Master Solvers Club, posts up to June 2019

[Masse24]

MAY MSC

SPRING IS HERE! time to be thinking The Bridge World MSC.

Link here: https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/msc/mastersolversmainpage.html

Answers due APRIL 10. Good luck!

[kenberg]

Ah yes, the deadline looms. So what do I think? Beats me.  Preliminary thoughts.

A. X
The older I get the less inclined I am toward balancing but even I think I have to do something.
I double.
Maybe we play in a 4-3 fit? Hopefully not a 3-3 fit! with the suit on my left pard will be able to ruff w/o fear of an overruff. A ruff or two, the top !Ds, a bit of other stuff here and there, should be able to bring in 8 tricks. And if they start with a I can survive. Probably.
So I double and then shut up.

B. 2 .

Yes, I see the five card suit.
Partner is a passed hand, it is unlikely we can either bid or make 4 .
I have a stiff . Most likely the opps will outbid us in and, when they have done so, I want a lead.
There is another interesting feature: If I bid 2 then fourth hand can easily clarify his holding. With five , and some values, he bids them, With four , and some values, he doubles. If I overcall 2 then both and are as yet unmentioned and if, say, Lho has four and two , he will find this hand a little tough to describe. He will want to X but he will worry that his pard might get overly enthusiastic about . Say it goes P-P-1D-2C-X-3C-? Assuming that the X by Lho did not promise both majors, then  Rho, if holding but not ,  might have a problem here. And if they do play the X as showing both majors then, given my five card suit, it is unlikely that Lho would be able to make that X.  So it would have gone P-P-1D-2C-P-3C-?. However they play the X after I overcall 2 , the overcall might give then some problems.
Btw, I think Steve Robinson suggests that the X, after 1 is overcalled by 2 ,  should be either support for both majors or else, if only one major is supported, then doubler has a fit and a willingness to play at the level required for a correction when pard selects the major the doubler does not have.


More later, the coffee pot is calling for me.

[Masse24]

Initial guesses:

PROBLEM A: 2 . Pedestrian, yes. I hate the suit quality. This seems like the time for a “what would a beginner do?” choice. Double is certainly an option, as well as a slightly risky 1NT (Qx is a sorta-stopper, yes?). Double, though, could land us in a funny “fit” at the 2-level. Sometimes I overthink these problems.

PROBLEM B: 2NT. Opposite a passed partner this puts max pressure on the opponents, but the vulnerability is a concern. The opps almost certainly have a fit. This jams them, if only a bit. I do not like 1 , which may draw a lead from partner (I doubt 1 will garner may votes). Since game is unlikely, it’s probably best to “show what I have,” which is 2 -- a “bid where you live” call. I think 2 will be the plurality choice of the “solvers.” I'm highly skeptical of my choice here.

PROBLEM C: 3 . At Matchpoints, I really want to keep the possibility of 3NT alive, but that banks on running . Also, since partner has ostensibly denied having three , a subsequent 3 rebid by partner should show two, and it would presumably promise Qx or better. So a game is not yet ruled out. My close second choice was a forcing 4 .

PROBLEM D: 2 . My conservative nature tells me that 2 is too rich with such a threadbare suit as well as the dubious value of my honors. But if I don’t mention them now, I’ll never convince partner I have five. I agonized over my second choice—double—still showing the spades but hiding the length.

PROBLEM E: Pass. This is bold. Alternatively, 2NT then 3NT.

PROBLEM F: 2 . Treating this as a game-force is, I think, correct. I choose to bid my longer suit first, but 2 may be right.

PROBLEM G: 6 . A general try for grand. At face value it surely can’t elicit a first-round control from partner—we have all the aces! 5NT was my alternative, which in this auction should be Josephine. It still may be best, but it is very unilateral, asking only about partner’s honors. I think it’s a trap to lure us into making the cool “because I know what it means” choice. 😊 Also, partner’s 5 may not be what we hope it to be, the opp’s 5 preempt put partner under a lot of pressure. Preempts work.

PROBLEM H: 9. Not sexy. Partner bid ‘em. I supported. Show him I don’t have an honor. My second choice is the King.

Slow to review this month. Must pull the trigger in the next few hours. I'll probably go with what I have above, unless I get a sudden channeling of genius, which is highly unlikely.

[Masse24]

Btw, I think Steve Robinson suggests that the X, after 1 is overcalled by 2 ,  should be either support for both majors or else, if only one major is supported, then doubler has a fit and a willingness to play at the level required for a correction when pard selects the major the doubler does not have.

I agree. And I think this is fairly standard. Bergen teaches this. Lawrence, too. I can't imagine an advanced player ever thinking that this double: 1 - (2 ) - X shows both majors. That would be far too restrictive. It seems to be often confused with 1 - (1 ) - X which does promise both majors.

[jcreech]

PROBLEM A: Double
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades
PROBLEM E: (a)
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 6 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Spade 9

I don't have time to discuss my answers this time, so here they are.  Good luck to all who enter.

[drac]

SOLVER: Wladislaus Dragwlya
        Castrum Sex
        Romania

Your Solutions for the May 2019 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM B: 1 Heart
PROBLEM C: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM D: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM E: (b3)
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 6 Spades
PROBLEM H: Diamond King

[wackojack]

My first stab at doing something like this.  Will a Brit's view be wildly different?

A   2♦
I’ll go for the obvious 2♦.  Good lead director if opps continue to 2♠ and partner cannot raise..

