Some Problems from the GNTs '01

All at IMPs, long matches except for #4, which is IMPs, 10-board matches, VPs.

Today's panelists: Barry Rigal, David Capera, Dan Hugh-Jones, David Milton, Mike Shuster, Brian Oxley, Bobby Bodenheimer, Andy Lewis, Dan Molochko, JoAnna Stansby, Kent Hartman, Curt Hastings, Praba Balakrishnan

none vul, you hold
xx AJ10xx Q9xx 10x

Partner You

1 1

2 ?

Methods:
2 = 5+ hearts, forcing 1 round. Unlimited, could be weak
2 = lebensohl
3 = natural, forcing

BARRY
3. I believe this shows four diamonds without defining heart length, whereas 2 then 3 might be weak and non-forcing over a 2NT/3 bid. [I agree. What else can one do with a 4531 disaster hand? --Jeff] I am not a Walsh player so I can't hold four hearts and five diamonds and I spit metaphorically on people who might hold that hand and thus have to distort their auctions here to cater for the possibility that this sequence shows 4-5. [I don't see how it distorts anything, but I agree that there is more ambiguity given Walsh-style methods here. I don't think it matters, but evidentally Barry does. --Jeff] If you twist my arm and tell me 3 shows that hand, [Nope. --Jeff] then I have to bid 2 now and follow with 4 over a non-forcing action from partner. But don't make me try to like it!
DAVIDC
2 planning to bid 3 (forcing) [Nope, nonforcing, but he sticks with it anyway. --Jeff] over the expected 2NT or 3. Admittedly a bit of an overbid, but game is too likely to dump it.
DANHJ
2 now, raise diamonds next.
DAVIDM
I am going to bid 3, expecting that if partner has 3 card heart support or a great two card holding he will bid 3. I have primary support for partner's second suit and a side A which I think is just a tad too good to claim weakness through the use of Lebensohl. I know that if my minors were reversed, I would definitely bid 3 directly because if I used Lebensohl, I would have to make the final and probable mistake if I decided to pass. With diamonds, at least partner will have another chance after I correct 3 to 3. I still think I am good enough to bid 3 (can we stop in 4?) [I don't see how. Is 1-1; 2-3; 3-4 nonforcing? --Jeff]
MIKE
I think our opening notrump range at this vulnerability might actually be relevant information (is it possible partner has a 2245 16 count?) [Good point. It was 10-12, but I don't think it matters. I, personally, would rebid 1NT if I had a hand that would have opened a 15-17, rather than reversing. I'd bid 2NT with a great 16. --Jeff] Regardless, I think I should bid 3. Seems straightforward. I have an excellent dummy for diamonds and if partner has heart support in reserve, I'll hear about it immediately and get to 4. It is possible that this could get us overboard vis a vis the auction 1 - 1; 2 - 2; 2NT - 3, which from the above desciption sounds non-forcing. However, failing to bid game with these values opposite a reverse is cutting the line a little too thin (maybe without the ten of clubs).
BINKLEY
3. I presume this does not deny 5 hearts (your description of 2 didn't say), so I should show my prime support immediately so later diamond bids aren't ambiguous (by either of us). Plus with me having an A in a bid suit and the trump Q, my hand is looking super.
BOBBY
I bid 4 card suits up the line, so it seems 3 here would show my shape, 5-4, and my strength. [Sorry, even playing up-the-line, weak hands have to bid a major before a four-card diamond suit or get trapped into making too many bids on the hand. --Jeff] Opposite a reverse, I want to be in game, and this gives us the opportunity to find 5 as well as showing the 5-3 heart fit. It displays the spade weakness to the opponents but they already knew that anyway.
ANDY
3 seems like a slight overbid, while 2 planning to follow with 3 seems like an underbid. (Lebensohl seems like an underbid, and pointless to boot.) Can we potentially bail out in 4 if I bid 3 now? If so I'll take that route. If not I'll take the low road nonvul.
DANM
3. Lebensohl cannot be right on a hand where we might well belong in slam, notwithstanding my low pointcount. If I don't raise diamonds now we won't ever play in the suit. My heart length is not limited to four through failure to rebid the suit now; if pard gives me 3 I will raise to 4 and that will be a good picture. I'll pass 3NT, but I'll bid 4 over 3, 4, or 4.
JOANNA
2. Partner's 2 call could easily be a 3-card suit, something like x KQx AKx AKxxxx or perhaps Ax x AKx KQJxxxx so bidding 3 immediately will consume a lot of bidding room without helping us sort out where we belong. Over 2, partner can raise with 3 and the fit is clear. If I bid 3 then partner's 3 bid is murky: it could be just Kx to describe a hand with short spades.
After 2, partner can bid 2 if they want to hear about my Q9xx. If partner bids 2NT or 3 (neither forcing) the hand is worth 3.
Partner's jump to 3NT over 2 should be passed without a concern. If partner could make slam opposite this hand then he should have bid 2 to give us room to explore.
KENT
3. Partner has been know to manufacture this on 3-6 in the minors, but so be it. This describes my hand. I'm at least a queen heavy for lebensohl opposite a reverse.
[Odd. Two weak NTers worry about a made-up reverse. They are the ones who play 1-1; 3 as forcing! --Jeff]
CURT
This hand isn't so good since partner is highly likely to have heart shortness, maybe even none. However 2 will lead to a problematic auction (2-2;3 is not forcing I think) so I have to bid 3. [Two out of three ain't bad! Partner has no hearts; 2-2; 3 is not forcing; but if you think those things, why do you have to bid 3? --Jeff]
PRABA
Seems like an ideal hand for our methods! 2 keeps all options open. Partner either has a 'single suit - Game Forcing' type hand, or clubs and diamonds game forcing, or clubs and diamonds minimum reverse. We will be ideally placed to convey to partner that we wish to play 3 if he has the last type of hand. With other types of hands partner will explore other contracts and we may co-operate at that stage.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
wasn't there. I think I'd bid 3, but I think it's a mild overbid. But with at least two cover cards for partner, and as many as four (imagine AKx x AKJx AKxxx), showing weakness seems wrong. On the other hand, hearts are probably opposite shortness, as the opponents, who probably have some values, would probably not have been silent with ten spades, which means that this is looking more like a seven-count. Very close call. I'd go for the mild overbid.
VOTES

