IAC Forums
Chew the Fat! => IAC & Master Solvers Club => Topic started by: Masse24 on April 14, 2020, 10:45:43 PM
-
JUNE 2020 MSC
Deadline: May 10 at 9:00 a.m. (ET)
Submit your June MSC 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)
* * *
-
I'll look at A. It's a recurring theme. I decided to amuse myself by making up a hand for each of the other three players and then seeing what the bots would do:
!S K95
!H KQ76
!D AJ43
!C 82
!S QT7 8643
!H T8432 A95
!D Q62 K9
!C AJ KT93
!S AJ2
!H J
!D T875
!C Q7654
The uncontested bot auction went 1 !D - 1NT- Pass
Off two, -200.
Yes, the South bot self-alerted that he held either 2 or 3 cards in each major. Of course he does not have a good bid.
Me, I think I would bid 1 !S over 1 !D. Partner would rebid 1NT and then, I think, I would go back to 2 !D. It looks as if 2 !D would be off 1. Can the opponents make 2 !H, assuming they can somehow bid it? Maybe, but I sort of doubt it. We can certainly take 2 spades, 2 hearts, and 1 diamond, but just how does declarer plausibly get the other 8 tricks?
I chose the three non-S hands w/o trying for any particular result, I just chose some cards, but of course there are many possibilities. With this deal, I don't want to be in 3 !D. My 1 !S call, followed by the correction to 2 !D, seems to work out reasonably well.
But what should we really do? The choices seem to be:
1 !S on !S AJ2
1NT holding a stiff !H
3 !D on a hand that does not much appeal to me.
As I say, this is a recurring theme.
I am pretty sure that at the table I would bid 1 !S. But I am hardly prepared to strongly defend that call.
We could vary the hands a little, trading the !S 6 for the !H 6:
!S K965
!H KQ7
!D AJ43
!C 82
!S QT7 843
!H T8432 A965
!D Q62 K9
!C AJ KT93
!S AJ2
!H J
!D T875
!C Q7654
The bot auction would go the same, since the S hand has not changed and N has no reason to pull 1NT. The defense against 1NT could get interesting. Of course after my 1 !S call N would raise. Well, I have one top diamond, two hearttricks to be developed. Can I manage five spade tricks? Maybe. Without then first taking six tricks? Maybe. The opponents now have a 9 card !H fit but still, can they find it? And even if they do, can they take 9 tricks? So 2 !S making would be great, 2 !S off 1 might well be acceptable.
Still. What should be done? Beats me. I doubt that it is hard to deal the cards so that 1 !S works very badly.
-
Me, I think I would bid 1 !S over 1 !D. Partner would rebid 1NT and then, I think, I would go back to 2 !D. It looks as if 2 !D would be off 1.
But what should we really do? The choices seem to be:
1 !S on !S AJ2
1NT holding a stiff !H
3 !D on a hand that does not much appeal to me.
As I say, this is a recurring theme.
I am pretty sure that at the table I would bid 1 !S. But I am hardly prepared to strongly defend that call.
Still. What should be done? Beats me. I doubt that it is hard to deal the cards so that 1 !S works very badly.
Nice summary of the choices, Ken.
This . . . mild maneuvering of partner via a 1 !S response in a three-card suit seems relatively safe.
An inverted-minor bid in diamonds (1 !D - 2 !D) is common with only four-card support, but the jump to 3 !D should have five. I don't recall ever making this jump with only four-card support. To do so "feels" wrong to me. So I rule it out for the moment.
This leaves the mild maneuvering choice of 1 !S (in an effort to land in what I think is the best contract of 2 !D), and the "value-bid" of 1NT.
It's a close call for me. A coin flip. At the table, I probably respond 1NT. But I like the science of the 1 !S response.
I'm not ready to commit, but I lean toward the vanilla, bog-standard, value-bid of 1NT. Thank goodness there is plenty of time remaining.
-
Thanks guys, I was going to bid 2♦, not being aware that BWS uses inverted minors. So now I am supposed
to bid with my hands tied behind my back and on crutches? I am not bidding 1♠ because with Ken's sample
opening hand I would always raise to 2♠ in preference to rebidding 1NT with a useful ruffing value in clubs, a
small doubleton in an unbid suit. I'm hardly left with any choice but to bid 1NT, as much as I dislike that.