B   2NT
2♣ for lead direction?  No I think has to be 2NT, the lower ranking unbid suits. 

C   4♠. 
I have 6 of them and better than a min opener.  For me the 3♣ bid would be showing 3 card support for ♠.  I appreciate that may not be the case here.  However, it would be inconceivable for partner to have only a singleton.

D   2♠
A forcing 2♠.  What else?

E   2NT
I cannot pass this since it looks to me that 2♠x will make easily.  So bid 2NT (lebensohl) and pass partner’s 3♣ response hoping for the best.  I don’t really like anything. 

F   2♦.
Game force.  The  ♥ suit is not good enough to bid 2♥.

G   6♣. 
Surely shows a void and try for the grand.

H   9♣.     
If in doubt lead partner’s suit. 

[Masse24]

I stuck with my first choices mentioned above. Too sleepy to think on it more.

SOLVER: Todd Holes
        Glen Ellyn IL
        U.S.A.
 
Your Solutions for the May 2019 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades
PROBLEM E: (a)
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 6 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Club 9

Too late to change now, but I wish I had just chosen the practical 6 on "G," or even 5NT. Anything other than 6 must show control of the club suit and be a try for grand. Oh well.

[kenberg]

For some reason I did not even think of 2NT for B. That seems very reasonable.

I still have a few moments to think.

[kenberg]

Whew. I was thinking the deadline was 10 but it's 9. But I made it.



SOLVER: Ken Berg
        Eldersburg MD
        U.S.A.

Your Solutions for the May 2019 Contest 
-------------------
PROBLEM A: Double
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: 4 Clubs
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades
PROBLEM E: (b3)
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 6 Spades
PROBLEM H: Club 9

[kenberg]

My first stab at doing something like this.  Will a Brit's view be wildly different?

 
C   4♠. 
I have 6 of them and better than a min opener.  For me the 3♣ bid would be showing 3 card support for ♠.  I appreciate that may not be the case here.  However, it would be inconceivable for partner to have only a singleton.
 

On this one, yes, wildly different. As I understand 3 , it shows a hand, if 2 were not game-forcing, I would bid 2 and then a passable 3 .  Otherwise put, it says  "I am pretty sure that should be trump". Another way of putting is that the 3 invites a pass if unless opener has extra strength or extra shape. So the 3 !c bidder will definitely not have three .

My thinking, with 4 ,  is that partner, if he should have two , could now bid 4 . He knows that I know he does not have three, so a bid of 4 will presumably be on two. If he has one, or none, we will try to make 5 . There should be a decent shot for it.

I think my understanding of 3 is the BWS meaning. At any rate, 3 is definitely passable so he does not have three . It's not a fit showing jump shift.

[kenberg]

SOLVER: Ken Berg
        Eldersburg MD
        U.S.A.

Your Solutions for the May 2019 Contest 
-------------------
PROBLEM A: Double                          60
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs                       100
PROBLEM C: 4 Clubs                        90
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades                     70
PROBLEM E: (b3)                            10
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds                100
PROBLEM G: 6 Spades                     80
PROBLEM H: Club 9                       100                                       


                                                   610

[Masse24]

SOLVER: Todd Holes
        Glen Ellyn IL
        U.S.A.
 
Your Solutions for the May 2019 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 2 Diamonds       80
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump         80
PROBLEM C: 3 Diamonds      100
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades           70
PROBLEM E: (a)                     60
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds       100
PROBLEM G: 6 Clubs               90
PROBLEM H: Club 9               100
                                           680

Tough set. I'm not hating my of my choices, so it's an acceptable score.
Always nice to read the panel comments, though. I expect the opinions on PROBLEM G to be all over the place. 

[jcreech]

PROBLEM A: Double           60
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump      80
PROBLEM C: 3 Diamonds   100
PROBLEM D: 2 Spades        70
PROBLEM E: (a)                  60
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds   100
PROBLEM G: 6 Clubs           90
PROBLEM H: Spade 9          70
                     Total           630

I was stunned by the balancing NT on Problem A for the top score.  Doubleton Q and 12 HCPs when opps are already showing five cards in one hand.

I was also surprised that for Problem E, that bidding leb followed by 3NT was a 40 point better choice than converting the double to penalty.  But what I failed to consider is that I was passing them into a potential game.  Wish I had taken more time on this decision.

[kenberg]

A question about problem E: My first thought was "Really, he wants to play 3NT?" But then I realized that maybe I had not thought this through. At least one way of playing Leb over the X of a wekk 2 goes like this: If in response to the X I bid a direct 3NT it says "Leave me alone, I want to play 3NT". The slow approach, forst 2NT and then 3T, says "Maybe I want to play 3NT, maybe I don't. If you have something is spades I do, if you don't then I don't" So, for example, maybe I can handle playing 3NT of pard has Qx. Lacking help in , pard pulls 3NT, hopefully to the 5 card suit that he has at least some chance of holding of he has no help in .  Maybe that's the logic. Certainly it seems to me that if pard has a stiff spot, and very possibly if he has a stiff minor honor, the opponents are about to run six spades against 3NT.

Leb over weak 2 means, as we often see, different things to different people. They must be playing something like what I describe.  My thinking was that if I Lebbed and then bid 3 at least I am likely (not sure but likely) to be in a 4-3 fit. If I Leb and pass 3 I might be in a 3-3 fit.


I am still not sure that I like this sequence but I am betting the explanation is something like the above. It did not occur to me.