3 10

2 3

2 1

CONSENSUS
The panel thinks this hand is good enough to force to game; some of the low roaders are planning agressive rebids.
WINNING ACTION
2 or 2. Partner has AKQ — KJ10x QJ9xxx. No game makes, but after 3, you'll never get to 3NT, which is better than 5. In practice, partner (I) bid 3, partner bid 4, and I bid game. How can I not, with AQxx and out being enough for game? There's no way I can afford to bid 3NT and have it played from my side, particularly with the opponents' having a lead-directing huddle available.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
3 seems right. You have two cover cards in high cards and possibly two more in ruffing values. That's a game force opposite a reverse. That it happens that three of the four potential cover cards are duplicated is more bad luck than anything else. At the table, I thought that each of us had overbid somewhat, but upon reflection, I'll chalk this one up to luck.
none vul
Kxx x KQxxx AKQx

LHO CHO RHO You

Pass Pass 2 Dbl

4 Pass Pass ?

BARRY
Dbl. No justification, but passing here never works for me and this hand looks offensive (in all respects to partner who may bid 4 on Qxxx xxx xx Jxxx and I could not blame him for that!)
DAVIDC
Pass. I quit. Partner had a chance and I don't fancy getting plus in the expected 4 bid with K third. I hope to take my small plus defending 4. I am thankful that no one is vul.
DANHJ
Double.
DAVIDM
I am going to DBL again. Didn't say how high we were playing responsive doubles, but... [Through 7NT, but it doesn't matter, as double by partner without express agreement to the contrary just shows "convertible values." AKA, the "Casto Double." --Jeff]
MIKE
LHO, a passed hand has just bid game opposite a preempt. Some people would say that this creates a force for us, but not me. [Me, either. --Jeff] I've seen RHO's third seat preempts contain decent 12 counts before and I'm not so optimistic about my chances in 4 with partner's having already passed twice. So if I was sure that partner would pass another double, it would be more tempting, as I'm fairly confident of a plus score on defense. In the real world, double is going to cause us to declare a hopeless contract a little too often. True, this is a four loser hand, but that assumes we have a good fit somewhere (and play in it). If I double, there is no guarantee we are going to get to the correct strain - after all, partner is never going to bid 5C holding 4225 shape. [Unless you bid 4NT! --Jeff] With some reservations, I believe pass is the best call.
BINKLEY
Double. Takeout, penalty, whatever... I have extras. LHO can't have a trap opening hand looking to clobber me, so even if partner bids a shaky 4 things should go well for us. I really don't know how much penalty this is, and how much partner is expected to correct or use judgement. [It's just a stronger takeout double. Partner will bid 4 agressively, but be fairly conservative about bidding at the five-level. He'll pass with most balanced hands. --Jeff]
Also, some of the alternatives look horrid. Bidding 4NT "for the minors" is bad since with 3-3 he'll usually pick clubs, the cheaper suit. Bidding 4 is pure speculation (but would make a fun story if it worked so I mention it for humor value). Bidding 5 is the mostly likely spot if you have to place the contract with no further input, but has only one way to win (barring unusual action by the opponents).
BOBBY
4NT and 5 are much too speculative, so pass and double are the only options. I have some extras, so I double.
ANDY
4NT. Very likely to be trading +50 for -100, I know, but the chance of a game swing (or even double game swing) makes it worth the risk. If partner had moderate values and 4 or 5 decent spades he would already have bid, so it will almost never be right to play it in spades. This would be a lot riskier if LHO were not a passed hand. Here, he has a fit, not a rock, and might save partner the trouble of declaring a dicey 5m by competing to 5.
