IAC Forums
Chew the Fat! => IAC & Master Solvers Club => Topic started by: Masse24 on June 16, 2020, 03:31:45 PM
-
AUGUST 2020 MSC
Deadline: JULY 10 at 9:00 a.m. (ET)
Submit your AUGUST 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)
* * *
-
PROBLEM E:>> Since I have gotten on my high horse over the following problem ( F ), I might as well vote my heart on this "MSC-horror-hand #2" . In my live partnerships, two spades shows "this hand"--better clubs would be nice, since partner's "I want out" rebid is 3 clubs, but he will be playing diamonds this time anyway. They throw this problem at us every 8 months or so, and a few good panelists do bid 2 spades, usually without expecting it to be taken as the equivalent of a 3C jump rebid, nor a fragment , so I am hoping for a 60 this month. If responder had bid 1 spade, there would be several votes for the fake reverse into AKJ of diamonds, and mentions of it by those who chose some different rebid. There should be a sequence analageous for the case in hand, and it starts with two spades, IMO.
--- TWO Spades--
PROBLEM F:>> The VERY FIRST sentence in BWS2017 / Over our 1 of a minor says"We skip diamonds to show our major on less than invitational hands " (unless possibly when 4-6). Given that, the hint below this problem is a howling mistake. "1S being natural and possibly weak is out the window , and good riddance. I play that 1 spade here is a "punt" a mark-time bid, and so should every pair that plays "bypass diamonds over one club", while TWO spades is natural and showing the same good hand that was prepared to reverse out of openers expected 1NT rebid. It's too logical to dispute actually. So my vote is to use this convention here, and sadly when partner re-rebids 1NT, i am obliged to raise that. Likewise, if he rebids his clubs, or supports my diamonds, I can rebid 3 clubs, showing "a hand worth two bids" and all should be fine.
--- ONE SPADE chisled in granite.
PROBLEM G:>> Double, for now -- not chisled in anything:(
PROBLEM H:>> How can we NOT 'cash' our heart? maybe the one-looser suit is KQJTxx without the ace in dummy?
problem A---> If this is a freakish deal, partner needs to hear from me NOW, so I am raising. If 2 spades is the garden spot, I apologise, and if partner goes to four with a good-but-NORMaL hand he might apologise. Too much time handling BBO's special dealing skils I fear.
problem B ---> May THE LAW protect this sad underbid of 2 Diamonds. I am really counting on a heart rebid somewhere, whereupon i will follow up with 2 Spades then things are all better. My second choice was a jump to 2 Spades on the first round --but one jump per month into a good 3-card spade holding per month is enough, and we all used that one up on problem E.
problem C---> Thanks for the footnote, bridge world. This is a clear inverted raise to me, but not if "our" systems says we cannot crash in 2NT--which puzzles me no end. So i vothe for "1 diamond" not willing to get another 10 points for bidding another forward-going notrump bid with both majors at xxx. who voted this footnote into our system?
problem D---> pass --- with the intention of leaving in the double trying for 500+. too tired to mull this over today june 29th
i say AMEN! Pat-- where is everybody!?
-
Thoughts from the European Zone:
A. Pass (but 3 !S is apparently not quite dead yet). I’d go into the tank here deciding between one of two calls; should I summon a fever specialist or psychiatrist for my partner? While the sirens approach, I’d reach for the green card. Funnily enough twice recently I’ve responded 1 !S with an awful 4c suit – 8xxx – so I guess this is what happened here and p has AKJxxx. Even so, this looks like a 20/20 hand (17/23 at best), and nothing I can do (aside from alerting medics) will make the situation better. My inner Mad Hatter might briefly consider 3N, but with my !H holding, East with AKxxx can run the suit. A still small voice is whispering "3 !S" - partner has 6133 and all our high cards are working - delusions, dementia or (for once) stunning instinct? [Ed: we know the answer to that].
B. 2 !H. BWS seems to offer two options. A cue-bid shows “at least game interest” and “2N is forcing”. Presumably, the latter would show a !H stop. I’m a bit shy of game values but partner (the stronger hand of the two of us) is over the opponent who opened, so why not? We know shrinking violets just get trampled into the dust in BWS bidding quizzes.
C. 2 !C. According to BWS there are two routes to invite: “single raise [of a 1m opener] is game invitational or stronger … and denies a 4-card major” and “a 2N response is natural and invitational”. How to choose? My !C suit is decent so 3 !C might play better than 2N?
D. 3N or 4 !S? We need to be in game somewhere. My hand makes 3 !S too weak and 4 !D too zealous. I’m offering no ruffs – with a 53 M fit and a 4333 hand don’t you experts often prefer 3N to 4M?
E. 3 !C (probably). North could be starting a Walsh-type sequence over a 1 !C opener holding a GI+ hand with 4M and 4 !D, possibly even 4441. I rarely like misleading p about M suit length. Sure, if I have AKJ maybe, but not AJ3. So, I don’t really like a 1 !S rebid here. It might lead to a Moysian 4 !S when 3N is better: if say p held 4342 with KTx in H or 4441.
F. 2 !C. If a partnership plays Walsh over a 1 !C opener, 2-way XYZ is tremendously useful. The continuations take up an awful lot of brain cells, but it is a wizard scheme. After 1x-1y-1z: 2 !C = GI (and forces 2 !D, unless opener is 17+) and 2 !D = GF (and asks for more info). BWS doesn’t seem to mention it, but I would expect the pros on the panel to use it. In which case 2 !C is automatic. If we are not playing 2-way XYZ, why the hell didn’t I respond 2N in the first place?
