IAC Forums

Chew the Fat! => IAC & Master Solvers Club => Topic started by: Masse24 on April 03, 2021, 01:01:41 PM

Title: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on April 03, 2021, 01:01:41 PM

Contest deadline change: The deadline for the JUNE MSC contest is April 30 at 11:59 p.m. (ET).

JUNE 2021 MSC

Deadline: APRIL 30 at 11:59 p.m. (ET)

Submit your JUNE MSC responses here: The Bridge World - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB (https://www.bridgeworld.com/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)

* * *

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: blubayou on April 08, 2021, 09:31:28 PM

Problem A reminds me of the fairy tale of Goldilocks & the 3 bears. Single raise of pard's vul. 2C is TOO COLD, Cue-advance it TOO HOT unless SHE offers 3NT. So we are left with the very 'just right' advance of 2NT. Sorry, I cannot fit showing my spades into a sane auction. Maybe my glass is half empty.

on Problem B It's clear to me that we want to start pushing by getting PARTNER to bid 1NT. But
"Responder's reopening double of a sandwich overcall is cooperative-takeout"[bws2017, section F] This means I show about 10 points and TWO (3??) spades to justify the OPTION of partner leaving it in, so the only push I can afford is raise clubs, and maybe we catch them at 2 Spades? "Two to HIT, four to SIT" isn't that the old rule of thumb? (I am aware that tis 1 !S bid is not technically a Sandwich Overcall, but it is clear we WOULD have made a 1 !H response if West stayed out, so IMO the italicized 'rule' applies here.)
Problem C: I have gotten some near-zeros by doggedly following the Rule of 15 with hands like this ( add your HCPs to your spade length and if you don't reach 15, then pass the thing OUT.) Not today! I'm pretty sure I will be opening 3C in 4th. [Looks like a great hand for the dreaded 200-deal SIMULATION ;>]
P.S. 144 random deals with this exact hand south showed that 3 passes to south NEVER HAPPENS in life unless somebody makes an off-the-wall decision to pass a logical bid!

On Problem D, I'm sure we all jumped at the chance to do Texas, then RKC either because it's fun to make those wheels go around or because we have never in ten years witnessed the "mild slam try" sequence (choice C ) get any respect. There are 12 points missing +/- and a slam TRY is what we have. Still, the fact that pard is relatively aceless could surely induce him to let the game bid lie, despite having what we need :( . Kxx, AK, Kxxxx, Kxx, for example. P.S> The self-splinter with a stiff ace is MORE misguided, here, than it is in the usual lesson hands, by the way! (really good clubs will be really useful, given enough control in the majors)

We have only QUESTIONS for Problem E, not answers so much :(
Do our 3 bids add up to a game-force or not? ___
Has partner denied a spade stopper? ___
Can his heart preference be FALSE ( ie:Jx)? ___
Where was the 1 !S sandwich bid by opp on round one? ____
WHY DID PARTNER PASS 2 !S DOUBLED ? ____
I would dearly love to take up the gauntlet and try to hold them to 5 trump tricks plus nada, but they probably WILL score a diamond as well, so I am stuck for now until most of those questions get solved.
t
Problem F: What Jim says, below.

Problem G: Let's wait for Ken to chime in and show us 2 or 3 hands he laid out showing how opponents can make 2 Hearts with their combined 17 or 18 points (and we can't do squat about it except hope to hold a perverted 2 Spades sac to 100. Jxxxx, 98x, Jxxx, x is the East hand I expect to see, and West will surely say "thank you partner" when it hits. A second double (of 2H, here) shows a full-on trap pass--not this average hand that we are already presumed to have. It's not 'co-operative' in an way, and might be done on a hand that would have left in the original balancing double of ONE Heart.

Problem H: a freebie for the lead problem?? Club Ace, 'til hell freezes over.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 09, 2021, 12:56:38 PM

Problem A: 2 !S   Unilke Blu, I can also see the 2 !S bid. It should be constructive, tends to show club support, but gives us possession of the master suit in order to compete.

Problem B: 2 !C   Matchpoints are nasty. We need to compete, and clubs look best. At least we are only at the two level.

Problem C: Pass   Only 13 Casino points. I would like to bid and be sure that we will go plus, but I can't - who has the spades - not me. Pass at least doesn't go negative.

Problem D: c   I don't like splintering into a stiff A. Definitely slammish, but I don't want to commit to the 5-level without a willing partner. Transfer and then bid 4 !H might not be pushy enough; I don't like my other options yet and it is a move in the right direction.

Problem E: 3 !C   This is one of those auctions where it seems to get worse the more it goes on. Partner advertised real clubs and I've shown my values, now I will show my doubleton club honor (hopefully he has six instead of the five I always have to rebid).

Problem F: Pass   I may change my mind, but my hand has gotten worse, and it is far from certain that the undisclosed minor is clubs. Partner was silent, if he has something, then let him keep the auction alive.

Problem G: Double   Too much to pass. Nowhere that looks good to compete. I think this should be cooperative; let partner know we have values with no clear direction, and hope if he passes, it will be right.

Problem H: !C A   Peter Boyd once told me that when you have a good normal lead, you should make it. This, at least, gives me a view of the dummy. Partner did not double 2 !H, so I will back off of that option. I don't think partner has a spade honor to pickle, so that is my second choice.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: peuco on April 14, 2021, 04:45:15 PM

A. 2S I never bypass a decent 5 card spade suit
B. X take out, may get us to 1NT 2C or 2D or 2HX or 1SX not afraid
C. 3C odds i will get some kind of C support starting wit stiff J
D. b. only way to get to slam and can still stop at game

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: yleexotee on April 14, 2021, 05:54:10 PM

Preliminary thoughts
A. 2S- obvious, I think. and I don't care if the panel disagrees!
B. Pass or X, never works out for me when I support the 1c open with 3 clubs, even given the other bidding.
C. Pass or 1c, with some thought given to 3C. 1c is maybe the least appealing because ops could have a 4-4 fit in spades, and 3c will keep them out while giving us a chance at a partial. except
that its a marginal suit.
D. A, I'm taking the middle road.
E. XX, this is what comes to mind trying to pass the buck to partner. we have GF points, but nothing seems to fit yet. maybe we just set them in spades, maybe p can bid NT, I don't know.
F. Pass. there better be some Unusual v unusual expectations in BWS because I have those expectations therefore p has zippo.
G. Pass. I have to keep in mind that p could just have been balancing. I already redoubled XX showing I have points and allowing p to bid something. Since they chose not to, I'm letting it go.
H. A!C followed by diamonds, but I'm taking my free peek at the cards.

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: Double
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: Redouble
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: yleexotee on April 14, 2021, 06:00:48 PM

incidently, about problem D - I have yet to see anyone show good criteria for how to proceed when you get that 2 level transfer and then a raise to 4. how do I know that I should accept or go forward towards slam. My hand is well defined with the 1nt bid, do I only go if I have ace or King in the other suits, do I go only if I have the max 17 pts, do I only go if I have more than 2 hearts, do I only go if I have an honor in hearts plus some of the previous criteria. that slam try seems like a real shot in the dark for the 1nt opener. What if I have two small spades, a couple of heart honors and the max, seems like I should go, but after asking for aces and finding that we have the Q and are only off 1 key card, slam is hopeless but I have already bid it.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: peuco on April 14, 2021, 07:34:49 PM

E. 3C gives pd the option of bidding 3S asking for half stopper
F. Pass If west has the S A the pass is clear if not, what to bid, H or D
G. X my Cs make more difficult for them to make 2H
H. Always lead what is obvious unless you like being scorned by partner

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: blubayou on April 15, 2021, 04:51:36 PM

Heaven help me--I'm going with Joe on problem D ( the self-splinter option). As we both seem to recall, the mild slam-try ALWAYS gets left at game except when 1NT opener can super-accept. We can hardly expect, nor need, 4 trumps plus a good hand with our 7-bagger, so showing a slammy hand with 1 club is what's left. That should take care of the shame of reaching six with crap spades in pard's hand-- or diamonds or hearts , for that matter.
Incidently, when Joe says 'maybe we can set them in Spades" re: problem E, I have the same thought, but realize that WE are in 2S--not THEM. Even so, I think we can win 8 in our Jxx facing xxx "trump suit" ?

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on April 17, 2021, 10:33:11 PM

PROBLEM A: 2 !S. Looks like the HCP are split evenly. This should generally show five, since with six I may have preempted. Shows !C tolerance, too, I think. I do not relish the location of my !H K, but you can’t have everything.

PROBLEM B: Double. Down the middle. 1NT was my sexy choice, but I just don't have the guts to try it here. Partner’s expected spade length (4?) would reveal that 1NT is based on having hearts stopped. The "gutsy" MSC call in my opinion. But Kleinman will be brutal if this it does not win, so my choice to go safe with double. I also like 2 !C, but my at-the-table choice would be double. On this auction, partner is quite probably 4=2=3=4. So if we end in 2 !C, we're likely playing a Moysian. Not awful at the two-level.
[Added] Double at least consults partner.

PROBLEM C: Pass. There will be bidders. Hope there are enough passers to make this score decently. The only other sane possibility would be 3 !C. The hero bid is 3 !C, which will score 100 or 50. But with Kleinman the director (he tend toward conservative), the "safe" Pass seems best.