DANM
4NT. Hope it's for takeout Not really worth another double, as I have no reason to think that 4 should fail. In addition, I don't want to emphasize spades. I do, however, want to bid on, as we may be able to take a lot of tricks, and there may be a double game swing. 4NT may get me to the Moysian club game, but I'll just have to take my lumps. (That doesn't have to be so bad, anyway; maybe I can pitch a spade loser on dummy's second heart loser.)
JOANNA
Dbl.
KENT
Double again. This is flexible; partner doesn't have a penalty double available in my partnerships, and may well be willing to hit this. Wouldn't be at all suprised to catch him with 4333 in any order and about a six count to leave it in. I have a king more than I promised the first time and none of my 16 is in jacks. Partner with 3-3 will not pick the right minor over 4N.
CURT
Pass. Doubling has a payoff vector of -5/+2/+5. I rate this part of the equation as a slight gain for us. However, doubling will lead to a lot of wrong pulls (e.g. Axxx xx ? ?) and not many makes (most hands with 4-1 spades lead to us down).
PRABA
Dbl. They are not going to make this contract undoubled at my table! This is the most likely result. However, there is also a good chance that our side can make something, or have a cheap save (or even beat them doubled while we make nothing -- if partner is short in clubs). The points we would lose in letting them make doubled will be more than compensated by the gains.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
wasn't there. I had no opinion at the time, and I still have no idea what to do. I probably would have doubled.
VOTES

Dbl 9

Pass 3

4NT 2

CONSENSUS
Double again, the "normal" action.
WINNING ACTION
Save. A 4NT call will get us to 5 vs. xx J10x AJ10xx xxx. 4 is cold; 5 is only down one. Partner will, of course, pass a second double, so you have to bid to get to 5.
Barry disagrees with partner's pass of the second double and has some pretty solid support for the position, though no one felt it was clearcut to bid. Maybe it's closer than I thought. I based my "of course" on the fact that the double was passed at the other table and that I thought it was normal to do it if partner came out of the tank with a double. I was busily working out whether partner's very slow double would cause me to change my action due to unauthorized information (UI). I hadn't decided then, but it seems to me that this slow double does not demonstrably indicate anything about partner's hand. He could a bit light (thinking of passing) or he could be offshape (thinking of a bid) or he could be thinking of something I have no clue about. Let's see if the two most likely cases suggest the same action. If he's light, I think I want to bid, as we probably will then be saving. If he's off-shape, I want to bid something other than 5, as he might have shortness there. I'm not sure if I want to bid or pass, in general. All in all, the UI is not real helpful, so I think I can go with my normal action, which I still think is to pass with a 5332 hand with a fairly high defense to offense ratio.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I still have no idea. This one is too hard. Double is normal, but is likely to trap partner. Partners who bid 4 after a second double and go for their lives tend to get grumpy. No one has said they can't make 4, either. My partners tend to be agressive about responsive doubles in pressure situations; if partner had a balanced 10-count, I'd've expected him to double 4. That suggests that we don't have the normal values for a game, so it's probably not a disaster to pass unless they make and we have a good save. I don't think the odds are too good for that, so upon lots of reflection, I think passing is best, but it's a really close call.
none vul
xx Kxxx KJxx AQ10

RHO You LHO CHO

1 Pass 2NT Pass

3 Pass 3 Pass

3NT ?

