Bramhall & Cheadle Hulme Bridge Centre
Release 2.19r
0 0 0 0 0 0
Pages viewed in 2025
WWYB 2020
What Would You Bid?
October Solutions

Here we go with our 10 months’ What Would You Bid Competition. The response has been overwhelming and humbling (51 competitors!). 
 
Let’s hope my meagre shoulders are capable of carrying the burden and of giving your engagement justice.
 
The aim is simple: Humour, Engage, Gel and Learn. If we are lucky, we might see an expert or two with egg on their face. 
 
The rules for judging are simple. The bid with most votes amongst the experts gets 10 points. No expert bid gets less than 4 points. No competitor bid gets less than 1 point. We honour the fact that you take part, have reflected and by doing so are on the route to improvement.
 
It was a delight to see that many of the competitors have put their panelist boots on and have given me an insight to their expertise. Unfortunately, or fortunately whatever might be the case their comments will be for my eyes only - unless I see a comment that I think can be used to add to the experts’ wisdom.
 
I’m sure that over the next 10 months we will get to know our experts’ personalities, if not their
family history or world views. 
 
The first set of hands might not have been the most difficult ones, but we did get to see some divergence in the expert panel. Only 4 of our panelists got a perfect 40, and not a single one of our competitors got a humiliating ‘Quatre points’ - we leave that for Norwegians in Eurovision!
 
The front runners after round one are: Ian Pendlebury with a perfect 40, Peter Foster (38), Victor Ridding (37) and Adrian Shiers (37).
 
I’ll interject comments as and where I feel them to be appropriate and they will all be in italics.
 

Problem 1
 
Bidding:
 
North    East    South    West
1♠       2♦      dbl       pass
?
 
You Hold:
 
♠ AK864
♥ A9842
♦ -
♣ A102
 
Should you Kiss or should you Tell? The great majority of our experts think it best to tell, whilst a few want to give partner some space to tell before the kissing can start. First let’s see what the ones who know where to go have to say.
 
Joy Blakey: 6♥ I thought of all sorts of forcing bids, 3♦ , 4♦  even 5♦  but not sure where these would get me so bid the most practical bid without giving away any info! Joy’s partners obviously tend to always produce the goods!
 
Now what about the slow walkers?
 
Irving Blakey: 3♦ . Forcing to at least game. Subsequent bidding will depend upon sophistication of partnership methods when small (or even grand) slam may be reached. Is Joy the maverick and Irving the rock in this partnership? Time will tell! 
 
Raymond Semp: 3♦  First establish a game going hand as 6♥  is looking good - As his double indicates - Showing Hearts & Clubs.
 
Both aiming for a slam but wanting to get some more info from partner. Now a few voices from the majority.
 
Michael Byrne: 4 ♦  Splinter agreeing hearts. My hand is too powerful for a leap to 4♥ , which may miss a slam facing as little as xx, KJxx, xxx, Kxxx, where we need either hearts to come in or a 3-3 spade break. There is some danger partner will think I am self-agreeing my own spades, but I think spade hands would start with 3♦ , then pull the expected 3♥  to 3♠  to show a single suited game force. If partner signs off in 4♥  I will bid again, I don't expect to go down at the 5 level. Michael’s comment on the distinction between the 3♦  and 4♦  bid is interesting and one we should take note of. 
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♦  Should be short diamonds and a heart-fit. Short and sweet, no indication of future ambitions. 
 
Rhona Goldenfield: 4♦  It is always better to agree suit so there is no confusion in the later bidding if partner bids 4♥  i will bid 4♠  now partner should get the picture that I have a very good hand. From the School of ‘Make it easy for partner’. We could all pick up more than one page from that curriculum!  
 
Alan Jones: 4♦  This is not clear-cut since South's double can be 8+ with four hearts or 10+ clubs, so 3♦  (strong, tell me more) or 3♥  (strong, two-suited) are also acceptable bids. I prefer 4♦  (splinter with at least four hearts as I play it) since it gets my slam ambitions over. This uncertainty might be what makes some of the experts go for 3♦  to get clarification before the slamming starts?
 
Jeffery Smith: 4♦  There is a high likelihood of a heart slam, and this bid best describes this prospect.
 
Tom Slater: 4♦ Feels right for shortage and slam ambition, not clear if this could be single-suited with strong spades or not, but hope that partner will expect hearts. Intend to pass 4♥  not make a further move. A bit like inviting Cinderella to the ball and not trying to find out if the shoe fits because she is a bit shy! 
 
Here comes my favourite, maybe a bit space consuming, but it will get you to a slam!
 
Alec Smalley: 5♦  I am going to the six level whether partner likes it or not! I know it is pairs but this gets my hand across so well that if Partner bids 5♥  with X - KQxx - Jxxx - Kxxx (a very minimal T/o x of 2♦ ) then a raise to six still has good chances) with more Partner might bid on to 7♥ . If Partner bids 6♥  after the 5♦  bid I bid the 7th. If P has 5♣  and 3♥  still happy to play 6♣ . I love it! No limping chickens as we say in Norway. It must be a void and showing willingness to play a small slam in all the other denominations and looking for a grand. Should we be glad or despair not having Exclusion Blackwood on our card? 
 
There you have it. I do prefer 3♦ as it keeps more options open. Toms unwillingness to procede if partner bids 4♥ shows the problem with 4♦ , but I have to give in to the superior force of the experts: they prefer to tell, with a few outliers going for the kiss. 
 
Bid Points #Panelists #Competitors
4♦  10 10 10
3♦  8 2 5
5♦  6 1 0
6♥  5 1 0
4♥  4 0 12
3♥  3 0 15
5♥  1 0 1
Pass 1 0 1
2♥  1 0 7

 

 

Problem 2

Bidding:
 
North    East    South    West
1♥       pass    1♠        pass
1NT      pass    3NT       pass
?
 
You Hold:
 
♠ QJ3
♥ AK1095
♦ A108
♣ J9
 
Do you trust your partner to be able to stop the clubs? I’m sure this problem is from a hand where North passed and East/West run off with 5 club tricks whilst 4♠  was stone cold on the Moysian fit. Any expert takers?
 
David Barton: Pass. Partner could find something other than 3N if he had 5♠  or 3♥  It is possible to construct hands where 4♠  on the 4-3 fit makes and 3N goes off, but I consider the converse more likely.
 
John Currie: Pass. Partner could have asked whether I had 3♠  or 5♥ . So I pass and hope he doesn’t have a 4252 hand!
 
John Holland: Pass. A non-problem, If I was worried about 3NT, then should have bid something other than 1NT on previous round.
 
Jeffrey Smith: Pass. There is no reason for any other action - Pass has closed the auction.
 
Competitor Peter Foster: Pass. I must be missing something. No and Yes. No: Your answer is picture perfect. Yes: The fact that you have outgrown the fear of ending up with egg on your face after having conducted a sound bidding sequence to a sound contract.
 
So, take the cues from the expert - trust your partner. If you have occasional bad results, they are more than counter-balanced by all the good results you get by just trusting partner. 
 
Bid Points #Panelists #Competitors
Pass 10 14 40
4♠  2 0 9
4♦  1 0 1
4♥  1 0 1

 

An extra sympathy point for the 4S bidders.

 

 

Problem 3
 
Bidding:
 
North    East    South    West
                      1♦        pass
1♥       1♠     2♣        3♠ 
4♣       pass    pass      4♠ 
?
 
You Hold:

♠ 6
♥ A107432
♦ Q
♣ K8654
 
Some panelists are critical of the 4♣ bid, why did they not bid 5♣ in the first place? Let’s hear from those who stick to their guns.
 
John Currie: Pass. Leave it up to partner and blame him if he gets it wrong! One who’s been around the blocks a few times and likes to be prepared for the post-mortem!
 
John Holland: Pass. If I thought the hand was only worth 4♣  on previous round. The School of not telling the same story twice. 
 
Rhona Goldenfield: Partner did not raise my 4 ♣ to 5 so now I leave the decision to partner.
 
Alec Smalley: Pass. Why didn't I bid 5♣  first time round? As I haven't, I am not going to take the second bite at the cherry - as West has done - it's my Partners's decision even if I haven't shown my playing strength in ♣ . If Partner doubles clear A♥  and another - Partner is obviously short ♥. Well you got the chance to right your wrongs and didn’t take it. As the Rueful Rabbit said, if people were not so busy righting wrongs, there would not be so many wrongs to right! 
 
What from the killing squad?
 
Joy Blakey: Dbl. Partner can decide whether to remove it. (at teams I would bid 5♣  but take my chances at pairs). The reluctant assassin.
 
Raymond Semp: Dbl. I don't want partner bidding 5♣  when I think 4♠  won't make if partner has the two minor Aces, and what looks like short hearts. I should have added. And opposition lead a club. Sorry about that. The goalie saving his partner from temptation. 
 
Now let’s hear from the majority, what are their excuses for bidding on?

Michael Byrne: 5♣  The bid that I should have made on the previous round. I was prepared to give up on 4♥  once partner suggests 5-5 or extra playing strength (he is not obliged to bid 2♣  after 1♠ , so he should have some reason to bid) and 5♣  will certainly have good play facing the expected singleton heart. I have no idea what the opponents are doing, raising to 3♠ and then 4♠  is either a cunning tactic designed to get me to double them, or they are just beginners. Regardless I hope to hit something like xx, x, Axxxx, AQxxx, or perhaps xx, x, AKxxxx, AJxx, which will make 11 tricks fairly straight forward. 
 
Espen Lindqvist: 5♣  Would probably have bid game on the previous round. Anyway, i got another chance.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 5♣  I would have bid 4♠  on the previous round, but now partner has passed 4♣ , there is little prospect of slam and 5♣  should be making with the penalty of defending 4♠  probably small.
 
Two different attitudes, either take control and bid 5♣  or double, or kick the can down the road for partner to deal with. You should not let them play undoubled in a sacrifice, so it has to be a question of 5♣  or double. Who’s best situated to decide? When it comes to criticising previous bids, we have all been in bidding sequences where we realise too late that we have made a bad bid and now have to play catchup.  
 
Bid Points #Panelists #Competitors
5♣  10 8 38
Pass 8 4 4
Dbl 6 2 9
 

Problem 4
 
 
Bidding:
 
North    East    South    West
            1♣      dbl       2♣ 
?
 
You Hold:
 
♠ AK102
♥  4
♦ KJ764
♣ 542
 

What is the best way to get the most information out of partner? What is the most informative bid for partner? 
 
Raymond Semp: 4♠  If partner has 4 spades I cannot think of a hand that he has that cannot make game. He is known to be short in clubs and I must be declarer and protect my ♦ King against a ruff if West is on lead. No room for discussion here, the point about the ♦ King is a good one though! 
 
Let's hear from those who wants to discuss the end station:
 
David Barton: 3♣  I am going to bid game, just need to sort out in which suit.
 
John Holland:  3♣  2 suits, will drive to game.
 
Alan Jones: 3♣  Since partner should be short of clubs, I am prepared to go to game (or even more!) in either spades or diamonds. Since I want to investigate both suits, I start with a cue bid of their suit. Bidding a suit suggests a more single-suited hand
 
Tom Slater: 3♣ At pairs I don't want to lose the major suit bonus for playing 4♠  even in a Moysian. Still, partner could have all sorts, so I would start with 3♣  then aim for 4♠  on most hands unless partner is keen to show diamonds. Best defence for the bid I love.
 
All sounding sound to me. As soon as you know your partner’s best suit, bid the game. Short and sweet. Let’s hear the majority
 
Irving Blakey: Dbl. Indicating at least two places to play and values.
 
Joy Blakey: Dbl. Showing values, at least two places to play. Harmony reestablished! 
 
Michael Byrne: Dbl. My flexible friend. I am worth 4♠ , but the trouble with bidding it straight away is that it might be a 4-3 fit (where have all the hearts gone?) and it won't leave partner well placed if they raise to 5♣ . My alternative call of 3♣  frequently suggests both majors, and convincing partner that I actually have diamonds and spades may take some time. Double is responsive and partner will bid suits up the line, giving priority to the majors as usual. When I convert hearts to spades later, he will infer I have diamonds as well - or at least that's the hope. As usual Michael gets to the crux of the matter: Is 3♣  both majors or two places to play? You have to sort this one out with your partner so that the convincing might take less time.
 
Espen Lindqvist: Dbl. This normally shows both majors. But my plan is to convert partner's heart bid to spades (4). This way i hope to bring diamonds into the picture. On Michaels team! 
 
There you have it. I can’t see that it is much in it. Dbl or 3♣ , both should get you to the right game. Horses for courses I guess.
 
 
Bid Points #Panelists #Competitors
Dbl 10 7 5
3♣  9 6 7
4♠   5 1 8
3♠  3 0 11
2NT 1 0 1
2♠  1 0 6
3♦   1 0 7
2♦  1 0 5
4♦  1 0 1
 

 

Results October
 
 
Panelist Problem 1  Problem 1  Problem 1  Problem 1  Total
David Barton   4♦ Pass 5♣  3♣ 39
Irving Blakey  3♦ Pass 5♣ Dbl  38 
Joy Blakey  6♥   Pass Dbl Dbl 31
Michael Byrne  4♦  Pass 5♣ Dbl  40
John Currie  4♦ Pass Pass Dbl 38
Rhona Goldenfield 4♦ Pass Pass 3♣ 37  
John Holland   4♦ Pass Pass 3♣ 37
Rodney Lighton  4♦  Pass 5♣  Dbl 40
Espen Lindqvist 4♦ Pass 5♣  Dbl 40
Alan Jones  4♦ Pass 5♣  3♣ 39
Raymond Semp  3♦ Pass Dbl 4♠   29
Tom Slater 4♦ Pass 5♣ 3♣ 39
Alec Smalley  5♦  Pass Pass  Dbl 33
Jeffrey Smith  4♦ Pass 5♣  Dbl 40


This Month’s Top Competitors (60% or Higher Score)

 

Place Competitor Score
1 Ian Pendlebury 40
2 Peter Foster 38
3 Victor Ridding 37
= Adrian Shiers 37
5 Paul Worswick  35
6 Andrea Knowles 34
7 Andy Robertshaw  33
8 Christine Benson 32
= Adam Wiseberg 32
10 Mary Green  31
= Sue Webborn 31
= Joyce White  31
= Ann Thornton 31
14 Dhun Daji  30
= Michael Wymer 30
16 Richard Acaster 29
= Rob Harris  29
= Michael Parr  29
=
Andy Green
 29
20 Geoff Ashcroft 28
21 Joyce Jones 27
= Michael Greaney  27
23 Jean Musker  26
= Heather Saunders 26
= Liz Ineson 26
26 George Leigh 25
= Paul Morrell  25
28 Steven Mattinson  24
= Barbara Lewis  24
= Del O'Sullivan 24
= Michelle Bovensiepen  24
= Ros Moorhouse  24
= David Fussell 24
= Val Hempstock 24

 

If your name is not on the list, do not despair - 9 more chances to show that you are the bidding wiz of Bramhall & Cheadle Hulme Bridge Centre.

 
Espen Gisvold
Competition Editor
What Would You Bid
 
July Solutions
 

We have now completed our 10 Month “What Would You Bid” competition. I hope that you as competitors have enjoyed taking part, and as a reader have enjoyed the panelists’ reasoning, and that everyone might have picked up a trick or two!

 

I would like to give a huge thank you to all the panelists for taking time to answer and share their expertise with us.

 

Also, special thanks to Alec Smalley and Michael Byrne - without them this would have been a horribly bad effort - they have kept me on the straight and narrow - a feat not achieved by many!

 

Also, a special thanks to Barbara Lewis - without her sub editing, it would have been hard work for you to get anything sensible out of what I put to paper.

 

The biggest thanks go to you, the competitors. Most of you have not only sent in answers, but also your reasoning. In the course of the competition, more than 70 members of the club have sent in answers.

 

This month’s problems, at least for the panelists, offered up few options, and all but one of the problems had a great majority bid in the panel. The competitors had much more imagination and on problem 4 managed to come up with no fewer than 10 different bids.

 

This month’s competition was won by Victor Ridding with a perfect 40, with a 3-way tie for 2nd place between Dhun Daji, Peter Foster and Mary Green on 39.

 

The winner of our overall competition is Peter Foster with 252 points from his 7 best results, followed in second place by Victor Ridding on 250. In third place we have Dhun Daji (241) and in fourth Mary Green (238). A small comfort for Victor might be that over the 10 results he managed to gather 348 points against Peter Foster’s 338. Congratulations to all of them.

 

Amongst the Panelists in July, we had a four-way tie on 40 - Rodney Lighton, Alan Jones, Raymond Semp and Alec Smalley.

 

As usual, my comments will be in italics. Enjoy a good summer!

 

Problem 1
 
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Teams
 
South  
 West   North    East 
 
  1♥ 
?
      
 
South
♠ AKQ9653
♥ -
♦ QJ8732
♣ -
 

We included this problem for ‘the fun of it’. It is the kind of hand that has no ‘right’ answer and what surprised me is that not a single Panelist or competitor opted for the ‘all in’ 6♠ bid. You need partner to have only one of the ♦ honours for it to make, and if it is off, it might still be a good save. And you get the opponents to guess at your level. Let’s see what the panelists said.

 

Alan Mould: Pass. The late great John Collings said that he was no longer prepared to discuss hands with 2 voids in them or hands with 9 card suits in them since anything could be right. I have great sympathy for that view. You are going to have to bid this hand on your own so it doesn't much matter what you do. 4♠, 1♠, 2♥, 6♠ could all work out fine. Since I don't have real teammates to answer to, I will try the old saw of passing - I may possibly bid later. Catches people occasionally… I told Alan: “Takes “walking the dog’ to a new level for me, but I’m sure you will get another chance to bid”. Alan replied: “I would be astonished if the hand got passed out. Mind you Neil Rosen did try passing Axx, AKxxxxxxx, -, x over a 1♦ opening on his right in a Camrose trial once and that did get passed out….”

 

Now to the bidders:

 

Espen Lindqvist: 4♥. Believe 4♥ should show at least twelve cards in spades and a minor, and game in hand. Anyway, it might be difficult to locate a diamond honour with partner.

 

Irving Blakey: Dbl. What else? I've got the Spades! Cannot disagree with the comment!

 

Joy Blakey: Dbl. It looks easy to get excited with this distribution but as you've got the spade suit you can start with dbl.

(1♥) - dbl - (4♥) - 5♣; Pass - ? Would that not be a bit of a pickle to be in?

 

The most popular way to show the two suiter amongst the Panelists was:

 

Royce Alexander: 2♥. Michael’s Cue bid showing 5+S, 5+m. Planning to jump in Diamonds on the next round.

 

Michael Byrne: 2♥. (Michaels Cue Bid). Hands with freak distribution immediately suggest a wild leap to a high level, and I am expecting to have to take several bids here, but the first priority must be to show a two suited hand and see if I can elicit support from partner. If I can, the sky's the limit. 

 

Rhona Goldenfield: 2♥. Spades and minor

 

Jeffrey Smith: 2♥. Best to show the two suited nature – Hopefully, you can cue bid later to find if Partner has a D honour which is possibly all you need for slam.

 

All sensible bids and comments in my book, even though I quite like my name brother’s distinction in distribution by the jump to 4♥. Now to the plurality who are deciding to take it slowly.

 

David Barton: 1♠. There is zero chance that this will be passed out and I feel I will be better placed if the auction comes back to me with opponents in a large number of Hearts or Clubs

 

Rodney Lighton: 1♠. Bid my longest suit first, intending to bid my second longest suit next (maybe).

 

Alan Jones: 1♠.

 

Raymond Semp: 1♠. Please don't tell me it goes P-P-P. I will not believe it! I will then bid 5♦.

 

Tom Slater: 1♠. 0%. Don't lose any sleep whatever you bid. So long as you don't pass throughout, I am sure you'll be fine.

 

Alec Smalley: 1♠. the bidding isn't going to end here - and I'll be better placed as to where to play with more info.

 

Alec’s final comment - I guess - is the reason that so many go for 1♠ rather than 2♥. As Tom Slater said: “Don’t lose any sleep whatever you bid”.  One competitor also suggested 3♣ (Modified Ghestem, showing S's and D’s) and 2♠ which we assume was meant as a strong jump shift.

 

Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
1♠ 
10
6
2
2♥ 
9
4
16
4♥ 
9
1
1
3♣ 
9
0
1
2♠ 
7
0
1
Dbl
4
2
3
Pass
4
1
0

 

 

Problem 2

Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
South West North East
      1♦ 
?      
 
South
♠ A63
♥ AKQ8742
♦ K2
♣ 3
 

Do you bid or double? Some 20 years ago it might have been more of a question, but our Panelists are almost in unison. Let’s start with those who do not agree with the majority.

 

Irving Blakey: 1♥. This might end the auction, but I'm prepared to take a chance as I want to hear what pard has to say - Slam is a real possibility opposite a few of the right cards. Space conserving it is, and if it doesn’t go pass-pass-pass you have survived, and it might be the best bid - but worth the chance?

 

Now the one who knows where he wants to be.

 

David Barton: 4♥. I wish I was playing a sensible system where 2♥ was strong!!  I will X if opposition bid over this to show that I expected to make 4♥ and I have a few defensive values. A reasonable punt, and if partner is used to such strong jumps to 4♥, you’ll probably get to slam when it’s right.

 

Now to the overwhelming majority.

 

Royce Alexander: Dbl. Alternatives are 4♥ or (at pairs) 3NT. If partner responds 3♣, I’ll try 3.

 

Joy Blakey: Dbl. It's too powerful to bid 1 or 4 hearts so again I choose to say dbl first.

 

Michael Byrne: Dbl. This hand is too strong for 4♥ and holding some good defence to spades (and diamonds) I can afford to start with double. It's unlikely I am going any higher than 4♥, but if partner can respond strongly there is no reason why we shouldn't bid our slam. With my regular partner's I play a gadget here of 4♦ to show a good 4M overcall, but since that is not mainstream, I shall start slowly and build up. It's interesting to note that if partner was a passed hand, now I would overcall 4♥, then double back in. 

 

Rhona Goldenfield: Dbl. Too good to bid 4♥ 

 

Espen Lindqvist: Dbl. Too good for a preempt or a one-level overcall. Planning to bid 4♥ next.

 

Alan Jones: Dbl. Whether this or 4♥ is better really depends on who my opposition is

 

Alan Mould: Dbl. Second choice 4♥. Doubtless David Barton will tell you this is a strong jump overcall…Finally, a precise prediction!

 

Raymond Semp: Dbl. I cannot afford to bid 1♥ this time.

 

Tom Slater: Dbl. 90%. Comfortably strong enough to double then bid hearts. Partner will not expect so much strength if we jump to game directly.

 

Alec Smalley: Dbl. Then followed by lowest ♥ bid I can make

 

Jeffrey Smith: Dbl. Bit too strong for an immediate ♥ overcall.