PROBLEM D: A. (2 !D then 4 !C Auto-splinter). My conservative nature tells me to transfer at the 2-level then bid 4 !H (mild slam-try). The reasons against doing otherwise are plain: 1) Splintering a stiff Ace is undesirable. How can partner properly assess the value of !C KQx? I know some do it, but I do not—unless my hand is strong enough to bid on. 2) Texas followed by RKC with two fast spade losers breaks a basic RKC rule. However, the “mild slam-try” approach with this hand seems far too timid. Which means the panel will choose one of the other choices.

I think this falls into the “better than a mild slam try” category.

Which means we should probably be safe at the five-level. Only a very unfortunate minimum holding by partner (off the three missing keycards) makes the five-level too high.

Texas then RKC could result in partner bidding 5 !H with the !H AK and off a !S control. Oops! Or partner bidding 5 !H with two Aces off the trump K and, small slam is very safe with even 13 tricks possible. So RKC off two quick losers is frowned on for a reason.

The splinter seems most flexible. If partner cooperates with 4 !D, I’m bidding 5 !D. If partner dislikes my splinter and bids 4 !H, I’m also bidding 5 !D. Hopefully this should highlight my lack of a !S control. But does it oversell my hand? Maybe.

PROBLEM E: Pass. Partner psyched. Does that mean this is the best call? No.

PROBLEM F: Double. First stab was Pass, then I changed to 3 !H. I want to show extras and bring partner into the conversation. However, I hate the location of my !S K. Considered 3 !H, but partner can still (although unlikely) chime in with something or even pass whatever comes round to him.

PROBLEM G: Double. Leading the !H 2.

PROBLEM H: My highest trump. I would lead my lowest trump, but I believe this one better expresses my dislike for lead problems!

Submitted:

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: Double
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: Pass
PROBLEM F: Double
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Spade 8

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 19, 2021, 11:39:57 AM

Why was this hiding at the end of the April discussion? Blu, have you become so unsure of your reasoning that you test your ideas in other threads, hoping that other solvers will not notice and scorn you choices. Say it ain't so, Jo (ck)! - lol - just relocating to its proper location and razzing at the same time.

Quote from: blubayou on April 19, 2021, 04:48:39 AM

<<--------June 2021 2nd draft--------->>
Problem A:> Still looks like what I want for a 3NT try facing a vul 2 level overcall
--2NT--
Problem B:> pard might be 4=2=3=4 so rather than trust clubs i will wrong-side the 1NT contract. Still no guts to give the co-op double, light and with one trump.
-- 1NT --
Problem C:> Three Clubs out-simulates passing out, 10 to 5. Didn't look at any other bid choices as it took 320 iterations to even get 15 hands that logically start with 3 passes!
-- 3 Clubs --
Problem D:> RKC is a bad bash; mild slam try bombs out unless pard has a rock where ANY rebid would work. That leaves the self splinter standing, since they left out choice D:"3 Diamonds--natural showing 10 red cards" lol -- (a) [ self-splinter in Clubs] --
Problem E:> in 2S hit, they take 5 trumps somehow or even only 4 and we take the rest.
-- pass --
Problem F:> -- pass --
Problem G:> sometime between now(4/18/21) ond curfew, Ken will show us how easy opps' 2H is, with their measly 17-count. -- 2 Spades --
Problem H:> -- Club ACE--

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: peuco on April 23, 2021, 05:38:45 PM

SOLUTIONS FOR:

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: Double
PROBLEM C: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM D: (b)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: hoki on April 23, 2021, 10:24:56 PM

E Can someone please answer these three queries:

1/ Why are we responding 1H instead of bidding four-card suits up the line with 1D?
My understanding is that we bypass [longer] diamonds on hands that are not strong
enough to force to game?

2/ Why are we bidding a non-forcing 2D after opener's hand is clearly limited by the
2C rebid? Isn't our correct rebid 3D? (Had I sensibly responded 1D in the first place
I could of course now bid 2H which would indeed be forcing and not result in partner
raising hearts on a doubleton.)

3/ How am I supposed to bid sensibly over 2S when I have already totally misdescribed
my hand?

Oliver

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 24, 2021, 01:42:12 AM

Quote from: hoki on April 23, 2021, 10:24:56 PM

E Can someone please answer these three queries:

1/ Why are we responding 1H instead of bidding four-card suits up the line with 1D?
My understanding is that we bypass [longer] diamonds on hands that are not strong
enough to force to game?

2/ Why are we bidding a non-forcing 2D after opener's hand is clearly limited by the
2C rebid? Isn't our correct rebid 3D? (Had I sensibly responded 1D in the first place
I could of course now bid 2H which would indeed be forcing and not result in partner
raising hearts on a doubleton.)

3/ How am I supposed to bid sensibly over 2S when I have already totally misdescribed
my hand?

Oliver

Hi Oliver,

I'll take a stab at it.

First, we are bound by the system we are playing which is BWS for MSC contest, It will be the basis from which we draw inferences about the meaning of partner's bids and partner will need to make similar inferences about our bids.

Second, we have to remember that BWS is based on Walsh-style 2/1, which is rooted in two central premises: (1) when you open 1 !D, you will hold four or more diamonds except when you are exactly 4-4-3-2 and (2) in responding to 1m, you bid your majors first unless you have a game-forcing hand and a longer minor than the major. Therefore, in response to your first query, as much as it pains you to bypass the diamonds, you need to with this hand.

Third, in response to your second query, you are not making a non-forcing 2 !D bid. A new suit by an unpassed-hand is a one-round force. If partner had rebid 1NT, it would have been forcing with a more specific meaning, but in this sequence it is simply forcing for one round and implies that you do not have longer diamonds than hearts.

Fourth, 2 !S was fourth-suit forcing to game. The opponents doubled, which gave partner a choice of actions - to bid something constructive or pass and find out more about your game-force. He chose to pass, so now it is up to you. My inference of partner's hand at this point is that he does not have a certain spade stopper, holds exactly 3 hearts, five or more clubs, and the fact that he did not rebid 1NT, should have an unbalanced hand. What I think I have shown with my bids is 12+ HCPs with exactly four hearts, less than five diamonds, at best a partial spade stopper, and probably semi-balanced because it looked like I was trying to get to 3NT. In response to query 3, and based on this information, it is up to you to decide whether you have still totally misdescribed your hand, and what bid you might make to answer. the MSC problem.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: hoki on April 24, 2021, 09:06:44 PM

Thanks Jim and Jock, you have certainly given me food for thought.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on April 24, 2021, 09:18:54 PM

I'm just getting started here but there seems to be a common element to A and B, of looking back to my first call.

A: I bid 2S. Partner thinks
Hmm, he did not open 2S. Now he bids 2S. I think he has five spades. And that would be a bit risky unless he also had a club fit for those times when I don't like spades." So it seems clear enough.

B: I double. Partner thinks "Hmm. He passed the first time but now doubles. He must have some values or he would not be doubling now. He does not have spades or he would have shown them before. If he just has diamonds he could bit them. After his pass on the first round I would not expect him to have much if he now bid 2D. And if he just has clube he could bid them or even have bid them first round. So[this is still pard thinking] I guess he has clubs and diamonds, not enough to bid them on his own." And he can probably figure me for some heart length given that I could not bis spades first round and don't have a clear choice yet about which minor. I suppose pard has four spades, more often than not he will, he night choose NT, more often I expect he will bid 2C. He should be able to guess right most of the time.

I'll get on to C and all before Mayday.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: blubayou on April 24, 2021, 10:52:12 PM

Everybody is misreading the diagrams this month :(
1) Joe considers setting them in 2S, when it is US that is in that bid ( admitted I have bulled that same idea)
2) Todd blurts out "partner has psyched", when he rebid his psyche-suit, then kept our 2D rebid open-on E:>
3) and just now, Ken ponders pard's failure to bid spades on B:> which has gone 1 !C (1 !H ) pass 1 !S ;__

I'm sure all 3 of these brain farts would get noticed in a week , but--since a week is ALL WE HAVE LEFT, here it is in writing ;D

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 25, 2021, 12:08:43 AM

Quote from: blubayou on April 24, 2021, 10:52:12 PM

Everybody is misreading the diagrams this month :(
1) Joe considers setting them in 2S, when it is US that is in that bid ( admitted I have bulled that same idea)
2) Todd blurts out "partner has psyched", when he rebid his psyche-suit, then kept our 2D rebid open-on E:>
3) and just now, Ken ponders pard's failure to bid spades on B:> which has gone 1 !C (1 !H ) pass 1 !S ;__

I'm sure all 3 of these brain farts would get noticed in a week , but--since a week is ALL WE HAVE LEFT, here it is in writing ;D

Very altruistic of you Jock. Many would let so many notables bask in their brain farts and hope the stink doesn’t spread into their own thinking. Others would blindly follow their chosen leader. Me, I didn’t go back to see if their thinking made any sense – glad we have a conscience for the forum.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on April 25, 2021, 01:09:24 AM

Maybe I phrased it badly. Here is how my response began:
I double. Partner thinks "Hmm. He passed the first time but now doubles. He must have some values or he would not be doubling now. He does not have spades or he would have shown them before. ... "

Note the quotes. I imagine partner thinking "Hmm. He [the He, from pard's mouth, is me] passed the first time but now doubles. He [same] must have some values or he [same] would not be doubling now. He [same] does not have spades ...

Along the way I did put in [this is still pard thinking] hoping to keep it clear but it didn't work.

I was a little worried about phrasing it that way, I guess I should have worried more.

To be clear, or hopefully clear, "He does not have spades or he would have shown them before." was my imagining that my partner would realize that I do not have spades.