2NT was natural and forcing, 12-15, did not deny a 4-card major. The rest of the bidding is natural.

BARRY
I am assuming that whoever posed this problem and could not put LHO and CHO in the right position also has given the auction wrong. What on Earth could I do here but pass? Surely some mistake?
[Whoops. I had LHO & CHO reversed originally. It was late at night when I was writing these. I was not claiming that two players had switched sides. --Jeff]
DAVIDC
Pass. Continuing my chicken-like tendencies with this set. This is the sort of hand that double could work but every once in a while they whip out the blue card (not the tournament director one). Let partner make a normal lead and see how it goes. And if you pass in tempo, you might not tell declarer how to play the hand.
DANHJ
Good problem. Pass - I think. Chicken, I admit. Since it seems that everything lies so poorly for them. (hopefully, partner's one card - if he has one - is in spades), maybe I should double. But I am expecting a red suit lead, probably, but not necessarily a heart, from partner and that looks okay. I don't want a club lead when I am expecting them to play clubs anyway. Declarer may have Jxx. Could they maybe come to 9 without touching clubs? Here's hoping the answer's no. I would however, be curious to know whether they were in an absolute, unequivocal game force. If there was any suggestion that 3 might be passable as, for example, if they played light opening bids, I think I might be swayed to pound it.
DAVIDM
I see that for this hand you decided to play with your LHO. [Somebody had to. RHO wasn't --Jeff] Is this a lead problem? Am I supposed to decide if I want to double? It looks like everytime I get put in with a club winner I am going to be endplayed. Is my double supposed to chase them back to 4? I am going to pass. I don't see beating 3NT more than 1 trick unless partner has the Q, and even if he does we might not beat it more than one.
MIKE
I don't really care for this problem, as it is reminscent of "the bell." It is much, much easier to find the double when posed in this format than it would be at the table. [Agreed. How else can I pose it, though? --Jeff] Having the bell rung for me, double seems like a good shot. I suspect a trap - someone doubled at the table and it didn't work, so maybe I'm a sucker. I can see double's working surprisingly poorly as it might get partner to lead a club instead of a diamond, dummy's tracking with Qx, J98xxx in the minors... oops!
[I strongly feel that a double here does not ask for a club lead. Dummy went out of his way to bid clubs; he's not going to do that with five losers in the suit. Doubles of 3NT after complicated auctions just mean "I think this is going down a few," not, "we can beat it if you lead the right thing," at least a fair bit of the time. In those cases, partner is not expecting you to lead the other side's source of tricks. --Jeff]
BINKLEY
Pass. I'm supposed to take action here? That sure is operating. Partner is marked with a Q or worse and some low spades, the opponents have a mild club fit they may misplay without help, and I don't relish defending 3NTXX.
BOBBY
This is a lead problem, right? Making any call other than double here is insane, and doubling pinpoints every high card in the deck for the opponents. Am I that sure they're going down? No. I pass and lead a small heart. [Good choice. If you are going to lead out of turn, it'd be foolish to double! --Jeff]
ANDY
Pass. Partner could still have Qxxx in a red suit, and declarer may have to play clubs himself anyway.
DANM
PASS! What, I'm supposed to double so we lead the suit that declarer needs to set up first? Partner is going to lead his favorite red suit (good) unless a spade is safe and forward-going. From here it looks like we should be trying to knock out dummy entries. Not to mention that they could be cold for ten tricks or so on any lead (although I remain hopeful so I wouldn't double even if weren't Lightner.
JOANNA
Pass.
KENT
Pass. It's not like I want a club lead so I'm endplayed at trick two. I don't expect them to make this--every honor I have looks correctly placed, but why tell them? [1,3,5,8? --Jeff] Smells like there's more here. What happened--partner hitched over 3 and it's an ethics problem? Yes, if he hits 3, I hit this and any higher contract at any form of scoring.
CURT