G. x or 3 !D? West and partner are passed hands, but figure to have 18 points between them, so each will have 8-10. 3 !C seems like selling the hand short because partner may well pass. Another option is x – does that start a Lebensohl sequence? If so, partner with 8-10 will be making an invite bid: either a slow (via 2N-3 !C) 3M or a direct 3 !C (unlikely, perhaps, but ya never know). The question then is what the devil do I do over 3 !H? A third option comes from BWS: “Against a natural pre-empt a three-level cue bid asks for a stopper for notrump.” That’s fine – partner may well have Kxx – but I have the same problem if he bids 3 !H.
H. K !H. By now my incompetence at opening leads should have become starkly apparent. What do the 3 !S and 4 !S bids mean - 1st and 2nd round control? West skipped over 3 !H and East as shown x in !H, so as blubayou says, let’s cash our !H. I’ll lead the K (rather than Q or J) so that when it wins, I can make a safe exit (from the point of view of the post-mortem) of the J !C.
-
My initial thoughts:
A: Pass I suspect that both partnerships have roughly half the deck, and partner is already looking at a known bad split in trump, so I am not inclined to move.
B: 2H I have multiple places to play and good values. Let’s give partner a clue.
C: 2C No other good bid – great 11 HCP, no other biddable suit, and I don’t want the lead coming into my hand. All I am missing is a fifth club.
D: Pass This should be a semi-automatic reopening double. If partner cooperates, then I will pass again. Otherwise, I will play it by ear.
E: ? I am still struggling with this one. I detest manufactured reverses, and it would be especially dangerous reversing into spades. I dislike making a jump raise of partner’s suit with only three. I detest splintering into a suit that contains an honor and only have three of partner’s suit. I dislike rebidding my six bagger headed by only QJ8. And I am absolutely not inclined to bid NT with singleton in an unbid suit. Double and redouble are inadmissible. So I am left with Pass, but that is not an option either. Guess I huddle.
F: 3C I feel like this is a highly invitational hand, so let partner know I have a quality fit for the first bid suit. We probably want to be in NT, but the spade stop is on that side of the table. Let’s not expose our assets in the majors.
G: Dbl Too many points to pass, not good or long enough suits to bid, so try a double and hope partner bids one of my suits.
H: CJ I am torn between the wooden HK and the more aggressive CJ. I am being aggressive today, but by the final decision, I may chicken out.
-
PROBLEM E:>> Since I have gotten on my high horse over the following problem ( F ), I might as well vote my heart on this "MSC-horror-hand #2" . In my live partnerships, two spades shows "this hand"--better clubs would be nice, since partner's "I want out" rebid is 3 clubs, but he will be playing diamonds this time anyway. They throw this problem at us every 8 months or so, and a few good panelists do bid 2 spades, usually without expecting it to be taken as the equivalent of a 3C jump rebid, nor a fragment , so I am hoping for a 60 this month. If responder had bid 1 spade, there would be several votes for the fake reverse into AKJ of diamonds, and mentions of it by those who chose some different rebid. There should be a sequence analageous for the case in hand, and it starts with two spades, IMO.
--- TWO Spade-- chizled in granite.
Have not made up my mind yet, but it's close between 1 !S and 3 !D. 3 !C will be the popular solver choice and is also a possibilty. The obvious flaw for both bids being that it lies about my suit length.
2 !S would never occur to me. It's a jump-shift and is game-forcing. This hand is nowhere near a game-force.
-
On problem B, we cue-bidders need a reminder that we are forcing "to suit agreement or game" I suppose 4C or 4D count as "game" for many partnerships, which is a relief, but this is still a bit rich, no? And what is our next call when we hear --suprise-- "2 spades" from partner? I will stick with the horrendous underbid of 2m and DARE the opps with their 9+ hearts to drop me there :) The level of forcingness above is not just a bizarre BWS2017, shocker, but almost universal if I am not mistaken..??
-
Your Solutions for the August 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM D: Pass
PROBLEM E: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Diamond 9
-
SOLVER: Jock McQuade Portland OR U.S.A.
Your Solutions for the August 2020 Contest -------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades (70)
PROBLEM B: 2 Diamonds (60)
PROBLEM C: 1 Diamond (80)
PROBLEM D: Pass (100)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs (100) ****
PROBLEM F: 1 Spade (50)
PROBLEM G: Double (100)
PROBLEM H: Heart King .. (100).
[660]
Pulled the trigger with all my early thoughts, except problem E, intact. Todd reminded us that my favorite -- "2 Spades" will be taken as a natural jump-shift, and that my "gadget" quasi-reverse treatment will score 20 at best so i went to Jim's list of disgusting possible bids and picked the obvious also-ran. (You left out "ONE Spade", I think, Jim :))
-
Late this month. First chance I've had to look at all the questions.
Problem A: Pass. 3 !S is also possible.
Partner has a good hand with moderate values, at least an opening hand. Possibly more. He also has a good suit. His 2M over opps 1M promises a good suit. Something like !S AKJTxx would be considered minimum. Personally, on the bidding, I think we are a max for 3 !S --- so passing is painful. I am not terribly concerned about the spade suit, my queen should fill it out nicely. But if partner is forced to ruff a heart in hand, the remainder of his hand must be a perfecto to make game. So I will stick with the safe Pass.