I guess I might have said "partner will realize that I do not have four spades". I was attempting to crawl inside partner's head to see what he would make of my double. Oh well.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on April 26, 2021, 12:42:18 AM

I am sticking with my A and B choices of 2S on A and X on B. On both of these I think my pass at my first turn significantly affects how partner should view my bid.

C: 3C. I can understand Pass, it could well be right, but I go with 3C. The issues seem clear enough, but the choice is not clear, not to me. But I go with 3C.

D: I go with c. There are a lot of ways to lose two ricks. I suppose we might well miss a laydown slam.

E: 4H. I suppose I could try science but I'm just going with 4H. Of course pard might have been a bit stuck for a rebid either with his 2C or his 2H but he will often have six clubs and three hearts, and not all that many spades. When he has only five clubs that actually might be better, because for a 2C rebid on a five card suit I would expect the clubs to be pretty good. Four heart tricks, one diamond and five clubs adds up to ten, and there seems to be some back up if that isn't exactly where the tricks come from.

Ok, F,G,H are still in the future. The one I am most likely to change my mind about is the 3C bid on C.

Btw, I would bid 1H over 1C on E even when I am not playing Walsh. AKQx looks a lot like five cards. BWS standard is sort of Walsh Lite but I just bid 1H whatever we are playing.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: hoki on April 26, 2021, 04:50:29 AM

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades - non-forcing constructive, implies at least club tolerance
PROBLEM B: Double - even though I passed on my previous turn this must surely be take-out
PROBLEM C: Pass - a pure guess, but no guarantee at all that we can make nine tricks in clubs
PROBLEM D: (a) - arguably the most descriptive option
PROBLEM E: Pass - tough, as discussed within the confines of the BW system
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts - an overbid but hard to pass
PROBLEM G: Pass - maybe they got lucky (?), don't want to hang partner for balancing
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on April 26, 2021, 03:42:05 PM

i have some incomplete thoughts on C, strictly fwiw.
I often express skepticism of LOTT but let's try it out here. We are looking at 7 clubs, the most likely holding for partner is 2 clubs but 3 is certainly possible. I have not calculated it all out but think of it this way Perhaps everyone else has two clubs. Or maybe they are distributed 1 to one player, 2 to another, and 3 to the third. In the first case pard has2. In the second case he will have 3 a third of the time, 2 a third of the time, and 1 a third of the time. Of course there are other possibilities but this suggests he will have 2 or 3 a decent portion of the time.

My initial thoughts were, and still are, that making 3C is a decent bet. The problem is that we might not be playing 3C passed out. If the unseen 6 clubs are split2-2-2 then maybe everyone passes and I make 3C, but that's asking for a bit.

When pard has three clubs then the opponents, together, have 23 non-clubs and so there is a good chance that they have a 9 card fit somewhere. Even when pard has only 2 clubs there is a fair chance they have a 9 card fit somewhere. If so, LOTT says that there are 18 total tricks.

I do think that LOTT is oversold ( last heard, Mike Lawrence agrees, that smart fellow). It's more like ona average the total;tricks and total trump are the same, sometimes one is ;arger, sometimes the other, and it balances out to being about equal.

Still, I have never claimed LOTT is irrelevant, It is just not as easy to apply as its supporters often claim.

I'm still thinking about this.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: bAbsG on April 26, 2021, 06:27:29 PM

SOLVER: Babs Giesbrecht
Qualicum Beach BC V9K 1C9
Canada

Your Solutions for the June 2021 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: Double
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: wackojack on April 26, 2021, 09:19:24 PM

PROBLEM A. 2♠

2♠ is not forcing and showing tolerance for clubs. That may be our only chance of a positive score.

PROBLEM B. Double.

The fact that I passed over 1♥, shows that I have hearts. Partner most likely has a balanced 12-14 maybe 4234 and will rebid 1NT. If say 4135 shape will rebid 2♣.

PROBLEM C. 3♣
Is the hand ours or not? Partner on average will have 9-10HCP. 4432 ♠Kxxx, ♥AJxx, ♦Jxx, ♣Jx. Here it looks like we can make 9 tricks in ♣s and opps can make 8 tricks in hearts. OK go for it matchpoint part score 3C

PROBLEM D. Option b

4♣ is not helpful to partner
I choose b because that is the most uninformative for the opps. If we are off ♠AK then still a chance ♠not led.

PROBLEM E. No idea
OK 3 !C looks least bad

PROBLEM F. 3 !D
Tell partner what you have got

PROBLEM G. 2♠
With 11 I need to compete but as cheaply as possible

PROBLEM H. A !C

Now I will read the comments and may change my mind

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: ccr3 on April 27, 2021, 12:08:44 AM

Problem A: No doubt, 2S. I imply I have tolerance for clubs. Give partner the choice.
Problem B: 1NT after going round and round: three possibilities. I passed the first go round to allow partner to double and I convert. That didn't
happen so now I'll bid 1NT showing hearts.
Problem C: Pass, I just don't believe in giving opponents a chance to find their major fit.
Problem D: C: I'm sticking with 2d. With three major suit top honors outstanding, bidding slam is risky unless
partner has interest.
Problem E: 3c. Since partner implied having 6 clubs, I'm giving him a chance to pass or bid 3nt. I've bid my hand to the
fullest. He could easily have values in spades.
Problem F: 3H. If West has long clubs along with spades, he can make 2 spades. There's always the chance my partner has
diamonds with me.
Problem G: Dble. West is broke. He passed the first round of bidding.
Problem H: C A looks like a trap. Looks too obvious. But......like Todd, I hate leads - at least dealing with MSC!

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 27, 2021, 01:07:28 AM

On Problem E, I am starting to project some wicked thoughts into the minds of our MSC panelists. What if YleeXotee is right about the redouble, but wrong about why. Perhaps our best game is to play in 2 !S XX and make eight tricks on power while in clear violation of Burns' first law. We may have a 3-3 or 3-2 fit, with enough outside cashers. If Woolsey still had a chance to be the moderator, I could see him giving this a decent score if he agreed with the theory.

It might even work with the simple pass, since 2 !S X is game.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on April 27, 2021, 01:38:56 AM

Quote from: jcreech on April 27, 2021, 01:07:28 AM

If Woolsey still had a chance to be the moderator . . .

Kleinman is director this month if they stick to their pattern.

In my opinion, he is the toughest of all the directors, giving little credence to choices he does not agree with.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: ccr3 on April 28, 2021, 02:40:55 PM

SOLVER: Patricia McDermott
8015 Buford Commons
N. Chesterfield VA 23235
U.S.A.

Your Solutions for the June 2021 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (c)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: blubayou on April 29, 2021, 01:12:37 PM

SOLUTIONS FOR: Jock McQuade 3 Bag End, Hobbiton OR 97030
.PROBLEM A: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM B: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM D: (a) Best answer = (d) --[5-5+ in the reds, forcing]
PROBLEM E: Pass We have at least 8 winners; I am drawing trumps and then taking them. If this is not true, then whatever game we reach won't be making, and three clubs, interpreted as passable will win the pot.
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: 2 Spades
PROBLEM H: Club Ace
A copy of these solutions will be e-mailed to you for your records.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on April 29, 2021, 01:19:27 PM

Taking a closer look at "B" this morning.

I know partner has spades. Probably four. But there is no guarantee he has an honor. They could be xxxx. So my admittedly “out there” 1NT is too speculative, and will probably not score. Kleinman would stomp on it and give me a 30. My at-the-table-I have-three-seconds-to-think-about-it call is Double. But thinking it through, I worry that partner will pass--and--a double promises more than a stiff, yes? To avoid that, Pass by me actually has merit. But it’s matchpoints and we’re only at the one level. Competing seems clear. What am I left with? 2 !C. Not really thinking we’ll play it there (though we might) but hoping to push the opps up to 2 !S in their eight-card fit. So I'm now vacillating between Pass and 2 !C.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on April 29, 2021, 02:18:36 PM

No changes from my initial thoughts.

SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
5107 Sewells Pointe Dr.
Fredericksburg VA 22407
U.S.A.

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (c) Extra thought: Partner knows I am slamish. If I was interested in any suit below spades, I probably would have tried a different route, but if partner does not have a spade control, I have no further interest.
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: MarilynLi on April 30, 2021, 03:27:45 AM

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: Double
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: drac on April 30, 2021, 06:26:49 AM

Wladislaus Dragwlya
Tin Street No.1
Castrum Sex 545400
Romania

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: Double
PROBLEM C: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM D: (c)
PROBLEM E: Redouble
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: 2 Spades
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: thornbury on April 30, 2021, 03:59:22 PM

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (b)
PROBLEM E: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: 2 Spades
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: msphola on April 30, 2021, 04:02:17 PM

A. 2S
B. x
C. P
D. C
E. 4C
F. 3H
G. X
H. 10D

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 01, 2021, 12:14:01 AM

Who knows?

SOLVER: Kenneth Berg

Your Solutions for the June 2021 Contest
-------------------

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: Double
PROBLEM C: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM D: (c)
PROBLEM E: Redouble
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Diamond 10

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Veeree on May 01, 2021, 12:41:45 AM

Your Solutions for the June 2021 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: Pass
PROBLEM D: (c)
PROBLEM E: Redouble
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 01, 2021, 03:54:55 PM

A couple of thoughts before the results come out.

On C, call me stuppborn. I can't defend my 3C bid but I am doing it anyway.