Pass (I got this ready on the previous round). I think the chances of down 2 aren't so great to begin with, doubling will probably reduce them. Also I want partner to make a normal attacking red suit lead. And if one of us has to play an honor to drive out the ace, it ought to be me.
PRABA
Pass. Is this a trick question? Declarer may wrap up ten tricks outside the club suit. [Maybe. I'd bet against it. --Jeff] Unless partner has the A or the A and the dummy has KJ, we may not beat the contract. Partner's having one of these specific aces is very very unlikely (they must be 11 opposite 12).
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Pass. I was certain that double was best, but we were up 38 to a weaker team, so I didn't want to take the risk that I'd chase them into 4x making. Of course, I'd double 4 if they ran there. The chances of that seem very low, but at the actual conditions, the risk/reward ratio seemed inadequate. I was certain that my counterpart would not think of a double here, so I took the push board.
VOTES
Pass: 12, Double: 2
CONSENSUS
Pass. Most seemed to think that a double demands a club lead. I don't agree with that; I have no idea if anyone would change their vote if the partnership "agreed" that this was a request for the leader's normal lead.
WINNING ACTION
Double. 3NTx is down 3. 4x is down 2.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
In the future, I'll be more worried about partner's expecting my doubles to be lead-directing towards a suit I can't possibly want led. But I'll also talk over with partners that if there is no chance that I could want the suit led that the double calls for, make your normal lead; I'm just trying for a penalty.
On this hand, I'm about 90% sure that they are going down in 3NT, possibly a lot. If it were the first board of a match, I'd double. I do not find the panel's arguments convincing at all. They are mostly, "what else would I do than pass?"
Why double? The opponents don't have substantial extra values or opener would not have bid 3NT and responder would have started with 1 instead of 2NT (he'll never untangle both suits and range if 2NT can have majors and extras). So they are in a normal-range game. Their main source of tricks (the 6-2 or 6-3 fit) is wedged; they are not expecting to lose three tricks in the suit. Spades are not breaking and are probably offside if any honors are missing. Declarer's only four-card suits are spades and maybe diamonds; diamonds aren't breaking, either. So they are only making tricks from high cards, not length. The high cards sit very poorly for them; entries to the dummy are going to be a problem. All in all, this hand is going to play very very badly, and I know it. Hands like this with only one seven-card or longer fit tend to go down a lot when the one fit is wedged badly. A 300 or 500 penalty can gain a reasonably large number of IMPs on a "nothing" board. Doubling now may make the opponents a little gun-shy in the future; the possibility of being doubled successfully in close games changes the IMP odds a lot.
Why not double? Partner may lead a club and I'll have to guess which red queen to play him for. They may run to 4 on a possible 4-3 fit. If they do, I'm doubling that, too, but I don't expect to beat it more than about two, in which case my upside might only be four IMPs. I don't really expect them to run, though. If they run to 4, I'm not upset. It's probably best for them, but who'd do it? I'm doubling because clubs are wedged, so you want to play there? It's possible that I might tell them how to play the hand. I don't really think so; I think their only source of tricks is clubs, and they'll know how to play that suit anyway. Most likely, there'll be nothing they can do about it. It's possible that they may just be rolling 3NT. The loss is probably only 4 IMPs; overtricks seem pretty unlikely, and a redouble seems nearly impossible.
Praba got me thinking when he said "they may make ten tricks outside of clubs." Four spades and two red aces is six. Dummy has to have a red ace; if he had AKx, he'd've raised spades. If he had AK tight, responder wouldn't've bothered with the suit most likely. The likely worst case is that they take three hearts via a finesse, four spades, and the diamond ace. The big disaster occurs when declarer has Jx(x). I think that's unlikely enough to bet against.
All in all, I think the double is extremely clear-cut, even upon reflection. I probably should have done it at the table despite the state of the match.
unfavorable
AJxxxxx — AJx Axx

You LHO CHO RHO

1 2 4* 5

6 6 Dbl Pass

pass 7 Dbl Pass

?

