imagine a spade lead being the panel's choice. No Checkback Stayman, the length (strength, too?) on my left. Partner has a minimum of three spades, maybe more. If a spade, so as not to confuse partner's count, the ten would be my choice.
This is a strong possibility!
-
I am not fond of any spade lead. It's fairly likely declarer will want to develop tricks in spades and my leading them might help him do it. I haven't constructed a layout, but it should not be too difficult to arrange the cards so that he can develop only three tricks on his own but he can get four if I lead them.
I am getting more inclined to a heart. What I would like is to find a suit in which declarer is 3-3, hoping that he already has three tricks and so I am not giving anything away. Declarer has opened 1 !D and then rebid 2NT. He could have four hearts, he could have four clubs, either one of these to go with his four diamonds. Of course he could have five diamonds, but I am not going to dwell on that.
I am thinking that if declarer has four hearts my lead might still not cost a trick because of my 9. Say pard has the J, and declarer has the T.
Still, it could get tricky. Give dummy ATx and declarer Kyz. So pard has Juv. I lead the 7, declarer plays x from dummy, I had better hope partner can manage to play u or v rather than J, else declarer gets three tricks where he should have gotten only two.
This seems to me to be a hand where 12 tricks might not be obvious to declarer and we very much want to not help him.
-
Based on Ken's argument, I am looking for a 3-3 fit with sure winners:
1. the heart is out because of the queen,
2. the spade is out because lefty has four, and
3. a diamond should be out because in BWS, there is a tendency (Walsh style) to open diamonds with four except if holding specifically 4-4-3-2.
So that leaves a club as my best opportunity of finding a 3-3. If I truly hit the magical 3-3 with sure tricks, then it doesn't matter which club I lead, but if it does, my spots are such that J may be a better choice than small.
Now all I have to do is decide whether I agree with Ken's argument.
-
Yes, and I also have to decide if I agree with my argument!
One thought. We lead fourth best against 3NT with the idea that repeated leads of that suit might establish the fourth card as a winner. Against 6NT we are rarely planning on establishing the fourth best card. It follows that we might adjust lead conventions.
That thinking could apply in the heart suit. If I am going to lead a heart there is something to be said for the 9 instead of the 7. The main argument against the 9 is that partner, if he takes it as a standard lead, will never imaging that I have the Q. No doubt there have been discussions in the literature about such matters, but I have not seen it.
Here is how I am thinking: Suppose I lead the 7, dummy comes down with AT5, partner holds I63. Switch around the spots however you like, they don't matter. Declarer calls for the 6 from dummy. What is partner to think? He will perhaps feel he cannot play small and let declarer hypothetically win with the 9, when I have led from KQ87. Of course if he is holding a four count he might, if he sees a 15 count in dummy and figures declarer for an 18 count, realize I cannot have a 5 count. Or he might, very reasonably I think, decide that I would not be leading small from KQ87 with anb advertised 18 count on my right. It's true, I probably would not. So maybe he will get it right and just play small.
I have a couple of books on leads. I might take a look and see if they have anything to say about modification of standard leads against 6NT contracts. It seem worthy of thought.
These MSC problems are fun. In a weird way.
-
These MSC problems are fun. In a weird way.
You're a sick man, Ken Berg! LOL ;D
-
I think the sickness may have come from Uncle Willie Wilson, Marge was just too nice.
And I have also been struggling with the 9 vs 7 lead if I go with hearts. When I made my initial guesses, I believe I went with the 7 because it would likely be easier to interpret it as a 4th best lead, than the 9 being the top of an interior sequence. The 10 would have been so much easier to think interior sequence than the 9.
What it comes down to is - I think I need a peek at the opps hands for this one. However, I have seen enough double dummy would you rather defend or declare hands to know that this could actually be one of those too - lol.
-
These MSC problems are fun. In a weird way.
You're a sick man, Ken Berg! LOL ;D
Appreciation of the weird is the key to a happy life!
Anyway, I did a little browsing in the books. I can't say it was very productive, but I did find a hand in a 1970 book by Robert Ewen, pp135-136:
!S Q863
!H K74
!D 853
!C J74
The auction is 1NT-4NT-6NT, again an auction where we expect balanced hands totally very close to 33 highs. The recommended lead is the !D 8.
This is a little different of course. With a 6 count we expect partner to hold at most a J.