Problem B: 3 !D. Right on values, though a fifth diamond would be nice. With 2 !D a very close second.
I had initially chosen 2 !D but switched to 3 !D. I think 2 !D can be tactical, allowing the opps to bid again t the two-level--WHICH I WILL HIT. I am curious if a panelist or two see it that way.
2 !H is sexy, and was my first instinct, but what does it accomplish? Okay, it’s flexible and elicits more information from partner. So what?
2 !H is actually my 4th choice behind 1NT.
Problem C: 1 !D.
2 !C also works. But I've been responding 1 !D with this hand shape as long as I can remember in an effort to right-side.
Problem D: 3NT.
How does it go? Blah, Blah, Blah Hamman’s Rule? This is the only one I like. Sigh . . .
I would bid 3 !S with less. Partner knows this.
I recall an MSC hand from a year ago that was something like this. The winning choice was 3NT. Surprisingly, 3M (not forcing) garnered more votes than 4M, so took second in the scoring. I thought it strange that to score 100 you had to bid game, but the second place score was a non-forcing bid.
Problem E: 1 !S. Waiting.
I also like 2NT. Weird, yes! And even 3 !D.
Problem F: 3 !C.
Partner should be unbalanced for this auction.
Problem G: 3 !C. Very difficult!
Double is too painful with Ax. I see five ugly clubs. Bid what I see.
Oh my. Two in a row that I hate!
Problem H: !H K.
I have thirteen cards. This is one of them.
Seems like partner has the !H Ace. My King lead will permit him many ways to defend.
Trigger pulled:
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM D: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM E: 1 Spade
PROBLEM F: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
A. Pass
B. 2H - My first thought, its a bit ambiguous but I won't make a bid that could be construed as zero points like 1s,2c,2d). I have a half stopper so if p does too, this even leaves 3nt in the game.
C. 2c inv minor - this is the kind of hand that IM solves our problems
D. 4S - aggressive bidding pays off in this competition
E. 2S ! Todd will hate this, I'm faking the reverse. This has worked for me, and its not worked for me on occasion. Ce la Bridge. However, I'm not bidding 2nt off shape and with a major wide open. 3C feels like an underbid. This is likely wrong because I have a hole here in my ranges for reverses, and jump raises of my own suit etc.
F. Very difficult for me because I think BWS is differing from my understandings. Wishing I bid 2nt in the first place. 1nt and 2nt now seem to imply spade stoppers and they will wrong side NT when p has one, so those are out for me. 1s doesn't make sense to me unless pard has exactly 4441 hand that I'm fishing for - so p bids 1nt over my 1s and s/he is baffled why I didnt bid 1nt and is thinking maybe I was trying to do 4th suit forcing. Plus I will probably bid 2c over 1nt, so why don't I do it now. Anwer, my hand is too good for that...So, 3C for me. my hand rates a little better than its 11HCP. and if p does indeed have a spade stopper we might be on for 3nt. aggressive bidding wins out in this competition again for me. 3C
G. 3C
H. Kh - I hate these leads that seem obvious. it means its not the ideal. I feel it's like we have the ace of hearts, so what other trick can we set up. this might make JC a better score. but I'm going to stick with the obvious (and how the heck is 6D 2nd round heart control)
-
E. 2 !S Todd will hate this, I'm faking the reverse. This has worked for me, and its not worked for me on occasion. Ce la Bridge. However, I'm not bidding 2nt off shape and with a major wide open. 3C feels like an underbid. This is likely wrong because I have a hole here in my ranges for reverses, and jump raises of my own suit etc.
You're faking a Jump-Shift, not a reverse. 8)
-
E. 2 !S Todd will hate this, I'm faking the reverse. This has worked for me, and its not worked for me on occasion. Ce la Bridge. However, I'm not bidding 2nt off shape and with a major wide open. 3C feels like an underbid. This is likely wrong because I have a hole here in my ranges for reverses, and jump raises of my own suit etc.
You're faking a Jump-Shift, not a reverse. 8)
Todd, you are right bout it being a jump shift, but for some reason it feels like a reverse - I made the same mistake in my initial thoughts, but it wasn't jumped on because I didn't make it explicit like Joe did.
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
FREDERICKSBURG VA
U.S.A.
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM D: Pass
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs One of my lesser bad choices
PROBLEM F: 1 Spade I hated this choice, but to jump to 3C risked a 3-3 fit - not a long-term favorite
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Heart King My heart is with the CJ, but the HK will not score badly
-
SUBMITTED FOR THORNBURY
SOLUTIONS FOR:
John Walter
Burlington ON
Canada
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM D: 4 Spades
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
H. Kh - I hate these leads that seem obvious. it means its not the ideal. I feel it's like we have the ace of hearts, so what other trick can we set up. this might make JC a better score. but I'm going to stick with the obvious (and how the heck is 6D 2nd round heart control)
3 !S should be a suit, and 4 !S presumably an offer to play it in spades? (Not that it matters much, but I'll be curious to see if this is what was intended.)
If opener had all suits controlled he can bid 4NT. But he didn't. Instead, he bid 5 !C, which should promise first round control since a club control has not been shown earlier.
Since 5 !D can be passed, and responder knows opener bypassed 4NT with, most likely two losers in hearts, the leap to 6 !D shows hearts controlled. This must be a stiff since, with the !H Ace responder bids 5 !H. Hence the explanation of "†second-round heart control; no appropriate control-bid."