 

So, the overwhelming opinion is that this hand is too strong for both 1♥ and 4♥. If you do play with old fashioned (some might say stone aged) strong jump shifts, you could of course jump to 2♥.

 

Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Dbl
10
12
17
4♥ 
6
1
1
3NT
5
0
1
1♥ 
4
1
4
2♥ 
1
0
1

 

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: East
Vul: All
Pairs
 
South West North East
      1♣ 
dbl pass 1♥  2♣ 
?      
 
 
South
♠ AKQJ
♥ 85
♦ AKQ6
♣ 852
 

You have a 19 count, but not what could be called a good fit for partner’s preferred suit, and a non-existing club guard. That said, partner must either have a long heart suit or some support for one of your suits, so should you keep going or leave it up to partner? Two competitors throw in the bowl, while that’s not for the red- blooded Panelists. All but one agree on the way forward. We give the microphone to the odd one out:

 

Alan Mould: 2♠. Second choice 4♥. Doubtless David Barton will tell you this is a strong jump overcall…The prediction is not 100%, but not off either.

 

Now to the rest of the panel.

 

Royce Alexander: Dbl. Showing a very strong hand, such as this balanced 19 count

 

David Barton: Dbl. An easy one - shows I have extra values but not Heart support - unanimous panel??? Thank goodness for the 2♣ bid or I really would have a problem.

 

Irving Blakey: Dbl. Least of the evils.

 

Joy Blakey: Dbl. Could possibly bid 3♣ looking for 3NT but partner might think I'm agreeing ♥  so prefer to double again.

 

Michael Byrne: Dbl. Twice in a row! I am too strong to pass and lack a club stopper to bid NT. Broadly speaking my double shows extras and 3 cards in hearts (with 4 I raise directly, with two I bid my long suit), so I am only a little bit short. If partner rebids 2♥then I might try 2♠, explaining to partner afterwards that this is flexible. 

 

Rhona Goldenfield: Dbl.

 

Rodney Lighton: Dbl. Again, hoping for something intelligent from partner. Good thing he’s not playing with me!

 

Espen Lindqvist: Dbl. More take-out. Would have liked to hold three hearts but have to act.

 

Alan Jones: Dbl.

 

Raymond Semp: Dbl. And hope partner is stacked with clubs and hearts. I lead a club if he passes.

 

Tom Slater: Dbl. 100%. Entirely clear at this stage, nothing else is attractive. Hopefully, partner will be able in a position to pass.

 

Alec Smalley: Dbl. More t/o -I would prefer one more ♥ for this but we cannot let 2♣ be the contract - unless Partner wants to penalise it, then I am happy

 

Jeffrey Smith: Dbl. It may be right to pass but this shows a very strong hand so partner can judge accordingly.

They all see some downsides to the double, but obviously regard the upside worth the bid. The Panel’s willingness to not have heel clicking attitudes is worthwhile to notice.

 

Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Dbl
10
13
13
2S
4
1
2
2D
4
0
2
3C
1
0
5
Pass
1
0
2

 

Problem 4
Dealer: West
Vul: E/W
Teams
 
South    
 West    North    East
  Pass 1♣  2♣(1) 
?  
(1) At least 5-5 in the majors, 10(ish)+ hcp
 
South
♠ 82
♥ A62
♦ AQ98
♣ Q532
 

You and partner have the balance of power, and highly likely a game on, so how to explore NT or minor game best? Let’s start with the doublers.

 

Joy Blakey: Dbl. Showing values.

 

Rhona Goldenfield: Dbl

 

Now to the players bidding the suits they don’t have:

 

Royce Alexander: 2♠. The system description section 4.2 says the higher cue bid of 2♠ is an artificial cue bid showing a sound raise of partner’s club suit. 2♥ would be showing Diamonds and a partial fit for Clubs. 2♦ would be natural NF. 3♣ would be about 7-9. I would like to be able to bid 2♥ showing a Heart stopper and values for 3♣ so that partner with extras can right side 3NT, but that is not the agreed system.

 

Espen Lindqvist: 2♠. Here I play cue-bid of opponent's highest ranking suit as a limit raise or better in clubs.

 

Alan Mould: 2♠. 2♥/♠. Given that the system says we are playing is Acol so 1♣ is natural then I bid whichever of 2♥ and 2♠ shows clubs in my methods. It is not a problem in Acol.

 

Tom Slater: 2♠. 100%. It's right to make a bid which says I have a raise in clubs and a good hand. I had no idea what that was in Standard English, but I am reliably informed by the link "A bid of the higher- ranking suit shows a sound raise to three of partner’s suit”.

 

Had the rules been that the bid that is best matched by a description in the system gets 10, 2♠ would be a possible winner. Can the majority convince us that the system is bad and their bid is the better?

 

David Barton: 2♥. Good raise to 3♣ with my Heart holding better than Spade holding

 

Irving Blakey: 2♥. Better choice than the ubiquitous double prescribed by the "system".

 

Michael Byrne: 2♥. Good raise in clubs. Holding a 12 count I want to force to game, and my main choices are to start with a double (showing 10+ balanced) or cue bid one of the opponents’ suits. Since double is normally reserved for hands that are interested in taking a penalty, I shall show a good club raise instead. Standard in this country is for the lower cue bid to show a good raise in partner's suit, and the higher cue bid to show a forcing hand with the 4th suit, in this case diamonds. (An immediate bid of 2♦ would show something like a weak two and be non- forcing). Having had another look at the vulnerability maybe I should double, but if we are playing 4 card majors and 1♣ is natural then I should probably raise!

 

Rodney Lighton: 2♥. In standard English this shows a limit raise plus in clubs.

 

Alan Jones: 2♥.

 

Raymond Semp: 2♥. When I eventually support clubs (at the 5 level if necessary), I hope partner reads it as the Ace.

 

Alec Smalley: 2♥. Good raise to 3 clubs+

 

Jeffrey Smith: 2♥. This unassuming cue bid shows at least a sound raise and looks the best way to progress the auction.

 

So, some disagreement about system, but much the same arguments for their choice of bids. Whatever the ‘book’ tells us - sort it out between you and your partner!

 

Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
2♥ 
10
8
5
2♠ 
8
4
4
Dbl
7
2
4
5♣ 
3
0
1
3♣ 
1
0
5
Pass
1
0
1
3♦ 
1
0
1
2♦ 
1
0
1
3♥ 
1
0
1
4♥ 
1
0
1

 

 

 

Summary 

 

Experts

 

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Rodney Lighton
1♠ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
40
Alan Jones
1♠ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
40
Raymond Semp
1♠ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
40
Alec Smalley
1♠ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
40
Michael Byrne
2♥ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
39
Jeffrey Smith
2♥ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♥ 
39
Tom Slater
1♠ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♠ 
38
Royce Alexander
2♥ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♠ 
37
Espen Lindqvist
4♥ 
Dbl
Dbl
2♠ 
37
David Barton
1♠ 
4♥ 
Dbl
2♥ 
36
Rhona Goldenfield
2♥ 
Dbl
Dbl
Dbl
36
Joy Blakey
Dbl
Dbl
Dbl
Dbl
31
Irving Blakey
Dbl
1♥ 
Dbl
2♥ 
28
Alan Mould
Pass
Dbl
2♠ 
2♠ 
26

 

Leaderboard June 

 

Place
Competitors
Sum
1
Victor Ridding
40
2
Dhun Daji
39
Peter Foster
39
Mary Green
39
5
Adam Wiseberg
37
Rob Harris
37
John Parsons
37
8
Ian Pendlebury
31
Karen Reissmann
31
10
David Fussell
30
Mel Pelham
30
12
Steven Mattinson
27
Valerie Morgan
25
Richard Acaster
25
15
Barbara Lewis
24
Michael Greaney
24
Heather Saunders
24
Paul Beckwith
24
19
Eamonn Scott
21
20
Joyce Jones
20
21
Francis William Wetton
19
22
Andrea Knowles
17
David Cash
17
24
Liz Ineson
16

 

Leaderboard Overall (7 solutions)

 

Pos
Competitor
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Top 7
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
30
31
29
27
39
252
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
33
33
33
35
40
250
3
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
34
32
35
16
39
241
4
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
36
37
33
31
39
238
5
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
30
36
30
30
31
230
6
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
17
30
26
24
37
228
7
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
25
33
18
22
30
226
8
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
36
40
22
22
27
218
9
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
32
33
26
19
30
213
10
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
14
32
33
38
25
24
212
11
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
29
32
33
32
20
211
12
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
25
32
26
14
37
210
13
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
27
33
32
21
25
206
14
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
30
33
27
23
24
204
12
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
21
26
27
28
25
194
15
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
21
34
29
15
17
193
Paul Beckwith
0
30
32
29
27
27
22
24
19
24
193
17
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
0
27
24
27
26
24
192
18
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
18
36
30
25
15
0
188
19
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
21
29
28
15
21
187
20
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
15
20
34
13
16
185
21
Francis William Wetton
10
31
25
0
21
0
34
29
0
19
169
22
Millie Lang
22
25
18
28
17
23
27
0
0
0
160
23
Gerard Keary
0
34
0
22
0
28
34
27
11
0
156
24
David Cash
0
25
21
16
16
0
0
32
25
17
152

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
What Would You Bid
 

 

If nothing else is mentioned the system used is Standard English Modern Acol. You can find the detailed system description: HERE

The problems this month are suggested me, Micahel Byrne and Alec Smalley. Good Luck

 

Problem 1
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Team
♠ AKQ9653
♥ -
♦ QJ8732
♣ -
Problem 2
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
 
♠ A63
♥ AKQ8742
♦ K2
♣ 3
 
South West North East
     1♥ 
?

 

 
South 
 West North East
  1♦ 
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Pairs
♠ AKQJ
♥ 85
♦ AKQ6
♣ 852
Problem 4
Dealer: West
Vul: E/W
Teams
♠ 82
♥ A62
♦ AQ98
♣ Q532
South
 West North East
     1♣ 
dbl pass 1♥  2♣ 
?

 

 
South 
 West North East
  pass 1♣  2♣ (1)
?
(1) At least 5-5 in the majors, 10(ish)+ hcp

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
June Solutions
 

We have now completed the penultimate round of this ten-month competition, and it is heating up for the last round. In this month - a set that both panelists and competitors found difficult - Victor Ridding came out on top with 35 points, followed by Joyce Jones on 32 and Mary Green on 31.

For the overall title of “Bidder of The Club” it is now getting closer than ever. Peter Foster and Victor Ridding are head-to-head in first place, each with 243 points, and they can’t be overtaken by any other competitor. Peter has a 30 point set that he can improve on and Victor a 33 pointer. The final scores will be very close!

Michael Byrne was the only panelist to achieve a perfect 40, followed by David Barton, Espen Lindqvist and Tom Slater with 34.

I will as usual give my more or less intelligent comments in italics. Enjoy

 

 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: West
Vul: None
Pairs
 
South  
 West   North    East 
 1♦ 
1♥  2♦ 
?
      
 
South
♠ AQJ1064
♥ K107
♦ K103
♣ 2
 

You have a great fit for partner’s heart suit, a semi solid spade suit and a club shortage. You’d love to tell all of this to partner, but sadly you can’t - what do you tell partner? First, the one who knows where to go:

Espen Lindqvist: 4♠. Could be the wrong game, but I don’t consider 2♠  as forcing here. My diamond holding screams for declaring.

The one settling for partner’s suit:

Rodney Lighton: 3♦ . Would like to bid 2♠ forcing, but it's not forcing in Standard English so will have to resort to the ubiquitous cue bid.

Then, we have those who agree that 2♠ is not forcing but still want to focus on their own suit:

Royce Alexander: 3♠. This hand is worth game in a Major. 3♠ is forcing. 2♠ is encouraging but non-forcing (say the system notes).

David Barton: 3♠. Should make an effort to get the contract played by the stronger player. Being self-confident I guess it is worth at least 1/2 trick on balance!

Irving Blakey: 3♠. A fit jump. Could be a Spade slam in which case protecting the King of Diamonds is probably essential. I like this agreement, you get to tell partner about 8-9 of your cards and if slam is on, for sure would be in spades for the reasons mentioned by Irving.

Let’s see if the plurality can convince us:

Joy Blakey: 2♠. This is the most awkward hand of the set for me. I like my heart fit but the spade suit is so good and it protects the DK. I'd like to have bid 3♠ but if partner has a 1,6,2,4 shape that's wrong! The pessimist in the family?

Michael Byrne: 2♠. For now! A great hand, but if I start driving to 4H partner will quickly be disillusioned when a diamond is led through the king and we have 4 top losers. Experience shows that these hands play best in spades and I shall start with 2♠ and hope to be able to offer a choice of games. Playing proper bridge (high level teams) I might well bid 4♠, but at pairs I can afford to go softly softly, and there's no need to hang partner for bidding on a 1525 7 count. Willing to end up playing in 2♠, a man who’s had his fair share of disappointments!

Raymond Semp: 2♠. I will eventually bid game in Spades unless partner insists in hearts. Hard to bid on after pass, pass, pass.

Tom Slater: 2♠. 100%. Natural and forcing. Would prefer to play the hand in spades not hearts if possible to protect the KD. The first to regard 2♠as forcing!

Alec Smalley: 2♠. Support hearts or introduce S? I think the latter as it is an, almost, self- supporting suit, partner rates to be short diamond so probably some sort of Spades. Not telling if he regards 2♠ as forcing or not.

Jeffrey Smith: 2♠. Nat and Fcg. Either 3♠ (Fit Jump) or 4♣ (Splinter) are alternatives, but we will get more info with the natural approach.

You and partner, for sure have to agree whether or not 2♠ is forcing in this sequence - in which case it is the best bid. If not, 3♠, 4♣ and 4♠ must all be better alternatives.

Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
2S
10
6
5
3S
7
3
7
3D
6
1
5
4S
4
1
0
4H
3
0
8
3H
1
0
1

 

Problem 2

Dealer: South
Vul: None
Teams
South West North East
1♠  pass 2♠  pass
?      
 
South
♠ K9753
♥ KQJ62
♦ A63
♣ -
 

You have found a fit, you have a 5 loser hand, and so game is on - any reason to beat about the bush? As always, we start with the bids with least support from the panel.

David Barton: 3♦. Want to be in game opposite QJxx xxx QJx xxx but not opposite QJxx xxx xxx QJx, so 3♦ is obvious try.

Irving Blakey: 3♦. Need help here.

Seem like sound arguments to me - it is in ♦'s that we need help.

Joy Blakey; 4♠. It's teams and I think game is a good possibility.

Rodney Lighton: 4♠. Bid your games and try to make them. Any game try may help the opposition find the right lead (likely a diamond).

Alec Smalley: 4♠S. Slam needs far too much from a 2♠ bidder - game a must at teams but this may not even make if Partner is something like 3 - 1 - 3 - 6.

All willing to take the risk of going off, but with the benefit of giving out as little info as possible - a favourable lead might be all you need! Now to the plurality

Royce Alexander: 3♥. This shows 5♠, 4♥ and at least Invitational strength. I only have 13 HCP, but it’s a 5-loser 5-5 Majors hand opposite usually a 9-loser hand, so has the power for 4♠. However, the Spades are weak and partner might just have 3 Spades and 4 Hearts, in which case 4♥ will be safer than 4♠.

Michael Byrne: 3♥. This is a stretch, but since playing Acol partner can have 4 card support I am worth one try, even at pairs. There is a lot of guesswork as partner will have no idea that club values are terrible and diamond values are good. There is also the possibility that we have a double fit with a 9 or 10 card fit existing in hearts as well, in fact if partner has as little as AQx, 10xxxx, xx, xxx then the opponents will need to find a diamond lead to beat a slam! A bit far fetched, more likely he has Qxx, x, Jxxx, KQJxx (is that a two level response playing Acol?) and he will leap to 4♠ only to watch the hand fall apart on a 4-1 trump break..sad times. 

Espen Lindqvist: 3♥. Long suit game try. If partner raises to 4♥, we have found the right strain.

Raymond Semp: 3♥. What other bid is one expected to make? If partner has 10543, 43, Q72, KJxx. Unlucky and I expect a flat board or even +2 on a diamond lead in my room.

Tom Slater: 3♥ 100%. We are going to force to at least game on this hand, but don't lose sight of the fact that 4♥ may be a better spot.

Jeffrey Smith: 3♥. We are bidding game, but it is possible 4♥ is better than 4♠ if partner has 4 hearts and poor spades (say Qxx)

I’m not sure I’m convinced that 3♥ is better that 3♦. If you bid 3♦  and partner has 4♥, partner can bid 3H to kick the ball back to you so you won’t miss out on the 4-4 ♥ fit. At the same time, it makes partner focus on ♦ values. The sting in the tail of this story:

Michael Byrne: This hand was originally from a lockdown league match, one table bid 4♠ and the other passed. Both were playing 5 card majors so only had the right to expect 3 card support...9 tricks were made at both tables on good breaks, partner would reject a try

 

Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
3H
10
6
4
3D
7
2
4
4S
6
3
8
4C
3
0
3
3S
3
0
2
Pass
1
0
2
5C
2
0
1
4NT
1
0
1
4H
1
0
1

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: North
Vul: All
Pairs
 
South West North East
    1♠  pass
2NT(1) 3♣  pass(2) 5♣ 
?      
 
(1) Game Force in Spades
(2) Showing a minimum
 
South
♠ KQ10954
♥ A3
♦ A54
♣ K6
 

You are in a game forcing situation, so a pass will be forcing. Are you willing to defend? Are you strong enough to pass and pull? As always, we have panelists who know where to go:

Raymond Semp: 6NT. Who bid 2NT? I think they miss-clicked and meant to bid 4NT! North must be another beginner. If pass is minimum what is 4♠ ? 4♠ must show two losing clubs and poor spades - there are many other bids in between. Surely the pass must have a meaning like goodish trumps and plenty of red honours. Having arrived in this mess I must just bid 6NT and hope we haven't missed a Grand Slam. The intervention (3♣) means that you have both 3♠ and 4♠ to show non minimum hands, I guess is the logic. Whether or not 4NT instead of Jacoby is the best start can be discussed, but it will more often than not give you and partner more space to exchange information needed to decide if a grand slam is on or not. But 6NT? That must have the possibility of being very wrong?

Alec Smalley: Dbl. It is pairs so 5♠one off is atrocious - hopefully set 5♣ by 3 but I doubt it - take the money on offer. Are you better placed than partner to decide? If you played with me, I guess you would be, but that is different story!

Now for the cohort knowing that 5♠ is the place to be:

Royce Alexander: 5♠. Expecting to make for +650. 5♣ is not going -3 for -800.

Irving Blakey: 5♠. The double may be more profitable, but who knows? Too many Spades and too few Clubs to really fancy the penalty and slam seems unlikely.

The panelists who want to look for slam by cue bidding:

Joy Blakey: 5♦. Perhaps partner has a singleton or void in clubs and I want to make a forward going bid rather than bidding 5♠. There's always a possibility of 6NT if partner holds ♠A, ♥K, ♦KQ.

Rodney Lighton: 5♦. Too good to just bid 5♠, if partner has short clubs then slam is possible. Can’t disagree with your argument, but maybe with your bid?

Jeffrey Smith:  5♦. (Cue). With 6cd supp, there is no question of defending and even if pard has a minimum there is still a chance of slam if partner has a void or single club which is possible on this auction.

Now to the space preserving slammers.

David Barton: Pass. Forcing. Will bid 6♠ unless partner doubles in which case I will bid 5♦.

Michael Byrne: Pass. I want to suggest a slam but the most important thing is to let partner have a go and see what happens. If partner doubles 5♣ I can pull to 5♠ and suggest higher things, if he bids (surely showing club shortage) then I will raise him to slam. I only need Axxx, xxx, KQJx, x...is that too much to ask for? 

Espen Lindqvist: Pass. Would think pass is forcing. If partner bids 5♦ or 5♥ maybe there could be a slam. But then again with short clubs, maybe partner should have acted over 3♣, despite minimum in high cards?

Tom Slater: Pass. 60%. At teams it is easier to double and take the money. At pairs the field will not all face this same problem and I would prefer to flatten the board if possible. A better agreement over 3♣ would be for North to indicate their desire to defend a club sacrifice rather than just “minimum".

Both the passers and the 5♦ bidders are all for declaring, but in contrast the 5♠ bidders want to investigate slam.

 

Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Pass
10
4
1
5D
8
3
4
6S
6
0
3
5S
4
2
11
Dbl
4
1
7
6NT
5
1
0

 

 

 
Problem 4
Dealer: South
Vul: E/W
Teams
 
South    
 West    North    East
1♠  dbl rdbl(1) 2♥ 
?  
 
(1) 10+. hcp
 
South
♠ KQJ754
♥ -
♦ KJ6
♣ AJ32
 

Back in the mist of time, in the prehistoric days of my youth, I was taught that when I open, lefty doubles and partner redoubles, I should, unless I had an opening bid that I was really ashamed of, shut up. For all I knew, partner might have taken the first step in staging a reenactment of Sitting Bull’s slaughter of General Custer at Little Big Horn. So, unless I wanted to end up with the tomahawk in my skull - shut up. Therefore, I was prepared for a unanimous panel, but my predictive powers are certainly nothing to write about!

Joy Blakey: Dbl. Take Out showing a good opener. According to the system gurus it is penalty.

Raymond Semp: 3♥. followed by 4♥, if possible. To splinter 4♥ on the first round crowds the bidding.

Irving Blakey: 3♠. Seems best. Why?

Tom Slater: 3♠. 70%. Lots of possible things we could try here but I am going to go for the least inventive. I am never going to manage to defend 2♥X even when it is right to do so.

Rodney Lighton: 3♣. Presumably forcing and showing a good hand not interested in defending 2H doubled. Auctions after redoubles are often too murky and ill defined. Pass and pull partner’s double would for sure get that message across?

Jeffrey Smith: 3♣. We have no interest in defending ♥'s at a low level so bid naturally. There is a pass-then-bid when pard doubles possibility, but the hand isn’t strong enough for that. I guess this is what the learned are arguing over? 15hcp 5 loser hand is a lot better than most opening hands…

Now the old schoolers: 

Royce Alexander: Pass. (forcing). Any bid would be weak at this stage, so you have to pass to see what partner does. If partner Doubles (for Penalties), that is the real problem: opponents are vulnerable, and I would then pass.

David Barton: Pass. Bidding at this point would show a light opener so pass is automatic. Not many things in bridge are automatic. What if partner doubles?

Michael Byrne: Pass. By far the most interesting problem in the set, and a lot of variations. Standard treatment here is to play pass as forcing for one round (not really playable to have it as NF) and double as penalty. Weak hands bids immediately, "in front of partner".  By that logic I would pass, and then seek to jump to 3♠ at my next go, which would be forcing. Alternatives are a practical 4♠, 4♥ as an auto splinter and 3♥, none of which are that useful. I should pass as sometimes good things happen and it gives me an extra round of bidding with which to work. No doubt the panel will bid spades and I will score 3 points but I can live with it when accompanied by the knowledge my bid is correct. Your bidding and logic is flawless and your predictive powers about on my level!