There was a similar hand in Lawrence's book on opening leads. The person on lead held a 7 count and the auction suggested balanced hands. In these cases we know partner is broke or close enough to broke.
Most of the lead problems , against slams, that I found in books were against suit slams. That's a different situation entirely. But what I did find on leads against balanced 6NT slams recommended leading passively, perhaps acknowledging exceptions.
I don't think Ewen is involved in bridge anymore. Here is something that shows books he has written:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS873US873&q=robert+b+ewen+books&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LSz9U3MC1PM44v0ZLKTrbST8rPz9ZPLC3JyC-yArGLFfLzcioXsQoX5SelFpUoJCmklqfmKYClAK4osblAAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj06LiLyu_mAhVqmeAKHQ6eBzMQ44YBKAIwDXoECAwQCA&biw=1353&bih=667
-
Your solutions have been received. This copy is for your records.
SOLVER: Babs Giesbrecht
Qualicum Beach BC
Canada
Your Solutions for the February 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: Pass
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Spade 4
-
I was disappointed with your response to Problem H.
other possibilities. Please reconsider your decision to not share this one time.
The ♠5 - and I never said I had a good reason for this lead. I shall be the first
to admit it was crazy if it turns out that a spade lead is going to help declarer
set up the 12th trick. I'm a bit worried that a heart lead will help declarer in
that suit. No one ever said that opening leads are a science. Thanks for
challenging me on the suppression of my answer. ;)
-
I did it. stuck with my day-one impressions all the way through. except for thelead problem which i misread ( low heart is for GAME bid--very silly vs point-count NT slam bid).
problem F i should have switched to 2NT rather than the "cue-bid" as my spade holding may need lead protection more than partner's hearts do, but who knows, we may be headed for somewhere else than 2 or 3 notrump?
SOLUTIONS FOR jock mcQuadeportland ORU.S.A
.PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: Pass
PROBLEM E: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Club 3[
-
Here’s a view from the cheap seats.
A. 2S/3S. 1N is semi-forcing, but we are vulnerable so N probably has 6+ HCP rather than being lighter. N could quite easily be 2x2x, so 3C could be a safe spot. However, with that distribution 3 or 4S could be on: lose 2D and 1S. If N is 1x3x, 3S might be ok on a good day – trumps 33 or 42 with N having the T). Having made a preliminary choice of 2S, am talking myself into a 3S bid.
B. 2N. When my p jump re-bids their opening suit I always think “16 (HCP) and 6 (c suit).” So, 3D might be passed. Under BWS a 1N rebid may include a singleton in p’s suit, so why not a 2N rebid? I might end up in 4H (or 6H) on a 6-1 fit; cue crossed fingers.
C. a3. Seems slightly less bad than the others. On a black-letter day, I might downgrade because of AKJ and weak clubs; then I would want (a5) 2C.
D. 2C. This looks like a part-score hand, unless W is a bust and N has 10/11 HCP, say. In that case, as N is likely to be short in H, should I pass and wait for a x; then bid 2N? But if N is a bust and W bids 1S or 1N on the way to 3S/4S or 2N/3N, N will never lead a C, no matter how hard I pray. Bidding 2C makes N’s life easier defending, and if N does have 10/11 I’ll get another bid.
E. Pass. If N has 3c H support, 2H looks a champion bid, but with 1 or 2 cards in H we might be left in 2N with a combined 21 HCP. Not a good idea if I am declaring. In 2D, I can offer 2 quick tricks and S ruffs. So 2N goes down but my p strolls to a plus score in 2D.
F. 2H. Just how strong is N’s hand?? EW are vulnerable, so probably hold a combined 17, which leaves N with 12. So, let’s not go mad. On the other hand, I am forced to bid and have the sort of hand (3+ card support – for D - and 9+ HCP) with which I would advance by making a UCB everyday, even after the cows are in the shed. But which bid as UCB – 2H or 2S? If there is a danger N takes the UCB bid as asking for a stop in that suit, 2H is better. E probably has a 2c S suit – with 3 or 4 E might have bid (xx or 2S respectively). So N may well have 3361 (maybe 3370). If N has a H stop, 3N looks none too shabby. Over 2H, if N has no decent H stop, 3D is a safe spot.
