Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Masse24

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37
1
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: October 14, 2021, 04:04:59 PM »
Thanks, Jim!

2
Sleight of Hand / Re: Bidding options and inferences
« on: October 09, 2021, 04:14:59 PM »
Agree, after splinter, signoff—then 4NT anyway is often treated as Exclusion. Presumably with at least a little discussion? I have never done this, only read about it.

Agree that the splinter on his auction is unnecessary noise. I am not fond of splintering (ostensibly an ask about slam viability) then bidding 4NT anyway.

A Last Train 4 !H (assuming the splinter auction) would be nice here. Like Jim, I thought of it when I kibbed this hand and he was bidding it. But I would never trot out a Last Train bid without an agreement between partners. Interestingly, that is exactly is how Rodwell was introduced to the concept by Meckstroth. It was “sprung” on him with no discussion!

As to the “third round control ask” in clubs. With no discussion, with the Q—bid the grand. (The “simple” treatment.) Without the asked for control, bidding another Q in a suit below trump seems viable. There is, however, a prescribed set of “fancy” responses set forth by Kantar. Especially useful (he states) if playing Matchpoints.

First Step                  =  xx (or a singleton with 2+ trumps).
Second Step              = the Queen.
Raise of ask suit         = QJ(x).
Jump in agreed suit    = Singleton with 3+ trumps
Sign-off in agreed suit = xxx(x)

I would have to have a ten-year partnership for that sort of detail. :) Goodness, is it worth the memory strain?!

3
IAC & Master Solvers Club / 2021 DECEMBER MSC
« on: October 03, 2021, 01:44:33 PM »
DECEMBER 2021 MSC
Deadline: OCT 31 at 11:59 p.m. (ET)

Submit your DECEMBER MSC responses here: The Bridge World - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB

BWS 2017 System: BWS 2017
BWS 2017 POLLS, CHANGES AND ADDITIONS: BWS 2017 - Polls, Changes, and Additions
  • 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


*     *     *


4
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: October 01, 2021, 07:19:02 PM »
Although my score was not stellar for the month, I'm disappointed my IAC colleagues did not comment on my cool choice on PROBLEM "C."  ;)

I've never pulled one in real life, so when I saw the opportunity I could not stay away from it!


5
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: October 01, 2021, 02:52:18 PM »
Jim,

"Official" is what is posted. I submitted to TBW at that time.

6
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: September 27, 2021, 01:54:04 PM »
NOVEMBER GUESSES:

PROBLEM A: 2NT. The value bid. QT is a stopper if I squint a bit.


PROBLEM B: 3 !S. Not necessarily promising a fit. I think 3 !D and 3NT will be the popular solver choices.


PROBLEM C: 4 !H. With a perfecto, we may have slam. This is how I tell partner my hearts are crap.


PROBLEM D: 3 !H. Not necessarily playing this in hearts (though partner doesn’t know it yet). But this will force a spade control from partner . . . if he has one.


PROBLEM E: 3 !H. Partner has more than a complete minimum, but less than GF values. It could be a simple obligatory raise of 8 or 9 HCP. This is due to the wide range of my 2 !D rebid which could be anywhere from 11 to about 17 or so. But partner could be just short of game values and have a limit raise.

If this were Matchpoints, I would be more inclined to pass and go quietly. But it’s IMPs. And we are vulnerable. I’d like to bid 3 !C to “ask” partner for !C help. But that would probably get me a director call! And 3 !S, another call below 3NT would promise delayed support, ostensibly showing three.

If only there was another call below 3NT to keep the auction alive. Hey . . . there is! 3 !H

It’s not forcing, so carries the danger of getting passed. But it keeps the auction alive in my grope for 3NT. And because I failed to jump-shift, partner knows my range is around 15-17.


PROBLEM F: Double. The helpful hint will make this a popular choice.


PROBLEM G: Double. Not enough for 4 !C. Too much to pass. Looks like the versatile double will have step in again. Partner will strain to bid a major.


PROBLEM H: !C 4. I hate lead problems!



7
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: September 04, 2021, 12:53:56 PM »
PROBLEM B:

1 !S - 1NT
3 !C -  ?

What is your call with?
!S x - !H xxx - !D AKJxxx - !C xxx

Wouldn't we all bid 3 !D? Natural? We'd prefer to keep 3NT open as strain if partner can bid it wouldn't we?
Defining 3 !D as "agreeing clubs" seems too narrow a target.