Espen Lindqvist: Pass. With a plan to remove partner's double to 2♠. Like to play a direct bid to show minimum and pass followed by a bid as extras.

Alec Smalley: Pass. Then pull partner’s likely X. This is stronger than an initial 2♠/3♣ bid (which both show weak shapely hands) - if partner passes I get a new partner as this is forcing.

To pass with all your non minimum hands might not always stop you from getting a headache later, but it should stop you from getting Sitting Bull’s tomahawk plunged into your skull!

Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Pass
10
5
3
3H
7
1
5
4S
5
0
5
3S
4
2
5
3C
4
2
4
Dbl
4
1
2
4NT
1
0
1
2S
1
0
1

 

 

Summary 

 

Experts

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Michael Byrne
2♠ 
3♥ 
Pass
Pass
40
David Barton
3♠ 
3♦ 
Pass
Pass
34
Espen Lindqvist
4♠ 
3♥ 
Pass
Pass
34
Tom Slater
2♠ 
3♥ 
Pass
3♠ 
34
Jeffrey Smith
2♠ 
3♥ 
5♦ 
3♣ 
32
Royce Alexander
3♠ 
3♥ 
5♠ 
Pass
31
Raymond Semp
2♠ 
3♥ 
6NT
3♥ 
31
Alec Smalley
2♠ 
4♠ 
Dbl
Pass
28
Joy Blakey
2♠ 
4♠ 
5♦ 
Dbl
26
Irving Blakey
3♠ 
3♦ 
5♠ 
3♠ 
22
Rodney Lighton
3♦ 
4♠ 
5♦ 
3♣ 
21

 

Leaderboard June 

Place
Competitors
Sum
1
Victor Ridding
35
2
Joyce Jones
32
3
Mary Green
31
4
Ian Pendlebury
30
5
Valerie Morgan
28
6
Peter Foster
27
7
Heather Saunders
26
8
Michael Greaney
25
David Cash
25
10
Adam Wiseberg
24
11
Barbara Lewis
23
12
Steven Mattinson
22
Mel Pelham
22
14
Richard Acaster
21
15
David Fussell
19
Paul Beckwith
19
17
Frank Wetton
18
Gavin Callow
18
19
Dhun Daji
16
Adrian Shiers
15
Eamonn Scott
15
22
Geoff Ashcroft
15
Andrea Knowles
15
24
Rob Harris
14
25
Liz Ineson
13
Gerard Keary
11

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 100 points)

 

Pos
Competitor
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Top 7
Lowest
1
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
33
33
33
35
243
33
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
30
31
29
27
243
30
3
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
34
32
35
16
230
28
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
36
37
33
31
230
31
5
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
30
36
30
30
229
30
6
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
25
33
18
22
218
22
7
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
17
30
26
24
217
26
8
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
36
40
22
22
213
22
9
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
14
32
33
38
25
212
25
10
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
29
32
33
32
211
24
11
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
32
33
26
19
207
24
12
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
27
33
32
21
205
24
13
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
30
33
27
23
203
23
14
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
25
32
26
14
198
25
15
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
21
34
29
15
193
21
16
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
0
27
24
27
26
192
26
17
Paul Beckwith
0
30
32
29
27
27
22
24
19
191
22
18
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
21
26
27
28
190
21
19
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
18
36
30
25
15
188
22
20
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
21
29
28
15
186
20
21
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
15
20
34
13
184
15
22
Millie Lang
22
25
18
28
17
23
27
0
0
160
17
23
Gerard Keary
0
34
0
22
0
28
34
27
11
156
0
24
Francis William Wetton
10
31
25
0
21
0
34
29
0
150
0
25
David Cash
0
25
21
16
16
0
0
32
25
135
0
26
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
19
0
23
0
0
0
134
0
27
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
25
0
0
0
0
0
116
0
28
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
11
24
0
0
0
0
114
0
29
John Parsons
0
0
29
0
0
0
40
38
0
107
0

 

 

 

 

 

 
What Would You Bid
 

 

If nothing else is mentioned the system used is Standard English Modern Acol. You can find the detailed system description: HERE

The problems this month are suggested by David Barton, Micahel Byrne and Alec Smalley. Good Luck

 

Problem 1
Dealer: West
Vul: All
Pairs
♠ AQJ1064
♥ K107
♦ K103
♣ 2
Problem 2
Dealer: South
Vul: None
Team
 
♠ K9753
♥ KQJ62
♦ A63
♣ -
 
South West North East
 1♦  1♥  2♦ 
?

 

 
South
 West North East
1♠  Pass 2♠  Pass
?      

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Pairs
♠ KQ10954
♥ A3
♦ A54
♣ K6
Problem 4
Dealer: South
Vul: E/W
Teams
♠ KQJ754
♥ -
♦ KJ6
♣ AJ32
South
 West North East
  1♠   pass
2NT(1) 3♣  Pass(2) 5♣ 
?

(1) Game Force in Spades
(2) Showing a minimum

 

 
South 
 West North East
1♠ 
 dbl rdbl(1) 2♥ 
?
(1) 10+ hcp

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
May Solutions
 

We are now closing in on the final few rounds of our 10-month long bidding competition. This month, none of the competitors managed to achieve a full pot. Michael Greaney and John Parsons came top of the pile with 38 points, Dhun Daji in third place with 35.

In the overall competition, Peter Foster is still in the lead with 243 out of a maximum of 280: an impressive 86.8%. Victor Ridding, in second place, cut the lead by one point and now stands on 241, and Dhun Daji is in third spot with 230. As there are two more rounds remaining, and it’s the top 7 scores that count, it is still all to play for: any one of the top 10 can win the competition if they finish off with a perfect 80 points.

My comments will be in italics. Hope you enjoy and maybe even learn a little.

 

 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: West
Vul: None
Pairs
 
South  
 West   North    East 
 Pass
Pass 1♦ 
?
      
 
South
♠ KQJ3
♥ A2
♦ 109
♣ A10832
 

We have the points, but do we a suit to bid or the shape to double? It is pairs too, so what is the best bid or should we say the least of evils? First, we have the panelists opting to sit tight.

Joy Blakey: Pass. I don't have a problem playing with Irving as I can bid 2♠ showing 4♠, 5+ minor and opening values. However, I don't want to bid 2♣  with such a poor suit and I don't like dbl with only 2♥. I could bid 1♠  but prefer to see how the bidding develops.

Rodney Lighton: Pass. There are hands that I would overcall at the 2 level on a 5-card suit but I would need a much better suit than this.

Let’s see if the bidders can convince us, starting with the take-out double without a ♥ suit:

Rhona Goldenfield: Dbl. Nothing is perfect but don’t like bidding that club suit at the 2 level.

Alan Jones: Dbl.

Not too much to tickle our imagination. What about the 2♣ bidders?

Royce Alexander: 2♣. This is a good 14 count, too good to pass. I do not want to overcall 1♠ on this 4 card suit with nothing to stop me being forced repeatedly in Diamonds. The Club suit is poor, but 2♣ is the best option. I may get the opportunity to follow with a 2♠ bid. Sounds like good reasons to me.

Irving Blakey: 2♣. The least of the evils.

Now let us see what the majority have to say in their defence:

David Barton: 1S. I feel I have to do something. 2C on a moth eaten 5 card suit is horrible and you will be badly placed if you double and partner responds in Hearts (don't they always?) So, while I am not a fan of 4 card overcalls, at least partner will find the right lead.

Michael Byrne: 1♠. I am prepared to be out on my own and receive a low grading, but the canape overcall has worked well for me over the years. 2♣ is grizzly and I lack the 3rd heart necessary for a double, and the values required for an overcall of 1NT. I am left with 1♠ which will work fine most of the time and at least lead us to being in the auction.

Espen Lindqvist: 1♠. Normally don’t like to overcall on four-card suits. Pass is timid and I prefer 1♠ over 2♣. Might play decent on a 4-3 fit this one.

Raymond Semp: 1♠ My first choice is Pass but depending on the state of the match I am playing - a very reluctant 1♠.

Tom Slater:1♠  50%. Anything out of 1♠, 2♣ or Pass could work. Normally it is right to stretch to bid at pairs, and the club suit is very poor for a 2-level overcall.

Alec Smalley: 1♠. Pass is a viable option and come in later with a dbl which now doesn't show tolerance for both majors and when partner bids ♥ removing to ♠ will get the message across. However, I want to get in quickly in case I don't get another chance and so I'll fib a little about the ♠.

Jeffrey Smith: 1♠. The alternatives of Dbl, 2♣or pass all have bigger downsides and we would be happy with a spade lead if we end up defending.

This problem reminds me of a hand I held not too long ago. After 4 boards in a row with nothing but twos and nines, I finally had AQxx, J9, K10x, Q10xx and righty opened 1♦ in second hand. Against my better judgement and to fend of my boredom and loss of will to live I bid 1♠ - it did not end well!

 

Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
1♠ 
10
7
7
2♣ 
8
2
9
Pass
7
2
6
Dbl
5
2
7
2♦ 
1
0
1
3♣ 
1
0
1

 

 

Problem 2

Dealer: South
Vul: None
Pairs
South West North East
?  
 
South
♠ K1093
♥ QJ108753
♦ 9
♣ Q
 

How weak can you be for a 1 level opening? Do you pre-empt in one suit with 4 cards in the other major? Or do you shut up and wait to see what will happen? This might be just as much about personality as it is about bridge.   Most of our competitors thought that the last option was the best. Let’s hear what the supporting panelists have to say:

Rhona Goldenfield: Pass. And hope - opening 4♥ could be the right bid.

Tom Slater: Pass. 100%. It is almost always wrong to pre-empt in one major with such a good holding in the other.

The rest of the panel wants to bid. Let’s look at them in descending order.

Rodney Lighton: 4♥. First in hand NV is one of the best positions for pre-empting. This hand has lots of playing strength and not much defence.

Espen Lindqvist: 4♥. A bit aggressive but feel I have too much playing strength for 3♥. Would be better if spades were substituted for a minor.

Irving Blakey: 3♥. Who knows? It might be ours, it might be theirs! I generally would bid 4 rather than 3 with a 7411, but the Spade holding tempted me to be (unusually?) cautious.

Michael Byrne: 3♥. This time I will sacrifice my principles and bid one lower than I should in order to attract mainstream appeal. I did originally hold the hand and opened 4♥ but that was at teams’ bridge, where going for a few 50s is no disaster. At pairs, I am going to try to be a bit sounder and hit the nail on the head. The holding of 4 strong spades suggests I pass, but I couldn't bring myself to let them have a free ride when I am 7-4, even if I do have the other major sewn up.

Jeffrey Smith: 3♥. Far from ideal given the strong 4cd spade suit, but this looks best - if the 3♠ was a club or diamond, then it would be entirely normal opener.

David. Barton: 2♥. Even if you have a ♠  fit these hands generally play better in your long suit.

Alan Jones: 2♥.

Now to the plurality of the Panel who regard this hand as good enough for a 1 level opening bid.

Royce Alexander: 1♥. Because the 4 card side-suit is a major, a pre-empt of 4H or 3H is not recommended, because partner will occasionally hold Axxxx Spades and a singleton Heart. Also, opponents are unlikely to make 4♠ , so what are we pre-empting them out of, 5♣ , 5♦ , 3NT? So, do we Pass?
Well, it’s only 8 HCP but has excellent playing strength with 6 losers. HCP 8 + 2 longest suits 7+4 = 19, so it qualifies as a “Rule of 19” 1-level opener. So open 1♥ , and hope partner can show spades or maybe raise hearts.

Joy Blakey: 1♥. A 6 loser hand and I don't like to pre-empt in one Major with 4 cards in the other.

Raymond Semp: 1♥.  I have had worse opening bids.

Alec Smalley: 1♥ . In a problem, but at the table who knows. It is a 6 loser hand which is better than almost all weak NT's. There are many downsides to 2♥/3♥ and my second choice maybe 4.

This problem reminds me of the hand partner had when I opened 1♠ in problem 1: Txxx, AQxxxxx, xx, - and due to having ‘the other major’ decided to pass. 4 spades was a dead duck contract, whilst 4 ♥ was a make. I think that the fair of missing a 4-4 fit in spades is an illusion as the 7 card suit more often than not will be just as good a place to play. Had it not been for the rules that the Plurality bid gets 10 points, the supreme court would have downgraded it and upgraded 4♥.

 

Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
1♥ 
10
4
9
3♥ 
8
3
4
4♥ 
8
2
1
Pass
6
2
15
2♥ 
5
2
1
1♠ 
1
0
1

 

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: North
Vul: All
Teams
 
South West North East
    1♦  pass
1♥  pass 2♥  pass
?      
 
South
♠ AJ10
♥ K10765
♦ 5
♣ AKQ8
 
We are definitely investigating slam here, but what is the best path to walk along? First, the one not to walk.

Alan Jones: 2♣. Director!

We have one voice for the splintering road.

Espen Lindqvist: 4♦. Like that 3♦ here shows shortness and 4♦ to promise a void. But without that agreement 4♦ as a splinter is just fine.

Now the road via adding an extra spade into the hand.

Irving Blakey: 2♠. Presumably long suit trial- the response should give clarification of how best to proceed.

Rhona Goldenfield: 2♠. Too good to bid 4♥. No arguing with that!

Rodney Lighton: 2♠. We must be close to a slam.  I will make what is ostensibly a game try and if partner rejects that with 3♥ make a further try with 4♣.

Then we have, as always, the RKCB cohort - the competitors’ most popular choice.

Royce Alexander: 4NT. RKCB. This is a 5-loser hand opposite partner’s presumed 7-loser hand, we have an 8 or probably 9 card fit, so there should be enough power for 6♥. Check in case opener has 0 aces (KQx QJxx KQJxx x), otherwise bid 6♥.

Joy Blakey: 4NT. A ♥ slam is looking promising.

Jeffrey Smith: 4NT. If partner shows 2 key cards, then ask for QT and look for Grand according to the reply.

Looks to me like 4 NT has a lot going for it. Can the plurality of the panel convince us otherwise?

David Barton: 3♣. and follow it up with 3/4 ♠ on the next round. Do not want to be in slam unless partner cooperates.

Michael Byrne: 3♣. I intend to start asking for aces, but our first priority must be to find out whether partner is maximum or minimum. A game try asks partner to bid 4♥ or 3♥ depending on strength, and only if he is in the middle does he look at his holding in the suit I'm bidding. A jump to 4NT would be wild, a jump to 4 ♥ would be timid, so I am left with this. (This is another hand from an OCBL competition, slam was cold with partner having a suitable minimum, something like xxx, Axxx, AKxx, Jx, in fact 13 tricks were made at both tables).

Raymond Semp: 3♣. Don't see the problem.

Tom Slater: 3♣. 90%. There are some 1-3-5-4 hands which belong in a club slam at teams. 4♦ splinter would be my second choice but should really have no alternative strain. 4NT RKCB a distant third

Alec Smalley: 3♣. A sound case for going to 4NT straight away but would like to see what P has to say and define their shape which may help get us to 7 with the correct controls.

 

Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
3♣ 
10
5
6
2♠ 
8
3
3
4NT
6
3
15
4♦ 
4
1
2
3♠ 
2
0
3
5♦ 
1
0
1
4♣ 
1
0
1
3♦ 
1
0
0
2♣ 
0
1
0

 

 

Problem 4
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Teams
 
South    
 West    North    East
1♣  1♠ 
?  
 
South
♠ AK54
♥ 1075
♦ KQ743
♣ J
 

When we discussed this problem, one suggestion was to have a 1♥  overcall, as perhaps the 1♠ overcall would make it too easy - it was the call made at the table. The prediction was that the panel would be unanimous - luckily they were not - whilst the competitors would find a lot of bids - and they did. So, this should be one to study what the panelists are saying!

Alan Jones: 2 NT.

Raymond Semp: 3♦ . Again, what else? We can only assume that you play 2♦ as non-forcing?

Now to the rest of the panel.

Royce Alexander: 2♦  Do we pass, hope partner reopens with a Double, pass again and hope for 1♠* -3 for +800? Or do we bid 2♦ and probably head towards 3NT for +600 or 630? Is 3NT definitely making? Probably. Is 1♠ making 4 tricks? Don’t know. Is partner re-opening? Probably. Are we making 6♦? Certainly, LHO has virtually nothing and the singleton ♣ Jack lead looks attractive. But I usually bid in these situations at the 1–level, so I will bid 2♦.

David Barton: 2♦. There is no rush to bid 3NT. Partner could hold say xx x Axxx AKQxxx and you go down in 3NT with 6♦ cold. Anyway, the more confident you sound when you bid 3NT the more likely it is that LHO will try his luck with his ♥ suit.

Irving Blakey: 2♦. No rush.

Joy Blakey: 2♦. Natural and forcing.

Michael Byrne: 2♦. Nice to include an easy one to let everyone score 10 points. No doubt the competitors are wondering "what's the problem" and for once I agree with them. I can't think of any other call to be honest, 2♦ is natural and forcing for one round and gets the job done. Your bidding, as always is sound, the predictions less so as a majority of the competitors found another bid.

Rhona Goldenfield: 2♦. Alternative is Pass and wait for partner to reopen with a X.

Rodney Lighton: 2♦. Natural and forcing. I have sat and stared at this problem and still thought of no alternative. Hope it has not damaged your eyesight!

Espen Lindqvist: 2♦. Natural and forcing.

Tom Slater: 2♦. 90%. OK I'm ready to hear the story about how we passed and took 500 when 3NT couldn't be made. But I'm not sure I agree with it.

Alec Smalley: 2♦. All roads look to lead to 3NT but blindly bidding it now falls foul of missing a diamond slam and maybe going off in 3NT when partner has no heart stop.

Jeffrey Smith: 2♦. The alternative of a 3NT bid would be reasonable at pairs.

Even if the panel is close to unanimous, two other options have been given some credence - trap pass or a blunt 3NT - the latter is what was bid at the table, but I have not been told if it was a success or not. I feel the danger of losing a ♦ slam when 3NT is going down is a good point made by David Barton.  If you do use 2♦ here as non-forcing - reconsider or do as Raymond Semp did and bid 3♦.

 

Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
2♦ 
10
11
15
3NT
6
0
9
2♠ 
5
0
3
2NT
4
1
1
3♦ 
4
1
0
Pass
1
0
1
Dbl
1
0
1
1NT
1
0
1

 

 
 

Summary 

 

Experts

 

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Alec Smalley
1♠ 
1♥ 
3♣ 
2♦ 
40
Michael Byrne
1♠ 
3♥ 
3♣ 
2♦ 
38
Tom Slater
1♠ 
Pass
3♣ 
2♦ 
36
David Barton
1♠ 
2♥  
3♣ 
2♦ 
30
Jeffrey Smith
1♠ 
3♥ 
4NT
2♦ 
35
Royce Alexander
2♣ 
1♥ 
4NT
2♦ 
34
Raymond Semp
1♠ 
1♥ 
3♣ 
3♦ 
34
Irving Blakey
2♣ 
3♥ 
2♠ 
2♦ 
34
Joy Blakey
Pass
1♥ 
4NT
2♦ 
33
Rodney Lighton
Pass
4♥ 
2♠ 
2♦ 
33
Espen Lindqvist
1♠ 
4♥ 
4♦ 
2♦ 
32
Rhona Goldenfield
Dbl
Pass
2♠ 
2♦ 
29
Alan Jones
Dbl
2♥ 
2♣ 
2NT
14

 

Leaderboard March (Over 60% score)

 

Place
Competitors
Sum
1
Michael Greaney
38
John Parsons
38
3
Dhun Daji
35
4
Liz Ineson
34
5
Victor Ridding
33
Mary Green
33
Joyce Jones
33
8
Richard Acaster
32
John Houlker
32
10
Ian Pendlebury
30
Denise Pthyian
30
Gil Fletcher
30
13
Peter Foster
29
Francis William Wetton
29
Andrea Knowles
29
16
Eamonn Scott
28
17
Barbara Lewis
27
Valerie Morgan
27
Heather Saunders
27
Gerard Keary
27
21
Adam Wiseberg
26
Rob Harris
26
David Fussell
26
24
Geoff Ashcroft
25
25
Paul Beckwith
24

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 100 points)

 

Pos
Competitor
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Top 7
Lowest
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
30
31
29
243
30
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
33
33
33
241
33
3
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
34
32
35
230
28
4
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
36
37
33
226
27
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
30
36
30
226
27
5
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
17
30
26
217
26
6
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
25
33
18
214
18
7
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
36
40
22
213
22
8
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
14
32
33
38
208
21
9
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
32
33
26
207
24
10
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
27
33
32
205
24
11
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
30
33
27
203
23
12
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
29
32
33
200
21
13
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
25
32
26
198
25
14
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
21
34
29
193
21
15
Paul Beckwith
0
30
32
29
27
27
22
24
191
22
16
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
0
27
24
27
190
24
17
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
18
36
30
25
188
22
18
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
21
29
28
186
20
19
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
15
20
34
184
15
20
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
21
26
27
182
20
21
Millie Lang
22
25
18
28
17
23
27
0
160
17
22
Francis William Wetton
10
31
25
0
21
0
34
29
150
0
23
Gerard Keary
0
34
0
22
0
28
34
27
145
0
24
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
19
0
23
0
0
134
0
25
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
25
0
0
0
0
116
0
26
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
11
24
0
0
0
114
0
27
John Parsons
0
0
29
0
0
0
40
38
107
0

 

 

 

 
What Would You Bid
 

 

If nothing else is mentioned the system used is Standard English Modern Acol. You can find the detailed system description: HERE

The problems this month are suggested by David Barton, Micahel Byrne and Alec Smalley. Good Luck

 

Problem 1
Dealer: West
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ KQJ3
♥ A2
♦109
♣ A10832
Problem 2
Dealer: South
Vul: None
Pairs
 
♠ K1093
♥ QJ108753
♦ 9
♣ Q
 
South West North East
 pass pass 1♦ 
?

 

 
South
 West North East
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Teams
♠ AJ10
♥ K10765
♦ 5
♣ AKQ8
Problem 4
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Teams
♠ AK54
♥ 1075
♦ KQ743
♣ J
South
 West North East
  1♦  pass
1♥   pass 2♥   pass
?

 

 

 
South 
 West North East
1♣  1♠ 
?

 

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
April Solutions
 
We have now concluded the 7th month of What Would You Bid and, from now, it is for the competitors to aim to replace their worst score with a better one to improve their standing.  Remember, it is the best 7 scores from 10 which count.
 
This month, Steve Mattinson and John Parsons managed to get the perfect 40, with Mary Green in 3rd place with 37.
 
Peter Foster is still in pole position overall with 243 points and a 30 to improve, with Victor Ridding in second place on 240 with a 32 to improve on.  In 3rd place, Dhun Daji has 223 with a 28 to improve on.
 