G. 3C. With 54 in the majors and non-vulnerable W could be a light opener and E evidently might be light too. That might mean N has 7 HCP with something like 25xx/24xx – possibly 35xx which would leave E (13xx) a thorn in the side in a C contract. Still, I can’t be passing this hand.
H. H7. W has 4 spades (with 5 a 3-level bid would have followed 2N) and 3- hearts (with 4 W would have responded 1H). E could be any of 2443/3343/2353/2344/3352/3253. That leaves N with 3 or 4S and on red-letter days, 3 or 4 hearts. So why not H7? N probably has a K or a J and Q, K or J in H and might be our best chance.
This is lots of anguish so early in January, and I suppose it’s not going to get any easier as 2020 rolls on. Happy New Year!?
Dick
-
low heart is for GAME bid--very silly vs point-count NT slam bid.
This is a very simple, clean assessment, Blu.
But correct, I think. So I steer clear of a heart lead. Let declarer find the queen.
-
It takes some courage to post my answers and share my thoughts here. I know pretty good players are around here.
Problem A: 3C. It shows my shape and strength.
Problem B: I see a few options: 3D. this hand is too strong to bid 3D.
3NT. It should show a long D suit with 16-19 hcp, the other suits stopped. But here, I feel the D suit is neither long enough (maybe one more D) nor solid enough(maybe one more J at least).
2NT. I don't really like. With all very good controls and a small singleton, I don't feel like showing a balanced hand.
1S. The problem with 1S is it's not forcing. But if partner can't make a rebid over 1S, we probably don't have anything anyway, because for me rebid 1S after 1D always shows a shapely hand, usually 5/4 in D/S (could be 4441), so even though with a very minimum response, my partner would probably make a 2D rebid with 3 cards. If he doesn't even have that, we probably don't have anything anyway. And 1S is flexible, with any of my partner's rebid, I can show my D again. But again the problem is 1S doesn't show my strength and probably hard to show such a good hand later after partner's rebid.
2S. It is a jump reverse, also lying about S suit, but I feel the lie can be expected more than 1S. I tend to make a lying jump reverse in this situation. And more importantly, it shows my strength. I go with this bid.
Probelm C: a3. I'm reluctant to make a reverse here, but life isn't perfect.
Problem D: 2C. I feel this is the only option if choose to make a bid.
Problem E: 2H. I don't want to pass risking partner having 3 cards D and I feel with 9 hcp I owe my partner a bid here.
Problem F: Pass. This one is a real headache for me. I decide to make a bold bid. Partner has Hearts for sure. My second option is 1NT.
Problem G: 3C. I don't see other options.
Problem H: S4. I tend to make a passive lead against 6NT.
-
Welcome MarilynLi.
In my mind, the most important piece to an exercise like this is the sit down and justify (at least in your own mind) why you have chosen a particular bid, and then have a a discussion among people you know and play with about options that you couldn't see, or the options you could see but dismissed for your own reasons. Finally, after the experts weigh in, see what was chosen by top players are the best choices, why they thought it was best, and most importantly, you can see when the experts tend to agree with one another and when their solutions are as scattered as the IAC contributors.
What I can say about your responses is that they look to be well thought out, and a nice addition to the discussion. Thank you and good luck!
-
I've pulled my trigger and am going with the following:
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
Fredericksburg VA
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM B: 1 Spade
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Spade 10
Before I go further, treat Ken Berg as my partner for this competition.
I changed a few from my initial guesses.
On B, I always felt that 3 !D was too weak of an action, and while I know 1 !S is nonforcing, it gives me the best chance of getting to the right spot. If partner has four and a weak hand, I am still happy to play this as a Moysian (taking one ruff in my hand, but unless partner is QJTx, I really don't want to do more. But if NT is right, partner can bid and probably right-side the contract, and I probably will get a chance to show my strength and diamond length.
On E, I was always tempted to bid the hearts, became enamored of getting out early. I was forgetting that I have 9 HCPs, mostly in aces. So I will make a weak 2 !H bid, and hope partner has the strength to make a game try that I will gladly accept.