-
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM D: Double
PROBLEM E: 1 Spade
PROBLEM F: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
A 3♠
I initially thought I should pass. On further reflection partner cannot have anything much weaker than something like ♠AJ109xx, ♥Ax, ♦ xxx, ♣Kx. Here you would expect to make 9 tricks. If we give opps 5HCP opposite 12 then partner could have 15 say ♠ AKJ109x, ♥Ax, ♦xxx, ♣Ax and we likely make 10 tricks. It is a tall order but could partner have these “right” cards. So, I need to raise to 3♠ to find out.
B 2♥
I cannot bring myself to make the gross underbid of 2♦ (or 2♣). The problem is can I pass 2♠ or 3m for that matter? I would say, yes I can, even if it breaks a BWS rule. At least I have made a token effort that a very passable bid of 2♦ does not do.
C 1♦
Easy
D 3NT
Give partner an average hand with 12HCP. ♠ KQJxx, ♥ Kxx, ♦x, ♣Axxx and give East ♠x, ♥ xx, ♦AKJxxxx, ♣ Jxx . I back 3N rather than 4♠ with these hands.
E 1♠
Partner likely does not have a 4 card major and so either is weak with a ♦ suit or balanced weak. I do not like jumping to 3♣ with this suit. OTOH a game forcing jump shift to 2♠ is out because I do not have a game forcing hand opposite a minimum response. A 3♥ splinter surely also must be a game force. That leaves 1♠. If partner does have 4 spades and raises to 2♠, then I know partner has a good hand with at least 5♦ and 4♠ and we could be investigating a slam in ♦s.
F 1♠
I Like Dickhy I am also also a fan of 2-way xyz. However, I do not think this is the hand for it. I will go for the 1♠ lie, as it is a safe lie. OK if partner has 4405 distribution, we may not be able to get out of a ♠ contract but that is most unlikely.
G 2♠
Which bid is the least of evils?
3♣? Then we never find our 4-4 ♠ fit.
Double? Then what do we bid when partner bids 2 or 3♥?
2♠ Yes, the least of evils to go for. It will probably score badly though.
H K♥
Why not?
Judging from other iac ers choice, my choice is likely to be low scoring. Then so be it.
-
Still struggling with PROBLEM E:
!S AJ3 - !H Q - !D AKJ - !C QJ8543
1 !C - (p) - 1 !D - (p)
??
Five different picks so far. Blu called it the Bridge World Nightmare Hand. Close enough. I think it may get written up as a variation on the Bridge World Death Hand. Blu is right in that they keep trotting out some variation of this hand every several months. The key elements are six cards in our own suit and a three-card fit with partner. Usually it's a major response from partner and some sort of fake bid in a minor is required. Here, partner bid diamonds. Had partner responded 1 !S I would have no problem reversing into a three-card !D suit, hoping to be able to show delayed support later. Anyway, I digress.
One choice, not yet mentioned is a not totally crazy 3 !D. That AKJ looks an awful lot like four cards. If partner bids 3 !H next, I bid 3NT.
Just a bit surprised no one has mentioned it as a possibility.
This is a tough one.
-
Still struggling with PROBLEM E:
...
One choice, not yet mentioned is a not totally crazy 3 !D. That AKJ looks an awful lot like four cards. If partner bids 3 !H next, I bid 3NT.
Just a bit surprised no one has mentioned it as a possibility.
My initial thoughts:
E: ? I am still struggling with this one. I detest manufactured reverses, and it would be especially dangerous reversing into spades. I dislike making a jump raise of partner’s suit with only three. I detest splintering into a suit that contains an honor and only have three of partner’s suit. I dislike rebidding my six bagger headed by only QJ8. And I am absolutely not inclined to bid NT with singleton in an unbid suit. Double and redouble are inadmissible. So I am left with Pass, but that is not an option either. Guess I huddle.
Just saying, its been mentioned, but not as a contender! Though dislike is better that detest - lol.
-
Aha, I stand corrected.
Still, no one has, as yet, chosen it. I don't see it as being that nuts.
But I'm going to choose it either, so maybe I should sit down and keep my mouth shut! :o
-
Aug 2020
A. pass
B. 2S
C. 2C
D. 3S
E. 3D
F. 1N
G. x
H. 9D
-
Your Solutions for the August 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM D: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 1 Spade
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Heart King
Thank you for participating in the Master Solvers Club.
-
On Hand F: under the 2-way XYZ scheme I know, this hand is eminently suitable: after 2 !C – 2 !D (forced) – 2 !H shows balanced GI hand with 3c !H suit, and no stop in the fourth suit ( !S).
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Dick Harvey
Southampton
U.K.
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM D: Pass
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Wladislaus Dragwlya
Castrum Sex
Romania
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM D: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM E: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Spade 10
-
a) 3 !D: I come from the school of thought that if you're going to want to bail out partner from their suit better preempt in advance such that when you don't, a new suit should be fitted. The only way partner thus can find game without holding their breath is to bid 3D showing values in !D with !S support. Even AJ9xxx xx Axxx x will make on a 3-3 !D Split. Add the !DJ and it's a perfecto. If 3D means something else I'd love to hear what.
b) 2 !H: Offering 2 places to play with 9+HC. Maybe partner will even cue back and we have 3N.
c) 1 !D: Subtracting 1 for the 4333 shape and not wishing to lie about !C length. Ideally we can raise partner's NT to game.
d) Pass: I'll bid to 3N if partner can't strive to make the reopening X.
e) 3 !C: I like partner's suit, maybe the feeling is mutual? In any case I need that for game in 3N or 5C (even 5D?) and the response to this bid should clarify whether this is the case or not. Admittedly it doesn't feel great, but sometimes partner has a clunker.
f) 1 !S: Not wanting to gf or wrong-side the NT contract. I can then raise 1N to 2 or rebid 3C next.
g) X: Though I don't know Equal Level Corrections really apply here and doubt it's BWS even if so. 3C appears too give up on Spades too early and 2S over commits. In competition Partner should be bidding Spades before Hearts when 4-4. Maybe I'll bid 2N over 2H and try to run from the X to 3C?