On E, I decided on XX. I have some thoughts on that.
On the previous round, and that's the third round, I bid 2S. It seems to me that if I had four spades partner would have heard about it before the third round. So forget about me having four spades. So what is XX? "How about: I have this good hand, you, my partner, opened the bidding, so we should have something somewhere but I am not sure where, What are your thoughts, pard?" I am not really thinking of playing 2S XX. Partner could possibly decide to pass, but I am more thinking that with Qx in spades he might decide that, having failed to bid NT on the previous round, he has denied Ax or Kx and so this might be a good time to show Qx by bidding 2NT. At any rate, I think XX asks pard for any further thoughts he might have. Passing my XX would be a surprising further thought. I expect us to be playing in NT or hearts or clubs or, I suppose just possibly, diamonds. Partner could have a 1=3=4=5 shape and bid the way he has, since he might view his xxx in hearts as not being right for immediately raising 1H to 2H.

I am expecting an all time low score for this month. But I'll live.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on May 01, 2021, 04:56:08 PM

My thoughts on "E" are that I want to play there. I worry a redouble permits the opps to flee to their diamond fit.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 01, 2021, 05:18:14 PM

Quote from: Masse24 on May 01, 2021, 04:56:08 PM

My thoughts on "E" are that I want to play there. I worry a redouble permits the opps to flee to their diamond fit.

Yes, we disagree on our choice but we appear to agree on what means what. If I think an 8 trick contract in spades has decent chances, I pass 2S X. +470 should be a good score. So my XX is not a greedy try for whatever 2S Xx making is, it's asking for pard's further thoughts.

There seem to be quite a few who chose Pass, it might be right. It's certainly an adventure!

I suppose maybe pard is 3=3=1=6 and they find their 8 card D fit at the 3 level. I confess that had not occurred to me. They are vul and I would certainly hit 3D but maybe they make it. This just had not crossed my mind.

I found these problems to be unusually frustrating, even by MSC standards.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on May 01, 2021, 06:00:08 PM

I find them all frustrating, Ken. Every month. That's what makes it fun!

One this month seemed obvious. Problem "A," which I thought was a really obvious 2 !S. But these MSC problems are supposed to be difficult with at least three possible answers. To me, this one looks like an almost unanimous choice. I could not figure out two other viable calls.

Which is quite . . . frustrating. ;)

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 01, 2021, 07:14:44 PM

Exactly.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 01, 2021, 07:35:04 PM

June Results

MarilynLi won this month with 760 and also made the Bridge World Honor Roll!

Also making the honor roll were JCreech, second with 740 and VeeRee, third with 720. Congratulations to all!

NAME	BW-SCORE	RANK	MPs
MarilynLi	760	1	30
JCreech	740	2	25
VeeRee	720	3	20
. . . . . . . .	. . . . . . . . . . . .	. . . . . . .	. . . .

Also participating were BabsG, Blubayou, CCR3, DrAculea, Hoki, KenBerg, Masse24, Msphola, Peuco, Thornbury, WackoJack, Yleexotee.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 01, 2021, 07:43:57 PM

Quote from: Masse24 on April 27, 2021, 01:38:56 AM

Kleinman is director this month if they stick to their pattern.

In my opinion, he is the toughest of all the directors, giving little credence to choices he does not agree with.

Looks like Todd is right about the director. Only one problem's third answer got a score of 70; all else were below that. And on one, the second answer was 50.

This time i only had three problems that scored 100, but I must have hit the director's choice on all the rest, because they all scored 90 (except the lead, which was 80). I have never done so well missing on so many,

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: bAbsG on May 02, 2021, 04:19:44 AM

Well done winners!!!!

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: yleexotee on May 03, 2021, 07:23:31 PM

Boy do I object to the scoring on B!

1nt after the ops bid 1s, and I have a singleton spade?? Sounds like a recipe for ending in 2nt after the ops compete, with no spade stoppers at all.

2c I can stomach because I have made that bid before, but its rarely good. yes, most of the time its a 3-4 fit in clubs, but more than once I have landed in a 3-3 fit making that 2c bid.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: wackojack on May 07, 2021, 02:04:52 PM

1NT the choice for B must surely be a mistake. The Emperor has no clothes

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 11, 2021, 12:52:55 AM

I was one of the doublers on B, and I have been thinking a bit about it. Let's see if I can make an argument for 1NT. What should partner make of this bid, given that I passed on the first round?

Can I have both a heart stop and a spade stop? If so, why did I pass on the first round?
And if I stop only one of the two major suits, and if I also have at least some values, then maybe the heart stop is more likely?
So maybe a 1NT call at this point should be thought of as an unusual no trump.
I don't think it's crazy.

As to my double> I thought that pard should be able to figure out what I am doing. But maybe not. Pard probably has four spades. After all, I have only one and the 1S call on my left was not raised. It seems unlikely that the opponents have a nine card spade fit. Possible, but not likely. With a double I think I should worry that my partner plays me for a three card spade holding and passes. I'm not all that confidant that we will beat it.

As mentioned, I was a doubler. But 12 panelists chose 1NT, and even more significantly several from IAC chose 1NT. Perhaps they wereall out together drinking, but perhaps it makes more sense than I first thought.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 11, 2021, 02:38:10 AM

The only IAC to both bid 1NT and comment was CCR3 “1NT after going round and round: three possibilities. I passed the first go round to allow partner to double and I convert. That didn't happen so now I'll bid 1NT showing hearts.“

I really would like to see what the BW panel has to say.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 11, 2021, 11:46:31 AM

Yes, just about any call that I can find an argument for, I can also find an argument against.

The scoring for C is different. I chose 3C, which scored 100, others chose Pass, which scored 90, and 1C scored 50. So the first three scores, in descending order, are 100, 90, 50 just as in B. But in C, this makes sense to me. I vacillated between 3C and Pass, but I never for a moment considered anything else. In B, my thinking was more "I guess I have to do something, but what?"

So yes, I await the panel's thoughts.

Added: Here is a way I have been trying to think of this. Partner could well be 4=2=3=4 or maybe 4=1=3=5. He is going to have a bit of a guess what to do next, and even more of a guess if then the opponents go on to 2S, a likely event. If we go with the reasonable idea that passing on the first round and then bidding 1nT now shows heart stops and probably not spade stops, maybe this gives him the best chance of getting it right. If he has some spade values, which seems reasonably likely, he might pass 1NT and then my Rho might choose 2S. I will feel I have done my bit and let him choose whether to pass it out.

Anyway, we shall see what the panel thinks.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: kenberg on May 14, 2021, 02:15:25 PM

My Bridge World came today. Interesting, as it always is.

Regarding B: Zia chose 2C, rejecting X because "double gives partner too much chance to err, not a winning policy". I like that. I was a doubler but after seeing it not score well I thought it over and that's pretty much why it got a bad score. A couple of panelists thought 1Nt should have been bid on the first round, directly over the 1H overcall. Danny Kleinman, moderator, said he was surprised only two panelists had said that.
DK welcomed Kit Woolsey to "The Lone Wolf Club" for his choice of 2H. KW regarded this as a natural call (I agree) and figured he had a good shot at taking 8 tricks in hearts (I am skeptical, as was DK).

An amusing point of temporary confusion. BW says there were three panel votes for X but lists four people speaking in favor of X. Ah ha. Pardon my baseball ignorance. One of those speaking in favor is Tony Lazzeri saying "Double. When I can clear the fence..." See
https://www.google.com/search?q=tony+lazzeri&oq=Tony+Lazzeri&aqs=chrome.0.0i355j46l2j0l7.5199j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Lazerri also chose X on problem A with the explanation "When I field a sharp grounder I toss the ball to Durocher. Leo's so smart, he'll know what to do."
I do have occasional memories of long ago baseball. I grew up in St. Paul back when the Saint Paul Saints were a farm club for the Dodgers and the Minneapolis Millers were a farm club for the Giants. Some guy named Willie Mays was playing for the Millers for a while (about a month) before being called up to the Giants. We Saints fans were very happy to see him be called up. Say Hey.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 16, 2021, 11:40:20 PM

June MSC SUMMARY (Part 1)– Danny Kleinman, Director

Problem A 2 !S (VeeRee, Masse24, KenBerg, WackoJack, DrAculea,MarilynLi, CCR3, Jcreech, Thornbury, Yleexotee, Msphola, Hoki, Peuco)

Imps North-South vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ K 10 8 5 3
♥ K 9 2
♦ J 6
♣ K 10 6

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
Pass 1 ♥ 2 ♣ 2 ♥
?*

*BWS: double = takeout
What call do you make?

This is just about as close to a “What's the problem?” problem that I have ever seen from the Master Solver's Club. Typically, if the answer is highly consistent among the experts, it may be for the solvers too, but with a different answer. So let's start with the dissenters.

3 !C (30) 11% Bridge World Panel (BWP) 11%; Bridge World Solver (BWS) 1 vote IAC Solver (IAC) The choice of 3 !C seems to be essentially a rejection of any other choice. Doub and Wildavsky make this argument well: “Too weak for a cue-bid; too short and weak for two spades (our second choice); and two notrump wold be dubious with no aces, light values, and only one heart stopper. Were the ten of spades a low one, and the jack of diamonds a spot card, few would consider anything but three clubs.”