On H, I behaved like Blu and was defending 3NT not the slam. Although I am intrigued by the idea of identifying where there may be a 3-3 solid fit, I think my better bet is to lead through presumed strength and hope to find partner with four (maybe even five) cards in the suit as well. So now I am leading a spade, but which one. I am guessing that I will find AKQx or AKJx for the leap to 6NT, so I am hoping to find partner with Jxxx(x) or Q9xx(x) - in the first case it doesn't matter much which spade I lead, but in the other, the 10 is an important card for partner to know about, so I may as well make it know from trick 1.
Anyway - good luck to all, I hope everyone makes the honor roll.
-
Welcome MarilynLi.
In my mind, the most important piece to an exercise like this is the sit down and justify (at least in your own mind) why you have chosen a particular bid, and then have a a discussion among people you know and play with about options that you couldn't see, or the options you could see but dismissed for your own reasons. Finally, after the experts weigh in, see what was chosen by top players are the best choices, why they thought it was best, and most importantly, you can see when the experts tend to agree with one another and when their solutions are as scattered as the IAC contributors.
What I can say about your responses is that they look to be well thought out, and a nice addition to the discussion. Thank you and good luck!
Thank you Jcreech!
Most of these problems are tough and some of them have no right or wrong answers--even the experts panel's votes split. But most importantly, what I like is to see how the experts think about the problems and the good points they make, that I missed. We all want to Think Like an Expert ;)
-
My solutions sent yesterday:
A 3 !C
B 3 !D
C a 3
D 2 !C
E 2NT
F 2NT
G 3 !C
H 10 !S
Wackojack
-
F. 2H. Just how strong is N’s hand??
Exactly!
Jim also asked this question, as I think we all did when reading the helpful BWS note.
Attempting to enlighten myself I went searching through BWS2017, but found only this: "A low-level delayed double by lurker after the opponents have bid three suits shows strength with length in the suit of the opening bid."
So not much help. Fortunately the MSC panel will be working under the same constraints. Except that they are world class, and have probably orchestrated such a double in their lifetimes. Me? Never. At least as far as I can recall. So it's a guess.
But . . .
I cannot imagine partner perpetrating such a call with a bunch of diamonds and 9 or 10 HCP. With that strength I don't see the need for it. So I will attribute partner with (and this is a bit of guesswork) an opening hand--or very close to it. Maybe a minimum of 11 or 12 HCP? Does that make sense? Hope so cuz that's my thinking.
Do I Pass . . . or stick with my first instinct and try 2NT?
This one is hard.
-
Here I come to collect my 1 monster point for participation! :P
A: 3C
B: 2N
C: a3
D: 2N if it is unusual, otherwise 2C
E: pass
F: 2N
G: 3C
H: h7
-
Some of my choices might be odd.
SOLVER: Kenneth Berg
Sykesville MD
U.S.A.
Your Solutions [comments added] for the February 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
This seems reasonable. I suppose partner has long hearts and too little strength to do otherwise. Since, after 1M, BWS says " a jump-shift to three of an underranking suit is invitational;" I suppose he does not have much. Still, 3C seems right.
PROBLEM B: 1 Spade
Often partner will not have four spades and then we will move on elsewhere. If partner does have four spades, it is very possible 4 !S is the right contract.
PROBLEM C: (a3)
This seems to be a popular choice. Often we read about how disciplined a reverse must be. The advocates for discipline then need to explain what else to do. Here, partner might well rebid 2S over 2H. BWS says "Opener's reverse after a one-notrump response is forcing. Opener's reverse after a one-level suit response is forcing and promises a rebid below game.". Over 2S I am forced, I don't mind, I bid 2NT. This seems like a decent start.
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
It would not occur to me to do anything else. I don't know what happens next, but 2C, for now, seems clear. Yes I would like to have a better five card suit or else a six card suit, but I am not passing.
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts
As has been noted, I should have a sixth heart. I don't. 2H might well end the auction, I don't mind.
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds
I have a good hand, partner is advertising a good hand with diamond length. How much length I don't know, but I can imagine a continuation that gets us to 3NT.
PROBLEM G: 2 Spades
Another choice that seems to be just me. Partner could be, say, 2=4=6=1. If instead I bid 3C I doubt he would pull 3C to 3D, he would figure he has one more club than he had shown so far, that I probably had six clubs or else a very good five for my 2C and have now gone on to 3C without encouragement, so he would leave it. But over 2S he will figure I have asked for his thoughts on the matter.