Of the Experts, only Joy Blakey achieved a full pot with 40 points.
 
The first of April’s problems was a brainchild of mine, whilst the other 3 were from the unpublished book ‘The Misbids of Espen Mole 65 3/4”
 
If you have a hand that you think merits the experts’ judgment and thoughts, please drop me a line on Espen.
 
My comments are in italics. 
 
 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Team
 
South  
 West   North    East 
 
1♦  1♥ 
?
      
 
South
♠ KQ4
♥ 8632
♦ K3
♣ 9865
 
This is my brainchild inspired by an encounter with Adam Wiseberg. This is what the system in use says about this situation:
 
"1.3 A double promises four cards in an unbid major suit – that is what you most want partner to bid. So, for example:
 
1 ♣  - 1 ♠ - dble Promises four hearts
1 ♦ - 1 ♥  - dble Promises exactly four spades
1 ♣ - 1 ♥  - 1 ♠ Shows five+ spades (as a double would show four)
1 ♣ - 1 ♦  - dble Shows four cards in both majors"
 
So, on the hand in question you would have to pretend to have a spade suit (double), pretend to have a heart stop (1NT), pretend not to have 8 hcp (pass) or give us a tool to fix what is rotten in the state of Denmark.
 
Pretending to have a heart stop:
 
Rodney Lighton: 1NT. A balanced hand with a heart ‘stop’. Too much to pass and lacking four spades for a take-out double, 1NT seems the best option.
 
Pretending not to have 8hcp:
 
Royce Alexander: Pass. This is why some experts play Dbl as showing LESS than 4.  Spades. Values for 1NT, but no Heart stop. Hoping partner bids 1N with ♥  Kx. Knowing it’s bad but going with Hamlet and the ghost into the dark.
 
Raymond Semp: Pass. If partner cannot reopen then I am quite happy to defend.
 
Tom Slater: Pass. 60%. Very heavy for pass and it may only delay the problem. Could well be right to double. Dislike 1NT with such poor hearts.
 
Jeffrey Smith: Pass. Although you have 8 HCP, there is no really sensible bid available here.
 
Something MUST be wrong when you cannot bid with this hand as it is such a commonplace bread and butter situation!
 
Pretending to have a Spade suit:
 
David Barton: Dbl. If partner bids ♠ 's it will probably not be a disaster as we may well get home on a ♥ /♦  cross ruff.
 
Irving Blakey: Dbl. The least of the evils. Without going into all the ‘whys and wherefores’, I would prefer not to be constrained by a system forcing me to hold four Spades for this bid. Anyway,I like partners who enjoy playing Moysian fits.
 
Joy Blakey: Dbl. I think this is a difficult hand. I haven't enough values for 1NT and if I pass and partner reopens with a x I would have to bid 2♣  which I don't like so whilst dbl shows 4♠ (not when I play with Irving) I think it is the best of the bids available. So, you know how to get out of the darkness, but are willing to lead us into the dark!
 
Michael Byrne: Dbl. This is a good sort of problem and showcases whether people have thought through what will happen. Holding KQ,K including a fitting honour in partner's suit, we must take sone action because if a big heart raise is coming we want to encourage partner to bid. Certainly, if you pass and the next hand bids 3 or 4 hearts then you are going to feel very guilty when partner passes slowly. 
 
1NT is sick and will often wrong side the eventual NT contract so the only choice is double. You might get away with pass, but it puts too much strain on partner in my view. The only downside of double is that partner will expect 4 cards in spades (in standard methods 1♠  shows 5) but that's something I can live with. Certainly, there are hands on which the only making game is 4♠ . 
 
Alec Smalley: Dbl. whatever I call will be a lie, Pass too many points, 1NT no H stop (and wrong sides it), 2♣ Ugh -too few ♣'s,  Dbl - only 3 Spades, however this looks the best lie if partner bids ♠ as the Moyesian fit looks like it will play very nicely.
 
A singular voice to guide us out of the darkness - but as Dr. Stockmann in Ibsen’s ‘An Enemy of the People’, he might declare himself the strongest man in town as he is able to stand alone:
 
Espen Lindqvist: 1♠. Here we should play either double or 1♠ to deny four spades. My agreement is 1♠ .
 
As I said, this was inspired from an encounter with Adam Wiseberg, where he used the double to deny 4♠. I had not come across it and told him so. He threw every expert in the Manchester area as well as the kitchen sink at me, so I investigated. For many of my contacts, it was a trip through their bridge history and down memory lane. And what I found out is that many top-flight players use this way out of the darkness:
 
1m - 1♥  - Dbl: 4 or 5 ♠  (opener bids 1♠  forcing with 3+ ♠)
              1♠ : Max 3 ♠ 
              2♥ : 6♠ 
              2♠ : Other Minor
 
Whether you play Acol, 2 Over 1, SEF, BWS, Sayc or whatever, it surely must be sensible to have a way to distinguish between having or not having a ♠ suit instead of using all the available space to distinguish between 4 or 5. Read Espen Lindqvist’s short answer again.
 
Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Dbl
10
5
6
Pass
8
4
5
1♠ 
8
1
0
1NT
7
1
15
 
 
Problem2

Dealer: North
Vul: None
Pairs
South West North East
1♠  pass
2♣  pass 2♦  pass
?  
 
South
♠ K
♥ QJ10
♦ 97
♣ AQ109843
 
Many years ago, I read that the best thing to do when you have identified a misfit is to stop bidding. To pass on this hand would surely be taking things to an unthinkable level, but should we slow down or march on?
 
Let us start with the minority views:
 
Espen Lindqvist: 2NT. I do play 2/1 as forcing to game. Alternative is 3♣, but find this hand a little soft and if partner raises me to 3NT, I think that would likely be the best game. Thinking the hand too weak for 3♣.
 
Royce Alexander: 3NT. It's Pairs, the club suit may or may not come in. A new take on gambling NT?
 
The players seeing some dangerous bumps and wanting to slow down:
 
David Barton: 3♣. This is not a weak bid. The (potential) misfit suggests caution. Been around the block a few times!
 
Alec Smalley: 3♣. I don't wish to force to game with this by bidding 2H - if P passes then fine. Once bitten, twice shy!
 
Now to the overwhelming majority:
 
Irving Blakey: 2♥. Need to hear more.
 
Joy Blakey: 2♥. FSF
 
Michael Byrne: 2♥. A damp squib here I'm afraid, 3C wouldn't be forcing in Acol and I have enough to have a go at game. 3NT would be crude and simplistic (is partner supposed to remove it with a singleton heart?) and anything else passable. 
 
Rodney Lighton: 2♥. Easier playing two over one where 3C would be obvious, fourth suit should help us to find the best game 4S/3N/5C with intelligent co-operation from partner.
 
Raymond Semp: 2♥. What other possible bid is there?
 
Tom Slater: 2♥. 70%. A bad feeling about the hand but too much playing strength for a NF 3C in these methods.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 2♥ . Game values so bid fourth suit forcing to get further information.
 
That’s it. Partner had ♠10xxxxx, ♥. AK, ♦ AQxxx, ♣ - and 3♣  was the last contract one could make on one’s own accord. 3NT could scramble home on bad defence. How we ended up in 6 clubs you’ll have to wait for my book to be published to find out about!
 
 
Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
2♥ 
10
7
12
3♣ 
8
2
6
3NT
7
1
5
2NT
7
1
1
4♣ 
1
0
1
3♥ 
1
0
1

 

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: North
Vul: E/W
Pairs
South West North East
    1♥  pass
1♠  pass 3♥  pass
3♠  pass 4♠  pass
?      
 
South
♠ KQ108743
♥ -
♦ KQ7
♣ A86
 
When this hand was played, only one pair reached and made a slam, and of course it was against me. Two questions: Is a grand likely? If so, what’s the best way forward? If not, any reasons to foot about?
 
We start with the bid that was made at the table:
 
Royce Alexander: 6♠ . partner's 3 - 6 - ? - ? without a minor ace to cue bid. Cold opposite Axx AKxxxx xx xx, and good opposite AJx AQJ10xx Jx Jx, and partner will be better than that. Partner only had two spades, but it was Ax.
 
Will it help you to know how many aces partner has when you have a void? These panelists think so:
 
David Barton: 4NT. I would not be starting from here as I would have bid 2♠  at my first turn. Partner has apparently denied ♦ Ace and ♣ King so must have ♠ Ace and excellent ♥. I can bid 5NT if partner does show 3 controls. I am going to guess to bid 6NT if he shows 2.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4NT. Don’t have a way to ask for aces excluding hearts here. Opposite two key cards I'll settle for six. If partner has three, I make a move towards seven.
 
As pointed out by Royce - can partner have 3 controls? If so, what happened to the 4♦ cue bid?
 
Now to the majority:
 
Irving Blakey: 5♣. What else?
 
Joy Blakey: 5♣. Cue, interested in slam.
 
Michael Byrne: 5♣. Recall seeing this hand before and I think it is as obvious to bid on now as I thought it was then. There is little point in Blackwood when holding a void and we have to do something when a grand slam might be on (AJ, AQJxxx, Ax, xxx) so 5C it is. In practice, stopping in 6 will be enough as partner would surely have cue bid himself with a hand where 7 was good. 
 
Rodney Lighton: 5♣. Blackwood with a void is a no-no, so initiate a cue bidding sequence.
 
Raymond Semp; 5♣. Again, what else is one expected to bid. If partner bids 5♦ I bid 6♦. If partner has solid hearts AND the ♠ Ace he will bid 7♠ and I will convert to 7NT. With 15 or 16 tricks! if partner bids 5♥ I sign off in 5♠ and leave it to partner to bid 6♠ with the ♠ Ace
 
Tom Slater: 5♣. 90%. No guarantees here whatever we do. I am forcing to slam possibly off two aces over a 5♥ response. Over 5♦ we still have a grand in the
picture.
 
Alec Smalley: 5♣. Toyed with 6♠ and 5♠ but I think 5♣ the best as it may deter ♣ lead and partner’s response will be very revealing. It will be, for the opposition too!
 
Jeffrey Smith: 5♣. Cue bid as slam is likely but the void in hearts is a bad sign. This also shows a hand where rkcb is unsuitable (with ♥ void) without 2 losers in a suit so partner can judge accordingly.
 
As pointed out by Royce Alexander - partner is unlikely to have the ♦ Ace so 7 is highly unlikely at the same time as partner can hardly have a hand where there is no play for a small slam. Alec Smalley points out that partner’s response to 5♣ will be revealing. It will be and it will tell the opponents what to lead too, enabling them to find the killing lead if there is one. Partner’s hand was ♠ A9, ♥ AKQJ97, ♦105, ♣ J42 and the spade suit split 2-2. Without a diamond lead 13 tricks was there for the taking.
 
Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
5♣ 
10
8
14
4NT
6
2
10
6♠ 
6
1
1
Pass
1
0
1
 
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Teams
South 
 West North East
pass
pass 2♥  dbl 3♥ 
?  
 
South
♠ 8742
♥ K75
♦ AJ
♣ K542
 
You have a spade suit that looks like the leftovers from a suit given to a grizzly for breakfast, but it is 11 hcp. Are you Homo Sapiens or Mouse?
 
We have the mouse section first:
 
Raymond Semp: 3♠. If partner is declarer, I only have eight working points and I doubt we can make 3NT unless partner bids it.
 
Alec Smalley: 3♠. It is a free bid and I only have a working 8 count.
 
The Inbetweeners:
 
David Barton: Dbl. By far the most difficult question of the set. X suggests not 4♠ and may wrong side the contract. 3♠ could be very silly if partner has only 3. 3NT could be going off with 4♠ making. I have a sneaking regard for Pass expecting partner to X again and I will Pass for penalties.
 
Irving Blakey: Dbl. (and hope for the best!).
 
Michael Byrne: Dbl. Responsive double to show values and get partner to bid. I can't bring myself to bid this spade suit which has no redeeming features and could lead to a daft contract, when partner passes with only 3 spades and Ax hearts. 
 
Let’s hear what the majority, who are willing to run off with the grizzlies’ leftovers, have to say in their defence:
 
Royce Alexander: 4♠. better played by me rather than Heart through King. Considered Dbl and 3NT.
 
Joy Blakey: 4♠. Another difficult hand. X would show values; 3NT with a ♥ stopper?? Anyway, hopefully Partner has 4+♠ .
 
Rodney Lighton: 4♠. At teams bid your games and try to make them; this one is quite pushy but the alternative of a responsive double would lead to a murky auction and possibly wrong siding the contract.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♠. Partner has made a take-out double against a passed hand. Although the king of hearts isn’t the best card, I feel I have to bid game.
 
Tom Slater: 4♠. 90%. Doing less seems a poor choice. Partner saw us pass in second when some of the field would have opened. Hopefully, they lead ♥ Ace.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♠. The ♥ King is doubtful value but a little good for 3♠ .
 
I bid as the majority did at the table, and partner converted to 5 clubs making. She was not too happy with my 4S, and after a friendly discussion we agreed that dbl would be the better bid - it also keeps open the possibility of ending up in 3 NT.
 
Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♠ 
10
6
9
Dbl
8
3
3
3♠ 
6
2
14
 
Summary 

Experts

 

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Joy Blakey
Dbl
2♥ 
5♣ 
4♠ 
40
Irving Blakey
Dbl
2♥ 
5♣ 
Dbl
38
Michael Byrne
Dbl
2♥ 
5♣ 
Dbl
38
Tom Slater
Pass
2♥ 
5♣
4♠ 
38
Jeffrey Smith
Pass
2♥ 
5♣ 
4♠ 
38
Rodney Lighton
1NT
2♥ 
5♣ 
4♠ 
37
Raymond Semp
Pass
2♥ 
5♣ 
3♠ 
34
Alec Smalley
Dbl
3♣ 
5♣ 
3♠ 
34
David Barton
Dbl
3♣ 
4NT
Dbl
32
Royce Alexander
Pass
3NT
6♠ 
4♠ 
31
Espen Lindqvist
1♠ 
2NT
4NT
4♠ 
31

 

Leaderboard March (Over 60% score)

 

Place
Competitors
Sum
1
Steven Mattinson
40
John Parsons
40
3
Mary Green
37
4
Ian Pendlebury
36
5
Francis William Wetton
34
Kathy Priestley
34
Andrea Knowles
34
Gerard Keary
34
9
Victor Ridding
33
Barbara Lewis
33
Michael Greaney
33
Richard Acaster
33
David Fussell
33
Mel Pelham
33
15
Dhun Daji
32
Joyce Jones
32
Rob Harris
32
18
Peter Foster
31
Adam Wiseberg
30
Geoff Ashcroft
30
21
Eamonn Scott
29
22
Millie Lang
27
23
Valerie Morgan
26
24
Heather Saunders
24

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 100 points)

 

Pos
Competitor
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Top 7
Lowest
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
30
31
243
30
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
33
33
240
32
3
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
34
32
223
28
4
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
30
36
219
23
5
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
36
40
212
21
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
36
37
212
19
7
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
17
30
208
17
8
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
32
33
204
23
9
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
30
33
196
20
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
25
32
196
24
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
25
33
196
0
12
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
27
33
191
18
13
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
29
32
188
21
14
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
14
32
33
184
14
15
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
21
34
183
19
16
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
18
36
30
181
18
17
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
21
29
176
18
18
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
21
26
171
16
19
Paul Beckwith
0
30
32
29
27
27
22
167
0
20
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
0
27
24
163
0
21
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
15
20
162
12
22
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
19
0
23
0
134
0
23
Millie Lang
22
25
18
28
17
23
0
133
0
24
Francis William Wetton
10
31
25
0
21
0
34
121
0
25
Gerard Keary
0
34
0
22
0
28
34
118
0
26
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
25
0
0
0
116
0
27
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
11
24
0
0
114
0

 

 

 

 
What Would You Bid
 

 

If nothing else is mentioned the system used is Standard English Modern Acol. You can find the detailed system description: HERE

Three of this months deals are from events in the area this last month and one is the creation of the editor. Good Luck
 

 

Problem 1
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Team
♠ KQ4
♥ 8632
♦ K3
♣ 9865
Problem 2
Dealer: North
Vul: None
Pairs
 
♠ K
♥ QJ10
♦ 97
♣ AQ109843
 
South West North East
  1♦   1♥ 
?

 

 
South
 West North East
1♠  pass
2♣  pass 2♦  pass
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: North
Vul: E/W
Pairs
♠ KQ108743
♥ -
♦KQ7
♣ A86
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Teams
♠ 8742
♥ K75
♦ AJ
♣ K542
South
 West North East
  1♥  pass
1♠  pass 3♥  pass
3♠  pass 4♠  pass
?

 

 

 
South 
 West North East
pass
pass 2♥  dbl 3♥ 
?
 

 

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
March Solutions
 
This month’s problems were honestly stolen from the book “Bid Against The Masters - The Best of Bidding Forum” by Terence Reese and Keith McNeil.
 
They seemed to create huge problems for many of the competitors, and it is clear that bidding theory has moved on in the 25-45 years since the problems were first set.
 
None of our competitors managed a perfect 40. Three managed to score 36 points - Geoff Ashcroft, Mary Green and Steven Mattinson.
 
Peter Foster is still in pole position with 212, followed by Victor Ridding on 207 and Dhun Daji on 191.
Of the Panelists, only Espen Lindqvist achieved the perfect 40, followed by Rodney Lighton and Alec Smalley with 39. 
 
As usual, I will give my more or less intelligent comments on the panelists’ explanations in italics.
 
In addition to my comments, some of the comments from the original editor and commentator might be added in to provide some historic spice.
 
If you have a hand that you think merits the experts’ judgment and thoughts, please drop me a line on Espen.
 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Team
 
South  
 West   North    East 
 
1♣
pass
1♠ 
 pass 2♣  pass
?
 
South
♠ AK62
♥ Q5
♦ J93
♣ KQ75
 
The main question is how to investigate 3 NT and show club support at the same time. The panelists found 3 bids, and it is a draw for the top spot. As usual, let’s start with the minority.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♣ . Although we bypass 3NT, it’s teams so we want to play in clubs at the 5 or 6 level. This looks the best bid to get partner’s opinion. The only other option would be 2♦  but that feels confusing here. You are in good company as both T.R and Hamman agrees with you.
 
The rest of our panel are divided by investigating and taking control. Let’s start with the players who know where to go.
 
Royce Alexander: 3NT. I have a balanced 15 count opposite 11-15 with probably a 6-4 Club fit. There have been no overcalls and partner is almost certain to have something in both red suits. Even QJ, Jxx, Qx, AJxxxx would be enough for 3NT.
 
Joy Blakey: 3NT. I don't think I'm strong enough to look for slam.
 
Michael Byrne: 3NT. Very tricky, a choice between the crude jump to 3NT and the scientists’ bid of 2♦ . Every single competitor will bid 3NT (except the ones trying to emulate the experts) and most experts will choose different bids, although most of us would bid 3NT in real life, especially towards the end of the night. 
I think I am going to bid 3NT, since playing Acol the rebid of 2♣  often shows short spades (it won't be a balanced hand) and the odds of partner having something in the red suits is quite good. Even if we bid 2♦ , what are we going to do on the next round? A bid of 3♣  surely suggests heart shortage which is also misleading. 
 
Raymond Semp: 3NT. I cannot honestly think of another bid. We certainly are not going to make a Grand Slam on partner’s bidding.
 
Alec Smalley: 3NT. Ugh - what else - too little for slam - looks like a NT so bid NT - I'm sure it will be wrong.
 
Convinced? Let’s see what the ‘scientists’ have to offer.
 
David Barton: 2♦. 6♣  5♣  3NT or even 4♠  may be the right contract here. I will make the cheapest forcing noise and hope to be in a more informed position later.
 
Irving Blakey: 2♦. Forcing - If partner bids 3♥, I'll bid the NT game - anything else we'll play 5♣.
 
Rodney Lighton: 2♦. 3NT, 5♣ and even 4♠ in a 4-3 fit are all possible contracts. 2♦ is a one round force, usually showing five spades. I predict a murky auction but hopefully we will get enough information to make a sensible decision as to the final contract.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 2♦. Do play 2♦ here as artificial GF.
 
Tom Slater: 2♦. 80%. Slam looks too far away most of the time. Keep the bidding semi-natural to find the best game. The only alternative is to bid 3NT and hope you are right but concealing your hand type may help.
 
It seems to me that the 2♦ bidders have the best arguments. My question to the 3NT bidders is: is 3NT on when 5♣ is off more likely than the other way around?
 
Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Yesteryear
3NT
10
5
15
7
2♦ 
10
5
3
10
4♣ 
6
1
1
6
5♣ 
4
 
6
3♣ 
1
 
1
1
3♥ 
1
 
1
4NT
1
 
1
 

Problem 2

 

Dealer: South
Vul: None
Teams
South West North East
1♠ 
 pass 2♣  pass
2♦  pass 2 NT pass
?
 
South
♠ AQJ94
♥ 8
♦ AJ1074
♣ KJ
 
Bidding problems can cause strong emotions, and this is one where players will have strong opinions, even though the opinions might change over time. In 1973, not a single expert thought of 3♥, whilst it was a front runner, to Terrence Reece’s displeasure in 1983. Let’s hear from our 3♥ bidder first:
 
Royce Alexander: 3♥. 4th suit forcing and asking partner to describe their hand (showing ♠ Kx, or confirming a heart stopper, or showing Diamond support) opposite my good 16 count. Could 3♥ be natural with a 5-4-4-0 shape? No, because such a hand would show the Major and bid 2♥ on the 2nd round, not 2♦. In my book (which is, of course, Eric Crowhurst’s 1974 opus Precision Bidding In Acol Page 208), 3♦ is non-forcing and would be bid on AJ9xx 8 AJ1074 Jx . I was tempted by 3♣ which would intimate a 5-1-4-3 shape, but 3♥ seems better. As one who has read Eric Crowhurst’s book, I find Royce’s argument good, might be that it shows my age though!
 
We always have some opting for 3NT.
 
Irving Blakey: 3NT. The Heart stopper should be robust (otherwise pard would (should) employ fsf)
 
Tom Slater: 3NT. 70%. Most would play 3♦ non-forcing here. 3♣ would be forcing but should guarantee three with serious aspirations to play 5♣ or 6♣. 3♥ is reasonable if you intend to raise 3♠ to 4♠ but that is far from clear.
 
The next cohort comprises those panelists who want to force to game.
 
David Barton: 3♣ . Keeps game in ♣, ♦ or NT in the picture and draws partner's (and opponents') attention to the weakness in ♥!
 
Rodney Lighton: 3♣. Forcing and showing a shortage in ♥, usually 5143 shape but we have enough strength and good enough spades to play in any of 3N, 4♠ or 5 of a minor.
 
Alec Smalley: 3♣. 3NT may have no play - 4♠/5♦/5♣ could all be better – let’s keep all balls in play.
 