-
I'm dithering on problem D as well. In standard methods a reverse bid is not only forcing, but also promises
that the opener will bid once more unless responder jumps to game. So do I misdescribe the shape of my hand
with a 1NT opening bid, do I overbid via (b3), or do I go quietly via (b2)? I think I've convinced myself to go on
the low road.
Oliver
-
Problem A:>> 1 Spade on AJx . this works almost always-- trust me
Problem B>> leave in the neg double.. DOWNSIDE should be mins 140---and you and I see 3nt with presumed 27 or so points having 2 in-cards + 3 spades, to beat. i see small loss ,often chunky gain-- sue me!
Problem C>> pass "STAY FIXED, WHEN THEY HAVE FIXED YOU"--- my hero, Al Roth.
Problem D>> open 1H, reverse into spades: "scientific" reversing rules do not apply to THIS auction
pROBLEM E>> 4 Spades. 5 looser hand anyway, and BOTH help-suit asks are flawed , so, why bother!. only SSGT 3 Hearts would change my mind, ..and i don't need to hunt through the BWS-2017 listings, since i have a blast to spade game ANYWAY...yes?
Problem F >> 3 diams now, and spades later ( at 3 or 4).
Problem G>>> 2!D --VERY distant 2nd choice = 1NT barff (must have read the problem wrong change to 2H
Problem H>>> interior-sequence spade card.. jack or ten-- whichever the bws polling has agreed is the normal . --cannot wait for JULY, folks!!!
-
G looks like a problem of our own making. Why didn't we respond 1NT after the overcall? Now
whatever we do partner will not know we have at least 6 points, essentially a balanced hand,
and a good card in hearts. Had we bid 1NT initially, partner would at least have known two of
those three things and we can always support hearts if asked to bid again. I'm not bidding 2♦
at matchpoints when hearts rate to score more than diamonds and partner's shape might be
2=5=3=4.
Oliver
-
My initial thoughts:
A: 1S I hate this bid, but not strong enough for 2D, not enough length for 3D, not enough balanced shape for 1NT, not enough spades for 1S. So which is the least lie? I am beteen 1S and 1NT, but am afraid of a pass of the 1NT. At least if partner raises spades, I can take a ruff in the short hand.
B: Pass This hand reminds me of a regional section top I once had. I never declared a single hand, but should have. What happened was, every time I was supposed to declare, the opponents stepped out of line. The double brought a score slightly (or more) better than what we would have gotten had I declared. This hand smells like one of those hands. 200/500 vs. a partscore. 800/1100 vs. a game. My worry is that we might have a slam and at this level, we don't have enough tricks to recover that score.
C: 4S I hate these preempts. Never sure whether it is right to overcall or double. The spade suit is not really right to overcall, but the hand is a bit too good to pass, and I've been burned on this level double too much recently. If it had been hearts, I would have said "accepting the transfer" and bidd 4S, diamonds, just gives me two potential "transfer" suits.
D: b4 If my minor HCPs were in my majors, I would reverse (b3), but they aren't. This hand feels a lot like a NT, but with nine cards in the majors, I prefer to show my hearts and give partner a chance to show spades. We are not playing Flannery, so the spades can be partner's responsibility to show. If partner bit a forcing NT, I will raise to show my values.
E: 3S Partner needs too much to try for slam via a self-splinter, but could also have too little to make game. Therefore, I am splitting the baby and only inviting. Before I submit, I want to double check the game tries section of BWS, because if I have a short suit GT available or a way to show a mini-splinter, that would be perfect to get to the game when it is right.
F: 2D I intend to show both suits and I want to eat up some bidding space. I am just not certain how much space to use. I wish I had a top and bottom bid available, but that has to be beyond the scope of BWS and since I am certain that hearts will be shown, I will show the diamonds first and the spades second. My big worry is that partner is the one showing hearts. That is part of the reason why I am laying a bit low with my first suit (at least for now).
G: 2H 1SX by the opponents will be a struggle given the 5-? break, but my holding is not at all robust, so I feel I have to bid. 1NT is not very palatable (they could still run four in the suit on me) and a 4-3 in diamonds, while could be right, still worries me. Kx is great support under the circumstances, so I will make the reluctant raise. (I saw Hoki's comments just before posting - I agree with them and while I did not notice that this was a MP problem, that would have been an additional reason for my selection.)