PROBLEM H: Heart 9
How about a small heart? Well, if partner has the K and plays it, declarer will take his ace. That heart K will be close to the last high card partner has, so probably declarer can take four spades in dummy, four diamonds in hand, the heart A and three clubs. Or maybe he will, after taking the heart A, lead a heart to the J on the board establishing the T in his hand. At any rate, if I play a small heart and partner produces the K I doubt we are actually beating 6NT. Better to play the 9 I think. If the dummy hits with the T, this might work well. If partner has Txx then the 9 was no worse than the 7. I really hope the experts talk a bit about fourth best leads against 6NT. Against 3NT we are trying to set up a card by repeated leads. We will not be having repeated leads against 6NT.
And I want to say, as I have before, that I think the MSC thread has been one enormous success.
-
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
This seems reasonable. I suppose partner has long hearts and too little strength to do otherwise. Since, after 1M, BWS says " a jump-shift to three of an underranking suit is invitational;" I suppose he does not have much. Still, 3C seems right.
I think maybe you misunderstand this jump-shift reference? I believe they are referring to a Bergenesque sequence? Something like:
1 !H - (P) - 3 !C or
1 !S - (P) - 3 !D
Or I am misunderstanding your post.
-
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
This seems reasonable. I suppose partner has long hearts and too little strength to do otherwise. Since, after 1M, BWS says " a jump-shift to three of an underranking suit is invitational;" I suppose he does not have much. Still, 3C seems right.
I think maybe you misunderstand this jump-shift reference? I believe they are referring to a Bergenesque sequence? Something like:
1 !H - (P) - 3 !C or
1 !S - (P) - 3 !D
Or I am misunderstanding your post.
No, you understand my post. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the BWS notes but I don't think so.
Here is what I get out of their statement: If we were not playing 2/1 then the auction 1S-2H-2S-3H would be passable. In Sayc, for example, the 2H promises another bid (unless opener bids game) but it is not game forcing. So, if responder has maybe an 11 count and six hearts, he bids 2H and then a passable 3H. Playing 2/1, that option is not available since 1S-2H-2S-3H is still forcing. Thus, with 11 points and six hearts, the auction goes 1S-3H, passable.
This agreement can be useful. In the case at hand, I have a stiff heart so there is a fair chance partner has six. He might not, but he very well could. If he does, then he lacked the strength to bid the invitational 3H on the first round.
I am pretty sure that BWS does not include Bergen raises. Not positive, but pretty sure. And even pairs who do play Bergen don't include 1S-3H as some sort of spade raise as far as I know.
So: I am thinking that after 1S -1NT I can assume that partner might have a five card heart suit with a 12 count, and he might have a six card suit with as much as a bad 10 count, but he will not have a 6 card suit with an 11 count. With that, he would have bid 3H, not 1NT (unless he also has three spades and was starting a three card invitational raise to 3S).
At any rate, my concern on the auction is that partner might have long hearts, not a great holding opposite my hand, so I was thinking thorugh just what sort of long heart holding he might have.
And I believe BWS plays 1M-3m in the same way. Long m, invitational values.
-
This agreement can be useful. In the case at hand, I have a stiff heart so there is a fair chance partner has six. He might not, but he very well could. If he does, then he lacked the strength to bid the invitational 3H on the first round.
I am pretty sure that BWS does not include Bergen raises. Not positive, but pretty sure. And even pairs who do play Bergen don't include 1S-3H as some sort of spade raise as far as I know.
And I believe BWS plays 1M-3m in the same way. Long m, invitational values.
I see. I was not reading into it what you did not say, or more specifically what was not bid --- 3 !H . :-[
-
Yes. What I said made sense to me, but then I can (sometimes) read my mind!
-
Feb. Master Solvers Club. Not confident of any of my answers....
A. 4C
B. 2nt
C a3
D. 2c
E. 2H
F. 2H
G. 3C
H. H9
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM B: 1 Spade
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Spade 10
Very hard. Again.
I feel good about one. Not so good about the other seven. Oh oh.