Qxxx Kxxx xxx QJ would be amazing
h) !H K: Can't fathom a setting layout without us taking a Heart and a Diamond apart from the Spade Kx which I deem less likely.
-
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 2 Spades. I'd like to settle in Spade with 4-3 fit, and if we have game, Spade game is the most feasible.
PROBLEM C: 2 Clubs. I don't want to wrong side the NT.
PROBLEM D: Pass. Hopefully, partner will make a reopening double, and I'd pass.
PROBLEM E: 2 Notrump. Tough one. I can see other options.
PROBLEM F: 3 Clubs. To me, opener has a unbalanced hand, probably 5 card clubs.
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
SOLUTIONS FOR:
Jack Goody
Guildford
England
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM C: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM D: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM E: 1 Spade
PROBLEM F: 1 Spade
PROBLEM G: 2 Spades
PROBLEM H: Heart King
-
Your Solutions for the August 2020 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: 1 Diamond
PROBLEM D: 4 Spades
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Club Jack
I suspect I am the only nut who passes on board G but here is my thinking: We are probably beating 3D and if we aren't then partner is so weak that I do not want to be playing something like 3 !C. So I need to bid only if I think game is plausible. Do I? Well, game is possible but not all that likely. And how to get there? I have only two hearts and Rho has a 2 !D opening. Ok, it's a third hand opening so we cannot make all that much of what it shows, but most often he will not have four !H. So partner should have four, often five. I think I will wait to see what he does. If he has four !S to go with his !H he might well double.
I realize that this is all iffy, but so is bidding 3 !C. That could easily turn a plus into a minus. And bidding 2 !S is also pretty adventuresome. As is doubling. The main problem I see with passing is that in real life it would probably take me so long to come to that conclusion that partner would not be allowed to then come into the auction.
-
Scores are out . . .
Masse24 led the way, with DracuLea and DickHy tied for second; Masse24 was the only one on in The Bridge World Honor Roll this month (which required a 690 this month), so congrats!! But there were several nipping at the heels of our second/third place finishers. There were actually 9 people who finished with scores above 600! That's some high scoring!
Way to go to Masse24
REVISED!
Due to a typo when calculating the scores, one answer was not calculated properly. It has now been fixed and DracuLea and DickHy were bumped up to a tie for 2nd/3rd with a 670.
| NAME | BW-SCORE | RANK | MPs |
| Masse24 | 700 | 1 | 30 |
| DracuLea | 670 | 2 | 15 |
| DickHy | 670 | 3 | 15 |
| . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . |
|
Also participating and receiving 1 Monster Point are (alphabetically): BabsG, Blubayou, CCR3, Hoki, Jcreech, KenBerg, MarilynLi, Msphola, P0stm0rtem, Thornbury, VeeRee, WackoJack, and Yleexotee. A solid month, with some high scores all around!
-
A - pass. The bidders must be assuming that partner holds 18+ points because with any less I can't see us wanting to be in game. And if the opposition can be trusted just a little (11 points with East, 5 with West) partner can't have more than 17.
B - 2♥.
C - 2NT, probably not the bid I'd make at the table but experts frequently bid notrumps with an unstopped suit, so why not with two unstopped suits?
D - dble. The passers assume opener will reopen but why should that be the case if partner has just a normal minimum hand?
E - 1♠, again probably not the bid I'd make at the table but sometimes these panellists can get quite adventuresome.
F - 1NT, as with problem C this is about describing the general hand shape rather than guessing the right suit contract to play in.
G - 3♣. I don't buy into the argument that we are changing a potential plus score into a minus one, would seem to me to be a clairvoyant's view. If a partner who passed initially is unable to balance then bidding 3♣ now could do the reverse, change a minus score into a plus one.
H - ♥K.
-
I should learn not to complain:
Personally, I like to have a bit of closure on the previous months problems before opening up the new set, but Todd is getting slower in providing a summary of the comments and Pat is getting faster with her complaints about no activity on the new month's problems. I keep looking around for Major Major Major, to ask if he got his promotion to Major yet.
So Todd is in a bit of a time bind, and has now asked me to see if I can pull together a summary. The squeaky wheel gets to do... Below is the first half of the August hands. I will get to the second half as soon as possible (unless Todd feels sorry for dumping this on me - not a chance).