H: SJ I think that spades is the right suit for us to be attacking. It would be better if the lead were coming from partner, but it isn't, and I have no idea where partner may have an entry. In some ways, I would prefer to start with the 3, but if partner has five, then I probably have just blocked the suit. This lead caters to a variety of holding with partner and with declarer.
-
A. 1N. Wasn’t there a problem similar to this recently, which had 3C = weak but supports 3N. From memory 3C scored well, but the suit was something like AJxxxx. This suit is too short (much like life is with BWS bidding problems) for 3D. I don’t like misleading partner over major suit length, but note there are plenty of experts here who argue against that.
B. Pass/3N. I expect p to have a minimum of 6/7 HCP to make a negative x at the 1-level, so we have enough for 3N, so that’s one option. We might have more, in which case p (reading me for 19) would raise my 3N in some cunning way. We will score 800 in penalties if we can restrict N to 4 tricks. He may have 6 spades, as they are quite anaemic. If we use 2 of my trumps to ruff H, he might come to 4 tricks in trumps alone.
C. Pass. P must be short in D but didn’t x, which he may well have done holding both majors and 11 HCP. If I bid it will be 4S (p will not appreciate a Moysian in H breaking badly). Will we make 4S? We look certain to beat 4D.
D. (b4) This looks straightforward to me (oh, wait, those are the words I often use just before being disembowelled in post-mortems).
E. 4S. Torn between a short suit game try and a 4S bid. BWS offers a long suit and short suit game try. The latter, like Romex after 1S – 2S, is via 2N; the short suit being shown later. This hand looks too strong to be messing about giving information to opponents. Incidentally, in the BWS system a re-raise to 3S is apparently pre-emptive.
F. pass/2D. This looks to me a little like problem B in reverse, so do we want to tread carefully? BWS says the xx shows any hand with 10-plus HCP that is not suitable for a raise or a new-suit bid – 3334, then. That would leave p holding 4432 (and opener 1417). At least we’re sure of a fit, but p is not offering any ruffs. They could well be heading to a making 3N. Bidding a pre-emptive 2D ain’t likely to get much in their way & does it give them an option for 800?
G. 2H. The cat obviously got my tongue earlier in the auction. Now she’s back at her milk saucer, I better continue being conservative (comatose?)
H. JS. Declarer has 7+ cards in the minors, with missing minor honours well placed and a H entry into dummy. Let’s hope he has Qxx in spades (and xx AKxxx Axx or xx AKxx AJxx), so we can proceed against H later in the best possible fashion after seeing dummy. BWS says highest-equal from interior sequences when leading against NT.
A couple where I'm undecided, with the (presently) favoured bid shown first. Crikey! that's 3 passes - no way to do well in a BWS (red meat) bidding competition.
Hope you're all keeping well
-
I keep looking at PROBLEM A.
While I stand by my likely choice above, I think there is another choice that may garner a panel vote or two.
2 !D.
It's not totally nuts. It does, however, preclude stopping in 2 !D, which seems to be the goal of the few who have offered an opinion.
I saw Richard Pavlicek make a similar inverted minor response within the last two or three weeks. I tried to find it in my hand records, but could not. But he did it.
-
Your Solutions for the June 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b2)
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM F: 1 Spade
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
-
I keep looking at PROBLEM A.
While I stand by my likely choice above, I think there is another choice that may garner a panel vote or two.
2 !D.
It's not totally nuts. It does, however, preclude stopping in 2 !D, which seems to be the goal of the few who have offered an opinion.
I saw Richard Pavlicek make a similar inverted minor response within the last two or three weeks. I tried to find it in my hand records, but could not. But he did it.
Right, not totally nuts. But but but
The opponents have. almost certainly, 8+ hearts. Of course they are vul, but still it seems unlikely they will sell to 2 !D even if we somehow get there. So the problem is to help partner when he needs to decide what to do over their 2 !H, if they get there. The stiff !H perhaps makes 3 !D attractive, but bidding 2 !D now makes it almost certain that partner will not let them play 2 !H undoubled. If Lho comes in with 2 !H over my 2 !D and partner doubles, I have no idea what I should do next.
Would Lho bid 2 !H. Well, sure he might. Would partner double, and what would it mean? It seems that with !H KTxx he might well think "Maybe this belongs in 2 !H X, maybe it belongs in 3NT, whatever the case I will start with X and see what partner does".