2 was Michaels.
4 was fitted, clubs and spades.
What's your plan? Do you agree with your bidding so far?

BARRY
Pass and lead a cashing ace. the auction seems fine -- how can I object to it? I lead A which will not be a ruff and discard and won't set up more than one discard (and frankly can't really do that either if partner has my definition of a fit jump, namely one where the sight of partner leading a top honor against any contract will not upset him).
DAVIDC
Pass. And I gobble on. (I am tempted to change my bid on hand 1 to 2NT just to be consistent.) Bidding is ok. You bid 6 to get partner's opinion. Partner had two chances to voice his opinion and said "whatever hand you hoped I don't have, well, that is what I hold." I would expect to be missing a black suit K.
These auctions always call for a trump lead. (I don't think my A is cashing, I don't think the A is going away, so I guess I start A. We aren't getting real rich, I don't imagine.)
DANHJ
I bid 7 regardless of partner's double, but I wish I could turn the diamond jack into a club.... I'd also like to know a bit more about our agreements on the 4 bid. Can it be a bad hand, i.e. suggesting a subsequent save? [No. That'd make life too hard on partner. --Jeff] At these colours I would think it might, [Red on White? --Jeff] which is worrisome. All the same, I think have a reasonably good expectation of the spade king, and the king, queen fifth of clubs opposite. Even at this vulnerability I can't see our getting rich against 7. Unlike on questions 2 and 3, I will not feel the need to apologise if I get this one wrong. And yes, I like my auction so far. [Odd. You asked partner's opinion, then overruled it, and on this hand you don't feel the need to apologize if you went wrong, whereas on hands that are simply close judgment calls you would? --Jeff]
DAVIDM
If partners dbl of 6 is confirming the K [It's not. It's showing a preference for defense. --Jeff] then he could hardly have less than Kxxx ? ? KQxxx; however, I don't expect clubs to break; however, he might have the J or a 6th club, or a stiff diamond. [I guess that means he's bidding 7. --Jeff]
I would probably have bid it the same.
MIKE
Yes, I agree with my previous auction.
What does partner's auction mean? The opponents have given him this wonderful opportunity to double 6 en route to 7 which, should deny a first round heart control. Therefore, he could have passed 7 to me. Surely double then double shows a strong opinion in favor of defending. This said, let's construct some hands for partner consistent with the auction. Qxx KJx x KQxxxx. Kxxx KJx x Kxxxx. Kxxx QJx Q KQxxx. [I agree more or less, but I'd flip the two. I think the double of 6 just says, "I prefer to defend than to bid on" and the double of 7 shows no heart control. I can understand how it might be superior to play them the other way around, but general principles can't be changed on the fly without a good chance of error. --Jeff]
It is quite possible to be off either a spade or a club trick (partner will have a stiff diamond most of the time given the double portraying heart length and the fit-jump). Partner has really gotten in the way to express a strong opinion. If he has the key K and KQ he might well have backed down.
Some will think that since we are holding all the first round controls partner could never invite 7 himself, but this is flawed reasoning. Think back to the auction - 6 is the highest available cuebid. If we only had 2 first round controls, we could have cuebid cheaper (although it is unclear that 6 would have been a cuebid). [It would not be, of course. We might have a 5-5 club fit. --Jeff] IMO 6 strongly suggests (shows) first round control in all the side suits.
How will we do on defense? Not so badly. A, ruff, A, ruff +800: more than the value of our game. If partner has the A (likely) then we get 1100.
It is very tempting to overrule partner with 2 extra trumps and so many controls, but I am going to go with a more disciplined pass, as if partner had taken either X/P or P/X (I'm not sure the difference) instead of X/X I would bid 7 with all due haste.
Overall a tough set of hands.
BINKLEY
Your bidding is nice. I'm not sure the clever 6 bid would have occurred to me, but I'd like it to in the future. Because of that call, I feel good passing 7X. Partner knows you don't have hearts and is sure you are looking for the grand, but decided to X instead of bidding 7 so I'll trust him. No point in cancelling your message of "you decide, partner". If you want to bid 7 now, you should have done that before instead of 6.
What is your plan? I'll take that as a defensive lead question. The goal is to get as close to 2210 as possible (hedging against 7's making). Partner has some hearts, and lots of black cards, so he may have a stiff diamond. I start A and see what turns up in dummy.
BOBBY
My bidding so far seems fine. I'm not sure what 5NT would have meant in this auction. If I had a solid agreement that it was GSF, for example, then I might have been tempted to bid that. 4 sets up a force, so partner's doubles are telling me not to bid further. But how could he be telling me anything else but that, since he has an aceless hand? Should I read anything into LHO's bid of 6? It's clear he was intending to go to 7 after my bid of 6, so was he just being a nuisance or is there some meaning to that bid? He's probably just being a nuisance, although it did allow us to exchange some additional information that we probably weren't able to take advantage of. For example, what would double of 6 and then a pass of 7 mean, etc.?