-
Wladislaus Dragwlya
Castrum Sex
Romania
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM F: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Spade 10
-
A hearty welom to our forum Marylin Li! your thoughts are beauties. Especially my hat is off to you for meaking the RIGHT bid on problem B, even though we will score 10 or 20 for it:( because a couple of the panelist will mention it, but choose 3D anyway:(
<quote>
" 2S. It is a jump reverse, also lying about S suit, but I feel the lie can be expected more than 1S. I tend to make a lying jump reverse in this situation. And more importantly, it shows my strength. I go with this bid."
also in awe of your leaving the trap double of one spade on # F ("Two to HIT; Four to SIT?). Bold indeed, and I wish your pair godspeed on your way to +500 or the matchpoint equivalent:):)
-
Well done DrAculea who made The Bridge World MSC Honor Roll this month!
| NAME | BW-SCORE | RANK | MPs |
| DrAculea | 690 | 1 | 30 |
| Jcreech | 660 | 2 | 15 |
| BabsG | 620 | 3 | 10 |
| MarilynLi | 620 | 3 | 10 |
| Masse24 | 620 | 3 | 10 |
| . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . |
|
Also participating and receiving 1 Monster Point are (alphabetically): BluBayou, ccr3, Curls77, DickHy, GGbridge, Hoki, KenBerg, MsPhola, WackoJack
We had a great turnout! Hopefully we can build on this in the coming months!
Commentary is still welcome for this set. :) There were some interesting problems, solutions, and choices by our members.
-
Congratulations to DrAculea, you have been a long time contributor and deserved the win and hitting the Honor Roll.
Congratulations also to first time contributor MarilynLi, who tied for third.
To show everyone how close things can be, if I had gone strictly with my initial impressions, I would have had 40 more and hit the Honor Roll myself. I won't blame anyone for suggesting different answers because in the end it still was my decision, but sometimes first thoughts are the best thoughts. You can overthink bridge problems, particularly in a contest situation.
I hope to see everyone back for next month, meanwhile, I am anxiously awaiting Todd's summary of this month's MSC. Too bad we always have to wait for the U.S. Postal Service to catch up.
-
For me, there is usually one problem that sticks out as a "What was I thinking?" once the answers are provided.
Mine this month is problem B, where in a fit of I don't know what, I chose to be "cutesy" with a non-forcing rebid of 1 !S . It was a lame attempt to "outsmart" the smart guys on the MSC panel. In that last two years of participating in the MSC I've pulled a cutesy bid three times. All ended miserably.
My belated New Year's resolution is . . . no more cutesy for me! ;)
-
I also bid 1 !S and I have not yet changed my mind. Do I really like a game forcing bid on A43 more than a non-forcing bid on AK9? The 1 !S is non-forcing but one of those seldom passed bids where I feel that anytime it is passed I might very well be happy that I only need 7 tricks.
It is not unusual for me to be stubborn.
-
I too ended up in the 1 !S camp.
Problem B: 3 !D I hate this sort of holding, do not want to rebid 2NT with a stiff in partner’s suit, afraid that we are missing a laydown 3NT if I rebid 3 !D and it goes floating away because partner did not have the spades covered and did not have enough heart length to rebid. Particularly with aces and kings, I feel this is too rich for a 3 !D, but not anxious to jump shift into a 3-card suit. I feel stuck.
On B, I always felt that 3 !D was too weak of an action, and while I know 1 !S is nonforcing, it gives me the best chance of getting to the right spot. If partner has four and a weak hand, I am still happy to play this as a Moysian (taking one ruff in my hand, but unless partner is QJTx, I really don't want to do more. But if NT is right, partner can bid and probably right-side the contract, and I probably will get a chance to show my strength and diamond length.
This is the problem that I most want to see the panel's responses. Surely they are with me that 3 !D is an underbid. Nonetheless, I can see going with 3 !D as the least lie. I ended up going with 1 !S because it has the right sort of texture for a Moysian, and became for me the eventual least lie because despite being too rich for 3 !D, it still was not quite good enough for a game force. Although I would have scored much better without the switch, and at the table I probably would not have taken the time to come up with a 1 !S response, it is the call I would like to think I could have come up with at the table (if this makes sense).
On this problem, regret is akin to being a resultist. Just as I always want to be in a game needing one of two finesses (even if they both happen to be offside), I prefer to make the call that gives the partnership its best chance to get to the proper level and strain to one that required less thought yet happened to score better.
I feel the same way about Problem H, though the pain of point reduction was not nearly as severe.