Dbl (40) 11% BWP; 4% BWS; 0 votes IAC Double is a vote for perceived flexibility. Billy Eisenberg chooses double because “Two spades or three clubs would relinquish the chance to play in the other black suit.” Paul Ivaska has a different perspective: “Too strong for a competitive three clubs, too weak for two notrump. Two spades would suppress the club support and fail to convey the nature of the hand; as it isn't forcing, it requires a much better suit. I'm not sure what this double shows, but it must be better than anything else.” Not so fast. Eric Kokish does not double because he “... would be unprepared for partner's three-diamond reply.” And the moderator, Danny Kleinman, agrees “A double of responder's raise is played almost universally as takeout.”

2NT (50) 14% BWP; 6% BWS; 1 vote IAC You have a heart stopper; what about 2NT? BluBayou develops a fairy story “reminds me of the fairy tale of Goldilocks & the 3 bears. Single raise of pard's vul. 2C is TOO COLD, Cue-advance it TOO HOT unless SHE offers 3NT. So we are left with the very 'just right' advance of 2NT. Sorry, I cannot fit showing my spades into a sane auction. Maybe my glass is half empty.” I like Brian Platnick's for the bid best: “Targets the most-likely game, though perhaps missing a five-three spade fit. Some panelists may suggest that two spades here promises a club fit, but it might be based on no club fit and a spade suit too poor for a two-spade opening.” Frank Stewart prefers “... the straightforward value bid, aiming toward the most-likely game.” Zia succinctly regards the bid as “Clear and to the point.” And the moderator shows his bias: “I'm surprised to see panelists preferring two spades to two notrump. Do they expect partner to bid again with a low doubleton in spades and a normal, minimum two-club overcall?” This said to me that when there is overwhelming concensus for an opinion other than Danny's, he punishes his own choice as severely as he does other minority choices.

2 !S (100) BWP 64%; BWS 77%; IAC 87% In a direct response to Jock, Jcreech “2 !S   Unilke Blu, I can also see the 2 !S bid. It should be constructive, tends to show club support, but gives us possession of the master suit in order to compete.” Across the board, 2 !S was the choice. Masse24 stated the IAC position clearly “2 !S. Looks like the HCP are split evenly. This should generally show five, since with six I may have preempted. Shows !C tolerance, too, I think. I do not relish the location of my !H K, but you can’t have everything.” Agreeing, CCR3 has “No doubt, 2S. I imply I have tolerance for clubs. Give partner the choice.” WackoJack thinks “2♠ is not forcing and showing tolerance for clubs. That may be our only chance of a positive score.” Hoki says “2 Spades - non-forcing constructive, implies at least club tolerance” And to round out that perspective has KenBerg imagines “I bid 2S. Partner thinks “Hmm, he did not open 2S. Now he bids 2S. I think he has five spades. And that would be a bit risky unless he also had a club fit for those times when I don't like spades." So it seems clear enough.” Peuco is a simple soul: “2S I never bypass a decent 5 card spade suit” While YleeXotee has a stubborn one: “2S- obvious, I think. and I don't care if the panel disagrees!“ From the Panel, Leonard Hefgott writes “As I didn't open two spades, two spades now implies club tolerance. A double would suggest at least four-four in the unbid suits.” Drew Casen has similar thoughts, but adds “I am unlikely to have six, so partner won't leave me in two spades if he's short.” Bart Bramley is “Rightsiding spades. As a passed hand, I'm likely to have only five, but partner should expect club tolerance in case he hates spades. If three notrump is right, we may still reach it.” David Berkowitz: “Two spades. Spades first; everything else can wait. Having passed initially helps, as partner knows I didn't open two.” Jeff Rubens: “The heart king has limited value on offense, so there is not enough room for three clubs then three spades; therefore two spades now.”

Problem B 1NT (MarilynLi, Blubayou, CCR3)

Matchpoints Neither side vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ 7
♥ Q J 9 5 4
♦ A 9 5 3
♣ J 6 2

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— 1 ♣ 1 ♥
Pass 1 ♠ Pass Pass
?

What call do you make?

This problem is a classic case of do I double because I have shortness in the opponent's last suit and no clear choice of actions, do I bid 1NT to show the heart stopper that partner almost certainly does not have and trust that (s)he has that suit covered, or do I raise partner's suit on 3-card support when (s)he only promises three?

Dbl (50) BWP 11%; BWS 46%; IAC 53%. Let's start with the solver's choice of Double. What does double mean? Philip Alder: “Double would show a penalty pass of hearts.” Zia: “Though a double would show a penalty double of one heart, doubling gives partner too much chance to err, which is not a winning policy.” Drew Casen: “Doubling to show a trap pass of hearts doubly flawed: too few spades and too little high-card strength.” I fear that IAC did not think this: Peuco says “X take out, may get us to 1NT 2C or 2D or 2HX or 1SX not afraid “ Hoki writes “Double - even though I passed on my previous turn this must surely be take-out” YleeXotee goes with Double because it “never works out for me when I support the 1c open with 3 clubs, even given the other bidding.” KenBerg: “I double. Partner thinks "Hmm. He passed the first time but now doubles. He must have some values or he would not be doubling now. He does not have spades or he would have shown them before. If he just has diamonds he could bit them. After his pass on the first round I would not expect him to have much if he now bid 2D. And if he just has clubs he could bid them or even have bid them first round. So[this is still pard thinking] I guess he has clubs and diamonds, not enough to bid them on his own." And he can probably figure me for some heart length given that I could not bid spades first round and don't have a clear choice yet about which minor. I suppose pard has four spades, more often than not he will, he night choose NT, more often I expect he will bid 2C. He should be able to guess right most of the time.”

1NT (100) BWP 43%; BWS; 19%; IAC 20%. The Panel was largely split between the next two answers, but had a slight preference for 1NT. The Panel seems to choose 1NT largely to not sell out too cheaply. Frank Stewart: One notrump. I can't sell out to one spade. I hope North will visualize my hand.” David Berkowitz: “One notrump. If we belong in clubs, partner will have five and rebid the suit.” Kevin Bathurst: "One notrump. I expect one spade to make, so I won't pass; both double and two clubs have serious flaws.” While in IAC, BluBayou feels he has to take the bull by the horns: “It's clear to me that we want to start pushing by getting PARTNER to bid 1NT. But ...”there is no good way to do that, so I have to bid it myself.” And CCR3 seems frustrated that there was no reopening double and tries to make the best of the situation “1NT after going round and round: three possibilities. I passed the first go round to allow partner to double and I convert. That didn't happen so now I'll bid 1NT showing hearts.“ Robert Wolff is worried about “The alternative, two clubs, which might catch partner with a 4=3=3=3 minimum.”

2 !C (90) BWP 36%; BWS 23%; IAC 27%. For the Panel, 2 !C was a strong second, but not without its risks. Carl Hudecek makes the bid and says “I like to see partner squirm in a three-three fit.” Bart Bramley is a bit more optimistic: “Clear. Short hearts opposite improves the chance of five-card club length, but four-three fit may play well anyway. Joel Wooldridge thinks that 1 notrum wouldn't help partner judge what to do over twp spades. I won't double lest partner pass.” Jcreech : “2 !C   Matchpoints are nasty. We need to compete, and clubs look best. At least we are only at the two level.” And Marty Bergen thinks the previous bid was the opportunity for NT and now bids “Two clubs. I object strongly to the pass over one heart. Supposing that the opponents have at least eight spades, I would have responded one notrump to show my values and shut out West's spades. It's a flawed description of the hand, yes, but much better than a pass that says nothing.”

In fact, the moderator was surprised that only one panelist, other than himself, objected to the pass over one heart. His argument is that “As South failed to act over one heart, you cannot expect partner to bid two clubs or anything else over West's one spade. Yet another merit in an admittedly-flawed one notrump last turn: It empowers partner to compete effectively. Not having acted earlier, South must shoulder the burden of competing.”

Problem C 3 !C (Peuco, Blubayou, KenBerg, WackoJack)

Matchpoints Neither side vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ Q 6
♥ 8
♦ A K 2
♣ Q 10 8 6 5 4 2

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— Pass Pass Pass
?

What call do you make?

In fourth seat at matchpoints, you do not want to open unless you think you will go plus. So if you open, you either want to win the contract at a level you can make or get the opponents to commit to a level that they will go down. The strongest choices are to pass, showing concern that only having a doubleton spade that the hand may belong to the opponents, opening 3C, thinking the best way to keep the opponents out of the auction is to make the level daunting for two passed hands, or to open 1C to indicate confidence that the hand belongs to your side just because you were the only one willing to open. Let's start passively.

Pass (90) BWP 43%; BWS 56%; IAC 67%. This was the solvers top pick and was actually tied for the Panel's top pick. So why didn't this choice get the 100? We will get into that later. However, the question I will consider now is, why should the hand be passed out? The answer is a combination of Pearson points (if HCPs + spades are greater than 14, then you should consider opening) and quality of the club suit. With 13 Pearson points and a Q10-seventh suit, for many, the hand does not quality for opening. Marc Jacobus: pass. Only 13 Pearson Points.” Leonard Helfgott also considers the heart suit: “Too short in majors and too few Pearson Points to bid.” Jcreech “Pass   Only 13 Casino points. I would like to bid and be sure that we will go plus, but I can't - who has the spades - not me. Pass at least doesn't go negative.” CCR3: “Pass, I just don't believe in giving opponents a chance to find their major fit.” YleeXotee was trying to balance the desire to get to a making partial with concern about what the opponents might do, and finally selected “Pass … 1c is maybe the least appealing because ops could have a 4-4 fit in spades, and 3c will keep them out while giving us a chance at a partial. Except that its a marginal suit.” Suit quality is the other consideration. Several experts have specific ideas of what a 3 !C bid means, and this does not qualify. Drew Casen says “Pass. My idea of a fourth-seat three clubs is seven solid clubs, so partner can convert to three notrump easily.” Frank Stewart: “Pass. Three clubs would suggest a different type of hand. One club might work, but North would have opened a borderline hand in second seat if he had major-suit length.” Hoki: “Pass - a pure guess, but no guarantee at all that we can make nine tricks in clubs” Masse24: “Pass. There will be bidders. Hope there are enough passers to make this score decently. The only other sane possibility would be 3 !C. The hero bid is 3 !C, which will score 100 or 50. But with Kleinman the director (he tend toward conservative), the "safe" Pass seems best.”