Nothing seems all that great here. Of course if we were not playing inverted minors 2 !D would be obvious. But that can be said of any agreement, sometimes you are glad you are playing it, sometimes you wish that you weren't. I recall reading some expert opinion, I forget who, saying that inv minors is a slight plus for a partnership that has discussed the details, and a bit of a trap for those who haven'. Again this can be said of many conventions.
I am wavering between 1 !S and 1NT. I am thinking that maybe I go with 1NT. There are various ways that the auction could go well from there, and if 1NT is passed out and is set then maybe they could have made 2 !H and all is well. I don't have to worry about 1NT being doubled, I can run to !D.
Anyway, I agree that 2 !D is not totally nuts. But I am not doing it.
-
SOLUTIONS FOR: Terry Adamik Boulder City NV U.S.A.
REDBIRD44
PROBLEM A: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:Jock McQuade Portland ORU.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade happy to have some backup, but was never in doubt really
PROBLEM B: Pass DITTO this problem but here i could have been persuaded otherwise
PROBLEM C: Pass no comment
PROBLEM D: (b3) having no contempt for those who just raise notrump, BUT
PROBLEM E: 4 Spades comforted bigly by DICKYHS observation that scientific probe mayjust improve the defense-- -
..IF game isn't just a rock!
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds my monthly self-inflicted "ten"
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts kudos to OLIVER - my MAN! for calling B-S on the first round pass :) Seven is not in the "book" for a free 1NT, so let's call the 10-fifth in his suit point #8, and salute the empire upon which the sun never did set for calling a spade a spade!;>
PROBLEM H Spade Jack..... ( 2nd choice------------------>??)
-
A: 1♠
Even if you play 1♦ as guaranteeing 4 (as I like to) the raise to 3♦ opposite a balanced 12-14 looks more like going off than making whereas 2♠ looks more like making than not. Ken’s examples are instructive. So, stay low. You are happy if partner bids no trumps and can deal with it if partner raises spades provided that they do no break too badly.
B: 3NT
Looks crude but that is the contract that I think will make opposite a min take-out double. Pass is out because we don’t really want to defend 1♠x do we?
C: 4♠
My initial thought was pass. Then thinking of median hands:
4♦ opening without the Ace more likely to be on an 8 card suit than a 7 so something like ♠ x, ♥ xx, ♦ KQJ10xxxx, ♣ Qxx an 8 count. 17 remaining between the other 2 hands. Give partner 8. Say ♠ Kxxx,
♥ KQxx, ♦ xx, ♣ xxx. Or ♠ Kxx, ♥ KQxx, ♦ x, ♣ xxxxx. On each of these I can make 4♠, but then I was careful not to give partner a wasted Q♣. So, I think the decision is very close. Reward risk ratio? I think maybe just a bit better than 1 so I will go for 4♠.
D: 2NT (b4)
Open 1♥ and with 17 invite with 2NT. I reject 2♠ having 2 minor doubletons with stops.
E: 3♣
3♣ or 3♦? I need more help in ♣ than ♦ so go for trial bid of 3♣.
F: 1♦
I don’t really want to compete so will stay as safe as possible with 1♦. The opps will buy the contract and hopefully the distribution will be a shock to them.
G: 2♥
Partner has made a take-out double and I have a 4 card suit available. OTOH it is match points and we could be playing in 2♦ when 2♥ is a perfectly good contract. So will go for 2♥.
H: J♠
I think we have already had a discussion on the merits of leading the J versus leading the 3. Of course playing zero leads as promoted by Joosth you lead the 10.
-
PROBLEM A: 1NT.
An inverted-minor bid in diamonds (1 !D - 2 !D ) is common with only four-card support, but the jump to 3 !D should have five. I don't recall ever making this jump with only four-card support. To do so "feels" wrong, so I rule it out for the moment.
This leaves the mild maneuvering choice of 1 !S (in an effort to land in what I think is the best contract of 2 !D ), and the "value-bid" of 1NT.
It's a close call for me. A coin flip. At the table, I probably respond 1NT. But I like the science of the 1 !S response.
I'm not ready to commit, but I lean toward the vanilla, bog-standard, value-bid of 1NT.
PROBLEM B: 2NT.