Let’s now see the majority
 
Joy Blakey: 3♦. Forcing, bidding out the shape.
 
Michael Byrne: 3♦. This time I am going to bid the hand properly and bid 3♦ (which is definitely forcing). I fully expect a bad score, since most of the panel don't trust their partners enough to know that 3♦ is forcing, (or don't know it themselves). (Your bidding is better than your predictions about your co-panelists!) I remember years ago that BG told me that he played 3♦ in this sequence as nf with 5/5 and 3♥ as gf with 5/5 but that isn't mainstream. Raising to 3NT could be ridiculous facing say Kx, Jxxx, KQ, Q10xxx (where 3 games might make but 3NT won’t) or even Kx, Axxx, Kxx, 10xxx where 4♠ is hugely better than 3NT. 
 
Espen Lindqvist: 3♦. 2 NT is forcing for me, so I bid my distribution.
 
Raymond Semp: 3♦. Seems logical, partner can choose the final contact.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 3♦. Best to shape out to find the best game.
 
The forcing nature of 3♦ I can only assume is something the experts of yesteryear were less in agreement about.
 
Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Yesteryear
3♦ 
10
5
7
5
3♣ 
9
3
1
10
3NT
6
2
13
4
3♥ 
6
1
5
8
3♠ 
2
 
1
Pass
1
 
1
Problem 3

Dealer: South
Vul: N/S
Pairs
South West North East
1♥  1♠  2♦  pass
?  
 
South
♠ KQ94
♥ K9873
♦ AJ65
♣ -
 
West’s 1♠ was not too good for your hand, but you have a great fit for partner’s suit and have a lot you would like to get across. So much to do, and so little space!
 
This problem shows a significant change in thinking since the problem was posted some 30 years ago. We still have one Panelist agreeing with the majority from the past.
 
Michael Byrne: 3♦. I have to admit to being completely mystified as to why this hand is considered a problem. Are we supposed to bid 4♣  as a splinter? My hand has got significantly worse after the 1♠ overcall (only 1 spade trick rather than 2 or 3 when we started) and my heart suit is patchy and awkward. 3♦ is non forcing and does the job nicely, a minimum hand with 5♥ and 4♦. 
 
The rest of the panel is divided between two roads forward. We start with the low road.
 
Royce Alexander: 2♠. Cue-bid. A very difficult problem. This is a 13 count with 5 losers, a 5+-4 diamond fit and a club void, but with poor honours in the majors. Partner probably has 4 Clubs. Is partner or RHO short in Spades? Is 5♦ going off on spade to Ace, spade ruff, Ace Hearts? 3NT probably won’t play well. A very difficult problem.
The options are a 3♦ underbid, a 4♣ splinter overbid, a 4♦ forcing overbid, or a 2♠ cue bid.Where are all the clubs? Partner with 5♦ & 4♣ may have negative doubled, so maybe partner has 6♦ & 4♣. LHO with 5 & 5♣ may have used a Michael’s cue-bid, so perhaps LHO has 5♠ & 4♣, or 6♠ & 4♣. So, RHO has passed with perhaps 2♠, 3♥, 3♦, 5♣.
 
David Barton: 2♠. A good raise in ♦. Showing signs of life but may still be possible to stop in 3♦ if partner has something horrible like xxx xx KQxxx KJx.
 
Joy Blakey: 2♠. Let's hear more.
 
Raymond Semp: 2♠. At least it won't be passed and maybe I can find out a little more about partner’s 2D bid.
 
Tom Slater: 2♠. 50%. A difficult choice between this and 4♣, but I judge 4♣  too committal at pairs.
 
Sounds sensible to me to make a noise a bit more than ‘Don’t call me, I’ll call you’ as well as preserving bidding space. Now to the other half wanting to force more out of partner.
 
Irving Blakey: 4♣. Not strong enough for exclusion Blackwood although it could be six on quite slender values. If I hear 4H, 5C shows the void and I must have at least second round Spade control - the Spade ruff might be our downfall but faint heart…..
 
Rodney Lighton: 4♣. Splinter agreeing diamonds. It would be difficult to show this much support if we start with 2♠.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♣. Splinter. You can say a lot about us Norwegians - wasting words is not one of our weaknesses!
 
Alec Smalley: 4♣. (I would prefer 5♣ but don't think it will score many) - and if Partner can find a 4♥ bid then 6♦ should be on.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♣. (splinter). With a void this looks the clearest description.
 
There’s no doubt that 4♣ gets the shape across, but it is at the cost of missing a possible 3NT and what would 4♥from partner be? It might also be a bit too much - there is a lot of truth in Michael Byrne’s answer, as well as in Alec’s 5♣.
 
Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Yesteryear
2♠ 
10
5
8
8
4♣ 
10
5
7
7
3♦ 
8
1
6
10
4♦ 
6
 
1
9
5♦ 
5
 
1
8
3♣ 
2
 
2
2♥ 
1
 
1
2NT
1
 
1
Pass
1
 
1
 
Problem 4
Dealer: West
Vul: All
Teams
South 
 West North East
1♠ 
dbl pass
2♣  
pass
2♥  
pass
?
 
 
South
♠ K4
♥ 653
♦ 1094
♣ K10842

 

Partner has shown a strong hand and you have more than you could have had for your forced 2♣  bid. How to proceed? The top score from yesteryear again gets poor support.
 
Joy Blakey: 3♣. If partner has a red 2 suited he would have bid 2♦ over 2♣ and I want to protect the ♠King.
 
The next bid has managed to keep its stance throughout 3 decades.
 
Royce Alexander: 2NT. Other options are 3♥, or Pass. Another very difficult problem. Partner has a strong hand too strong for an overcall of 2♥. Is ♠King worthless, worth a trick, or a stopper? Who has ♠Ace, partner or LHO? Is my hand worth 3 points or nearer 6. I don’t know, but if we end up in 3NT by me, I only need 9 tricks and I have a stopper at trick 1. If I raise Hearts and partner plays 4♥, he needs 10 tricks with the lead through ♠King.
 
David Barton: 2NT. ♠King more likely to have value if I am declarer and 9 tricks may be easier than 10.
 
Irving Blakey: 2NT. Shows willing.
 
Raymond Semp: 2NT. Partner has doubled for Take Out AND has made a second bid vulnerable when I could be 5432,5, 5432, 5432 shape so I think I am worth a game try.
 
Sounds like good reasons to me. Can the majority convince us?
 
Michael Byrne: 4♥. Again, another problem on which I expect to score badly, as most people will bid 3♥, and be shocked when partner passes and game is cold. Partner is showing a hand too strong to overcall (18-21) with 5+ hearts, and we have an 8 card fit, two kings and a ruffing value. Well, a score of 10 should come as a positive surprise!
 
Rodney Lighton: 4♥. A raise to 3♥would be non-forcing, a so-called courtesy raise in case partner has a very big hand, I am far too strong for that.
 
Espen Lindkvist: 4♥. Don’t know the value of my spade king. Trying a shot at game anyway.
 
Tom Slater: 4♥. 100%. Partner has a good hand. We don't have much, but you have to take a shot here. Nothing else is attractive.
 
Alec Smalley: 4H♥. 3.5♥ - It's teams so round it up to 4♥. ♠ King may be waste paper.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♥. Showing partner a good hand in context.
 
That’s it. In the end it will depend on whether or not the ♠King is worth what it says on the tin. The 2 NT bidders are trying to protect it, whilst the 4♥ bidders put their faith in its value.
 
Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
Yesteryear
4♥ 
10
6
2
6
2NT
8
4
1
9
3NT
7
0
0
8
3♥ 
6
0
12
10
2♠ 
6
 
 
7
3♣ 
4
1
 
Pass
1
 
12
4
3♦ 
1
 
1
 
Summary 

Experts

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Espen Lindqvist
2♦ 
3♦ 
4♣ 
4♥ 
40
Rodney Lighton
2♦ 
3♣ 
4♣ 
4♥ 
39
Alec Smalley
3NT
3♣ 
4♣ 
4♥ 
39
Michael Byrne
3NT
3♦ 
3♦ 
4♥ 
38
Raymond Semp
3NT
3♦ 
2♠ 
2NT
38
David Barton
2♦ 
3♣ 
2♠ 
2NT
37
Tom Slater
2♦ 
3NT
2♠ 
4♥ 
36
Jeffrey Smith
4♣ 
3♦ 
4♣ 
4♥ 
36
Royce Alexander
3NT
3♥ 
2♠ 
2NT
34
Irving Blakey
2♦ 
3NT
4♣ 
2NT
34
Joy Blakey
3NT
3♦ 
2♠ 
3♣ 
34

 

Leaderboard March (Over 60% score)

 

Place
Competitors
Sum
1
Steven Mattinson
36
Mary Green
36
Geoff Ashcroft
36
4
Dhun Daji
34
5
Victor Ridding
33
6
Michael Greaney
32
David Fussell
32
8
Frank Wetton
31
9
Barbara Lewis
30
Peter Foster
30
Ian Pendlebury
30
12
Joyce Jones
29
13
Gerard Keary
28
14
Richard Acaster
27
Heather Saunders
27
Paul Beckwith
27
17
Rob Harris
25
Mel Pelham
25
19
Millie Lang
23
Ann Thornton
23
Denise Pthyian
23

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 100 points)

 

Pos
Competitor
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Tot
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
30
212
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
33
207
3
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
34
191
4
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
30
183
5
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
17
178
6
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
36
175
7
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
36
172
8
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
32
171
9
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
25
164
10
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
30
163
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
25
163
12
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
27
158
13
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
29
156
14
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
14
32
151
15
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
18
36
151
16
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
21
149
17
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
21
147
18
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
21
145
19
Paul Beckwith
0
30
32
29
27
27
145
20
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
15
142
21
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
0
27
139
22
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
19
0
23
134
23
Millie Lang
22
25
18
28
17
23
133
24
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
25
0
0
116
25
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
11
24
0
114

 

 

 
What Would You Bid
 

 

If nothing else is mentioned the system used is Standard English Modern Acol. You can find the detailed system description: HERE

The bidding layout have been changed from what is standard where I grew up (West - North - East -  South) to what I now have been lead to beliebve is the standard English layout (South - West - North -East). I hope this will make it easier for all to read the bidding correctly.
 

 

Problem 1
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Team
♠ AK62
♥ Q5
♦ J93
♣ KQ75
Problem 2
Dealer: South
Vul: None
Teams
 
♠ AQJ94
♥ 8
♦ AJ1074
♣ KJ
 
South West North East
  1♣  pass
1♠  pass 2♣  pass
?  

 

 
South
 West North East
1♠ 
pass 2♣  pass
2♦  pass 2NT pass
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: South
Vul: N/S
Pairs
♠ KQ94
♥ K9873
♦ AJ65
♣ -
Problem 4
Dealer: West
Vul: All
Teams
♠ K4
♥ 653
♦ 1094
♣ K10842
South
 West North East
1♥  1♠  2♦  pass
?      

 

 

 
South 
 West North East
1♠
 dbl pass
2♣  pass 2♥  pass
?
 

 

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
February Solutions
 
 
 
We are now at the half-way point in our What Would You Bid competition and it is tightening in the race for the coveted title of “Best Bidder North and South of Bramhall and Cheadle Hulme Bridge Centre” as well as the first prize of one year’s membership.
 
This month, Mel Pelham was the only competitor who managed to get the perfect 40.  He had Dhun Daji on (37) and Adam Wiseberg (35) breathing down his neck.
 
At the half-way point, Peter Foster is still in pole position with 182, followed by Victor Ridding on 174 and Adam Wiseberg on 161. This is lining up to be a close race and if Mel keeps up his good efforts he might be the dark horse coming up from behind.
 
Of the Panelists, Michael Byrne and Raymond Semp managed to get the perfect 40. Once again, one of our panelists got the TD to the table.
 
As usual, I will give my more or less intelligent comments on the panelists’ explanations in italics.
 
Enjoy the experts’ answers and get ready for next month’s problems. If you have a hand that you think merits the experts’ judgment and thoughts, please drop me a line on Espen

 

Problem 1
 
Dealer: North
Vul: N/S
Pairs
 
West
North   
East    
South
1NT(1)
2♣ (2)
pass
?
(1) 15-17
(2) Both Majors
 
West
♠ Q972
♥ 4
♦ AJ986
♣ K53
 

You have a 7 loser hand and a fit for one of partner’s majors, so you would have to be looking for at least a way to invite to game? Let’s look at those taking the low road to Scotland.

David Barton: 2♠  At this form of scoring, partner could be bidding on any old rubbish Kxxx KQxxx x xxx Does not pay to push for close games at this scoring.

Irving Blakey: 2♠  More tricky at IMP scoring - reward partner's adventurous bid by playing the wheels off the partial for a good score.

Alec Smalley: 2♠  Why punish partner, also if partner only has 4 (likely) 3♠  maybe too high.

You should no doubt end up in a playable contract! Now for the one and only going for the High Road.

Espen Lindqvist: 4♠  Could be too much, but an invite would put pressure on partner. Going for game. From the school of “First we bid the game, then we make the game”.

We also have a scientist in our midst.

Royce Alexander: 2NT Game try enquiry. Usual responses are 3♣ /♦ = non min with longer ♥ /♠ , 3♥ /♠ = minimum longer ♥ /♠ , 3NT = max 5-5. Opposite a minimum, I’ll pass 3♠  or sign off in 3♠ . Opposite a non-minimum with 5 Spades and so a 9 card fit, I’ll bid 4♠ . Opposite a non-minimum with 4 Spades and so an 8 card fit, I’ll look who the opponents are and guess whether to bid 3♠  or 4♠ . Bidding the opponents’ as well as one’s own and partner’s cards. Good to know if one plays against Royce, and Royce lays off in 3 it’s a compliment!

Now to the majority going for the middle road.

Joy Blakey: 3♠  I think it's too good for 2♠  but unless partner is very distributional it's not good enough for 4♠ . This gives partner a chance to bid 4.

Michael Byrne: 3♠  This is a tough problem. In standard methods I can either bid some number of spades, or 2♦  (asking for the better major) then convert hearts to spades to invite game. (Or raise spades if he bids that). Here I think I want to protect my hand (have the lead come round to it) so I am going to plump for a straightforward 3♠ . At teams I might consider bidding game, but the singleton heart is not a huge asset (not when accompanied by only a 4-4 fit anyway) and a lot of my minor suit honours are not as useful as they might have been. I think 3♠  is the mainstream choice, though a few wild men will plump for 4♠  (and Dave Barton will bid 2♠ ).

Rhona Goldenfield: 3♠  Shows a 4 card spade suit and some values.

Rodney Lighton: 3♠  Partner should have around 9-15 points, a wide range. 3♠  about hits the middle of this range, the club king is a doubtful asset, but the hand may play well on a cross ruff or by setting up diamonds.

Raymond Semp: 3♠  Had South opened 1NT I would bid 4♠ . As North is the owner, I will settle for 3♠ .

Tom Slater: 3♠  May be right to bid more if the style is to compete only on good hands, but NV at pairs partner should be free to bid 2♣  on all sorts of rubbish. Don't hang them.

 

Finally, for our TD call:

 

Jeffrey Smith: Dbl You have the majority of points and this is the logical way to show this. This happens when you read the problem, but would not have happened at the table.

My favourite bid was not made by any panelist:

 

Competitor Adam Wiseberg: 2♦  You choose, I'll convert ♥  to ♠  at the 2 level. It looks as if too many of my points aren't working so I think I need to try to stop my partner from getting too high.

 

This caters for David Barton’s partner who has come in on some odd rubbish as well as for the partner who now can show some real values.

 

Problem 1
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
3♠ 
10
6
19
2♠ 
6
3
3
2♦ 
5
0
1
4♠ 
4
1
3
2NT
4
1
0
Dbl
0
1
0
 
 

Problem 2

 

Dealer:East
Vul: All 
Teams
West North East South
1♣  dbl
1♠  2♥  3♣  pass
?
 
West
♠ K10743
♥ 76
♦ A8
♣ Q865
 
This problem split the panel into two groups, a minority giving up on 3NT and the ones who wanted to keep it as a possible end station.
 
David Barton: 4♣ . I am probably going to bid this over 3♥  and will help partner if they bid 4♥ . However, I would not be starting from here. Would have bid 2♠  at my first turn to show 5♠  and 4♣  with invitational values.
 
Rhona Goldenfield: 4♣  Showing an interest in going to 5 if partner has good controls.
 
Tom Slater: 4♣  Does partner have a good hand, or just competing with more clubs. Playing purely natural methods it's a bit of a guess and I guess to compete only. I don't want to wait for 3♦  or 3♥  to come back to me.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♣  There should be a play for 5♣  (or maybe 4♠ ) at least here. This should be a safer game than looking for 3NT.
 
Now for the majority.
 
Royce Alexander: 3♥  asking for a Heart stop. Partner has 6+ clubs. If partner has a Heart stopper/trick, 3NT may be cold or on a finesse. If partner does not have values in Hearts, 5♣  may make.
 
Irving Blakey: 3♥  Fish with a cue. Definitely worth another bid.
 
Joy Blakey: 3♥  I want to give partner the opportunity to play in 3NT; otherwise there's always a club contract.
 
Michael Byrne: 3♥  This has to be the right first manoeuvre on a hand clearly looking for game. Vul at teams we can't consider passing (sure, partner could have Q, QJx, KQ, KJ10xxxx and all games fail by at least 2 but he could also have xx, Kxx, Kx, AKJxxx giving us 9 top ones in 3NT) so the only question is what bid to make.  3♥  angles towards 3NT, as well as giving partner the chance to show support (at which point I can show club support). If he has a heart stopper then we have 8 tricks on top (surely the clubs are running) and partner's short suit rates to be spades, not hearts due to the absence of a raise. 
 
Rodney Lighton: 3♥  Just enough to go on here, though partner's 3♣  may be shaded. The ubiquitous cue bid should help us find 3N or 4S if partner has the right hand, otherwise we will likely end up in 5♣ .
 
Espen Lindqvist: 3♥  Partner has bid 3♣  freely, need to make a try towards game.
 
Raymond Semp: 3♥  With what I suspect is seven top tricks (maybe eight) I will risk trying for game and bid 3♥ 
 
Alec Smalley: 3♥  Is 3♣  just competing or a good hand that would have bid 3♣  without the interference - it is good to have a method eg. 2NT to show a good hand first and 3♣  competitive. This doesn't answer the question though - whichever hand partner has I will bid 3♥  as a good raise in ♣  and see where this leads us - 3NT one off probably but who knows it may make.
 
3H makes sense to me. You might of course end up every now and then in 3NT going one off when 5♣ is on, but I believe that the opposite is more likely. If you do go down - just say ‘my fault partner’. I say that time and time again!
 
 
Problem 2
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
3♥ 
10
8
10
4♣ 
6
4
7
5♣ 
3
0
4
Pass
1
0
5

Problem 3

Dealer: East
Vul: All
Team
West North East South
1♠  pass
2♣ (1) pass 3♠ (2)
?
(1) GF 12+ hcp
(2) Extras, Good suit
 
 
West
♠ 987
♥ J10
♦ AQ7
♣ AQ1097
 
With partner’s extras and a good suit, there must be a way to safely look for/invite to slam. The question is what is the best way?
Let’s start with what could be the least good way to go hunting for the slam.
 
Joy Blakey: 4NT I don't play a 2 over 1 system but it doesn't sound as if 4♠  would be in any way constructive.  I didn't know if 4♦  would indicate ♠  support so plumped for 4NT.
 
Tom Slater: 4NT Ok I gave up on the science here. If we are off two heart tricks in 6♠  they still have to lead one. Not with much conviction. 
 
Can the rest of the Panelists conjure up more enthusiasm?
 
Rodney Lighton: 4♣  3♠  shows a solid or semi-solid suit and sets trumps, a cue bid now doesn't promise extras.
 
Alec Smalley: 4♣  I haven't any extras to what I promised, so a case for 4♠  but partner still unlimited I'll bid 4♣  (a cue - not more clubs as that would be a 5♣ /3NT bid)
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♣  Cue. You are too good for 4♠ . In this situation, your p should assume spades are agreed even though you are rebidding your suit. Makes sense to me, can the majority convince me?
 
Royce Alexander: 4♦  Cue bid. Partner has a good 6 card suit and about 6 losers/7 tricks. I have 3 card support, 7 losers, a good club suit, but 2 heart losers. Does partner have: AKQxxx Axx xx Kx, or AKJ10xxx KQJ Kx xx, or AKQxxx xxx KJ  Kx. We need to cue bid and see if partner has a Heart control. 4♦  is an unambiguous cue bid directing partner’s attention to Hearts. What about 4♣ ?  Is that a cue bid, or natural? I play it as a cue bid (only 1♠  2♥  3♠  4♥  being natural). Switch my red suits, and I’d cue bid 4♣  (hoping for 4♦  from partner, then 4♥  from me)
 
David Barton: 4♦  Cue bid. The real problem is what to do over 4♥ 
 
Irving Blakey: 4♦  (4♣  may be misconstrued) Hoping to hear 4♥  - then RKCB.
 
Michael Byrne: 4♦  Cue bid. This was what I chose at the table, although it occurred to me that 4♣  might be correct. Having said that partner often infers something in clubs anyway and will probably bid either 4NT (we will show him key cards) or 4♥  (then we will ask for key cards) or 4♠  (when we will pass knowing of a heart control missing). Ideally, we want to be the one asking for key cards, as assuming we have all of them (likely) we will be best placed to bid 5NT and ask for kings, the ♣ King will be vital although the ♦ King might do in practice.
 
Rhona Goldenfield: 4♦  Cue bid showing interest in slam.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♦  Control bid. Would bid 4♣  with an agreement that it's not natural.
 
Raymond Semp: 4♦  Seeking a 4♥  response, which, if is fourth-coming, followed by 4NT.
 
It’s the fare of how partner would read 4C that drives the majority to the 4♦  cue bid rather than 4♣ . Making life easy for partner doesn’t only pay off on that one hand, it also pays off in all subsequent hands as no extra effort or disharmony has been introduced.
 
Michael gave us this problem, and here is the tail:
 
Partner's hand was AKQJxxx, AK, xx, xx and over 4♦  he bid RKCB and forced to slam, stopping in 6 when his enquiry about kings yielded a negative response. The play was really neat - he won the heart lead and drew trumps (2-1) and then cashed the other top heart before playing a club to the queen - and claiming! Whether the club finesse wins or loses, the other hand was endplayed to lead back round into the dummy (or give a ruff and discard), nice and easy. 
 
 
Problem 3
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♦ 
10
7
9
4♣ 
7
3
3
4NT
5
2
6
4♠ 
3
0
5
5♠ 
1
0
1
3♦ 
0
0
2
 

 

Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
West  
North  
East   
  South
1NT(1)
  pass
2♣  
pass
2♥  
pass
?
(1) 15-17
 
West
♠ K1064
♥ KQ10876
♦ 3
♣ A4
 
You have found a 10- card fit, and have a 5 loser hand, so slam must be looked for. Any point in looking for another strain?
 