Problem A: Five of the IAC solvers (BabsG, BluBayou, WackoJack, DrArcula, DickHy) went for the top choice of 3 !S. There were a number of IAC solvers that waivered between 1 !S and Pass. WackoJack said it best “I initially thought I should pass. On further reflection partner cannot have anything much weaker than something like ♠AJ109xx, ♥Ax, ♦ xxx, ♣Kx. Here you would expect to make 9 tricks. If we give opps 5HCP opposite 12 then partner could have 15 say ♠ AKJ109x, ♥Ax, ♦xxx, ♣Ax and we likely make 10 tricks. It is a tall order but could partner have these “right” cards. So, I need to raise to 3♠ to find out.” From the BW panel Berkowitz comments “Three spades. A vulnerable two-spade bid is not to be sneered at; partner has a good hand. Perhaps the better try is three diamonds, but I hate playing in three-two fits.” “Three spades.” Writes Boudreau, “At imps push to invite but not to accept. Both partners can’t push.”
Ten IAC solvers went with Pass. According to Jcreech “Pass I suspect that both partnerships have roughly half the deck, and partner is already looking at a known bad split in trump, so I am not inclined to move.” Woolsey’s logic was “Pass. Bidding would be punishing partner for making what is one of the most effect overcalls.”
Interestingly enough, the submitter of the problem, Chorush, was also a panelist and thought that 3 !D would be fit showing in spades and showing a concentration of strength. P0stm0rtem was the only IAC solver that was brave enough to take this position, “I come from the school of thought that if you're going to want to bail out partner from their suit better preempt in advance such that when you don't, a new suit should be fitted. The only way partner thus can find game without holding their breath is to bid 3D showing values in !D with !S support. Even AJ9xxx xx Axxx x will make on a 3-3 !D Split. Add the !D J and it's a perfecto. If 3D means something else I'd love to hear what.” However, the moderator said “If it were known to be a raise, three diamonds would be superior to three spades, but is dangerously ambiguous, as several direct raisers indicated(.)”
Problem B: Almost all of the IAC solvers got the top score for this problem with the 2 !H cue bid. DickHy said it nicely “BWS seems to offer two options. A cue-bid shows “at least game interest” and “2N is forcing”. Presumably, the latter would show a !H stop. I’m a bit shy of game values but partner (the stronger hand of the two of us) is over the opponent who opened, so why not? We know shrinking violets just get trampled into the dust in BWS bidding quizzes.” Zia likes this bid well enough to quote himself, “Two hearts. The cue-bidder can’t pass intrvenor’s below-game continuation, but I may well forget that when he bids two spades. ‘Winning is purer than purity’ – Zia circa 2019.” While Wolff just doesn’t like the other options. He writes “No doubt an overbid, but no good choice is available. I might as well be aggressive.”
The next choice for IAC solvers was 3 !D. Masse24 described his thoughts “3 !D. Right on values, though a fifth diamond would be nice. With 2 !D a very close second. I had initially chosen 2 !D but switched to 3 !D. I think 2 !D can be tactical, allowing the opps to bid again t the two-level--WHICH I WILL HIT. I am curious if a panelist or two see it that way.” Kamil and Sherman agree – “Fudging one notrump (which we might be constrained to bid with only 6-7 HCP) without a stopper simply to show values feels misguided, and a cue-bid would be too much. We’ll go the stodgy route by bidding our best suit while showing values.”
Problem C: Five IAC solvers chose 1 !D (Masse24, KenBerg, WackoJack, BluBayou, P0stm0rtem), the Panel’s choice. BluBayou is both grateful and perplexed as he wrote “Thanks for the footnote, bridge world. This is a clear inverted raise to me, but not if "our" systems says we cannot crash in 2NT--which puzzles me no end. So i vote for "1 diamond" not willing to get another 10 points for bidding another forward-going notrump bid with both majors at xxx. who voted this footnote into our system?” While Masse24 says “2 !C also works. But I've been responding 1 !D with this hand shape as long as I can remember in an effort to right-side.” Kriegel says it nicely from the Panel “One diamond. I don’t want to play in clubs opposite a minimum weak notrump, and I don’t want to grab the notrump. If partner rebids one notrump, I will probably pass.” And Swanson argues, “Even with three quick tricks, this is a pathetic hand. If partner rebids in a, I’ll give him three clubs. I’ll pass North’s one-notrump rebid.”
Seven IAC solvers went with the inverted raise. YleeXotee said “2c inv minor - this is the kind of hand that IM solves our problems.” And Jcreech agrees, “No other good bid – great 11 HCP, no other biddable suit, and I don’t want the lead coming into my hand. All I am missing is a fifth club.” From the BW Panel, Kleinman opined “A hand for which The Great Shuffler in the Sky created inverted minors. Don’t tell me anyone would dream of bidding the newly-fashionable invitational two notrump with this extremely anti-positional hand.”
Problem D: Seven IAC solvers (BabsG, Jcreech, MarilynLi, DickHy, DrArculea, P0stm0rtem, BluBayou) selected the top bid of Pass. MarilynLi summed it up succinctly, “Pass. Hopefully, partner will make a reopening double, and I'd pass.” Planning his next bid, P0stm0rtem wrote “I'll bid to 3N if partner can't strive to make the reopening X.” Hurd noted the range of possibilities – “Could be minus 670 Instead of plus 420 or more but could also be plus 500 or plus 800.” With a different view of bidding following a reopening double, Kriegel writes “If partner doubles, I will bid four spades. The diamonds spots might be strong enough for a promotion on defense late in the day, but they aren’t good enough to tempt me to sit for the double.”