1 !C(50) BWP 14%; BWS 14%; IAC 0 votes. The rationale for opening 1 !C is that the side rates to go plus but there is no hiding from the fact that if the opponents have the majors, it will be a competition for the contract. Paul Ivaska can”... see no reason to abandon normal bidding. We have a good chance to buy the contract if I peacefully open and rebid clubs. Having adequate high-card strength, almost none in clubs, I don't fear that the opponents will arise from their slumbers to bid and make some large number of hearts or spades.” Joel Wooldridge: “I don't like passing the deal out. It's either one club or three, and the suit is too weak for three.” Kevin Bathurst: “Three clubs would invite partner to bid three notrump with scattered values, but clubs don't figure to run in time. So it's one club or pass. With seven clubs, I can hope to outbid the opponents' major.”

3 !C (100) BWP 43%; BWS 28%; IAC 27%. Not getting the suit-quality memo, the Panel made this selection co-equal as the top choice; it got the nod for the 100, though, because the 1 !C bidders effectively broke the tie toward action versus passivity. Marty Bergen refers to it as “Reaching the right contract promptly.” Robert Wolff calls it “A 'leave-me-alone' forth-seat preempt.” WackoJack asks “Is the hand ours or not? Partner on average will have 9-10HCP. 4432 ♠Kxxx, ♥AJxx, ♦Jxx, ♣Jx. Here it looks like we can make 9 tricks in ♣s and opps can make 8 tricks in hearts. OK go for it matchpoint part score 3C” Peuco thinks “3C odds i will get some kind of C support starting wit stiff J “ And KenBerg says “call me stuppborn. I can't defend my 3C bid but I am doing it anyway.” But perhaps Zia has the right idea: “I prefer to use this as mild invitation to three notrump, but I hope partner has forgotten. If he bids three notrump, I'll bid four clubs. Sorry, partner!”

Thus ends part 1. The remainder will be revealed as time permits. Until then, please enjoy.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 17, 2021, 05:42:54 PM

June MSC SUMMARY (Part 2)– Danny Kleinman, Director

Problem D (a) 2 ♦ then 4 ♣ [BWS: autosplinter] (BabsG, Yleexotee, Hoki, MarilynLi, Blubayou, Masse24)

Imps Neither side vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ 7 6
♥ Q J 10 9 6 3 2
♦ A J 2
♣ A

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— 1 NT Pass
?

Among these plans, which do you prefer?
(a) 2 ♦ then 4 ♣ [BWS: autosplinter];
(b) 4 ♦ then 4 NT [BWS: key-card-ask for hearts];
(c) 2 ♦ then 4 ♥ [BWS: slam-try].

This problem gets at the strategy taken with a potentially slam-going hand after partner has opened a strong NT. The three strategies delineated are flawed, but no one proposed a better mousetrap. Option A involved a splinter into a singleton ace suit; a general situation frowned upon for splintering. Option B involved a four-level transfer, followed by RKC; this commits to the five-level, which may be risky without knowing more about opener's hand. And Option C is the old fashioned transfer at the two-level and raise to game. YleeXotee spent some time analyzing why that option is not useful: “I have yet to see anyone show good criteria for how to proceed when you get that 2 level transfer and then a raise to 4. how do I know that I should accept or go forward towards slam. My hand is well defined with the 1nt bid, do I only go if I have ace or King in the other suits, do I go only if I have the max 17 pts, do I only go if I have more than 2 hearts, do I only go if I have an honor in hearts plus some of the previous criteria. that slam try seems like a real shot in the dark for the 1nt opener. What if I have two small spades, a couple of heart honors and the max, seems like I should go, but after asking for aces and finding that we have the Q and are only off 1 key card, slam is hopeless but I have already bid it.”

b 4 ♦ then 4 NT [BWS: key-card-ask for hearts] (70) BWP 21%; BWS 24%; IAC 20%. This bidding plan is the most aggressive approach because you cannot stop short of the five-level. WackoJack thinks “4♣ is not helpful to partner. I choose b because that is the most uninformative for the opps. If we are off ♠AK then still a chance ♠not led.” Peuco “b. only way to get to slam and can still stop at game“ Marty Bergen's assessment is that “We have a play for slam opposite the right minimum. As six hearts may hinge on the opening lead, there is no reason to give the opponents a chance to learn anything specific about our hands or theirs.” Billy Eisenberg feels that this is “The wrong hand for telling the opponents what not to lead.” Paul Ivaska believes “This holding is so strong that I will drive to slam unless we're off two keys. I gave some thought to grand-slam possibilities, which aren't good; but if North shows three keys, I'll ask for specific kings and bid seven hearts if he shows the king of diamonds.”

a 2 ♦ then 4 ♣ [BWS: autosplinter] (100) BWP 39%; BWS 23%; IAC 40%. The other two responses received the same number of votes from the Panel; the moderator claimed that the ties was broken based on Ted Williams was often known as the “Splendid Splinter.” I suspect the reason was more that there is a way to probe gently after the splinter, but that the rebid in game leaves you with only blunt instruments to move forward. Barnet Shenkin thinks all the choices are flawed: “No key-car-ask with uncontrolled spades, so I'll follow with a five-diamond control-bid over partner's retreat to four hearts.” Doesn't that still leave the problem of uncontrolled spades at the five-level? Robb Gordon says “I hate to splinter with a singleton ace, but this offers the best chance for a reasonably intelligent auction.” Kit Woolsey adds “While singleton ace isn't ideal for a splinter, here the splinter is the most-accurate description of the hand. Fortunately, partner will have a Last-Train four diamonds available, so if he discourages with four hearts, he'll have a poor hand for slam, and we can stop there.” Hoki thinks “(a) - arguably the most descriptive option” Masse24 “My conservative nature tells me to transfer at the 2-level then bid 4 !H (mild slam-try). The reasons against doing otherwise are plain: 1) Splintering a stiff Ace is undesirable. How can partner properly assess the value of !C KQx? I know some do it, but I do not—unless my hand is strong enough to bid on. 2) Texas followed by RKC with two fast spade losers breaks a basic RKC rule. However, the “mild slam-try” approach with this hand seems far too timid. Which means the panel will choose one of the other choices. I think this falls into the “better than a mild slam try” category. Which means we should probably be safe at the five-level. Only a very unfortunate minimum holding by partner (off the three missing keycards) makes the five-level too high. Texas then RKC could result in partner bidding 5 !H with the !H AK and off a !S control. Oops! Or partner bidding 5 !H with two Aces off the trump K and, small slam is very safe with even 13 tricks possible. So RKC off two quick losers is frowned on for a reason. The splinter seems most flexible. If partner cooperates with 4 !D, I’m bidding 5 !D. If partner dislikes my splinter and bids 4 !H, I’m also bidding 5 !D. Hopefully this should highlight my lack of a !S control. But does it oversell my hand? Maybe.” YleeXotee “A, I'm taking the middle road.” BluBayou “Heaven help me--I'm going with Joe on problem D ( the self-splinter option). As we both seem to recall, the mild slam-try ALWAYS gets left at game except when 1NT opener can super-accept. We can hardly expect, nor need, 4 trumps plus a good hand with our 7-bagger, so showing a slammy hand with 1 club is what's left.” People always seem to remember that it is bad to splinter with an singleton ace, but not much why it is bad. The problem is values in the splinter suit are mentally discounted, when they shouldn't; a QJx being viewed as two losers in NT or KJ-tight having potentially no value. For that reason, Zia's position strikes a chord: “(a) But I'd rather splinter in spades, as the opening lead may be crucial, and I want to deter a spade lead.”

c 2 ♦ then 4 ♥ [BWS: slam-try] (90) BWP 39%; BWS 54%; IAC 40%. Jcreech summarized his thoughts: “I don't like splintering into a stiff A. Definitely slammish, but I don't want to commit to the 5-level without a willing partner. Transfer and then bid 4 !H might not be pushy enough; I don't like my other options yet and it is a move in the right direction ... partner knows I am slamish. If I was interested in any suit below spades, I probably would have tried a different route, but if partner does not have a spade control, I have no further interest.” KenBerg decided to “... go with c. There are a lot of ways to lose two ricks. I suppose we might well miss a laydown slam.” CCR3 “C: I'm sticking with 2d. With three major suit top honors outstanding, bidding slam is risky unless partner has interest.” Nick L'Ecuyer thinks there is “Enough strength to try for slam, and I don't want partner to downgrade the king of clubs. The good slams are those that make, and I want partner to use judgment. We might bid a slam off two top spades and make it if partner has: ♠ Qxx ♥ AKx ♦ KQxx ♣ Kxx, so why give the opponents any specific information?” Leonard Helfgott says “I don't splinter with a stiff ace if I have any alternative. I slightly prefer to invite slam than virtually to force to slam opposite two or three keys via a key-card-ask.” Brian Platnick feels the hand is “Not strong enough to ask for keys. Splintering with a singleton ace might cause partner to misevaluate. That leaves only a general slam-try.”

