Author Topic: Master Solvers Club - November 2019  (Read 11522 times)

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1040
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2019, 04:04:52 PM »

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

Your Solutions for the November 2019 Contest


PROBLEM A: 2 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM D: (d)
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM F: Pass
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Diamond 7
Ken

msphola

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2019, 06:24:19 PM »
A  3h
B 2c
C 3d
D E2
E 3c
F pass
G 2d
H 5d

EddyHaskel

  • IACAdmins
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2019, 06:46:41 PM »

PROBLEM A: 3 Hearts
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM C: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM D: (a)
PROBLEM E: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM F: 2 Hearts
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Club 2

jcreech

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 394
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2019, 02:57:09 PM »
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
Fredericksburg VA
U.S.A.

PROBLEM A: 2 Spades      60
PROBLEM B: 2 Clubs        90
PROBLEM C: 2 Hearts     100
PROBLEM D: (d)             100
PROBLEM E: 3 Clubs        100
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump      70
PROBLEM G: 2 Diamonds  100
PROBLEM H: Diamond 7     90

Total                                 710

A good month, but a couple of scores that were below where I hoped.

Congratulations to Todd (Masse24), Jack Goody (wackojack) and Ken Berg for making the BW Honor Roll!  Todd was tied for 7th with a 770, while Ken and Jack had a 740.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2019, 03:23:12 PM by jcreech »
A stairway to nowhere is better than no stairway at all.  -Kehlog Albran

Masse24

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 487
  • Karma: +11/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2019, 04:00:53 PM »
We (the IAC) had five people who scored over 700 this month, though not everyone submitted to The Bridge World.

FIVE!

Really Outstanding!
« Last Edit: October 10, 2019, 07:14:15 PM by Masse24 »
“Kindness is the only service that will stand the storm of life and not wash out. It will wear well and will be remembered long after the prism of politeness or the complexion of courtesy has faded away.” Abraham Lincoln

jcreech

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 394
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2019, 07:24:07 PM »
The scores for everyone and placing for the November MSC contest are as follows:

NAMEBW-SCORERANKMPs
Masse24     770   1   30
Anony1     760   2   25
KenBerg     740   3   20
WackoJack     740   3   20
Jcreech     710   5   11
DrAculea     660   6   1
EddyHaskel     640   7   1
BabsG     630   8   1
Msphola     620   9   1
Blubayou     580   10   1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Congratulations for the four that had scores that were good enough to make the Bridge World Honor Roll!

Thank you all for participating, and good luck next month.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2019, 02:45:40 PM by jcreech »
A stairway to nowhere is better than no stairway at all.  -Kehlog Albran

Masse24

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 487
  • Karma: +11/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2019, 12:46:59 PM »
My Bridge World arrived so I've added some panel opinions below.
The director for November was Bart Bramley.

A few snippets from the panel:


PROBLEM A: 2 !C . The MSC panel votes were very close, with 13 going for the flexible 2 !C and 10 voters choosing the “traditional jump-rebid” of 3 !H . 2 !H and 2 !S were a distant third and fourth.

Bramley summed it up immediately with the following: “Yet another version of the MSC Nightmare Hand: Extra values, a strong six-card suit, and three-card support for partner. The choice I between the traditional jump-rebid in the six-bagger, and “something else,” which is usually scattered among several possibilities. Over time, “something else” has gravitated toward the cheapest call in a three-card minor.”

This summary by Bramley was echoed upthread by yours truly (though I called it The Bridge World Death Hand), but I went the traditional route with 3 !H . Surprisingly, not one of our IAC group chose the winning bid, the “something-else” bid of the cheapest call in a three-card minor. 


PROBLEM B: 1 Notrump. Bramley: “Another nearly binary decision.” 1 Notrump was the number one vote-getter with 14 with 2 !C a close second at 12. Justin Lall stated it most completely with: “One Notrump. Not more, because the hand is very soft opposite a white overcall. [Welland agrees – B.B.]. One should not fear bidding notrump with Queen-low of hearts; in fact, I relish it when hearts haven’t been raised. I am showing values, rightsiding notrump, getting the general hand-type off my chest, and bidding what should be a very playable partscore while leaving all of my options open.”

Rubens, exhibiting typical brevity, “One notrump. Too queeny not to try notrump. Too slow to adventure higher.”

Lall’s point about the allure of bidding notrump when hearts have not been raised is, I think, the clincher here.


PROBLEM C: 2 !H . Bramley: “Our third straight heavily two-way choice.” 2 !H garnered 15 panel votes. 3 !S was a close send with 12. A distant third was 2NT.

There were five panelists (Hudecek, Kleinman, Eisenberg, Rajadhyaksha, and Bramley) who agreed with my assessment that the hand should be “downgraded” to a 15-17 notrump.

Mike Passell forces to game with 2 !H stating, “The old all-purpose cue-bid. Partner did freely bid one spade, so I will force to game.” Good point. It crossed my mind that the “free bid” of 1 !S should not be made on complete garbage, so the game-force 2 !H should be a winner. But I could not pull the trigger on that winning choice.