Four IAC solvers received a 90 on this problem; three for 3NT and one for 3 !S. Representing the 3NT bidders, DickHy tells us “3N or 4 !S? We need to be in game somewhere. My hand makes 3 !S too weak and 4 !D too zealous. I’m offering no ruffs – with a 53 M fit and a 4333 hand don’t you experts often prefer 3N to 4M?” While Masse24 is a bit flippant with his reasoning – “How does it go? Blah, Blah, Blah Hamman’s Rule? This is the only one I like. Sigh . . . I would bid 3 !S with less. Partner knows this. I recall an MSC hand from a year ago that was something like this. The winning choice was 3NT. Surprisingly, 3M (not forcing) garnered more votes than 4M, so took second in the scoring. I thought it strange that to score 100 you had to bid game, but the second place score was a non-forcing bid.” Lee from the BW Panel thinks this bid “Could be a big matchpoint winner in several ways, especially as East likely has ace-king or diamonds and no side entry.”
3 !S was the other 90 selected by an IAC solver. She provided no discussion so we don’t have her reasoning, but Silver argues from the BW Panel for “Three spades. Influenced by the sterile shape, diamond wastage, the lack of a fourth spade, the possibility of bad breaks, and, of course, the form of scoring which encourages going low. Brave ain’t I?” Adler is more succinct. “An underbid, but it is pairs, and there are lots of losers.”
-
Part two of the summary:
Problem E: This was the problem IAC solvers struggled with most. Jcreech described the overall problem like this: “I am still struggling with this one. I detest manufactured reverses, and it would be especially dangerous reversing into spades. I dislike making a jump raise of partner’s suit with only three. I detest splintering into a suit that contains an honor and only have three of partner’s suit. I dislike rebidding my six bagger headed by only QJ8. And I am absolutely not inclined to bid NT with singleton in an unbid suit. Double and redouble are inadmissible. So I am left with Pass, but that is not an option either. Guess I huddle.”
IAC solvers largely missed the boat on this problem. Only Msphola selected the winning 3 !D bid, but without comment. So we need to look the BW Panel for why it won out. Woolsey writes “Three diamonds. About right on value, and this is pretty-good three-card support. Partner had some reason for bidding diamonds. Anything else would be a big distortion.” The thought process for Bramley was “Three clubs is a close second. Two notrump would be grotesque, though it might work. Majors-first responding style implies greater chance that partner has five-plus diamonds.”
By and large, the IAC solvers picked one of the two choices that received an 80, 3 !C. When Jcreech finally selected, “3 Clubs One of my lesser bad choices.” P0stm0rtem, upon selection, gave a more thoughtful response, “I like partner's suit, maybe the feeling is mutual? In any case I need that for game in 3N or 5C (even 5D?) and the response to this bid should clarify whether this is the case or not. Admittedly it doesn't feel great, but sometimes partner has a clunker.” From the BW Panel, Meyers said “Another problem with no scintillating options. Two notrump was my knee-jerk reactions, but I talked myself out of it. Too far out. Three clubs is boring, and I’m not proud of it. If I could have one hand each session where I could peek in partner’s hand before bidding, this would be the one.” Similarly, Rosenberg writes “Hate it, but I hate everything else more. Switch the spades and diamonds, and I might try one spade.”
Speaking of 1 !S, IAC solvers also tried it, the other 80. WackoJack gave the choice nice thought: “Partner likely does not have a 4 card major and so either is weak with a ♦ suit or balanced weak. I do not like jumping to 3♣ with this suit. OTOH a game forcing jump shift to 2♠ is out because I do not have a game forcing hand opposite a minimum response. A 3♥ splinter surely also must be a game force. That leaves 1♠. If partner does have 4 spades and raises to 2♠, then I know partner has a good hand with at least 5♦ and 4♠ and we could be investigating a slam in ♦s.” Nonetheless, I liked Hoki’s reason best, “1♠, again probably not the bid I'd make at the table but sometimes these panellists can get quite adventuresome.” Silver, from the BW panelists, gave the most thorough analysis: “Too strong for two clubs, but the suit quality is not good enough for three. Too strong for two diamonds, but not enough of them to jump to three. Maybe two notrump, valuing the quingleton heart? Nah! One spade is the perfect rebid except for the insignificant detail of the lack of a fourth spade.” Which leaves us agreeing with Adler’s assessment of “One spade. With my fingers and toes crossed.”
Problem F: This problem was brutal for most of our solvers - if you did not get it right, the drop to 50 was precipitous. Only two (Masse24, MarilynLi) managed to find the right choice of 3 !C. This sounded easy to MarilynLi, who wrote, “3 Clubs. To me, opener has a unbalanced hand, probably 5 card clubs.” Masse24 agreed: “Partner should be unbalanced for this auction.” From the BW Panel, Chorush describes 3 !C as “Honest, if not typical. If partner tries three notrump, I will be delighted.” Bramley agrees, saying “Partner’s rebid shows real clubs, so I’ll angle for three notrump. Grabbing the notrump is for matchpoints.” And Zia seals the choice with “The easiest bid in 20 years of Master Solvers’ Club problems.”
Hoki and MsPhola were the only other IAC solvers to get as much as 50 on this problem with his choice of 1NT. Hoki chose “1NT, as with problem C this is about describing the general hand shape rather than guessing the right suit contract to play in.” Brogeland, from the BW Panel, describes his thoughts on the problem as “Eleven points, but we don’t rate to make game opposite partner’s 12-14 HCP in a balanced hand (even if he has a maximum).” And Rosenberg points out that “In BWS, opener’s rebid guarantees at least four clubs but does not promise and unbalanced hand, so there is no good answer.”