Irving Blakey: 2♠  Forcing and natural (unless other specialised methods are used to distinguish twixt 6/4 and 5/4 hands in response to 1NT). This potential slam may well need playing in the four-four fit.
 
Rhona Goldenfield: 2♠  Bidding other M after finding heart fit shows slam interest.
 
Tom Slater: 3♠  Generic slam interest in hearts. Prefer this to a 4♦  splinter on balance as the club cue or lack thereof may help a later decision. Obviously keycard to follow. Note that a direct 4NT here is quantitative with spades but not hearts.
 
Sounds like good arguments, to me, but will it introduce a bit of unnecessary muddle? Now to the majority who are happy with the denomination found.
 
David Barton: 4♣  Strange decision to start with 2♣  rather than 2♦  but seems to have worked out ok. Over 4♦ , I will bid 4♥  but a failure to cue improves the hand so I will move on with 4♠ . Strange it might be, but so is a splinter on a doubleton?
 
Now to the majority.
 
Royce Alexander: 4♦  Splinter -  I have 5 losers, we have a 10 card fit, and 27-29 points. There’s enough power to probably make a slam, but we might be missing 2 (or even 3!!!) aces. Some people might play 4NT as RKCB, but most experts now play it as quantitative. There’s a case for punting 6♥  and getting a helpful lead. I could bid 2♠  (F1 invitational+) to see if partner shows a minimum or maximum. But the 4♦  Splinter seems best. Partner will sign off with ♦  KQJ. But partner will go on with ♦ Ace  (unless it is QJ Jxxx AJx KQJx).
 
Joy Blakey: 4♦  Personally I don't bid Stayman with 6/4 hands preferring to make a transfer then bid S. If 2♠  were forcing over 2♥ , I may try that in case we have a 4/4 spade fit and a 6/4 H fit. However, as that information isn't available to me, I bid 4♦  as a splinter. Do you play it as forcing? Hope so - your regular partner does!
 
Michael Byrne: 4♦  I think that most experts have a gadget to agree hearts in this sequence (3♠  or some such) but in the absence of any machinery I shall plump for a straightforward splinter. Partner will probably bid 4♥  at which point I will bid RKCB anyway but doing so in the knowledge that we are on a firm footing. Why not bid 4NT over 2♥  I hear you ask? That would be quantitative, showing a balanced hand and inviting slam, a balanced 16-17 with 4 spades (and not 4♥ ) that could be passed. No doubt many of the less experienced members of the panel (and a lot of the bolder contestants) will choose this bid, but it is not correct, and they deserve to be passed out. 
 
Rodney Lighton: 4♦  I would like to bid 3♥ which I play as forcing with most partners, but I suspect that isn't Standard English, so I will describe the hand with the space consuming splinter.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♦  Splinter. Next bid more difficult if partner signs off.
 
Alec Smalley: 4♦  splinter 4+H - why I bid 2♣  is a bit beyond me, why not a transfer to ♥ , then bid ♠ 
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♦  The splinter shows the hand and ensures that the subsequent 4NT is RKCB (rather than an immediate 4N which many partnerships treat as quantitative)
 
No doubt most of us would start with a transfer to ♥  followed by ♠ , but here we had not. I think the 2♠  bidders have a point, but it might be tough to get the 6-4 character across. The splinter bidders have a headache after a 4♥  response. The competitors of whom 10 went for 4NT have a lot to chew over on this hand. Michael has good points and I’m sure it would only take one pass for partner to get it sorted out.
 
 
Problem 4
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♦ 
10
8
7
2♠ 
4
2
0
4♣ 
4
1
4
4NT
4
0
10
4♥ 
1
0
5
5♦ 
1
0
1
3♠  4 1 0

Summary 

 

Experts

 

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Michael Byrne
3♠ 
3♥ 
4♦ 
4♦ 
40
Raymond Semp
3♠ 
3♥ 
4♦ 
4♦ 
40
Rodney Lighton
3♠ 
3♥ 
4♣ 
4♦ 
37
Joy Blakey
3♠ 
3♥ 
4NT
4♦ 
35
Royce Alexander
2NT
3♥ 
4♦ 
4♦ 
34
Espen Lindqvist
4♠ 
3♥ 
4♦ 
4♦ 
34
Alec Smalley
2♠ 
3♥ 
4♣ 
4♦ 
33
Irving Blakey
2♠ 
3♥ 
4♦ 
2♠ 
30
Rhona Goldenfield
3♠ 
4♣ 
4♦ 
2♠ 
30
David Barton
2♠ 
4♣ 
4♦ 
4♣ 
26
Jeffrey Smith
Dbl
4♣ 
4♣ 
4♦ 
23
Tom Slater
3♠ 
4♣ 
4NT
3♠ 
25

 

Leaderboard February (Over 60% score)

 

Pos
Name
Score
1
Mel Pelham
40
2
Dhun Daji
37
3
Adam Wiseberg
35
4
Victor Ridding
34
Peter Foster
33
5
Boris Ewart
31
6
David Fussell
30
7
Richard Acaster
29
Rob Harris
29
9
Mary Green
27
George Leigh
27
Paul Beckwith
27
13
Andrea Knowles
26
14
Ian Hempstock
24

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 60% score)

 

Position
Competitor
October
November
December
January
February
Total
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
33
182
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
34
174
3
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
35
161
4
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
37
157
5
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
23
153
6
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
27
139
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
29
139
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
30
139
9
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
40
138
10
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
21
136
11
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
23
133
12
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
29
131
13
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
26
128
14
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
12
127
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
21
127
16
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
18
126
17
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
20
124

 

 
What Would You Bid
 
Problem 1
Dealer: North
Vul: N/S
Pairs
♠ Q972
♥ 4
♦ AJ986
♣ K53
Problem 2
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Teams
 
♠ K10743
♥ 76
♦ A8
♣ Q865
 
West North East     South
1NT(1)  2♣ (2)  pass
?      
(1) 15-17
(2) Both Majors
      

 

 
West
 North East South
1♣  dbl
1♠  2♥  3♣  pass
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Teams
♠ 987
♥ J10
♦ AQ7
♣ AQ1097
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ K1064
♥ KQ10876
♦ 3
♣ A4
West
North
 East  
South
1♠ 
pass
2♣ (1) pass 3♠ (2)
pass
?
(1) GF 12+ hcp
(2) Extras, Good suit

 

 
West
North
East
South
 
1NT(1)
pass
2♣ 
pass
2♥ 
pass
?
(1) 15-17

 

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
Problem 1
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ KJ109865
♥ 97
♦ K
♣ K65
Problem 2
Dealer: North
Vul: All
Teams
 
♠ 3
♥ A10642
♦ Q9654
♣ A6
 
West North East South
1♥  pass
1♠  pass 2♣  pass
2♠ (1) pass 3♣  pass
?      
(1) 8-11 NF      

 

 
West
 North East South
1♠ 
pass 2♠ 
?
 
       
       

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: West
Vul: N/S
Teams
♠ A
♥ AQ8
♦ Q963
♣ AQ943
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ AKQ653
♥ 32
♦ 1073
♣ Q2
West
North
 East
South
1♣ 
pass
1♦ 
pass
?
 
 

 

 
West
North
East
South
 
1♥ 
pass
1♠ 
pass
2♥ 
pass
?

 

 

 
 

 
What Would You Bid
 
January Solutions
 
January’s problems seem to have been the most problematic yet, if the division amongst the experts is a measure of the set’s complexity.
 
Only one panelist got the perfect 40 this Month - Joy Blakey. None of the competitors managed that feast this time, but Valerie Morgan and Mel Pelham got close with 38 followed by Victor Ridding on 35.
 
In the overall competition, Peter Foster is still in the lead with an impressive 149 out of 160! Peter still has to look over his shoulder as he is being chased by Victor Ridding (139) and Ian Pendlebury on 129.
 
As usual, I will give my more or less intelligent comments on the panelists’ explanations in italics.
 
Enjoy the experts’ answers and get ready for next month’s problems. If you have a hand that you think merits the experts’ judgment and thoughts, please drop me a line on Espen
 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
 
West
North   
East    
South
1♥ 
pass
1♠ 
pass
2♣ 
pass
2♠ (1)
pass
3♣ 
pass
?
(1) 8-11 NF

 

♠ KJ109865
♥ 97
♦ K
♣ K65
 
Partner has an opening hand and a 5-5 or 6-5 two-suiter and you have good support for one of the suits. With your shapely 10 count, is it time to pack it all in?
 
Rodney Lighton: Pass. Partner has not shown a lot other than dislike of Spades, time to stop bidding before the opponents start doubling. The wisdom of many a doubled misfit. The rest of the panel wanted some more punishment. First those who are used to being in total control:
 

Michael Byrne: 4♠. I think this is pretty clear. 3♣ is constructive, as bad 5/5 hands should just pass 2♠, this is not a position for weak take outs. Although the kingleton (singleton king) is not likely to be useful we have a solid suit missing only the ace and queen, and a very good club holding in context. The doubleton heart will be more useful than a singleton, and I fancy my chances. I have just spotted than the problem setter changed it from teams to pairs, well I'm sticking with my answer. 

 

Jeffrey Smith: 4♠ . Partners 3♣ bid should show significant extras, the ♣ King looks a handy card.

Then we have the group who likes listening to partner's advice.

David Barton: 3♦. Partner's 3♣  should be constructive and 3♦  offers choice of contracts.

Raymond Semp: 3♦. Partner did not pass 2♠  therefore, he must have one or no spades or else a reasonable hand in his two suits. So we might have a choice of games - or just a part score in clubs. The games being in Spades, Hearts or even 3NT. The question is, which? The chance of game in spades means partner must have two spades or the stiff queen. If partner has six hearts and five clubs 4♥  is probably the best spot. Lastly, if partner has a diamond stop maybe 3NT will make. Say with x, AQxx, Ax, AQ10xx. (Even Q10x in diamonds might be enough). Better still; Void, AKxxx, QJx, AQ10xx. So I shall ask for more information and bid 3♦ . I will pass 3NT or 4♣ . I will bid 4♥  if partner bids 3♥. I will bid 4♠  if partner bids 3♠.

My problem with Fourth Suit Forcing is that it gives the auction a lot of momentum without adding much clarity. I also like to promise to bid again unless partner bids game after my Fourth Suit Forcing bids, but then I'm old hat! Now to the majority.

Royce Alexander: 3♠. Partner is likely to be 0-5-3-5, but could be 0-6-2-5 or maybe 1-5-2-5. Could 4♥  or 5♣  be making? 3NT is unlikely. How about 4♠ ? Am I strong enough to bid FSF 3♦? It’s Pairs and so I’m going to bid 3♠  with my 7 Spades.

Irving Blakey: 3♠. The best further try. The length and strength of the suit makes it worth another bash at game.

Joy Blakey: 3♠. For me 7 card suits have to be the trump suit - cannot guarantee game so hopefully partner will bid 4 if he's got it to bid.

Espen Lindqvist: 3♠. Partner is short in spades and pass may be right. But I'll take my chances with this suit.

Alan Jones: 3♠. I like to play that the 2♠  bid is a serious game try, about 10 hcps and 6 good spades. Does partner know that? Wish I knew. If no, I would probably bid 4♠ . Meanwhile +140 beats +130

Tom Slater: 3♠.I have no idea whether 3♣  or 3♠  is forcing, but these spades are somewhat playable opposite a void, and I don't believe 3♣  is the winning matchpoint contract. 

Alec Smalley: 3♠. First of all I think 3♣  is not a game try - but shows the shape with a very genuine distaste for ♠, probably void. So it appears I have 3 options - pass, 3♥ or 3♠. I rate 3♠ as best as you are going to make 5 ♠ tricks opposite the expected void as opposed to no ♠ tricks when playing in ♥ or ♣

The decision between passing and bidding is probably closer than we might think at first. The Match Point consideration is an important one - one to bear in mind! Michael Byrne suggested this hand and at the end of his reply he said:

This hand was originally from the Junior Channel Trophy, the player who held this hand bid 4♥, which was as barking mad now as it was then, although it was a lucky make on the wrong defence! Partner held void, A10xxx, Qxx, AJxxx and should have passed 2♠ , regardless 4♠  was the best game available.

 
Problem 1
Score
#Experts
#Competitors
3♠ 
10
7
11
4♠ 
7
2
7
3♦ 
4
2
5
Pass
4
1
1
4♣ 
3
0
2
5♣ 
2
0
4
4♥ 
1
0
2
 

Problem 2

 

Dealer: North
Vul: All 
Teams
 
West  
North  
East  
South
1♠ 
pass
2♠ 
?

 

♠ 3
♥ A10642
♦ Q9654
♣ A6
 
This time you are looking down on a nice 5-5 hand with a lot of potential. Of course, the opponents have been a nuisance as usual. Three of our panelists think it’s better to stay at home, not risking to get wet:
 
Royce Alexander: Pass. They have a Spade fit, so we have a fit somewhere. Can I bid 2NT showing any 2 suiter? Partner didn’t bid over 1♠. Can't argue with the observation, but is it the right conclusion?
 
Tom Slater: Pass. Playing equal level conversion I might stretch to a double, but without ELC there is no way to get this hand across safely. Life and bridge are both full of risks,  it is a question of whether or not they are worth while..
 

Alec Smalley: Paass. Not a problem? I wouldn't overcall 1♠ with this, the suits are horrendous, so why should I force a passed partner to bid at the 3 level vulnerable - and it is useless to fight the spade suit. Important to consider the importance of the Boss suit. Sticking your neck out might help the opponents more than you.

 

Now to the majority who want to stick their necks out. As always, we have the voice of the ones knowing where to go:

Jeffrey Smith: 3♥. With spade shortage, you have to come in now. There is no alternative other than Pass.
 
Now, let’s look at what the majority have to say for themselves:
 
David Barton: Dbl. Hopefully partner will realise I am pre-protecting and give me a bit of slack. She does not have to bid Clubs but it is panto season so all together now "Oh yes she does!!!" It's my prerogative to make the jokes!
 
Irving Blakey: Dbl. Not ashamed of the hand. The timorous souls will wait for the pre-emptive 3 spade bid to come round and wish they had bid the first time round.
 
Joy Blakey: Dbl. if partner bids 3♣  I'll have to bid 3♦  showing ♦  and ♥.
 
Michael Byrne: Dbl. The is the toughest problem of the set and I can think of no great answer. Whenever I bid 3♥  on these hands partner always bids 3NT (which won't make given my paucity of values) and whenever I pass we miss a part-score. A lot depends on what system the opponents are playing, but I think I shall double. (I've just remembered that Kieran and I play 2NT as hearts and a minor, that would solve this one nicely - shame I can't inflict my latest toys on the rest of the panel.) Double will work fine if partner bids hearts or diamonds (if only!) and should be ok if he passes (his spades lie over declarer at least) If he bids clubs that will be fine as he will have 5, with only 4 he can bid a scrambling 2NT and we can play in a red suit. (I will pass a response of 3♣ , double and then 3♦ shows a beter hand for me, something like 1462, or an off shape monster).
 
Rodney Lighton: Dbl. Dangerous, but so is passing, partner with the longer spades is unlikely to be able to protect, we could still make game.
 
Espen Lindqvist: Dbl. We might go for a number, but passing isn't without risk either.
 
Raymond Semp: Dbl. This one is simple, partner needs so very little to make game; xxx, KQ97, K2, xxxx will give us a sporting chance. It is teams and we cannot afford to miss a vulnerable game. So I will double and bid 3♦ over a 3♣ response. However, there is a danger - I would not be a happy bunny if I were to return to team mates with minus 670 on the card. But no gain is without risk. 
 
Finally, someone with a trick up their sleeves:
 
Alan Jones 2♠. Director!! 
 
Problem 2
Score
#Experts
#Competitors
Dbl
10
7
14
Pass
6
3
12
3♥ 
4
1
1
3♠ 
3
0
5
2NT
1
0
3
2♠ 
0
1
0

 

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: West
Vul: N/S
Team
West  
North  
East   
South
1♣ 
pass
1♦  
pass
?
 
♠ A
♥ AQ8
♦ Q963
♣ AQ943
 
How to proceed sensibly with this almost game forcing hand with a fit for partner? One would think that would be plain sailing, but the Experts found 5 bids and the competitors found 9 ways to proceed! We'll start with the lone wolfs.
 
Rodney Lighton: 2♥. Tricky, I could splinter with 3♠  but ace singleton is a poor holding for a splinter. If partner raises hearts I can go back to diamonds. I would be happier to bid 2♥  playing 2/1 game forcing where partner will only have four hearts with a game going hand. Inventing a fourth heart to create the needed force, but avoiding the risk of:
 
Raymond Semp: 1♥. I am a simple soul. 1♥  stands out as automatic for me. I need more information about partners hand. If MY partner supports hearts he will have 11 plus points and at least 9 red cards and most probably a 3-4-5-1 shape. (If he had less points he would have responded 1♥  on the first round). I will then bid 4NT followed by a confident 6♦ if I get a reply of two controls (♦ Ace & ♥ King) otherwise pass a 5♦  response - (1 or 4). If he bids 1♠  (4th Suit) I shall bid 3♦ . If he bids 1NT I will raise it to 2NT. If he bids anything else I shall support diamonds heavily. If he passes I will look for another partner. As above, showing an extra heart and willing to go looking for a new partner. 
 
David Barton: 2NT Nothing is ideal here. In my system of choice I could bid 2♠  as splinter. Getting your point count across.
 
Now, the answers with more than one expert vote. First, the lot who are willing to risk missing a game (but will always end up in a makable contract)
 
Michael Byrne: 3♦. I think this is a tough problem because the hand is nearly strong enough to force to game, but the question remains, what game? A splinter bid of 3♠  looks tempting until you realise that partner is not going to bid 3NT when it is right to do so, and will surely expect more than 8 points in the minors. (x, Axx, AKJx, AQJxx looks more like a splinter and that is a much better hand). A bid of 2NT would be inaccurate and misleading with a singleton in an unbid suit and will make it harder to get to 6♦ when partner is flat (Qxx, Kxx, KJxx, Kxx will not consider a slam, and 7♦  has play!). 
 
Alec Smalley: 3♦. this is what the bid means isn't it? 1 ♥  seems tempting to save space but could lead to some horrible contracts and if partner has a decent hand I am going to have to go some to convince them I have more ♦ than ♥. Also "ou et les piques" the opps haven't been able to squeak 1♠ so it is likely partner has some and is a decent hand. I hate 3♠ as partner can't evaluate their K(Q). Will partner expect a 4 loser hand?
 
Jeffrey Smith: 3♦. You are a tad good for this but it is the best overall description. Partner knows its teams so will strain to bid with even the right 6 count i.e. ♦King and ♥King or ♣King. Willing to make what he knows is an underbid.
 
Now to the majority, those willing to splinter with a singleton Ace.
 
Royce Alexander: 3♠. Splinter. I don’t like it with stiff Ace, but what else can I do? If partner bids 3NT, it’s the right spot as partner’s Spade values are wasted in 6♦.If partner bids something else, his points are working. 
 
Irving Blakey: 3♠. Don't like to "splinter" with a stiff Ace, but seems the best way forward (an encouraging 4♣  response would be nice) We are all looking for miracles but they don't happen too often! 
 
Joy Blakey: 3♠. I hate to show a singleton Ace but it's too good for 3♦ . Old fashioned may bid 4♦ as strong but not these days. Playing with Irving I would bid 4♣  which is RKCB for ♦. The suggested 4♣ bid looks like a good tool to me...
 
Espen Lindqvist: 3♠. Splinter, agreeing diamonds. Still not wasting his words! 
 
Alan Jones: 3♠. This is splinter, of course, with the alternative call (for me) being 2NT. A long time ago I was told that you shouldn't splinter with a singleton Ace since partner fails to value KQx in the suit correctly. So for years I chose the no trump bid, only to find that MY partners always failed to value xxx in the suit correctly. Demoralized by this, and disappointed in my gurus, I splinter these days without regard to the strength of the singleton.
 
Tom Slater: 3♠. It is not ideal to splinter a singleton ace, but it is key to raise diamonds immediately if we're to get to a good diamond slam. 
 
Problem 3
Score
#Experts
#Competitors
3♠ 
10
6
5
3♦ 
8
3
8
1♥ 
5
1
3
2NT
4
1
10
2♥ 
4
1
4
3NT
2
0
1
5♦ 
1
0
2
4NT
1
0
1
4♦ 
1
0
1
 
 
 
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs

West  

North  

East   

South
1♥ 
pass
1♠ 
pass
2♥  
pass
?
 
♠ AKQ653
♥ 32
♦ 1073
♣ Q2
 
In first hand, you would surely open this with 1♠, so it is an opening hand opposite an opening hand, so we should look for the right game, or maybe not? We always have some who have had enough bidding and are longing to get to the play of the cards:

David Barton: Pass. It does not pay to push for close games at pairs and we have at least an 8 card fit in Hearts. 
 
Raymond Semp: Pass. I know you could construct hands that make game but experience tells me when a misfit is suspected bale out ASAP. It sounds like game is unlikely and I know we have a 6-2 heart fit, to rebid spades (One possible alternative, 3♥  being the other) just might give us a minus score if partner is void in spades or even a singleton - and we have five minor suit losers. (Partner having something like; 4. AKQ1075, Q43, J107. Even if 2♠  makes, surely so will 2♥. 2♥ might even make 9 tricks.
 
Now to the bidders, all but one are hoggs, so let’s hear it from the anti-hog:
 
Alec Smalley: 3♥. First which suit are we playing in - clearly ♥  as we have 8+ guaranteed and the most we can hope for in ♠ is 8. Now the level - I am very tempted to pass this as even 3 might be a step to far with the junky 11 count that partners invariably have. However I am going to lose out in the post mortem if game makes so put me down for a 3♥ invite. Planing past the play to the post mortem - always good to be on the right side of a bad discussion!
 
Now to the hogs, divided into part score hogs and the more kamikaze inspired variety.
 
Irving Blakey: 2♠. Good suit game interest - What else?
 
Espen Lindqvist: 2♠. Hoping we play same agreement as on board one (8-11 NF)
 
Alan Jones: 2♠. This is a constructive game try for me, not an attempt to improve the contract. It can be passed if partner has an unsuitable hand. I prefer it to a raise in hearts (we have eight hearts since partner has shown six in modern Acol, but a broken heart suit might create difficulties for partner). It could also be right to pass but this seems a bit pessimistic. Repeating the spades seems a better description of the hand.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 2♠ . Technically NF, but should still be a constructive effort in this context.
 
Sounds about right to me. Let’s see if the majority can convince us.
 
Royce Alexander: 3♠  
 
Joy Blakey: 3♠. Got to show the strong nature of the spade suit. 
 