With our actual hand: !S J3 - !H KQ4 - !D A962 - !C T643 I may also choose 3 !D, but as a "waiting" bid, not agreeing trump. Strain is still in doubt. Maybe partner has a sixth spade? Maybe the club jump-shift was a fakey? How might partner bid with: !S AKQT9xx - !H Ax - !D 7 - !C AJx? Is the auction provided possible with that holding?

So . . . because of the difficulty in bidding over a jump-shift, the 3 !D call must wear many hats. One of them is "waiting." I may go with it.

3 !S is also possible. It does not promise three spades. It is not a three-card limit-raise in spades. 4 !S accomplishes that.

I can also hear the little guy on my shoulder whispering in my ear, "3NT . . . 3NT . . . 3NT." Maybe, but I think my hand has too much slam potential (it's borderline) with the right "fit" with partner.

If I wanted to "agree clubs," I would probably go with 4 !C on the actual hand. Not today.

8
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: MISSING OCTOBER 2021 MSC
« on: September 03, 2021, 09:14:10 PM »


PROBLEM H: !H 6. Passive. As likely to find partner as the other choices. The book lead from four small is second highest. I’m slightly worried that the size of this might be misconstrued as being from strength. Would the panel agree and go with a slightly contrary !H 9?




FINAL CHOICES:

PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: Double
PROBLEM D: 6 Diamonds
PROBLEM E: Double
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Spade 6 -------- CRAP! I misclicked and did not double-check my selections before submitting. OUCH!

I forgot to mention last month how much I hate lead problems.  :o  :'(  ;) The irony is not lost on me . . .

9
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: September 02, 2021, 03:41:12 PM »
There is still a problem with the forum platform. I was not allowed to attach the MSC problem set. I received an error message.

 :-\  :-\  :-\  :-\  :-\

10
IAC & Master Solvers Club / 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: September 02, 2021, 02:11:24 PM »
NOVEMBER 2021 MSC
Deadline: SEPT 30 at 11:59 p.m. (ET)

Submit your NOVEMBER MSC responses here: The Bridge World - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB

BWS 2017 System: BWS 2017
BWS 2017 POLLS, CHANGES AND ADDITIONS: BWS 2017 - Polls, Changes, and Additions
  • 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


*     *     *


11
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 OCTOBER MSC
« on: September 01, 2021, 11:09:51 PM »
On "B" 3 !H crossed my mind, but I never seriously considered it. However, I do recall this from a previous MSC . . . two or three years ago.

I suppose that panel arguments will be something like "!H Ax is closer to being three card support than !S xxx is to being a stopper."
But it is so foreign to what I have learned . . .  :o

Blu, if the game has passed you by . . . I am still running to catch up! Still learnin' every day.


And "F" I never did "get." As evidenced by my final selection and my pre-submission comment in red.

Jim, I like your description of the winning bid: "Shrug Double;)

12
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 OCTOBER MSC
« on: September 01, 2021, 01:36:08 AM »
Screwed the pooch.  >:(

Misclicked my lead submission. Oops!
My request to have it changed was denied. Not surprising.
Maybe a gaggle of panelists will think a spade lead is best? ;)

Pro tip: don't submit when exhausted.

13
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 OCTOBER MSC
« on: August 31, 2021, 01:22:48 AM »
FWIW . . .

Regarding PROBLEM A:

If dealt the following:
!S K8 - !H A97652 - !D K7 - !C J83

and the auction had gone
1 !D - 1 !H
1 !S - ??

Would you bid a 4SF 2 !C?

In Feb. 2019 18 of 25 panelists did!!!
Note the similarity with this month's "A"

Granted, the fourth suit is not so auspiciously stopped as the diamonds in this month's problem. But they are quite similar.

14
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 OCTOBER MSC
« on: August 31, 2021, 01:16:20 AM »
No such luck, Jim.

At the time of our forum crash I believe only you and Blu had recorded any guesses. I had not even created the October spreadsheet at that point.

I do recall that 2 !S on "A" was your first impression.

On "D" you mentioned 4 !D. I remember it clearly because I thought it a woeful underbid (though I sorta figured you'd be changing it).

And I'm pretty sure your lead was the same !D K.

15
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 OCTOBER MSC
« on: August 30, 2021, 01:21:43 PM »

F:  4 !D  I think this shows a good two-suiter (will have to check before submitting) - that way, partner will not be surprised if I pull spades, and partner will bend over backwards to keep hearts in play if staring at long spades.

Interesting. This didn't even occur to me. I did check to see if BWS includes Non-Leaping Michaels (it doesn't), in which case it's an automatic 4 !C. And I do not recall seeing this. But logically, by cuebidding 4 !D then pulling 4 !S to clubs you are showing these two suits and a hand strong enough to withstand the 5-level.

So maybe . . .

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37