Almost all of the remaining IAC solvers chose one of two 40 point selections. 1 !S was the slight favorite. WackoJack described his decision as “I will go for the 1♠ lie, as it is a safe lie. OK if partner has 4405 distribution, we may not be able to get out of a ♠ contract but that is most unlikely.” P0stm0rtem is a bit more succinct with, “Not wanting to gf or wrong-side the NT contract. I can then raise 1N to 2 or rebid 3C next.” And Masse24 is even more pithy with, “Waiting.” Woolsey, from the BW Panel, agrees: “I’ll show the four-card spade suit I don’t have. If partner raises, I’ll bid two notrump and then three notrump, and he should get the message.”
The other popular 40 for the IAC solvers was 2 !C. DickHy was the only one to express his reasoning, though it is based on the players violating the BWS system. “If a partnership plays Walsh over a 1 !C opener, 2-way XYZ is tremendously useful. The continuations take up an awful lot of brain cells, but it is a wizard scheme. After 1x-1y-1z: 2 !C = GI (and forces 2 !D, unless opener is 17+) and 2 !D = GF (and asks for more info). BWS doesn’t seem to mention it, but I would expect the pros on the panel to use it. In which case 2 !C is automatic. If we are not playing 2-way XYZ, why the hell didn’t I respond 2N in the first place?” But then the moderator points out that many of the BW Panelists made bids that “… were deliberate system violations” on this problem. There were two panelists that voted for 2 !C, but neither were quoted in the article.
Problem G: Five IAC solvers (CCR3, VeeRee, Hoki, Masse24, YleeXotee) made the top pick on this problem with 3 !C. Masse24 said “3 !C. Very difficult! Double is too painful with Ax. I see five ugly clubs. Bid what I see.” While Hoki doesn’t “… buy into the argument that we are changing a potential plus score into a minus one, would seem to me to be a clairvoyant's view. If a partner who passed initially is unable to balance then bidding 3♣ now could do the reverse, change a minus score into a plus one.” Echoing Masse24, Adler (from the BW panel) said “Three clubs. The brave will double, but that doubleton heart makes me nervous.” Fleisher and Friesner sees “… little reason to distort the description.” And keeping partner in mind, Kamil and Sherman bid 3 !C “Trying to avoid a scolding from pard. We live in fear.”
Nine IAC solvers went with double. P0stm0rtem writes “X: Though I don't know Equal Level Corrections really apply here and doubt it's BWS even if so. 3C appears too give up on Spades too early and 2S over commits. In competition Partner should be bidding Spades before Hearts when 4-4.” While Jcreech banks on luck: “Dbl Too many points to pass, not good or long enough suits to bid, so try a double and hope partner bids one of my suits.” The BW Panelists were not much better at justifying a double. Hudecek has a warning for partner: “Double. At some point my partner will need to develop skills at declaring with a combined six rotten trumps. It is best to practice this art when nonvulnerable.” Rosenberg describes his choice as “Not liking it, but disliking the other choices more. I’d bid three clubs if guaranteed that it wouldn’t be the final contract. If partner advanced two spades, I’ll raise to three. Whether I should continue after a two-heart advance is probably a function of what partner should do with four-four in the majors. Over a three-heart advance, I’ll be truly stuck: pass and four clubs will both be legitimate choices. Basically, I am doubling and praying that something good will happen.”
Problem H: KenBerg was the only IAC solver that found the winning lead of the !C J. He did not describe his thoughts, but Jcreech did in his initial thoughts: “I am torn between the wooden HK and the more aggressive CJ. I am being aggressive today, but by the final decision, I may chicken out.” From the BW Panel, Meyers writes, “Club jack. At the table, I would lazily lead the heart king, but here I fantasize about declarer’s having no entry outside of diamonds and not being able to enter the closed hand in a timely way.” Brogeland’s analysis goes “If partner has the ace of hearts, I doubt that we have another trick. So I hope t find partner with ace-queen of clubs, or the king of clubs and another trick. After the opponents had supported each other in spades, it is not so clear that partner would have doubled five clubs, anticipating that he would be on lead against six spades (or helping the opponents to play in spades instead of diamonds).”
All other IAC solvers selected the “wooden” !H K. DickHy writes, “K !H. By now my incompetence at opening leads should have become starkly apparent. What do the 3 !S and 4 !S bids mean - 1st and 2nd round control? West skipped over 3 !H and East as shown x in !H, so as blubayou says, let’s cash our !H. I’ll lead the K (rather than Q or J) so that when it wins, I can make a safe exit (from the point of view of the post-mortem) of the J !C.” Masse24 is getting the obvious out of the way: “I have thirteen cards. This is one of them. Seems like partner has the !H Ace. My King lead will permit him many ways to defend.” Among the BW Panel members voting for the !H K, the lack of a double seems to weigh heavily. For example, Kitty and Steve Cooper say “Heart king. Pard didn’t double five clubs.” And Rosenberg’s analysis is “The best chance is that there has been a misunderstanding, and that we can cash two hearts. Partner didn’t double five clubs or six diamonds.” The moderator threw in another twist to the !H K lead – “How about a dull idea? If South thinks the king-of-hearts lead is as likely to defeat the contract as any other thrust, a tie-breaker is that it will often stop an overtrick. The contract will frequently be cold against any lead, so …”
-
Thank you, Jim!
Nice summary.
:) :) :)
-
Problem E. So you raise to 3♦ and end up in a 3-3 fit if partner bid 1♦ with a hand like in problem C.
Pretty. ;)