Michael Byrne: 3♠.In my methods I would bid 2♠ , showing 8-11 and inviting game. However that is a system based on weak jump shifts, whereby hands of 5-8 are shown with 1♥  P 2♠ . Given that the system is standard English (which still uses 1♥  P 2♠  as strong) I shall have to bid 3♠  and invite game. 2♥  does show 6, but the hand will play better in spades (there are plenty of entries to partner's hearts but few to my spades).

Rodney Lighton: 3♠. This seems about right if 3♠  is a limit bid as it was when I used to play Acol. This doesn't match up with problem 1 though.
 
Tom Slater: 3♠. A definite overbid here but I cannot bring myself to bid only 2♠  with such crisp honours. If partner bids 3NT I would be minded to stand it rather than convert back to 4♥ , even if we are a pair that has guaranteed 6 hearts with this auction.
 
I'm afraid that the majority did not convince me, as I see much more merit in bidding 2♠ as a 8-11 non-forcing, but slightly constructive bid. I might of course be biased by the fact that that is how I play it. 
 
Problem 4
Score
#Experts
#Competitors
3♠ 
10
5
14
2♠ 
8
4
12
3♥ 
5
1
4
Pass
4
2
1
4♥ 
2
0
4
 

 

Summary 

Experts

 

Name
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Joy Blakey
3♠ 
Dbl
3♠ 
3♠ 
40
Irving Blakey
3♠ 
Dbl
3♠ 
2♠ 
38
Espen Lindqvist
3♠ 
Dbl
3♠ 
2♠ 
38
Royce Alexander
3♠ 
Pass
3♠ 
3♠ 
36
Tom Slater
3♠ 
Pass
3♠ 
3♠ 
36
Michael Byrne
4♠ 
Dbl
3♦ 
3♠ 
35
Alec Smalley
3♠ 
Pass
3♦ 
3♥ 
29
Rodney Lighton
Pass
Dbl
2♥ 
3♠ 
28
Alan Jones
3♠ 
2♠ 
3♠ 
2♠ 
28
Jeffrey Smith
4♠ 
3♥ 
3♦ 
2♠ 
27
Raymond Semp
3♦ 
Dbl
1♥ 
Pass
23
David Barton
3♦ 
Dbl
2NT
Pass
22

 

Leaderboard January (Over 60% score)

 

Pos
Name
Score
1
Valerie Morgan
38
Mel Pelham
38
3
Victor Ridding
36
4
Peter Foster
34
5
Michael Greaney
32
David Fussell
32
Heather Saunders
32
Ian Pendlebury
32
9
Adam Wiseberg
30
10
Paul Beckwith
29
Karen Reissmann
29
12
Steven Mattinson
28
Dhun Daji
28
Millie Lang
28
Millie Lang
28
Tim Foster
28
17
Liz Ineson
25
Paul Worswick
25
Val Hempstock
25
Peter Jones
25
21
Richard Acaster
24
Joyce Jones
24
Rob Harris
24
 

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 60% score)

 

Position
Competitor
October
November
December
January
Total
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
34
149
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
36
140
3
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
32
130
4
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
30
126
5
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
28
120
6
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
25
116
7
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
28
115
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
25
115
9
Mary Green
31
31
31
19
112
Heather Saunders
26
27
27
32
112
11
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
19
111
12
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
20
110
Rob Harris
29
27
30
24
110
14
David Fussell
24
30
23
32
109
15
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
22
108
16
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
24
106
17
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
32
105
18
Valerie Morgan
23
16
27
38
104
19
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
24
102
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
19
102
21
Val Hempstock
24
30
19
25
98
Mel Pelham
0
32
28
38
98
23
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
22
97

 
December Solutions
 

In what seemed to be an easy set for the experts, as many as 6 of them had a perfect 40, our competitors struggled, and for the first time not a single perfect score. Peter Foster did best with 37, followed by Barbara Lewis and Adam Wiseberg on 36. Over the 3 months to date, Peter Foster is in the lead with an impressive 115 out of 120 followed by Victor Ridding on 104 and Ian Pendlebury on 98.


Even though the experts did not find many options for each problem, the competitors seemed to have more imagination. There are many subtleties and a lot to learn from the panelists’ reasoning. I hope you will find this solutions’ page an interesting and entertaining read over the Christmas period, in between good food and with whatever company you have. 


I'd like to thank all the panelists and the competitors for their time and effort in 2020 and hope that 2021 will be a lot better for all of us than 2020 turned out to be for many of us. 
From the Competition Editor, a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year!


Espen Gisvold



PS As usual, my inline comments below are in italics.

 
 
 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: East
Vul: E/W
Teams
 
West  North.  East.  South
  1♦   pass
1♠   pass 2♦  pass
?

 

♠ AQJ107
♥ A97
♦ J108
♣ J10
 
This is a thread of the mill bread and butter problem, but the competitors were all over the shop. The Panelists were almost unanimous, with one solitary outside voice. Let’s start with he who stands alone:
 
Espen Lindqvist: Without agreement of another forcing bid over 2♦ , i try 3♠ . Game in spades could easily be right even on a 5-2 fit. 
 
For many, this is a voice from the past as the rest of the panel regard a simple change of suit as 100% forcing, and most had a LOT to say:
 
Royce Alexander:  2 ♥ This looks easy. I have 13 HCP, three 10’s and a good 5 card Spade suit, so we have the values for game. But which game? 3NT or 4♠  are likely, but 5♦ may well lose 3 tricks despite a likely 6-3 fit. I have a balanced hand so why not just bid 3NT? Well, East has rebid 2♦, so should not have 4 clubs. So the opponents have at least 8 clubs. Does partner have ♣ Hxx to stop the suit? Does partner have 3 card spade support or ♠ Hx to make 4♠ a better contract? So what bid can I make? 2♠  is much weaker than my hand and non-forcing. 2NT is weaker than my hand and would usually have a club stop. 3NT does not show the 5th Spade and will be passed when 4♠  is a better contract. 3♠  would show a 6 card suit GF. What else is there I can bid? Well, I’m going to bid 2♥  which is forcing for at least 1 round, shows 4 Hearts (which I haven’t got) and 5 Spades and says nothing much about clubs. I hope that partner will bid Spades with Spade support, NT with a stop in the 4th suit Clubs, or else rebid his Diamonds. The only problem will be if partner has 4 Hearts with longer Diamonds and 11-15 and raises to 3♥ . If he does, I’ll try 3♠  and we might have a 5-2 Spade fit. Seems to cover all the bases and also identifies the weakness in the 2 ♥ bid - the lack of a biddable heart suit!
 
David Barton: 2♥ But which game? 3NT or 4♠  are likely, but 5♦ may well lose 3 tricks despite a likely 6-3 fit.
 
Irving Blakey: 2♥ Forcing and paving the way (who doesn't enjoy playing Moysian fits anyway!?)
 
Joy Blakey: 2♥ Want to hear what partner will do now. Sounds menicing! 
 
Michael Byrne: 2♥ This should be universal, but lots of inexperienced players will scratch their heads and bid 2♠  or a crude 3NT. 2♥  is forcing for one round (gone are the days when you had to jump to 3♥  just because you had a 12 count) and will elicit spade preference or a club stopper from partner.There are several possible games, 4♠  on the 5-2 fit facing Kx, xx, KQxxxx, Axx when 3NT is down by leading a 5 card heart or club suit, 5♦  facing K, xxx, AKQxxx, xxx, 3NT facing xx, Qxx, AK9xxx, Kx or even 6♦  facing Kx, xxx, AKxxxxx, x.Anyone jumping to 3NT should a) look at the last hand I've put in and then feel bad and b) be shot. As for anyone giving 3NT full marks..... 3♦  is non forcing (far too much of an underbid and 3♠  is also nf in standard methods (and promises 6 cards) so those are also terrible bids. I do think that the death penalty is just a little bit too strong a penalty, just a bit though! Look at the disapproving dots!
 
Rhona Goldenfield: 2♥ between that and 3♣  if partner raises to 4 will have to play in 4-3 fit if he bds 3NT I am happy. Nothing better than a partner who is happy!
 
Rodney Lighton: 2♥ A question of finding the right game. Any of 4♠ , 3NT or 5♦  could be right a gentle probe with 2♥  (one round force) will help us find the best contract.
 
Alan Jones: 2♥ Normally I just bid 3NT on hands like these but that will end the auction and there are several alternative game contracts possible (4♠  if partner has Kx, 4♥  if partner has KQxx, 3NT with the lead up to partner's ♣ Kx; even 5♦ , although usually that is a bit of a stretch). So I bend the bidding. 
 
Alan Mould: 2♥ If anyone asks you why it is now universal to play change of suit forcing forcing in all auctions, show them this hand....
 
Raymond Semp: 2♥ With 13 HCP opposite an opening bid means game even after a weak rebid, but which is the problem here. Spades, Diamonds or NT is the question. I realise bidding 2♥ might hit partner with four and finish up in 4♥  but I am prepared to take that chance. If he responds with spade support I bid 4♠  if he bids 2NT i raise to 3NT, if he rebids 3♦ I raise to 5♦. I hope most are now getting convinced
 
Tom Slater: 2♥ Not ideal with only three, but we need more information to find the best game. Short but accurate.
 
Alec Smalley: 2♥ My partner had this hand and bid the same(it will be interesting to see if he bids the same again)- it is forcing for at least 1 round so what can go wrong! easy game calls after partner bids 2♠ , 2NT, 3♦ . Easy descriptive bid over 3♣ . So what did I do with the other hand - I bid 3♥ , the only return that causes a problem - now very awkward - 3NT looks doomed so a toss up between 4♥  in the 4/3 fit or 5♦ . 
 
Jeffrey Smith: 2♥ Forcing of course. That should produce the most meaningful response from partner to decide which of the games (3NT,4S,5D) to bid or even a slam in Ds slam. Even if p raises the hearts, we go back to diamonds so partner will know our intention. So not keen on the Moysian fit
 
I allowed all the panelists a say on this hand. The competitors were all over the shop. In a natural system there will be many situations where you have to make a lie of sorts. The question is always what is the lie that causes the least damage to the possibility of reaching the right contract as well as to partnership confidence. If you are not going for the game forcing 3♠ the only viable option seems to be 2♥  
 
 

Problem 1

Score

#Panelists

#Competitors
2♥ 
10
13
8
3♠ 
5
1
5
3♦ 
5
4
3♣ 
5
3
5♦ 
4
1
3NT
4
9
4♦ 
3
2
3♥ 
1
1

 

Problem 2

 

Dealer: East
Vul: None
Teams
 
West  
 North   East South 
1NT(1) 

Pass 
?      
(1) 12-14
 
♠ 4
♥ KJ87
♦ 10876
♣ AQ62
 
The question here is: How strong is this hand? Let’s hear from the minority:
 
Michael Byrne: 2♣ Stayman. A straight forward choice between pass and 2♣ , and stayman gets the vote for the simple reason that your hand is worth 4♥  if you have a heart fit, and you aren't risking much if you don't. 1NT is truly a ridiculous contract facing something like Qxx, Qxxxx KQJ, Kx where we will go minus in part-score and make game comfortably.There is also the possibility that a minor suit game might be worthwhile, partner could have for example xxx, Qx, AKx, K10xxx where 5♣  is easy and 1NT in danger if a 6 card spade suit is led.
 
Alan Mould:  2♣ If pard bids 2♥ , bid game, otherwise 2NT. Second choice pass (1st choice at Pairs).
 
Raymond Semp: 2♣ This is a problem hand, my first instinct is to pass as a 2♦  response would be a major disappointment. But success comes with some risk and I cannot afford to miss a vulnerable game.
 
Now let’s see what the majority have to say for themselves!
 
Royce Alexander: Pass We have a combined 22-24 HCP, which is not enough for 3NT, but my 1-4 shape in the majors means that 4♥  may be cold if partner has a 4 card suit.And if opponents at the other table are playing 15-17 5CM, they will find a 4-4 Heart fit. What is the likelihood of opener’s weak NT including 4+ Hearts? Across all hands,4-4-3-2 shapes are 21.6%4-3-3-3 shapes are 10.5% 5-3-3-2 shapes are 15.5% Despite most NT openings being 4-4-3-2 shape, the chance of partner having 4 Hearts is between 25% and 30% whereas, due to my singleton spade, I think the chance of partner having 4 Spades is over 40%). So if I try Stayman, I am likely to hear a 2♠  response, and end up in 2NT or 3NT going off.
 
David Barton: Pass Surely unanimous. The only alternative of 2♣  has too many downsides. Like getting to a sound 3NT or 4♥ 
 
Joy Blakey: Pass. You say it best when you say nothing at all comes to mind!
 
Rodney Lighton: Pass Pushing for non vul games at teams is not a good idea. If partner has four hearts and a maximum Stayman could work well, but we would be too high if there is no fit. 
 
Alan Jones: Pass The only reason to move is that game could be on if partner has a heart fit with me. However, it is more likely that partner has spades and misfits play badly in no trumps. Even 2NT might fail. I might have tried Stayman had I been vulnerable when the break even point is a 37.5% success rate.
 
That’s it. I am rather shocked! Had the hand been 4441 instead of 1444 all the experts, I'm sure, would bid. Had it been 2443 with an extra Jack I'm sure they would go on as well. Here the majority count to 10, add it to 14 and say it’s too little. Is this hand a 10 count? Running it through Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator it comes out as 11.45, or as one tends to say: a good 11 count! As I am prosecution, judge and jury I find the majority guilty of bean counting and not seeing the value of the 3rd 4 card suit - a 3rd possible suit to establish an extra trick from. At the table I did bid 2♣ and I did get the dreaded 2♠ response and my 2NT was raised to 3NT and it was cold! One hand is not enough, but play around with it as you like, for every hand you construct where 1NT is the limit I'll construct an equal number of hands where game is cold. Here the Majority always wins, but it is not always right! 
 
 

Problem 2

Score

#Panelists

#Competitors
Pass
10
11
20
2♣ 
7
3
14

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: East
Vul: E/W
Pairs
 
West   
 North   East.  South 
1♠ 
Pass
Pass dbl 2♥  dbl
2♠ 
3♣ 
3♥ 
4♣ 
?
 
 
♠ QJ6
♥ 53
♦ 10984
♣ 10874
 

This problem reminds me of a deal from S.J.Simons’ book "Why You Lose At Bridge" where you have been forced to show preference between partner’s two suits at the 6 level holding Ax in one of partner’s suits - bid 7! When partner has shown a lot of strength, bid on with whatever helpful rubbish you might have.

As always, we let the minority have the first say:

 
Royce Alexander: Pass Partner is 5-5 or 6-5 in the majors, didn’t bid 4♥  at his last turn, and will have another bid. Trusting partner to save the day
 
Rhona Goldenfield: Pass I dont think suits will break well so let the oppo struggle in their contract. Expecting partner to fold
 
Alec Smalley: Dbl I don't rate 4♠  to make, so what do we know. Partner 5/5+, N likely 4♥  and 4♣  - South 4♦  and 4♣. The lengths are all in the right places and the club break is bad for them, if partner is 6/5/2 void I hope they pull it. If partners started to pull my penalty doubles, I might start looking for a new partner! 
 
Now we give the floor to the majority:
 
David Barton: 4♠ If partner is prepared to invite game, I am happy to accept.
 
Irving Blakey: 4♠They'll probably bid 5♣ at this vulnerability - and if you've never doubled a making contract, you don't double enough. Spoken by a someone who is willing to burn his hands in persuit of victory!
 
Michael Byrne: 4♠ A few points to note here. I assume double of 2♥  was take out, (since he didn't double 3♥ !) so if both opponents want to keep bidding normally so do I. Both my earlier bids were wrong (I should have responded initially and also bid 3♠  over the double of 2♥  to let partner know what I had) but now I have to make a decision. Partner has shown a 5-5 hand and given that I have shown nothing at all and he has forced to the 3 level he should have a playable hand. I don't see how he can possibly have less than AK109x, AKxxx, xx, x (it doesn't matter what way round he is in the minors but if he is void club then my 10♦  might come in hand) in which case we have ten on top.I am half tempted to double for penalties, since the cards don't appear to be lying well for the opponents, that will probably be the winner if partner has scattered values such as Axxxx, AKJxx, KJ, x, as the field won't be recording 620 and 4♣ X will go for a fair number but if partner has extra shape (6-5 or 6-6) then that would be silly.

Espen Lindqvist: 4♠ Expecting partner to be better than just AKxxx AKxxx in the majors. Thus 10 tricks should have decent chances.
 
Alan Jones: 4♠ Partner has bid to 3H all on her own, with my bidding so far showing no points and only promising xx in spades so I have quite a bit to spare.
 
Raymond Semp: 4♠ There seems no problem here. Partner has bid 3 times vulnerable opposite a possible Yarborough and 5-5 in the minors.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 4♠ The ♠ QJx and doubleton hearts are golddust here. There is a slight worry of psuhing opps to a making 5♣  but our club holding could be sufficient to beat that. To the point in my book - the hand fits well and has an offensive rather than a defensive character. 
 
 
Problem 3
Score
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♠ 
10
10
19
Pass
6
3
14
Dbl
5
1
1
 
 
Problem 4
Dealer: South
Vul: N/S
Pairs
 
West  
 North.  East South
 
   1♥ 
pass 2♥  dbl 3♥ 
?
 

♠ 1064
♥ KJ6
♦ A62
♣ 10762

Again, a hand where the panelists are almost unanimous. Let’s start with the blood thirsty outlier:

Joy Blakey: Dbl Don't think we've got game on so hope to take this off - esp at this vul. If it’s right its right, if not, it’s not - all in!

Now to the majority

Royce Alexander: Pass (hoping partner will Double for takeout again which I will pass for penalties) I have a 3334 8 count with KJ6 in opponents’ bid and supported suit.Do I Double: is it responsive or penalties? The system includes responsive doubles, but doesnt mention this sequence. But I think it’s not for penalties. Bid 3N: hoping for 2 Heart stops and 7 tricks elsewhere? Pass hoping partner will protect with another Takeout Double that I can pass for penalties? The sneaky assassin

David Barton: Pass Partner may well be pre-protecting so may not be that strong. X would be inviting partner to bid a minor. I hope to hear another X that I can Pass for a magic +200. Good thing you are not playing this hand with Joy!

Michael Byrne: Pass I think they call this a staggering non problem. Even if I played double here as penalties (actually I think I do) this is not the hand for it, with only one certain heart trick and a partner who may be acting under pressure with hearts shortage. (No reason not to think the ♥ Queen is in dummy)Although the most likely result of 3♥  will be one off, if partner can't bid again over 3♥  then we are not making game and have no plus score to protect.3NT is a long way off unless partner has a trick source and 4♣  is truly awful, it is likely to be a 4-3 fit and will play badly regardless. It might be a staggering non problem for an expert, but for the mere mortals, it clearly wasn't! 

Rodney Lighton: Pass This looks like a good hand for defence, we might want to try a penalty double if desperate for a good board, but double would be responsive (take out) anyway. Looks like the experts have to sort out what dbl is in this sequence!

Espen Lindqvist: Pass Any bid out of the question for me.

Alan Jones: Pass If partner doubles again I will try 3NT but at the moment I have insufficient strength to make a call. For me a double would deny four spades and show 10+ hcps and 3NT would be wildly optimistic, given that partner might be pre-protecting and not even have a hand with full opening strength. TThe only one with game ambitions if partner doubles - the rest are going for the magic +200.

Tom Slater: Pass  I want to defend 3H, and if partner has enough to double again, even better.

So, even if the Majority always win but are not always are right - more often than not they are! For those of us living in the minority, we have to find solace in Ibsen’s “Strongest is he who stands most alone” 

 

Problem 4
Score
#Panelists
#Competitors
Pass
10
13
14
Dbl
4
1
11
3♠ 
3
2
3NT
1
4
4♣ 
1
3
 

Summary 

Experts
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Royce Alexander
2♥ 
Pass
Pass
Pass
36
David Barton
 2♥ 
Pass
4♠ 
Pass
40
Irving Blakey
 2♥ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
40
Joy Blakey
 2♥ 
Pass
Pass
Dbl
30
Michael Byrne
 2♥ 
2♣ 
 4♠ 
Pass
37
Rhona Goldenfield
 2♥ 
Pass
Pass
Pass
36
Rodney Lighton
 2♥ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
40
Espen Lindqvist
3♠ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
35
Alan Jones
 2♥ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
40
Alan Mould
 2♥  2♣  4♠ 
Pass
37
Raymond Semp
 2♥  2♣  4♠ 
Pass
37
Tom Slater
 2♥ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
40
Alec Smalley
 2♥ 
Pass
Dbl
Pass
35
Jeffrey Smith
 2♥ 
Pass
 4♠ 
Pass
40

 

Leaderboard December (Over 60% score)

Pos
Name
Score
1
Peter Foster
37
2
Barbara Lewis
36
Adam Wiseberg
36
Peter Jones
36
5
Victor Ridding
35
Dave Audley
35
7
Dhun Daji
34
Ann Thornton
34
9
Paul Beckwith
32
10
Mary Green
31
Ros Moorhouse
31
Eamonn Scott
31
George Leigh
31
Ian Pendlebury
31
15
Rob Harris
30
Gill Butterworth
30
17
Paul Worswick
29
John Parsons
29
18
Steven Mattinson
28
Liz Ineson
28
Mel Pelham
28
22
Valerie Morgan
27
23
Ian Hempstock
26
24
Francis William Wetton
25
Andrea Knowles
25

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 60% score)

Position
Competitor
October
November
December
Total
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
115
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
104
3
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
98
4
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
96
5
Mary Green
31
31
31
93
6
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
92
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
92
8
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
91
9
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
90
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
90
11
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
87
12
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
86
Rob Harris
29
27
30
86
14
Ros Moorhouse
24
30
31
85
Joyce White
31
32
22
85
16
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
83
17
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
82
18
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
79
19
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
78
20
David Fussell
24
30
23
77
21
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
75
22
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
73
Val Hempstock
24
30
19
73
What Would You Bid
 
Problem 1
Dealer: East
Vul: E/W
Teams
♠ AQJ107
♥ A97
♦ J108
♣ J10
Problem 2
Dealer: East
Vul: None 
Teams
♠ 4
♥ KJ87
♦ 10876
♣ AQ62
West North East South
1♦  pass
1♠  pass 2♦  pass
?

 

 
West
 North East South
1NT(1)
 pass
?
(1) 12-14

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: East
Vul: E/W
Pairs
♠ QJ6
♥ 53
♦ 10984
♣ 10874
Problem 4
Dealer: South
Vul: N/S
Pairs
♠ 1064
♥ KJ6
♦ A62
♣ 10762
West North East South
1♠  pass
pass dbl 2♥  dbl
2♠ 3♣ 3♥ 4♣ 
?      
 
West North East South
    1♥ 
pass 2♥  dbl 3♥ 
?
 