The moderator likes “... none of the plans offered. (a) will induce North to devalue the king of clubs when it can provide a useful discard. (b) may land us in a slam off two fast spade tricks opposite a hand as strong as: ♠ QJ10 ♥ AK874 ♦ KQ ♣ KQJ (yes, we'd open two notrump with that hand). (c) destroys the bidding space below game that we could otherwise use for control-bidding after anchoring hearts, but it's the least of the given evils, as it lets partner move toward slam with many appropriate hands.”

Problem E 3 !C (MarilynLi, CCR3, Jcreech, BabsG, WackoJack, Peuco)

Imps North-South vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ J 9 5
♥ A K Q 2
♦ A 9 8 2
♣ J 3

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— 1 ♣ Pass
1 ♥ Pass 2 ♣ Pass
2 ♦ Pass 2 ♥ Pass
2 ♠ Double Pass Pass
?

What call do you make?

The choices receiving good scores were essentially between showing the club support, or giving partner a chance to do something intelligent with the more flexible redouble. To tell the truth, I did not even consider redouble as an option because I was staring at Jxx, partner had essentially denied four spades when rebidding clubs, and I had recently been burned in a Burns 1st Law violation – you need to have more trump than the opponents. So let's start there.

Rdbl (80) BWP 32%; BWS 19%; IAC 27%. KenBerg “I decided on XX. I have some thoughts on that. On the previous round, and that's the third round, I bid 2S. It seems to me that if I had four spades partner would have heard about it before the third round. So forget about me having four spades. So what is XX? "How about: I have this good hand, you, my partner, opened the bidding, so we should have something somewhere but I am not sure where, What are your thoughts, pard?" I am not really thinking of playing 2S XX. Partner could possibly decide to pass, but I am more thinking that with Qx in spades he might decide that, having failed to bid NT on the previous round, he has denied Ax or Kx and so this might be a good time to show Qx by bidding 2NT. At any rate, I think XX asks pard for any further thoughts he might have. Passing my XX would be a surprising further thought. I expect us to be playing in NT or hearts or clubs or, I suppose just possibly, diamonds. Partner could have a 1=3=4=5 shape and bid the way he has, since he might view his xxx in hearts as not being right for immediately raising 1H to 2H.” Nice analysis, Ken, but why not think about 2 !S XX as the final contract. Phillip Alder thinks “Might we go plus 840 or 1240 in a three-three fit?” Kit Woolsey: “West didn't overcall at favorable vulnerability, so his spades can't be too long and strong. If partner sits, I'm betting we will make an overtrick.” Billy Eisenberg: “Redouble. Unusual, but clear to me.”

3 !C (100) BWP 46%; BWS 39%; IAC 40%. It is hard to envision game on a 3-3, so the top spot was for the bidders. CCR3 bids “3c. Since partner implied having 6 clubs, I'm giving him a chance to pass or bid 3nt. I've bid my hand to the fullest. He could easily have values in spades.” Leonard Helfgott said “Two spades created a virtual game-force, so showing a doubleton opposite partner's likely six-card suit is the best description.” WackoJack thinks “3 looks least bad” Jcreech writes that “This is one of those auctions where it seems to get worse the more it goes on. Partner advertised real clubs and I've shown my values, now I will show my doubleton club honor (hopefully he has six instead of the five I always have to rebid).” Peuco thinks “3C gives pd the option of bidding 3S asking for half stopper” Joel Wooldridge: “Three clubs. Forcing. If partner bids three spades, I'll bid three notrump. Over three diamonds or three hearts, I'll aim at four hearts.” Frank Stewart wanted to bid clubs on the previous round: “Three clubs. I might have bid this last turn. I'm not sure why I bid two spades. Are we focused on three notrump when as little as: ♠ AQx ♥ 10xx ♦ x ♣ AQ108xx opposite makes six clubs reasonable?”

It is not often that we get the back story of one of the problems, but this is one of those times. The moderator held this hand 55 years ago and set the stage: “Real life at the time was the rubber-bridge club that Bob Hamman called “The Office,” where he spent 40-hour weeks during the mid=1060's. … Bob and I were among those who came to the club weekday nights, cut for teams and played eight-board matches. … On the actual deal, I passed. A redouble might have worked if partner judged to pass, but I didn't want to risk it at a 1966 dollar per imp.” So why did you give a 30 to your actual action? If 2 !S XX is such a great contract, it will outperform any other action (getting the game bonus) including those that lead to a game, and gains against the redoubler when partner runs.

Problem F Double (Masse24, MarilynLi, BabsG)

Imps Neither side vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ K 3
♥ A J 10 6 4 2
♦ A Q 6 3
♣ 7

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
1 ♥ 2 ♥* Pass 3 ♣†
?
*spades and a minor
†pass-or-correct

What call do you make?

What is the sensible action here? You have a sixth heart, you have a second suit (which may be LHO's as well), and the !S K looks to be badly placed. If the opponent's fit is in clubs, then you probably want to be a bidder, but if it is diamonds, then maybe you want to defend. Meanwhile, you don't know which minor until lefty lets you know, then it may be too late unless partner acts.

Dbl (100) BWP 43%; BWS 10%; IAC 20%. Masse24 waffles, but settles in with “Double. First stab was Pass, then I changed to 3 !H. I want to show extras and bring partner into the conversation. However, I hate the location of my !S K. Considered 3 !H, but partner can still (although unlikely) chime in with something or even pass whatever comes round to him.” He is not alone. Paul Ivaska says “I don't want to pass, double is the most flexible and least dangerous way to reenter the auction. The heart intermediates are very weak, three diamonds would usually deliver five, and double preserves the chance of a penalty.” Barnet Shenkin sees penalty: “Partner has spades. I hope he has clubs or will pull my double.” While Robb Gordon only sees takeout: “Is double not takeout? Am I forced to bid three diamonds and distort my shape?”

Other actions were less popular. For example, 3 !D (50) BWP 14%; BWS 24%; IAC 13%, has a large proportion of the Panel agreeing that it shows equal length with the hearts. Nonetheless, Bobby Wolff said “Three diamonds. Aggressive, but I'll die with my boots on.” And Marty Bergen says “I am unwilling to sell out. I'd like to double three clubs for takeout, but as three clubs is artificial, a double would show clubs. Though the hearts are two cards longer than the diamonds, being in doubt I choose the cheapest reasonable bid. If viciously doubled, I'll reconsider.” Also 3 !H (30) BWP 4%; BWS 24%; IAC 20%, was not pushed by other members of the Panel due to the weakness of the intermediates. But Billy Eisenberg made the selection more because the diamonds were too short: “A little light for a double, and three diamonds would be appropriate with a red five-five.” Hoki “3 Hearts - an overbid but hard to pass” CCR3 “3H. If West has long clubs along with spades, he can make 2 spades. There's always the chance my partner has diamonds with me.”

Pass (90) BWP 39%; BWS 42%; IAC 47% The most popular choice for solvers, and only one vote shy of a tie for first among Panelists was Pass. Jcreech “Pass I may change my mind, but my hand has gotten worse, and it is far from certain that the undisclosed minor is clubs. Partner was silent, if he has something, then let him keep the auction alive.” Carl Hudecek agrees in part: “Partner still has a turn.” As does Joel Wooldridge, but for a different reason: “An ill-placed doubleton king of spades dissuades me from further action.” YleeXotee thinks partner is broke: “Pass. there better be some Unusual v unusual expectations in BWS because I have those expectations therefore p has zippo.” While Peuco chooses inaction because he can't decide which action: “Pass If west has the S A the pass is clear if not, what to bid, H or D” Phillip Alder passes because “It seems dangerous to bid, because the deal has the aura of a misfit.” And if there were any doubts, Zia clarifies his pass: “These auctions are land mines. Suits figure to break painfully badly.” To which the moderator adds his own “Yes indeed!”

Here ends the second installment. The last two problems will be posted as soon as they are ready and include the infamous lead problem. Until then, please enjoy.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: jcreech on May 18, 2021, 03:27:18 PM

June MSC SUMMARY (Part 3)– Danny Kleinman, Director

Problem G Double (Msphola, Peuco, CCR3, Jcreech, VeeRee, Masse24)

Matchpoints East-West vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ K 9 4
♥ J 4 2
♦ K 10 5
♣ K J 8 5

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— —— 1 ♥
Pass Pass Double 2 ♣
Double 2 ♥ Pass Pass
?

What call do you make?

What are some of the things we know about this hand? We know that E-W have eight or more hearts; that West does not have enough HCPs to respond; that partner is not sitting on a big hand; and that the double of clubs is a penalty double. I did not know all of these things when I made my selection, or I would have chosen differently. How do we know these things? Would partner double with three or more hearts in the balancing seat? Not likely unless the intent was to show a NT above the balancing NT. That did not happen so the most North should have is two hearts, added to my three leaves eight for E-W. North did not act over West's preference to two hearts, therefore cannot have a big hand. And why is the double of two clubs penalty? The double of a new suit implied by partner's bidding is penalty. Partner made a takeout double of hearts, so clubs is presumably one of partner's suits, and South's double is penalty. So now the auction is back to South.