I see what is probably five sure tricks if I choose to defend. However, the spades are just not robust enough for a penalty pass.
2NT looks about right on values, and only slightly misdescribes my shape, so is a strong contender.
The most flexible call is a cuebid of 2 !S. But flexible to what end? What does it accomplish?
PROBLEM C: 4 !S .
A complete guess. My nature here is to pass. It’s a flat hand with a weak five-card major. It’s nothing special. But I have come to realize that on hands that are close between a conservative pass and an aggressive call, it is more often best to take the high road.
That’s a weak argument, but it’s all I’ve got.
This one is a tough decision for me.
PROBLEM D: b(4). 1 !H then 2NT.
1. The b(3) option, 1 !H – 1NT – 2 !S, a reverse, is an uncomfortable misdescription of my hand. Half my points are in doubleton suits, which is not what partner will expect. It does not accurately describe where my “stuff” is. I may be totally off base, but I doubt this gets more than 3 or 4 panel votes.
2. The b(2) option, 1 !H – 1NT – 2 !C, rebidding my doubleton, is the ”book bid” with this shape IF I had an Ace less. A silly option.
3. The b(1) option, 1 !H – 1NT – Pass is even more silly. For obvious reasons.
That leaves only two viable options . . .
4. b(4), 1 !H – 1NT – 2NT, upgrading a 5-card major 17 count to 18-19, or
5. (a), 1NT, calling a 17 point hand a 17 point hand.
I know I’m not revealing new information here, since this is such a common treatment; opening 17 point 5332 hands with a five-card major with 1M intending a 2NT rebid is common (Expert-Standard if there is such a thing). I do it frequently, but NOT always. I would guess over 80% of the time.
When do I not do it? When the suit quality of the major is so poor that it does not warrant the upgrade. In those cases, I open it 1NT. The suit quality of this heart suit is awful. !H KT642. So it’s an auto-1NT right?
Not so fast. Change the hand just a tiny bit to: !S KQ2 - !H KT642 - !D A92 - !C AJ
That hand I open 1NT. The five-card major is garbage. This “flatter” 5332 hand is worth less than the MSC problem hand. The KnR for almost any 5332 combination of these cards (hearts remaining intact) is under 17.
The clincher, then, that improves the value of this MSC hand is the fourth spade. KnR = 18.0
So it’s b(4) for me.
PROBLEM E: 3 !D.
With four diamonds, rather than three cards in clubs, I would prefer to set up the diamonds.
I get the “I need more help in !C “ argument, and it may be best. 3 !C would also permit partner to offer a counter-try of 3 !D if he had no help in clubs.
This is an interesting problem. I guess we’ll find out how the big boys think regarding game-tries.
PROBLEM F: 2 !S .
Not confident. 2 !S could be right, keeping the bidding a level lower. However, 3 !D has the added benefit of taking the opps 3 !C bid away.
[Added]: I see now this is Matchpoints, which I missed. Oops! I changed this for that reason alone.
This is a complete guess.
PROBLEM G: 1NT!
Probably would have done this last round. But here we are.
Both 2 !H and Pass also possible with 2 !H likely the vanilla solver call.
PROBLEM H: !C 9.
Down the middle. This should be popular with just about everyone. Second choice is the safe, give-nothing-away !C 9.
[Added]: Initially went with the !S Jack, still guaranteed to get plenty of votes. But I changed to the !C 9 for the reasons listed.
The !S J is only correct when dummy has Hx or declarer has KQx or Qxx and hopefully we can wait on those holdings. It's just wrong in all other cases like Hxx in dummy, Kxx in declarer's hand missing the Q.
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM H: Club 9
I may be wrong, but I get the feeling this set will produce a lot of similar answers. This typically results in very high scores. So I'm guessing something like a 730 will be required to make the honor roll.
-
A- 3D - You all convinced me that 1S was a right and clever bid. but due to my own weird rules of this game, I must bid 3D because I would never have truly thought of 1S. and everyone knows I wouldn't pass
B - 2nt - In real life I would strongly consider bidding 3nt, because I think there is a technical problem in standard bidding 2nt with a GF hand. But here I bid 2nt because spades are behind me and my spade holding is not as secure as I would like and its technically correct.
C- 4S - gamble, and everyone knows I wouldn't pass.
