December MSC SUMMARY (Part 3)– Danny Kleinman, Director Problem G 1 NT (Peuco)
Imps North-South vulnerable
You, South, hold:
♠ Q 6
♥ A Q 7 5 3
♦ A K 9 8 ♣ K 4
SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
1
♥ 1 ♠ Pass Pass
?
What call do you make?
With a better spade stop, this would be an automatic reopening of 1NT. With 3-3 in the minors, it would be an automatic reopening of double. With neither, you have a problem.
2 ♦ 40 BWP 11% BWS 26% IAC 31%
Some (including a sizable percentage of the solvers) chose to reopen in the second suit, diamonds. I think
Hoki had the best argument for 2
: "as I said I'm a simple soul;" it says I have hearts and diamonds.
Doub and Wildavsky: "Two diamonds. Second choice one notrump, third choice double, both quite reasonable. Not likely enough to score a penalty against one spade to risk a club reply to double, even if we intend to correct to diamonds. Game seems remote, and we can still reach a rightsided three notrump if partner has judged well to pass with ace-third and values." The moderator,
Danny Kleinman also chose 2
, but viewed this as "A very happy problem with three reasonable choices. I have my preference, but I wouldn't call either of the alternatives wrong."
Double 80 BWP 39% BWS 53% IAC 46%
The true choice of the solvers, and a large swath of the panelist was to double.
BluBayou may have hit the nail on the head: "Really this should be a question about the next round of bidding --after "double, [pass], 2Clubs, [pass]" shouldn't it?"
Bart Bramley plans to follow-up with "... two diamonds over two clubs will show about what I have. Too many defects for one notrump. If we belong in three notrump from my side, partner might have peeped." Similarly,
Paul Ivaska says "Over partner's most-likely action, two clubs, I'll bid two diamonds. If North perseveres with three clubs, I will pass, as he should have six."
KenBerg joins the crowd, saying "I am not passing. Maybe I should, but I am not. So X. If pard bids 2C I bid 2D and then whatever happens happens."
Frank Stewart argues "I see the queen of spades, which makes it less likely that North has a penalty pass, but am I not supposed to reopen with a double on a hand this strong?"
Brian Platnick thinks double is "Straightforward."
JCreech writes: "They say you should try to justify a reopening double whenever possible; this one is light on the clubs and possibly heavy on the spades, but who knows, partner may have the trap pass that makes it worthwhile. Personally, I am hesitant due to the vulnerability, but I have been wrong before."
Masse24 commented that this problem was the "Easiest of the set, which means I will get it wrong." Not exactly wrong Todd, but also not the top score.
1 NT 100 BWP 50% BWS 16% IAC one solver
Half of the panelists reopened with 1NT.
Peuco got it wrong about "almost unanimously and i do not have the problem of the next round of bidding" but got it right for the score.
Marty Bergen thinks it "Shows the strength and approximate shape. That's very important. With East not supporting West's spades, the doubleton queen will be very good to me."
Eric Kokish agrees: "Double works well only when we have no game and North passes or removes to two clubs with long clubs, then I guess to pass. I must choose between two diamonds and one notrump; I'll vote for the bid that shows the strength and nature of the hand."
David Berkowitz feels it is "The right bid on values. The doubleton queen of spades isn't so hot, but life isn't perfect."
Robert Wolff considers the bid "Aggressive, and a bit offbeat, but nevertheless reasonable."
Kit Woolsey is optimistic: Three notrump from my side is the most-likely game, and this the way to reach it." And
Phillip Alder points to the psychological: "If the opening leader thinks you have a stopper, then you do."
Problem H 
4 (MarilynLi, CCR3)
Matchpoints Both sides vulnerable
You, South, hold:
♠ A 7 5 2
♥ 10 6 4
♦ Q 10 7 4 ♣ J 6
SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST
—— —— —— 1
♦ Pass 1 ♠ Pass 1 NT
Pass Pass Pass
What is your opening lead?
Although I might not have agreed with the final conclusion, I think
Brian Platnick described the problem well: "Tough problem. I'll eliminate clubs first, as the lead of a doubleton jack will often blow up the suit. A diamond could easily be the winner if East has only four, but could be disastrous, especially if he has five. A heart looks better than a spade. I choose the ten, as leading low could be confusing, and a compromise six-lead could be even worse."
♣ J 40 BWP one Panelist BWS 23% IAC 31%
IAC's plurality was the lead Brian eliminated first. Panelist
David Berkowitz was our spiritual leader: "Trying to catch partner's best suit."
Masse24 discussed how he vacillated: "My first choice. Then was sold on a low heart for the entire month. Back to first choice at the last minute. By the way . . . I hate lead problems."
JCreech's explanation seemed to be almost a shrug: "Almost anything could be right or wrong. If declarer is missing the Q as well, maybe I will be played for a false-card lead." The moderator takes time to provide two more reasons to not choose the
J. "First, it's the one suit that responder (if using common methods) was forced by system to suppress. In older versions of Bridge World Standard as well as the new, responder's two-club rebid is artificial. Second, if dummy has three or four weak clubs, leading the jack might spoil North's pleasure. What a pleasure it will be for him to obtain the lead, shift to a low club, and score our short jack for us."
♥ 6 60 BWP 18% BWS 18% IAC one solver
The moderator expands on the Brian's comment about the
6 "could be even worse." "Strangely enough, BWS is silent on leads from three-card suits, but a preference for middle puzzles me. As North, I'd be sure to go wrong. If South dropped the ten on the next round, I'd read him for a missing queen or king; if South played the four, I'd read him for a low doubleton." Nonetheless, there were Panelists making the lead, but their concern seemed more on trying to hit partner.
Doub and Wildavsky: "In his book
Opening Leads, Mike Lawrence advocated leading opener's minor from hands like this. The four of diamonds is our second choice, but we prefer trying to hit partner's suit." While
Nick L'Ecuyer says it "Combines relative safety with constructiveness. Everything else looks more dangerous. At matchpoints especially, we should try to avoid blowing tricks on lead against low partscore contracts." When I was considering my choice, I looked hard at the hearts, but I rejected when all seemed to be deceptive for partner to read.
♥ 4 100 BWP 36% BWS 32% IAC 15%
The Bridge World plurality went with the
4. Again, safety was the overriding concern. Joel Wooldridge says "Longest and strongest in an unbid suit looks normal. Low in case dummy has honor doubleton."
Eric Kokish waffles a bit: "Yes, East may have four hearts and West three, but it's the most-passive lead and has an upside if it hits North's length."
Susan Panter thinks it is "The best of a bad lot. Second choice: spade deuce."
Bart Bramley feels it "Combines safety with potential to set up tricks. Leading any other suit would be riskier and more speculative, as would be any other heart."
♠ 2 80 BWP 29% BWS 12% IAC one solver
How many safe leads can there be? Well, according to Panelists, at least one more.
Carl Hudecek: "Passive defense seems in order, and a low spade looks reasonably passive."
Billy Eisenberg: "Hoping to lose the least."
Irina Levitina: "It looks safest."
Jeff Rubens: "Least unattractive." However, the logic that speaks to me is
Kevin Bathurst's: Leading any suit could blow a trick. I hope to catch partner with spade strength behind dummy, while I sit with strong diamonds behind declarer."
And so ends another edition of the MSC torture room. This session resulted in more solvers struggling than many, but at least the moderator seemed to punish himself as frequently as he did everyone else; he even sided with the solver's choice in a tie, over his own.