-
[problem B, of course]
To my esteemed senior members (who outscored me by 150 pts or more anyway , this month): You cannot 'outsmart the MSC panel! If your better bid is too deep for them, and the rejected "no-brainer" bid is chosen by a majority or even a plurality, the peasants will get the 100, and you will get 40 or less. I commend you three for tanking honor roll placements sticking to the bid you 'love' -- and the new gal who actually bid TWO spades --my homemade system-bid which 2-3 panelist actually chose(!?!?!?)
I think we should all 'vote our heart's desire" once a month, but that is not actually our job -- it is the 25 panelists' job.
p,s. problem D ....-- AQTx, Jxxx, AQJxx IS a trap pass, and we all knew that 2C overcall would get the 100, but i voted my heart --trap-pass and lucily got Best of the Also-Rans 70 pts not the 20 that sometimes comes from being stubborn like this :)
-
I will move this to MARCH thread when it gets started:) Have got LOTS of typing for March, and need to get started! MARCH PROBLEM A :
East hasn't a prayer of having a 2-level free-bid, so he will pass when raised. If opener puts him in game when I pass, and [suprise] it is makeable, are we going to save red vs. not? That's 500 folks.This looks like 9 for each side to me quite often, so I let sleeping dogs lie, not even trying to eke out the 1 IMP for 4 diamonds -100. --- PASS now, and sell out to 3 hearts, also.
-
February Solutions: Jeff Rubens was the director.
A handful of the panel's comments:
PROBLEM A: 3 !C . A majority. Although there was a handful of both 2 !S and 3 !S bidders (with the more aggressive 3 !S the more popular choice), the descriptive 3 !C was the clear winner. Several who chose something other than 3 !C mentioned the three small in the opponent’s suit as a negative:
• Curtis Cheek: “Double. Those diamonds scare me.”
• Ira Chorush: “Double. Obviously I would rather have the red suits reversed.”
• Jill Meyers: “2 !S. As holding three low diamonds is a huge drawback, I will stay at the two level.”
• Kleinman: “2 !S. The death holding in diamonds deters me . . . .
• BluBayou: “2 !S. Not stretching to jump with diamond xxx.”
Rubens nailed it with, “It is true that South is frustrated because he would like to bid both spades and clubs.” Yup.
Choosing the more aggressive path:
• Phillip Alder: “3 !C. Vulnerable at IMPs, I am pushing for game, despite the obvious diamond danger.”
• MarilynLi: “3 !C. It shows my shape and strength.”
• Fleisher & Friesner: “3 !C. Keeps both suits in the picture. Two spades would be too conservative with this much playing strength.”
PROBLEM B: 3 !C . The game-force. A plurality choice (not quite gaining a majority), as MSC problems often are. That’s why they are good problems! Shockingly, not one of our participants chose 3 !C.
Kamil & Sherman nailed it with: “3 !C. Just too strong for 3 !D, which would be somewhat misdirected with the outside controls. Bidding two spades might lead to fighting off partner’s spade continuations forever. A jump in notrump would be way out. The imperfect phony jump-shift is the least of evils.”
Kleinman not unexpectedly took a contrary view with, “Three diamonds. Three clubs might produce a tangled web.”
Michael Rosenberg (who also chose 3 !D) was the lone voice in the wilderness who mentioned 1 !S stating, “I have some positive feeling about one spade.” So I guess Jim, Ken and I were not completely lost!
PROBLEM C: (a3) 1 !C | 2 !H . Another majority, so this was apparently not as difficult as it might be. This was also reflected in the unanimity of our IAC participants, who all voted for this choice.
• Kitty & Steve Cooper: “We hate distorting our distribution.”
• Bart Bramley: “Color me old-fashioned. A reverse shows four hearts, longer clubs, and extra values. No, I don’t like having clubs this weak when I reverse, but all other plans misdescribe much worse.”
Similarly . . .
• JCreech: “I will not distort my shape.”
• GG_Bridge: “Partner could still have 4 hearts, and 1NT understates my hand, 2NT overstates.”
• DickHy: “Seems slightly less bad than the others.”
PROBLEM D: 2 !C . Wow, another majority! Rubens begins with some of his thoughts: “The majority’s choice, two club, risks preempting hearts, but it also preempts spades. The latter might be good if it is partner preempted, but what if it is the opponents?
Opting not to pass . . .
• DickHy: “2 !C. Bidding 2C makes N’s life easier defending.”