D- b4. would like to bid b3, but I think going from memory now that pard already didn't bid spades
E- 3C some kind of game try. I like 3D too. I should probably look up bws methods
F- 2S - I really wanted to bid 2D because I see in BWS methods this is preemptive. BUT 2S takes up so much more room. that I make that choice on a little reflection. I might bid 1D in real life because I don't see a new suit jump as a weak.
G - 1nt - I dn't have enough to pass. doesn't meet the rule of 9 (it's a 6 or 7 depending on counting the 10- so not really close)
H - JS bothers me that its everyone's choice! I was considering a low heart, leading through the heart responder.
-
Trigger pulled - additional thoughts added for bids where I have given the problem significant additional consideration.
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
Fredericksburg VA
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade - thought strongly about bidding 1NT as the value bid, but the stiff heart too dangerous for me
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump - I would pass at the table, but don't think the panel will go for the penalty
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs - with a partner that I normally play 2-way game tries, I would make the short suit try. I really think that is the right try. In the contest, I think most panelists will not when a direct bid is a help-suit GT. 3C asks about the most questionable suit (plus it allows for partner to counter with a 3D game try (which I would accept); so I will go with the more direct and flexible try.
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
-
Pat's answers ---- CCR3
SOLVER: Pat McDermott
N. Chesterfield. Va VA
U.S.A.
Your Solutions for the June 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade
PROBLEM B: Pass
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b1)
PROBLEM E: 4 Spades
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
Thank you for participating in the Master Solvers Club.
-
A couple of undecideds.
B. I’m convinced Jock is correct theoretically, but securing 800 in penalties requires accurate defence. I’m not sure I could pull that off, so in the debate between 600 or 800, I will opt for the former. Philosophically, are we choosing bids in the BWS quiz which we would make at the table or the bids we believe top pros will make?
F. I’m still wary about a 2D bid. Pre-empting here just seems to offer opponents the chance for a telephone number. I suppose I ought not to leave 1Cxx in, so 1D will do. Partner will know from the bidding that I have nowt.
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Dick Harvey
Southampton
U.K.
PROBLEM A: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 4 Spades
PROBLEM F: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
-
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade. I can pass any partner's non forcing rebid and I'm willing to play a 4-3 spades fit with the ability to ruff H in short trump hand.
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump. This shows my strength and stopper in Spades and gives partner room if he likes to make a second bid.
PROBLEM C: Pass. Too balanced and too many losers to bid and non vul.
PROBLEM D: (a). Not a great 17 hcp hand. Just look like a 1NT opener to me.
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds. Natural game try.
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades. Preemptive. Plan to bid D next round
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Club 9
-
Wladislaus Dragwlya
Castrum Sex
Romania
PROBLEM A: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM F: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Club 9
-
SOLVER: Babs Giesbrecht
Qualicum Beach BC
Canada
Your Solutions for the June 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 4 Spades
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Club 6
-
Pulled the trigger. Went with choices above.
One change I made, the lead problem . . .
PROBLEM H: !C 9.
Initially went with the !S Jack. But the !S J is only correct when dummy has Hx or declarer has KQx or Qxx and hopefully we can wait on those holdings.
It's just wrong in all other cases like Hxx in dummy, Kxx in declarer's hand missing the Q.
Although any !C lead could work, the least misleading (no pun intended) for my partner is the !C 9.
-
I looked up leads on BWS.
Against NT, I believe that a club lead should be the 6:
From BWS:
"Against notrump contracts:
(i) Honor leads: ace requests unblock or count signal; queen requests jack; highest equal from non-ace sequences and interior sequences
(ii) Spot-card leads: fourth-highest; second-highest (but highest of equals) from a weak suit"
Often I see these second highest leads from spots against suits as well, but against according BWS:
"Spot-card leads: third-highest from even length; lowest from odd length".
That's BWS against suits.
At any rate, I had decided on a club lead so I looked up BWS to see which spot they prefer. It makes sense for the spot card lead rules to depend on NT or suits.
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Jack Goody
Guildford
U.K.
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 4 Spades
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds (changed Q !D help more important)
PROBLEM F: 2 Spades
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Spade Jack
-
I looked up leads on BWS.