Obviously, a grand could be lay-down here, but the question is, are the chances good enough to warrant the bid.... I prefer to be relatively conservative bidding grands, so I think the right answer is to pass and lead a minor suit ace. Clubs has a chance of getting ruffed, diamonds has a chance of giving up a trick. On balance, it seems like the best chance of setting this the maximum amount is diamond ace, diamond ruff, club, diamond ruff, ... So I lead the A and see what happens.
ANDY
Bidding so far seems fine. When your second bid comes at the 6 level, there is only so much you can do. 6 doesn't even begin to describe just how good your hand is, but at least it's unambiguously a grand slam try.
As for the subsequent action, it's hard to know what's going on. Why would LHO screw around with 6 instead of just bidding 7 directly (he is going to be on lead, and an alternate strain seems unlikely when his partner has jumped to the five level in hearts), and why would RHO pass instead of bidding 7? The only purpose seems to be to give our side more bidding room. Of course, we don't really know what to do with that bidding room, so I guess it's not a big deal. Anyway, I think partner's actions (double and double again) show the worst hand possible for the 7 level; unfortunately this doesn't tell us anything we didn't know from looking at our own hand.
I'll bid 7 (here at my computer terminal, a safe distance from any actual cards), since even Kxxx xx xx KQxxx is enough. If partner is missing one of those black honors then it's likely on a finesse, which is anti-percentage, but hardly the end of the world.
DANM
a) Pass. When partner doubled 6 she said, "Please, PLEASE don't bid more, let me double 7." Presumably this is precisely why I bid 6. I said that I would trust partner's decision here, so it would be wildly inconsistent to do anything but pass.
b) Not really. I guess the way things turned out it was probably right, but I confess I would have bid 7 earlier. If partner doesn't have at least KQ and KQxxx then I don't wanna play fit jumps any more.
I always lead trumps against grands. What's that you say? Oh... OK, then, low club (if we lead 3rd/low, otherwise A). Let partner lead the trump.
JOANNA
Pass. Even if partner has KQxx xx xxx KQxxx I still need 3-2 clubs to make 7.
I don't like 6, because it implies that I don't have first round diamond control. Perhaps I should have passed 5, and when partner doubles I cuebid 6 (if partnership is on firm agreement that spades are always trump). This would imply first round control of both red suits. [Not me. I play that 6 is an offer to play there. I open 1 with 5-5 in the blacks, so I might well want to play the 5-5 fit instead of the 5-4. --Jeff]
I'll lead the A.
KENT
7. I like the auction. Assuming partner's double of 6 was a cue attempt, [It isn't, but he didn't say, "otherwise...", so he's a 7 bidder. --Jeff] I'll bid the grand. All you need is serious clubs and king fourth of spades. Partner had lots of raises available and went out of his way to bid this one. (Interesting bid of 6 by the opponents--hmm.)
CURT
So far very nice. Now pass. I already promosed heart control, so the 2 doubles shows strong desire to defend. I will respect partner.
PRABA
No, I do not agree with the bidding so far. It is obvious after the 5 bid that buying the hand is more important (because they will have an excellent save) than looking for the unlikely grand, opposite minimum values and possible bad breaks (partner needs to have Kxxx and KQJxx). So the bidding target should have been to get to 6 and hope that you have a club/spade loser. Now, if the opponents can be convinced that you also have a heart loser, may be they will choose to defend. So, my choice over 5 will be to bid 6, as if I want to hear 6 from partner. The alternate strategy of bidding 5 and then hoping to get 'pushed' to 6 may also work against some opponents.
[This is a VERY good point. No, we didn't expect them to be saving, but we do have the sort of hand that should worry about it; lots of extra trumps, none of their suit, and aces with no lower honors. On the other hand, Kxxx + KQJxx is exactly what we expect partner to have for his 4 bid. --Jeff]
On the auction given, I pass. Partner has heard my 6 and yet has doubled 6 and 7 showing absolutely no interest in bidding on. I have no reason to overrule his decision.
Lead the A. I have to try and get the maximum penalty. I cannot burn my entry on the opening lead. Well, if declarer ruffs this, they may make this silly contract. But that will mean that partner is 4-0-4-5. Rather unusual to double 6 and 7. Also RHO perhaps has 7 or 8 hearts -- most unlikely. ["Unusual" is too kind. "Dumb?" --Jeff]
JEFF AT THE TABLE
wasn't there. I would have bid 5NT (GSF) earlier, not 6. I don't see how partner is going to be willing to suggest a grand with no aces, so I would not ask him to make a decision he can't possibly know enough to get right. I would think that 7 was making, with seven spades, five clubs, and the ace of diamonds, so I'd've just bid it, after making sure partner has the K. I know this might not work out, but I think the grand is almost always going to have play and will often be cold. I don't know how to determine that, so I'd take the plunge.
Once I made a possibly better bid than I would have at the table, I'd judge to pass. Partner thinks that we should defend, and trumps are zip-splitting. That might cause some handling problems. On the other hand, clubs rate to break, reducing the handling problems somewhat. Still, I think I'd pass. It's really close.
I'd lead the A, then my low one, and get two ruffs. Partner has made an effort to show me a diamond stiff, so I shall get the maximum.
VOTES