Given all of the above givens, double should be virtually an automatic bid and a trump lead. However, it is clear that not everyone either processes these givens the same or they do not regard the double as being so automatic. The moderator has a speculative question: “Was this problem submitted because at the table somebody took dubious action following a telltale huddle by his partner? Perhaps any action now is dubious.”

Dbl (100) BWP 39%; BWS 52%; IAC 40%. Let's start with the “obvious.” Irina Levitia and Marc Jacobus (separately): “Double. And lead a trump.” Robert Wolff: “Double. But only at matchpoints, and not with a partner (like myself) who hates very close matchpoint doubles. Of course, I'll lead a trump.” CCR3: “Dble. West is broke. He passed the first round of bidding.” Masse24: “Double. Leading the !H 2.” Peuco :“X my Cs make more difficult for them to make 2H Waffling a bit because either the double of clubs was incorrect or unclear of all the “givens.” Jcreech “Too much to pass. Nowhere that looks good to compete. I think this should be cooperative; let partner know we have values with no clear direction, and hope if he passes, it will be right.” David Berkowitz: “Double. To me this is not pure penalty – at least that is what I plan to tell partner later.” Feeling even less certain. Leonard Helfgott: “Double. Sitting behind opener with clubs, I'll lead a trump and pray. The vulnerability is right.” Joel Wooldridge: “Double. Lead trumps and hope that dummy doesn't take too many tricks.” The moderator adds his two cents with “If I could lead trumps, I too would double. Alas, I could lead only one trump at a time, and I might not be able to lead a second trump until after East has ruffed two clubs in dummy.” Being totally realistic, Paul Ivaska writes “Double. Nervously, as the opponents have at least eight hearts, but I see no alternative except to pass, which would be very dangerous in a different way, because we may have out own plus to protect. Of course, I will lead a trump to minimize ruffs in dummy. It's matchpoints, so if they make it, it's not the disaster that it would be at imps.” Or as Zia says even more succinctly: “Double. Iset a trap, but I fear I might end up the trappee not the trapper. I hope my trump lead will prevent that.” Among the panelists, this choice was tied for the top pick; double got the nod because action outnumbered inaction.

Pass (90) BWP 39%; BWS 33%; IAC 32%. In a dead heat with double among the panelists, but losing out on the action/inaction tiebreaker is Pass. Sensing something may be wrong and wanting to protect any semblance of plus position are the passers. Frank Stewart recognizes the problem South created with the double of 2 !C: “Pass. The basic goal of North's double was to push the opponents higher – accomplished. Still, I am uncertain what to do now. Perhaps we shouldn't have doubled two clubs. West was all but certain to take a preference. North may have passed two hearts with a good hand, because he thinks I may be itching to double again.” Robb Gordon finds it “Hard to pass, but I didn't promise another bid, and this might be our last chance to go plus. The clubs aren't nearly good enough to “rebid,” nor can I bid a stopperless two notrump. The hand is not strong enough for a cue-bid. What's left?” Billy Eisenberg: “Pass. Hoping to beat it, rather than bidding and going minus.” Hoki “Pass - maybe they got lucky (?), don't want to hang partner for balancing” YleeXotee “Pass. I have to keep in mind that p could just have been balancing. I already redoubled XX showing I have points and allowing p to bid something. Since they chose not to, I'm letting it go.” Kit Woolsey is pessimistic, “I don't expect to defeat two hearts, but I don't see where we can go plus on offense.” Marty Bergen: “Partner's pass over two hearts limited his hand, and even if he has full values, two hearts might be cold. So unless we have a silly agreement that my double of two clubs created a force, I will go quietly. Balanced hands defend.”

2 !S (60) BWP 18%; BWS 12%; IAC 27%. If we do not defend, where do we turn? It looks like spades is the answer, on a three-card suit, with a partner who may only have three as well. If we were going to compete by bidding, there might have been a better way. The moderator thinks “We trapped ourselves by doubling two clubs. Sensing what was coming, we might have bid two diamonds last turn in preparation for bidding two spades now.” That did not happen so … Doub and Wildavsky argue that “Pass would be too wimpy, double two macho. Two spades will often be our best spot, and down one when two hearts makes can show a nice profit.” WackoJack says “With 11 I need to compete but as cheaply as possible” Brian Platnick bids “Two spades. With the ace of clubs instead of the king, I might double and lead a trump. I can hope partner realizes that I may have only three spades.” Barnet Shenkin sees this as a better alternative to gambling: “Two spades. I could double and lead a trump, shooting at a top or bottom.” And Bart Bramley clearly sees the risk: “Doubling would be too hungry. Can't sell out, so I'll try one nudge. The Reverse Moysian should play fine, as I can cash a lot of diamonds after drawing a couple of trumps. Even the sub-Moysian (three-three) might fetch.”

Problem H !S 8 (Masse24)

Imps Neither side vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ 8
♥ K Q 9 8
♦ 10 9 7
♣ A K 10 9 2

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— —— 1 ♠
Double 2 ♥* 3 ♦ 3 ♠
Pass Pass Pass

*weak spade raise
What is your opening lead?

!S 8 (100) BWP 50%; BWS 19%; IAC 1 vote. Fully half of the Panel led a trump, and many summed it up with one sentence. Kit Woolsey (similarly Billy Eisenberg, Leonard Helfgott, Marc Jacobus and Barnet Shenkin) “Spade eight. All other suits being well-covered, it's clear to start trumps to cut down dummy's ruffs.” The only expert qualms were based on whether a club ruff might be needed. Bart Bramley thinks “With all of the side suits locked up, this must be best. Too bad if we needed to get a club ruff.” Eric Kokish agrees, “Likely to be wrong only if we had a club ruff coming, and we may need the tempo to deprive dummy of any ruffing tricks.” And Robb Gordon sees the club ruff as a low probability: “For a high club to be right, we need partner short and declarer with three-plus, against the odds. Let declarer make tricks on his own.” Masse24 puts his own spin on things: “My highest trump. I would lead my lowest trump, but I believe this one better expresses my dislike for lead problems!” Todd has been nailing the lead problem for several months now, so methinks thou dost protest too much!!

!C A (80) BWP 32%; BWS 51%; IAC 80%. The arguments for leading a top club are basically, its looks like a normal lead, it allows you to peek at dummy for little or not cost, it is flexible, and, did I mention, it looks like a normal lead. Perhaps, that is why 80% of IAC solvers went with that selection, as did a third of the Panel. Phillip Alder calls the lead “Unimaginative.” While Doub and Wildavsky say that to “Not lead a high club would be masterminding.” And Drew Casen writes “I am on lead with an ace-king combination, so I'll just take a peek at dummy and not try to be a genius.” It strikes me that a top club is what you lead at the table, and a trump is what you lead when you have a month to think about all of the nuances of the problem. CCR3 is concerned “C A looks like a trap. Looks too obvious. But......like Todd, I hate leads - at least dealing with MSC!” Peuco says “Always lead what is obvious unless you like being scorned by partner” YleeXotee plans “A !C followed by diamonds, but I'm taking my free peek at the cards.” Kevin Bathurst: “Club ace. Even if we can't give partner a ruff, we may be able to switch in time to set up our tricks. Knowing so little about the hands, I want to look at dummy first.” Marty Bergen: "Club ace. Most flexible.”

!D 10 (50) BWP 14%; BWS 18%; IAC 13%. The argument for a diamond lead is that after South made a takeout double, North freely bid diamonds, so there must be a reason. The question is whether there is lead direction value involved. David Berkowitz thinks so: “Diamond ten. Partner went out of his way to help me, so I oblige. A trump lead is a close second choice despite the risk of blowing up partner's holding.” Ron Smith believes in a diamond lead (though he choose the seven) because “A top-club lead doesn't rate to produce a ruff. We need to tap declarer or set up winners.” And Carl Hudecek is still bidding: “I would have bid four diamonds. I meekly lead partner's suit.” The moderator points out nicely that “... the last thing we should want is for our partners meekly to refrain from bidding suits they eagerly want led.” Partner did come in freely at the the three-level; perhaps, for those who did not lead a diamond, the question we should ask is, did we hurt our credibility with partner when we did not lead his suit?

That's all folks, for this month. New submissions are due by midnight May 31 (Eastern time). Hope to see what you have to say about the new problems.

Title: Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
Post by: Masse24 on May 20, 2021, 06:02:52 PM

Quote from: jcreech on May 17, 2021, 05:42:54 PM

Problem E 3 !C (MarilynLi, CCR3, Jcreech, BabsG, WackoJack, Peuco)

Imps North-South vulnerable

You, South, hold:
♠ J 9 5
♥ A K Q 2
♦ A 9 8 2
♣ J 3

SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— 1 ♣ Pass
1 ♥ Pass 2 ♣ Pass
2 ♦ Pass 2 ♥ Pass
2 ♠ Double Pass Pass
?

What call do you make?

It is not often that we get the back story of one of the problems, but this is one of those times. The moderator held this hand 55 years ago and set the stage: “Real life at the time was the rubber-bridge club that Bob Hamman called “The Office,” where he spent 40-hour weeks during the mid=1060's. … Bob and I were among those who came to the club weekday nights, cut for teams and played eight-board matches. … On the actual deal, I passed. A redouble might have worked if partner judged to pass, but I didn't want to risk it at a 1966 dollar per imp.” So why did you give a 30 to your actual action? If 2 !S XX is such a great contract, it will outperform any other action (getting the game bonus) including those that lead to a game, and gains against the redoubler when partner runs.

Partner's hand--if anyone is interested--was:

!S Q8xx -- !H J -- !D xx -- !C A9xxxx