Against NT, I believe that a club lead should be the 6:
From BWS:
"Against notrump contracts:
(i) Honor leads: ace requests unblock or count signal; queen requests jack; highest equal from non-ace sequences and interior sequences
(ii) Spot-card leads: fourth-highest; second-highest (but highest of equals) from a weak suit"
Oopsy
Hope enough panelists are either too lazy to read BWS, or simply like the "big fat 9" rather than the "itty-bitty 6." ;)
-
Wouldn't risk Todd "yelling" at me again :-[
PROBLEM A: 3D
PROBLEM B: 3N
PROBLEM C: 4S
PROBLEM D: b4
PROBLEM E: 3D
PROBLEM F: 2S
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: sJ
-
A: 1s
B. Pass
C. 4S
D. B4
E. 4S
F. 3d
G. 2H
H. JS
-
If any of you have previously followed the link provided in the beginning of month post, you'll see how the scores are tallied. This month, I thought I would see what the total was of the different choices for each problem. To make it easy, I just created mini pivot-tables.
The link is here: Totals by Problem (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1whamPj4_SDF3cbYUdGL9dpMX23tpwzUJzUvNoVmip_w/edit?usp=sharing) Click on the second worksheet (at the bottom) titled: 2020 June Prob Totals
I find the numbers on Problem "C" surprising, thinking that Pass would be the popular choice. Instead, most of the IAC went high with 4 !S.
Problem "D," was no surprise. Most went with opening 1 !H then rebidding 2NT. I thought this problem the easiest of the set.
There are a couple of straggler IACers who normally post. One entered into the spreadsheet, the totals will automatically adjust.
I was thinking that it might be interesting--fun too--to post all of the most popular answers from our IAC forum to The Bridge World MSC using a pseudonym. We would all have a piece of it! :D
Opinions?
-
I might have mis-understood something
SOLVER: Kenneth Berg
Sykesville MD
U.S.A.
Your Solutions for the June 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: Double
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 2 Notrump Please score this as 3D, I misunderstood.
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Club 6
Why did I bid 2NT on E? Because I went to the BWS site to see optins and, I think, misunderstood.
Here is what they have:
After a single raise:
(a) a reraise to three is preemptive;
(b) two notrump is forcing with at least game-invitational strength;
(c) a simple new-suit bid is a game-try showing length (or a suit where honor strength would be helpful).
After a two-notrump forcing raise: a simple new-suit bid shows shortness, a new-suit jump shows a two-suiter, and the three other game-and-below bids (simple same-suit rebid, three notrump, jump same-suit rebid), herein called TOBs, deny the requirements for any new-suit bid. The TOBs are graded from strongest to weakest (cheapest bid is strongest).
I read this and thought Oh, I can bid 2NT and then 3 H to show a stiff heart. No, they mean that if partner had bid 2NT instead of 2S then I could bid (of course) 3H to show a stiff heart/ Oh well.
-
After a two-notrump forcing raise: a simple new-suit bid shows shortness, a new-suit jump shows a two-suiter, and the three other game-and-below bids (simple same-suit rebid, three notrump, jump same-suit rebid), herein called TOBs, deny the requirements for any new-suit bid. The TOBs are graded from strongest to weakest (cheapest bid is strongest).
I read this and thought Oh, I can bid 2NT and then 3 H to show a stiff heart. No, they mean that if partner had bid 2NT instead of 2S then I could bid (of course) 3H to show a stiff heart/ Oh well.
While 2NT may not be the game-try you wanted (based on system), it's not horrible.
I went back and read it again. It's formatted poorly, I think. I, too, thought the 2NT they referred to was a continuation of a game-try===NOT Jacoby 2NT. A wee bit confusing!!!
P.S. I marked you down for 3 !D.
-
Also Ken, I think it was DickHy that read that same bit of system notes in the same way as you. Based on that, I thought about making the short- suit GT, but decided against because I figured that the panel would just select a bid instead of going back to read the system notes. Some sort of help/long suit GT being more the norm. If I trusted the panel, AND 2NT the start of a short suit GT, then I would have done that instead.
-
The bots use 2NT as the start of a short suit game try. Here is from their notes:
"The next step (1♥-2♥-2♠, 1♠-2♠-2NT) is a short-suit game try, showing unspecified shortness. Responder can bid the next step above that (2NT or 3♣) to ask where the shortness is. Opener bids the short suit, or bids his major if the short suit is one of the step suits."