 

 
Leader Board
Position
Competitor
October
November
December
Total
1
Peter Foster
38
40
37
115
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
35
104
3
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
31
98
4
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
36
96
5
Mary Green
31
31
31
93
6
Dhun Daji
30
28
34
92
Ann Thornton
31
27
34
92
8
Paul Worswick
35
27
29
91
9
Barbara Lewis
24
30
36
90
Liz Ineson
26
36
28
90
11
Steven Mattinson
24
35
28
87
12
Eamonn Scott
20
35
31
86
Rob Harris
29
27
30
86
14
Ros Moorhouse
24
30
31
85
Joyce White
31
32
22
85
16
Andrea Knowles
34
24
25
83
17
Joyce Jones
27
34
21
82
18
Ian Hempstock
23
30
26
79
19
Richard Acaster
29
31
18
78
20
David Fussell
24
30
23
77
21
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
23
75
22
Michael Greaney
27
25
21
73
Val Hempstock
24
30
19
73
What Would You Bid
 
Problem 1
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ A7
♥ KJ97542
♦ 72
♣ Q10
Problem 2
Dealer: West
Vul: All 
Teams
♠ KQ108765
♥ KJ3
♦ A6
♣ 6
North East South West
pass 1♣  pass
1♥  pass 2NT pass
?

 

 
North
East
South
West
3♦ 
3♠ 
pass
4♥ 
pass
?

 

 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: South
Vul: None
Team
♠ Q7
♥ K52
♦ 742
♣ AJ972
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Pairs
♠ -
♥ A75
♦ KQ92
♣ AQ10763
North East South West
1♠  2 NT(1)
dbl(2) 3♦  4♣  pass
?
(1) Minors
(2) Values
North East South West
pass pass 1♠ 
2♣  pass 2♦ (1) 2♥ 
?
(1) Assume weak 2♦ openings.
 

 
November Solutions
 
Our competition is marching on. This month it was all about whether or not one should be looking for a slam and, if so, how to do the looking. 
 
We managed to get the experts to diverge a little more than in our first set, and only two experts got the perfect 40 - John Currie & Tom Slater. 
 
Amongst our competitors, Peter Foster managed the same perfection. He was chased by Liz Ineson with 36 points and Steve Mattinson with 35 in what was a difficult set. 
 
In the overall standing, this took Peter Foster up in pole position with a total of 78. He has managed to get a length ahead of the chasing pack headed by Victor Ridding (69) and Ian Pendlebury (67).
 
It's still all to play for. 
 
The rules for scoring are as before, and my comments will be in italics. 
 
Enjoy!
 
Problem 1
 
Dealer: East
Vul: None
Pairs
 
North East South West
pass 1♣  pass
1♥  pass 2NT pass
?

 

♠ A7
♥ KJ97542
♦ 72
♣ Q10
 
This hand is from my private halls of horror. We didn’t have any fancy check-back., I didn’t know if partner would take 3 ♥  as forcing (she wouldn’t – but she will now). 4NT would be quantitative and 4♥  or 3NT don’t call me, I’ll call you and for 6 ♥ ...? Let’s see what the experts have to say, and first the minority.
 

Irving Blakey: 3♣  Having passed with a hand which many would open at the one level(others at the 3 or even 4 level!),and where slam is possible opposite the right 17/18 HCP, 3♣  will fish for three card heart support and a 3♠  cue will then keep the pot boiling. Good thing you didn’t open as the TD would get to the table due to opening out of turn and who knows how this hand would have been bid

Joy Blakey: 3♣  I think this is fairly automatic; I'm looking for some sort of heart support, 6♥  is a possibility. 13 out of 16 Experts found something else to bid. When I run this hand by Jeffery Smith he said "Yes run it, if not for any other reason than to hear Joy say "6♥ I don't know what to bid, and at least it will stop Irving from bidding 7♥ !" "So Jeff don’t give up your day job in an attempt to put Psychic Sally out of a job!

Raymond Semp: 3♠ . With at least two hearts plus and 18/19 HCP opposite a good six-card heart suit and 10 HCP including the ♣Q there is a good possibility of a small slam. Therefore, I should make at least one effort in tempting partner. As it is unlikely he has four spades so I will offer 3♠ in an effort to see if we have a heart fit and bid 4♥ over 3NT

Let’s hear from the two Experts who have had enough of this hand

David Barton: 3NT Yes there could easily be a slam on but it is mp's and I want it to be played by partner. An ABBA fan in disguise - Winner takes it all!  

Michael Byrne: 4♥  At pairs it doesn't pay to push for thin slams, and all that marking time with 3♥  (which is forcing after a rebid of 2NT 18-19) seems to do is tip them off to the right lead (for example cue bids 4♦ , exposing club weakness). There are hands where 3NT is better, but I am not sure that even if partner bids it over 2NT I will be able to bring myself to pass it with a 9 card fit. (If partner has an offshape 2NT rebid with a singleton heart honour then 4♥  will definitely be superior to 3NT) A possible hand for partner is KQx, Ax, AQxx, Axxx, now slam is good needing the diamond finesse or hearts coming in (76% or so) but if he is a little softer KJx, AQ, QJxx, AJxx, then slam might have no play, now the aim is to make sure they lead a spade and let him discard my diamonds. The actual hand favoured Michael as ♥  player for 1 trick more than NT.

The system in use states that “A minimum rebid in responder’s suit is weak, usually six cards”, so let’s see what excuses the majority have for diverting from this systemic treatment

Royce Alexander: 3♥ (5+ Hearts, Game Forcing) Might make 10,11,12,13 tricks depending on partner's controls. If partner cues 4♣ , cue 4♠  to highlight the 2 diamond losers.

Alan Jones: 3♥  Bidding 3♥  and then 4♥  (or 4NT) over partner's 3NT bid is a mild slam invitation, which is about how I rate the hand. And who knows, maybe partner will agree hearts and not bid 3NT! I like to dream. A jump to 4♥  would be sign-off of course.

Alan Mould: 3♥  This hand is an excellent example of why modern systems play basically everything over 2NT as Game Forcing (unless you have lots of toys over it). Games and slams are so much more important that part scores. Here if 3♥  is Non Forcing you have to find some weird distortion such as 3♦  or just punt the final contract. Bid 3♥  and see what pard does.

Jeffrey Smith: 3♥ (Forcing of course). There are slam chances so this helps partner's judgment when followed up by 4♥ . The alternative 3♣  is less effective. You want to tell partner about your hand rather than ask about his. I suspect slam is actually poor since partner needs a lot of suitable cards.

When I had this hand I jumped to 6♥ . Left Hand Opponent led the ♥ Ace and dummy came down with AJx,x,AKxx,AKJ9x, and lefty switched to a club won in hand and when the ♥ Queen fell under my ♥ King I could pull the last trump with my Jack and claim 12 tricks - Who said crime doesn’t pay! 

To paraphrase John Rawls in A Theory Of Justice “A Bidding Systems first virtue is to be sensible, if it is not it has to be discarded or changed”. To discard it might be to cut off your nose to spite your face, but changing it so that 3♥  is forcing seams to be sensible. 

 

Bid
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
3♥ 
10
10
9
3♣ 
7
3
1
3♠ 
7
1
0
3NT
6
1
2
4♥  
4
1
25
3♦ 
2
0
2
4♣ 
2
0
1
6♥ 
2
0
2

 

 

Problem 2

 

Dealer: West
Vul: All 
Teams
 
North  
East. 
South. 
West. 
3♦  
3♠ 
pass
4♥  
pass
?
 
♠ KQ108765
♥ KJ3
♦ A6
♣ 6
 
How far to go and what road to take? Or should we even try to continue this journey? Let’s see what those who pass say in their defence
 
David Barton: Pass. I stick with the bid I made at the table - or rather at my screen. There are 3 Aces missing and much will depend on there not being a ♦  loser. Looking for redemption?
 
Michael Byrne: Pass. The old adage "When the opponents pre-empt, aim to achieve the best result possible, not the best possible result" springs to mind. Of course we could be cold for a grand slam (A, AQxxxxx, xx, Axx) but equally the 5 level could be in danger (x, Q10xxxxx, QJx, KQ). Partner's bid is not particularly strong - if he has 7 hearts and 1 spade (quite likely looking at my hand) then there is no reason he will want to choose a minus score in what he thinks is a seven card spade fit when an 8 or 9 card fit might exist in hearts. The honour structure is slightly dubious - the ♦ Ace will be bumped off at trick one and now we will need some hard work to bring the spades in, probably needing him to use the 3rd round of trumps as an entry. Stealing quotes from S.J. Simon and giving good reasons to take the low road
 
Rodney Lighton: Pass. Difficult we could easily make slam, but five could be too high. I will settle for the plus score, if the minors had been reversed I would make a slam try.
 
If you want to take this hand further, the experts offer up two routes
 
Joy Blakey: 5♦  I like my heart fit so I'm giving partner a chance to get to 6. 
 
Irving Blakey: 5♦  Seems pretty automatic! This time it is hubby who is driving the automatic car.
 
Alan Jones: 5♦  I feel I am a bit too strong to pass and I think this is a general slam try rather than a specific control showing bid. Of course bidding on isn't safe, but then nor is passing.
 
Alec Smalley: 5♦  heart slam try with the control I think my partner wants to hear about
 
The most popular means of transportation is Roman Key Card Blackwood (RKCB
 
Royce Alexander: 4NT (RKCB in Hearts) Is partner 0-7-2-4, 0-7-3-3, 1-7-2-3? Is 6H making on a ruffing Spade finesse? I'll try 6H if 2 aces opposite, 5♥  if 1 ace opposite, and apologise if 0 aces opposite
 
John Currie: 4NT. Keycard, no guarantee that 6♥  will make if partner has two, but could miss grand if I pass 4♥ .
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4NT. Asking key-cards
 
Tom Slater: 4NT. Not much extra strength but partner has got the jackpot with KJx in trumps. No great way to cooperate.
 
I cannot see that one road offers much more that the other. If you think it is you who needs to get to know about partner’s controls so that you can decide, then 4NT is your man. If you like to tell partner what you have so that she can decide, then 5♦  is your woman.
 
How to score this draw? Had we had a draw between two non-pass bids I'd give them both 10. Here though we have 60%  in favour of bidding on, so moving on has to score higher than passing. Hence 4NT gets 10 and pass 7. Even though 5♦  has less votes than pass, bidding on has won the day and what remains is to give it 8 or 9. 
 
Bid
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4NT
10
6
25
5♦ 
9
4
4
Pass
7
6
12

 

Problem 3

 

Dealer: South
Vul: None
Team
 
North  
East. 
South. 
West
1♠ 
2 NT(1)
dbl(2)
3♦  
4♣ 
pass
?
(1) Minors
(2) Values
 
♠ Q7
♥ K52
♦ 742
♣ AJ972
 
All the experts broadly agree that even though they have never come across this sequence, there is no doubt that partner is showing a void or singleton in clubs. From here, they start diverging. Some think a good spade suit with slam interest and others a major two suiter, so not strange that they disagree about what to do
 
Alan Jones: 5♣ . I think partner is trying to show a strong major 2-suiter with short clubs and will drool over my major suit honours when she sees them. Since I did NOT bid 4♦  she will not expect a diamond control so can sign off in five of a major if she does not have one herself. By the way, for me the double of 2N states that I can penalize at least one of their minors, rather than showing general values. Willing to risk the 5 level and in the strong two suited camp.
 
Royce Alexander: 4♥  (cue bid) Unless West has mis-bid 2NT (!!), South must have a very good hand with club control, so maybe 7-4-1-1 or 7-3-2-1. What can I bid? 4♥ , 4♠ , 4NT, 5♣  are conceivable. But I just have the 3 useful cards. If partner bids 4♠ , I'll pass.
 
Irving Blakey: 4♥  Difficult - the club Ace may not be an asset, but if South follows up with 5♥  (with two Diamond losers he would bid 4♠ ), I will bid 6♥.
 
Alec Smalley: 4♥ Partner is making life difficult here, but thats what partners like to do. How do we play 4C??? - self supporting splinter or good heart raise - whichever I will make life awkward for partner - I have a control or a H suit? I hope I can justify either. From one who knows, preparing for the post-mortem is as important as making the right bid, especially with a difficult partner! 
 
Now, let’s get it from the one who bid 4 ♣:
 
Raymond Semp: 4♥  If you ask five Experts what defence they use after an Unusual 2NT bid over one of a major, you would get five different answers. But two things they all would agree on, the double and somehow to show support and/or the other major so 4♣ looks like a self-supporting major suit splinter. With my ♠Q7, ♥ K52 and an Ace (Albeit in his obvious void but never-the-less a trick) I shall make one effort. o, we now know that 4♣  was a self-supporting splinter. 
 
With this knowledge, is the hand still worth a mild slam invite? Let’s hear from the slim majority
 
David Barton: 4♠ . Mysterious Partner has presumably got something like a strong 2 in Spades and a Club shortage. The AJ of Clubs are "wrong" values so I do not think I have enough to make a slam
 
Joy Blakey: 4♠  the 4♣  bid doesn't excite me.
 
John Currie: 4♠  Not sure if ♠ Queen  and ♥ King are enough to show slam interest opposite a potential void.
 
Espen Lindqvist: 4♠ . I Don’t have any extras, but slightly afraid partner has something like 5-5 in the majors.
 
Alan Mould: 4♠ . Pard has made an auto splinter for spades. This does not help my hand. Pard needs a HUGE hand for slam AKJxxxx, AQJx, Kx, - or the like. I could bid 4♥  I suppose but it just seems too much.
 
So, it’s not 100% clear what the 4C shows, and even amongst those who got it right it is even stevens whether or not to send out mild invitational signals. 
 
Bid
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♠ 
10
8
25
4♥ 
8
7
4
5♣ 
5
1
9
4♦ 
5
0
1
Pass
1
0
3
 
 
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: All
Pairs
 
North  
East  
South   
West
pass
pass
1♠ 
2♣ 
pass
2♦  (1)
2♥ 
?
(1) Assume weak 2♦  openings
♠ -
♥ A75
♦ KQ92
♣ AQ10763
 
To Slam or not to Slam? And if so, how to Slam? Let’s start with the odd one out
 
Royce Alexander: 5♦  Given East’s silence so far, partner could well be 4-4-5-0 shape and West 6-4-1-2. Hope to cross-ruff or beat 5♠ Doubled. 
 
At the other end of the scale, we have those who don’t need to be asked more than once
 
Irving Blakey: 6♦  Eschewing the very possible Grand - let them guess what to lead - The scientific approach would be Voidwood/splinters/cuebids etc. 
 
Alec Smalley: 6♦  correct number of controls - loads of tricks - partner clearly has S's - and the hope is a 6 card D suit, if I run into a void club as well we maybe down. I don't wish to bid this scientifically as it will tip off a H lead instead of a S - apologies partner if you have AD + KC. 
 
Espen Lindqvist: 6♦  Might be a good grand. Making a practical bid, as it seems difficult to locate both the ace of diamonds and king of clubs.
 
Both hoping to avoid giving away the lead that could set a thin slam.
 
Now for the Scientific camp
 
Raymond Semp: 3♥  As East has not supported spades partner must have some, if one is the Ace with his Axxxxx (x) diamonds we have nine top tricks. He should also be prepared to play in 3♣ in case I am void in diamonds so with the ♣Kx with his Axxxxx diamonds we might have a slam on.
 
Not sure exactly what 3♥  would be. I’d read it as showing ‘something’ in H, looking for a ♠  stop for 3NT purpose. I guess the nature of it would be revealed in the subsequent bidding.
 
The majority of the experts are split into two camps. First, the space preservers.
 
David Barton: 3♠ This feels like another hand I held. Hoping to hear 4♣  in which case I bid 7♦  (hope partner has the A) or 4♥  when I will bid 6♦. Highly likely you have seen it as the problems are from games within the county over the last few weeks. 
 
Michael Byrne: 3♠  This is a really fascinating deal and I can think of several alternatives that I might bid at the table, including 6♦ , 7♦  and psychic blackwood to encourage the ♠ Ace lead. Partner's failure to open a Weak 2♦  is less suggestive that he has only a 5 card suit and more suggestive that he has 4 spades on the side, something like 4-2-6-1 or even 5260 is consistent with the lack of a spade raise (if Responder has 2 surely the opener can't have 7 and want to introduce hearts?) In that case the issue of whether or not we can make slam comes down to how good partner's trumps are, and whether or not he has a club to take the finesse and help set the suit up. I am almost certainly heading to 6♦  but 3♠  (which is a splinter bid, showing shortage and Game forcing) leaves some room for partner to show a high card in hearts or clubs, and gives us maximum space.
 
Rodney Lighton: 3♠  I have a huge hand in support of diamonds, I will show the spade control and make further slam tries.
 
Jeffrey Smith: 3♠  (splinter). Slam is likely and we need to encourage partner to show a club (♣ King) or heart (♥ King) value and ignore any spade value.
 
Now to those willing to give up space to create clarity regarding the nature of the control
 
Joy Blakey: 4♠ . if p only has Axxxx and ♣ King I'not stopping short of 6; this way we may find our way to 7 if p has ♥ King, ♦ Ace to six and ♣ King.
 
John Currie: 4♠  Showing diamonds and a void. I’ll ’bid 6♦  over 5♦ , 7♦  over 5♣ , and an odd number of keycards and a void over 4NT.
 
Tom Slater: 4♠  This extra jump must show a void, and I'd be delighted if partner then took control as my entire hand is keycards. If partner is not interested will still bid a sixth.
 
Now to the exclusionists
 
Alan Jones: 4♠  The change of suit by partner is constructive, not a rescue so I am expecting club support here. I am also expecting at LEAST the Ace of diamonds - making a constructive try by bidding a Jack-high suit just misleads partner. The 4♠  bid is exclusion Blackwood, of course, and I choose it to get my 10 points. I can then continue by asking for (specific) Kings and so bid 7♦  if she has the ♣ King (as opposed to Jxxx). But I should mention that in real life I would bid 4♥ , exclusion in hearts instead of spades. This because if partner does NOT have the ♣ King then I want to encourage them to lead a spade not a heart.
 
Alan Mould: 4♠  EKCB obviously. I don't care that pard has not opened a weak 2. xxxx, x, Jxxxxx, Kx is a slam and pard would not dream of bidding 2♦  on that. I will drive slam and if that tips off the killing lead well so be it. Maybe I should bid exclusion in hearts, but would anyone believe me?
 
The space consumer just has the balance of power, even though they bid it for slightly different reasons. 
 
Bid
Points
#Panelists
#Competitors
4♠ 
10
6
3
3♠ 
7
4
2
3♥ 
7
1
1
6♦ 
6
4
4
5♦ 
6
1
17
4♦ 
5
0
4
3♦ 
4
0
6
2♠ 
1
0
4
6♣ 
1
0
1
4♣ 
1
0
0
 

 

Summary 

Experts
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Total
Royce Alexander
3♥ 
4NT
4♥ 
5♦ 
34
David Barton
3NT
Pass
4♠ 
3♠  
30
Irving Blakey
3♣ 
5♦ 
4♥ 
6♦ 
30
Joy Blakey
 3♣ 5♦  4♠ 4♠
36
Michael Byrne
 4♥ 
Pass
 4♥  3♠  
26
John Currie
 3♥ 
4NT
 4♠  4♠
40
Rhona Goldenfield
3♣
4NT
 4♥  4♠
35
John Holland
 3♥ 
Pass
 4♥  6♦ 
31
Rodney Lighton
 3♥ 
Pass
 4♠  3♠  
34
Espen Lindqvist
 3♥ 
4NT
 4♠  6♦ 
36
Alan Jones
 3♥  5♦  5♣ 4♠
34
Alan Mould
 3♥ 
Pass
 4♠  4♠
29
Raymond Semp
 3♠  
Pass
 4♥  3♥ 
29
Tom Slater
 3♥ 
4NT
 4♠  4♠
40
Alec Smalley
 3♥  5♦  4♥  6♦ 
33
Jeffrey Smith
 3♥ 
4NT
 4♠  3♠  
37

Leaderboard November (Over 60% score)

Position
Competitor
Points
1
Peter Foster
40
2
Liz Ineson
36
3
Steven Mattinson
35
Eamonn Scott
35
5
Joyce Jones
34
Gerard Keary
34
7
Victor Ridding
32
Joyce White
32
Mel Pelham
32
10
Mary Green
31
Richard Acaster
31
Francis William Wetton
31
13
Barbara Lewis
30
Ros Moorhouse
30
David Fussell
30
Ian Hempstock
30
Val Hempstock
30
Paul Beckwith
30
19
Dhun Daji
28
Adam Wiseberg
28
21
Del O'Sullivan
27
Paul Worswick
27
Adrian
27
Rob Harris
27
Heather Saunders
27
Ian Pendlebury
27
Ann Thornton
27
28
Millie Lang
25
Michael Greaney
25
David Cash
25
31
Geoff Ashcroft
24
Andrea Knowles
24

 

Leaderboard Overall (Over 60% score)

 

Position
Competitor
October
November
Total
1
Peter Foster
38
40
78
2
Victor Ridding
37
32
69
3
Ian Pendlebury
40
27
67
4
Adrian
37
27
64
5
Joyce White
31
32
63
6
Liz Ineson
26
36
62
Paul Worswick
35
27
62
Mary Green
31
31
62
9
Joyce Jones
27
34
61
10
Adam Wiseberg
32
28
60
Richard Acaster
29
31
60
12
Steven Mattinson
24
35
59
13
Dhun Daji
30
28
58
Andrea Knowles
34
24
58
Ann Thornton
31
27
58
16
Rob Harris
29
27
56
17
Eamonn Scott
20
35
55
18
Barbara Lewis
24
30
54
Ros Moorhouse
24
30
54
David Fussell
24
30
54
Val Hempstock
24
30
54
22
Heather Saunders
26
27
53
Ian Hempstock
23
30
53
24
Andy Green
29
23
52
Michael Greaney
27
25
52
Geoff Ashcroft
28
24
52
27
Del O'Sullivan
24
27
51
What Would You Bid
 
Problem 1
Dealer: North
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ AK864
♥ A9842
♦ -
♣ A102
Problem 2
Dealer: North
Vul: None 
Teams
♠ QJ3
♥ AK1095
♦ A108
♣ J9
North      East        South       West
1♠           2♦          dbl           pass
?
 
North      East        South       West
1♥          pass        1♠            pass
1nt         pass        3nt           pass
?
 
 
Problem 3
Dealer: South
Vul: None
Pairs
♠ 6
♥ A107432
♦ Q
♣ K8654
Problem 4
Dealer: East
Vul: N/S♠ 
Pairs
♠ AK102
♥ 4
♦ KJ764
♣ 542
South      West        North       East
1♦          pass        1♥            1♠ 
2♣          3♠          4♣            pass
pass        4♠           ?
North      East        South       West
               1♣          dbl          2♣ 
?
 

 
This site is built with BridgeWebs, the easy web solution.