• MarilynLi: “2 !C. I feel this is the only option if choose to make a bid.”
• JCreech: “2 !C. Can’t double, don’t want to treat this as a trap pass, and too strong to ignore.”
• Boye Brogeland: “2 !C. I am not a big believer in overcalling in a four-card suit with a good hand, and I prefer pass, hoping to be able to make a takeout double of spades, to overcalling one heart.
Of the 2NT bidders, Kleinman chooses to slide the jack of diamonds into his heart suit, thereby completing the 5-5 shape he is promising.
PROBLEM E: 2 !H . Another majority. This boiled down to a binary choice. Either bid the moth-eaten heart suit, a card short of expected length, or pass and hope partner’s diamond suit is not xxx.
Among the 2 !H bidders:
• MarilynLi: “2 !H. I don't want to pass risking partner having 3 cards D and I feel with 9 hcp I owe my partner a bid here.”
• John Strauch: “2 !H. Opener will hold three hearts 41 percent of the time, two hearts 32 percent, one heart 25 percent, no hearts 2 percent.” [I’ll take your word for it, John!] Least of evils.”
• Kamil and Sherman: “2 !H. Ugh!
In discussing Roger Lee’s dismissal of passing the 2 !D rebid, there was an interesting point made by Jeff Rubens: “Opener makes that [2 !D] rebid on 5=3=3=2 only with a hand too weak to open one notrump and too strong to pass the one-notrump response—a very narrow band of strength.” True, since in BWS the “forcing notrump” is only semi-forcing.
PROBLEM F: 2 !S. Well done BabsG and BluBayou!
Not a majority. And both Pass and 2NT garnered several votes, with several other choices scoring, but with little support.
• The Coopers: “2 !S. We bid our spade stopper, show a good hand, and invite partner to do something intelligent. What could go wrong?”
• BabsG, not known for her brevity, explained her winning choice of 2 !S with, " ".
• DickHy, on his way to choosing 2 !H asked, “Just how strong is North’s hand?” This was parroted by Jeff Rubens in explaining the range of Notrump bids, from 3NT to 1NT. Rubens pointed out that, “When there are votes for natural bids of one, two, and three notrump, we can deduce that there is uncertainty about the strength shown by partner . . . . How strong is ‘strong’?” Jim, too, queried, “I’m not sure what BWS considers to be “a strong hand” on this auction, so I will just invite.”
PROBLEM G: Double! Another majority!
• JCreech: “Dbl Another bid I am not happy with, but I do have the requisite !H shortness. If partner does not have a penalty pass, perhaps there will be a cue bid and I will show my spade stop, or enough diamonds that I will not be displeased that I passed. Double is more flexible than rebidding my clubs, or cue bidding hearts; let’s bring partner into the discussion.”
That sums it up nicely. This was chosen by very few of our IAC participants, with only DrAculea and BluBayou joining Jim. Pretty much echoing those thoughts were:
• The Coopers: “Double. We hope partner has a heart stack, but if he doesn’t we have plenty of extras. Pard knows we prefer clubs to diamonds, so he shouldn’t go wrong.
• Fleisher & Friesner: “Double. Strong hand, short in hearts. Partner will not go out of his way to bid diamonds without a lot of them.” (A sentiment offered by sever others.)
PROBLEM H: !H 7. Like most lead problems this one had many answers. Several could work. The !H 9 socred 90, outpacing the !S T since, in combination with the !H 7 there were 13 who chose a heart lead, while only 8 chose a spade. This is logical and I agree with the scoring.
• Boye Brogeland, who also chose the !H 7 stated, “When the opponents (apparently) have bid comfortably to a slam, and the suits seem to be breaking well for them, I like to lead aggressively.”
• Kit Woolsey: “Spade Ten. Any lead could cost; this looks safest.”
• David Berkowitz: “Spade Ten. Looking for safety. At least the spade ten won’t kill partner’s jack-low-low-low.”
My thinking was in line with both Kit and David, so I’ll settle for that.
That’s all folks. Still time to opine----or complain about the MSC panel’s opinions. We welcome the conversation!
-
A johnny come lately to the party, but here are the solutions for ccr3 who was having problems posting:
SOLVER: Patricia McDermott
Richmond VA
U.S.A.
Your Solutions for the February 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: (a3)
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM F: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Spade 4