
DSBA 3rd Quarter 2002 Bidding Contest Results!
Edited by Jess Stuart
PANELIST SCORES
|
SCORE |
NAME |
|
430 |
Pete Filandro |
|
420 |
Rick Rowland |
|
420 |
Jeff Ruben |
|
400 |
Dave Smith |
|
380 |
Robert Grover |
TOP SOLVERS
|
PLACE |
SCORE |
NAME |
|
1 |
440 |
Randy Berseth |
|
2 |
410 |
Bill Erwin |
|
Manuel Paulo |
||
|
4 |
400 |
Lois Stuar |
|
Maggie Shellenberger |
||
|
6 |
390 |
Don Woodhouse |
|
Michael Lucy |
Leif Lundberg |
Amelio Silvestri |
|
10 |
380 |
Eric Luft |
| IMPs | QT54 |
Auction: | West | North | East | South |
| Vul: None | AJ62 |
- | - | 1![]() |
Double | |
| Dlr: East | 4 |
1![]() |
2![]() |
4![]() |
? | |
| You are: S | AKQ2 |
|
Action |
Score |
Votes(Panel) |
Votes(Solvers) |
|
5 NT |
100 |
1 |
4 |
|
Pass |
90 |
- |
1 |
|
4 NT |
80 |
1 |
5 |
|
5 |
60 |
- |
11 |
|
5 |
50 |
1 |
1 |
|
5 |
50 |
1 |
1 |
|
5 |
40 |
- |
1 |
|
6 |
30 |
- |
2 |
|
Double |
20 |
1 |
17 |
|
6 |
20 |
0 |
2 |
Four of the five panelists think a slam is likely, but they chose four different bids to get there. The winning bid, 5 NT, asks partner to pick a heart or club slam without implying first round control in the opponents' suits, as the cue bids would do.
Pete Filandro: 5 NT. In BWS, 2 spades is a game force and 5 NT is "pick a slam" (if it cannot be quantitative or the grand slam force). Perfect! There are not enough points for partner's game force if he has even one spade. He must have void KQxxx ?xx xxxxx with about 4 points in diamonds. If it's the KJ he bids 6 hearts and I pass. If he has Axx he cues 6 diamonds and I bid 7 hearts.
Jeff Ruben: 4 NT. Regular Blackwood since we have not agreed on a suit. I assume partner has a heart-club 2-suiter, with longer clubs (otherwise he would have just bid some number of hearts), something like: void KQxxx xx Jxxxxx. My bid shows slam interest, and I hope partner will get the message and jump with a void in spades. I will pass 5 clubs.
Since partner's cue bid is game forcing, he must bid or double over a pass of the opponents' 4 spades. Passing, like the 5 NT "pick a slam" bid has the advantage of getting to a slam in our best suit. Partner may have had too good a hand to just jump to game and may have elected to cue bid with a strong one-suiter, perhaps: x KQxxxx AQxx xx, or x KQ Axx JTxxxxx. By not accommodating these possibilities, the unilateral, conservative 5 hearts or 5 clubs and the unilateral, aggressive 6 hearts or 6 clubs don't score as well.
| IMPs | A6 |
Auction: | West | North | East | South |
| Vul: Both | - |
1![]() |
1![]() |
Pass | ? | |
| Dlr: West | AT97643 |
|||||
| You are: S | A852 |
|
Action |
Score |
Votes(Panel) |
Votes(Solvers) |
|
1 NT |
100 |
3 |
12 |
|
Pass |
80 |
2 |
10 |
|
2 |
60 |
- |
7 |
|
2 NT |
50 |
- |
3 |
|
2 |
40 |
- |
12 |
|
3 NT |
30 |
- |
1 |
I had a partner long ago who played his hands very well but was timid in bidding, especially without as fit. Our results improved when we developed the "ten point rule", which dictated a partner had to bid something if he had ten points more than indicated in the auction so far. This hand is a good application of the "ten point rule". Each bid has serious flaws, but the natural 1 NT seems to distort the hand less than the others.
Robert Grover (with Jeff Ruben similarly): 1 NT. I hate this bid with a void in partner's suit. Pass cannot be right. 2 NT is worse than 1 NT; too much can go wrong. If partner rebids only 2 hearts, he can play there.
Kurt Kilhefner adds: 1 NT. Hoping something good develops, rather than a disaster. How disappointed can partner be with my three Aces?
Rick Rowland: Pass. Not going out on a limb here. Only alternative is some number of NT, which I fear will get some bigger number of hearts. Might miss a NT game on occasion, but will always get a partscore plus.