I have often pushed the idea that when we do the BWS competition, where it is stated that we use BWS Standard, then that's what we should use. Every system has problem hands, and MSC often presents hands that are tough in the system being used. On A, if I were playing Goren, I would raise 1 !D to 2 !D. But we aren't playing Goren, so it's a problem. If I were playing with the bots on E I would bid 2NT and then 3 !H, showing my stiff. But I am not playing with the bots.
I was trying to use BWS I just mis-read it. I was in a hurry, these things happen.
-
On behalf of Aloha9 (Marty)
Your Solutions for the June 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 1 Spade
PROBLEM B: 2 Spades
PROBLEM C: 4 Spaes
PROBLEM D: (b4)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM H: Spade J
-
hand A 1S
hand B 2N
hand C 4S
hand D B3
hand E 4H
hand F 2D
hand G p
hand H 6C
-
Scores are out . . .
YleeXotee led the way, with Masse24 close behind and Redbird44 third; all three made The Bridge World Honor Roll (which required a 670 this month), so congrats!!
Way to go Joe!
| NAME | BW-SCORE | RANK | MPs |
| YleeXotee | 730 | 1 | 30 |
| Masse24 | 720 | 2 | 25 |
| Redbird44 | 680 | 3 | 20 |
| . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . |
|
Also participating and receiving 1 Monster Point are (alphabetically): Aloha9, BabsG, Blubayou, CCR3, Curls77, DickHy, DrAculea, Hoki, Jcreech, KenBerg, MarilynLi, Msphola, Thornbury,VeeRee, WackoJack. A solid month, with some high scores all around!
We had a GREAT turnout, our best yet! Hopefully we can continue to 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.
-
Usually, in a good month, I get burned on one choice, in an average month, two, and in a bad month, three. This month, I must have been out of it altogether - I was burned on four choices. And only one I would not make at the table. On Problem A, at the table, I am certain I would bid 1NT and then regret the choice; here I bid 1 !S, and still feel pretty good about the choice. I look forward to seeing which two panelists went with that choice. No matter what, I just could not get myself to bid 3 !D without some table feel. The last two times I tried that bid, I hit partner with a 4-4-3-2 hand and it did not work out well at all.
Other bad choices included raising partner with Kx in Problem G. As recently as last night, I made a similar bid. Last night, it was not my best bid - that would have been double, which would net 800, but putting partner in game was the next best bid as the cards lay. Here, I can appreciate the desire to have partner overruffed in spades, but with my luck, bidding 1NT will get me raised to 3NT, and they take four top spades and a side trick for down 1. I am not going there.
As for my other unfortunate choices, on Problem C, action was preferred over inaction - but the largest single vote getter was Pass. With 15 HCPs and a less than stellar five-bagger, none of the choices look great. And in Problem H, against 1NT, I tend to prefer leading something that I have values in rather than top of nothing; it was the second choice of the panel, but it was a distant 2nd choice.
A poorish 620 for me this month, but really, very few regrets. On to next month.
-
I had a total disaster for this month. That's ok. The sun sets but the sun also rises. It seems I read a book about that once.
One that I want to see the thinking for is the !C 9 against 1NT from 962 on problem H.
I quote BWS standard:
Against NT:
"Spot-card leads: fourth-highest; second-highest (but highest of equals) from a weak suit"
Against suits:
"Spot-card leads: third-highest from even length; lowest from odd length"
Personally, I have never been fond of the second highest fro spots rule, but I lead according to agreement. I await their explanation of why we should in this case depart from agreement. If I follow the agreement, I lead the 6 against NT, I lead the 2 against suits
As to the merits of the agreement to lead the 6 against NT:
With this agreement, we lead the 6 from 962 and we lead the 6 from Q96 (since leading the 9 would deny the Q) and we lead the 6 from Q976 (fourth best). The person doing the leading already knows whether he has the Q, the point is to help partner to know that. If I lead the 6 from 962, from Q96 and from Q976 I don't see that this helps pard all that much.
Anyway, I lead the 6 rather than the 9 because BWS standard says so. Since nearly everything else went wrong as well, it did not matter.
-
No Bridge World received, so no summary.
If anyone else subscribes . . .
-
Same with me. I am not sure when the magazine usually arrives but earlier in the month than this.
I'm not sure what's up. I also was having trouble with the BW website but I just checked and that problem no longer exists. Whew! These things happen and usually they get fixed.