Still, there was plenty of ambiguity about “what means what.” Bramley summarized with, “There are a number of issues here. The cue-bidders intend to force to game; the spade raisers are willing to stop at three. The cue-bidders hope to imply exactly three spades, either immediately or when they later raise spades; they want four-card support for a direct jump. The spade raisers are willing to incur trump length ambiguity to avoid strain ambiguity. The cue-bidders welcome exploration of alternative strains, especially notrump; the spade raisers, not so much.


PROBLEM D: 3 !C . Bramley starts with, “Awkward. We have great shape without enough high cards to be confident of making anything unless we catch a decent fit. Also, the vulnerable opponents, with almost half the deck, may have a big fit of their own and be about to raise to three or four spades.”

The immediate and forcing 3 !C garnered a high plurality of the vote with 14 of 29 choosing it. Next was 3 !H with 6 votes followed by a Texas 4 !D with 5.

I agree with Bramley, awkward!


PROBLEM E: 3 !C . This was almost unanimous with the MSC panel, garnering 24 of 29 panel votes. Zia, pithily adding, “Three clubs. Close to the truth.”


PROBLEM F: Pass. Bramley: “Answering this problem is easier than comprehending it; that’s a lot of auction-cum-footnotes to wade through.” I agree. I had to read it more than once to get a handle on what was going on. Bramley continues, “The opponents have shown a five-three spade fit, purportedly with enough values to open and respond. We have already shown exactly what we’ve got: Five clubs, two hearts, and enough values to compete. Partner has surprised us by showing secondary diamonds (LHO’s opening suit) along with his hearts. Even more surprising is that we have the agreement that 2 !D is natural. Who discusses this level of detail in complex competitive auctions.”

The majority went with Pass.

Justin Lall (again) explained best with: “Pass. This is definitely the right fit. Two diamonds is a strong statement about diamonds when partner could have passed and would often have bid one-notrump with only four diamonds. I would say it is a lock he has five diamonds. Since the opener is third seat not vulnerable, we may be the victims of a steal, but that is life. We have only one high card in partner’s suits,and partner is short in our best suit.

Bramley agrees, adding, “Why otherwise would partner go out of his way to introduce the suit into an apparent misfit?”


PROBLEM G: 2 !D . The majority went for 2 !D with 1 !S taking second place. Steve Beatty summarizes his thinking with, “Two diamonds. Too much texture and strength to pass; My passed-hand status will keep partner from being to aggressive.” Good point.


PROBLEM H: !C 2 . This ended up being another binary choice, with the lead of the stiff  !C 2 the plurality choice, garnering 14 panel votes. A !D (7, 6, and 2) totaled 11. Bramley, on the choice of a !D : “Among diamond leaders, those who commented on their choice of spot all led the seven, intending it as suit-preference.”

This was echoed by both Jim and Ken in their pre-choice opinions upthread. Don Stack, one of the MSC panelists nailed that thinking with, “Diamond seven. Could be partner has Aces, but my bet is on a diamond void.I’m leading the seven as suit-preference for hearts to give a second diamond ruff. Just like in the books. What about my club ruff? Maybe it doesn’t exist.”

Still, the Lightnerish/Lightneresque tone of partner’s double (mentioned by Jim and Ken) moved several panelists to choose the !C deuce anyway.



That’s all folks!
Once again, attempting to reproduce all the panel responses would take forever, however, if you have a question about a particular problem and how the panel voted, just ask.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2019, 12:59:00 PM by Masse24 »
“Kindness is the only service that will stand the storm of life and not wash out. It will wear well and will be remembered long after the prism of politeness or the complexion of courtesy has faded away.” Abraham Lincoln

jcreech

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 394
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2019, 01:00:11 PM »
Great summary Todd!.  Thank you.
A stairway to nowhere is better than no stairway at all.  -Kehlog Albran

bAbsG

  • IACAdmins
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 77
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #23 on: October 16, 2019, 04:48:16 PM »
Brilliant Todd!  Thanks so much for the summary.  And congratulations on your November score!!!

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1040
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Master Solvers Club - November 2019
« Reply #24 on: October 16, 2019, 07:40:29 PM »
Yes, a nice summary.  Problem A yielded my lowest score. I'll have to think about this nightmare idea. A number of the panelists who chose 2 !C at least commented that it could be passed but hoped that it would not be.  Give partner a 5=1=3=4 minimum and I guess we play in 2 !C instead of  2 !S. It's a risk but maybe it's best. I have to be convinced. I do understand the arguments for 3 !H, I just didn't like that call. A couple of panelists agree with my 2 !S, but it's pretty lonely out there.

These are all tough problems, that's why they are there. I got a kick out of the alternating responses to the lead problem.   
Rajahyaksha: !C 2 with explanation
Ekeblad: !D 7 with explanation
Bekowitz:  !C 2 with explanation
Stack: !D 7 with explanation
Grue: !C 2 with explanation
J. Lall: !D 6  with explanation

This back and forth was a good way of indicating that it's a close call.
Ken