Michael Lucy: 2
. ARGGGHHH (why me?). I don't like it ,
however this is the least of all evils in my opinion.
| IMPs | 94 |
Auction: | West | North | East | South |
| Vul: None | A532 |
- | - | 1![]() |
Pass | |
| Dlr: East | J754 |
2![]() |
2![]() |
Pass | Pass | |
| You are: S | 985 |
3![]() |
Double | Pass | ? |
|
Action |
Score |
Votes(Panel) |
Votes(Solvers) |
|
3 |
100 |
2 |
4 |
|
Pass |
90 |
1 |
13 |
|
3 |
80 |
- |
4 |
|
3 |
70 |
2 |
19 |
|
4 |
40 |
- |
1 |
|
4 |
30 |
- |
1 |
|
4 |
20 |
- |
3 |
Partner has a good hand with a pattern of: 6-3-3-1, 5-3-3-2, 5-4-3-1, 5-3-4-1, or such. How do you cater to these possibilities most effectively?
Rick Rowland: 3
. What inference should be taken from
the fact that partner didn't double the first time? His spades are too
good. Maybe he's only 3-3 in the red suits. His spades are too long
(6-4-3-0 or 6-3-3-1). Three of any suit could be right, but my guess is
spades.
Robert Grover: Pass. Not sure that game is right. If game makes, they are going down enough to compensate. Best bet for a plus is to sit for the double and contribute my trick.
Don Woodhouse: Pass. If pard was sure he wanted to play in spades he would not be doubling. I don't mind missing a heart partial and anyway he could be 5-3-4-1 or something.
If you don't take the double out to spades, do you chose hearts or diamonds? I think partner might be more inclined to double the first time with 5-4-3-1 and to overcall spades, then double later with 5-3-4-1. Two panelists don't agree, though.
Pete Filandro (with Jeff Ruben similarly): 3
.
First, level. Should I bid 4? No. Partner cannot have the 20+ needed
for game because he started with an overcall. Next, suit. If pard is
5-4-4-0 or 5-4-3-1, hearts is right. If he is 5-3-4-1, he will often bid 3
diamonds. I think a second suit in this auction should show
5.
| Matchpoints | K93 |
Auction: | West | North | East | South |
| Vul: None | AJT4 |
- | 1![]() |
Pass | 1![]() | |
| Dlr: North | 74 |
2![]() |
2![]() |
Pass | ? | |
| You are: S | 9653 |
Bidding Note:By partnership agreement, 2NT would have been natural and non-forcing.
|
Action |
Score |
Votes(Panel) |
Votes(Solvers) |
|
3 |
100 |
2 |
9 |
|
3 |
80 |
3 |
10 |
|
3 |
70 |
- |
7 |
|
Pass |
50 |
- |
8 |
| 2 NT |
40 |
- |
10 |
|
4 |
20 |
- |
1 |
Partner's bidding shows a good hand with more diamonds than spades. There's a good case to be made for keeping the bidding open with a choice that rates to be the best combined trump fit, 3 diamonds.
Rick Rowland (with Dave Smith similarly): 3
.
I'm looking to give partner some room to describe his hand. If he bids
3 hearts or 3 spades, I'll bid 4. If he bids 3 NT, I am happy to pass. If
he bids 4 diamonds, I'll raise to 5. If he passes, that's probably
where we belong.
Jeff Ruben (with Pete Filandro and Robert
Grover similarly): 3
. Too much to pass and I do not want to
raise spades immediately lest partner think I have 4-card support.
Over 3 diamonds I will bid 3 spades. Over 3 spades, I will raise. I will
pass 3 NT.
Randy Berseth: 3
. I have game going values but no
clear direction. Partner's next bid should clarify in which strain we
should be playing.
| Matchpoints | 6543 |
Auction: | West | North | East | South |
| Vul: N-S | KJ8 |
- | - | - | 1![]() | |
| Dlr: South | AKQJ43 |
Pass | 1![]() |
2![]() |
? | |
| You are: S | - |
Bidding Note: Your partner refuses to play support doubles!
|
Action |
Score |
Votes(Panel) |
Votes(Solvers) |
|
3 |
100 |
1 |
6 |
|
3 |
90 |
2 |
10 |
|
2 |
80 |
1 |
6 |
|
2 |
70 |
- |
8 |
|
2 |
60 |
1 |
3 |
|
3 |
50 |
- |
3 |
|
4 |
40 |
- |
2 |
|
4 |
30 |
- |
2 |
|
Double |
20 |
- |
4 |
|
3 |
10 |
- |
1 |
Pete Filandro: 3
. I can make a very descriptive yet
non-forcing bid. 3 NT is our most likely game. If pard has values but
no club stopper, he can bid a natural 3 hearts or 3 spades so our
8-card major fit can be located.
Jeff Ruben: 3
. Since all partner needs for a grand is
AQxxx of hearts and the Ace of spades, I had better make a forcing
bid and 3 clubs stands out. I will pass 3 NT but cue bid 4 clubs over
anything else.
Barry Gorski: 2
. Three clubs or three diamonds will
likely lose the spade suit and invite 3 NT which may be inferior to
either hearts or spades. Two spades shows my strength (which
improved due to the club overcall) and gives more flexibility to later
bidding.