What to bid now:

Pass 10

7 4

What to lead:

A 3

A 5

x 1

What would you have bid last time?

6 10

Pass 1

5NT 1

6 1

7 1

CONSENSUS
6 was OK, pass now, and lead an ace.
WINNING ACTION
7. Partner has Kxx Kxxx x KQxxx. Spades are 3-0, as expected, but the hook is on. Clubs break, so we have 13 tops.
JEFF THE NEXT DAY
After quite a bit of thought, I think that the reason partner is showing a taste for defense is that he has only three spades. This is somewhat more likely due to my having a couple extra. He knows that trumps are breaking very badly, so he doesn't want to encourage me to bid on because a 5-0 or 4-0 trump break might cause handling problems. I know, however, that it's not a problem; a 3-0 trump split is no problem; partner can't have less than Q98 and I expect him to have better than that. So, upon reflection, I think I can see what partner's problem is, and I happen to know enough to be able to bid on. I'm not sure; I'm just guessing, but it seems like a reasonable guess. Even if the grand isn't cold, I get good odds on bidding it once they have saved.
I also, later, thought that maybe a low club is the better lead. I don't know what partner's trumps are like; it might turn out that the tap is a better defense. Once we see the dummy, partner will be in a very good position to judge whether to go for ruffs, lead trumps, or go for diamond ruffs. I need to lead low so as to avoid losing my second entry. There's a small possibility that one of the opponents have a singleton club, so this lead is not without risk, but I think the chance to gain is worth it. I'd call it a toss-up between the A and a low club. Upon reflection, Dan's point that this can get partner in to lead a trump swings the balance for me; I didn't think of that until his note. That's three ways it can win.
Some wondered why LHO bid 6 and whether he can be trusted to have the spade void he suggests. In theory, of course not; why would he tell us this? In practice, however, no one would bid 6 for any reason, and I wasn't playing against Zia. I think I'd take the bid at face value, expecting LHO to be 0553, 0652, or 0562. This time.
In reality, I was the 4 bidder. Some would not choose 4 on those cards, but I like the action a lot. We'd've had no chance to reach 7 without it; after 3-5, partner could not possibly imagine 13 tricks and would simply be guessing. As our auction went, we could have reached 7. On the other hand, it also told the opponents that we had a source of tricks for 6, which may have encouraged them to sacrifice. It's hard to say; after all, the Michaels bidder did break discipline.
In fact, the reason I kept doubling rather than passing to encourage partner to bid was that I had only three trumps and partner expected four. With the expected bad break in the suit, 7 may have handling problems. If spades are 5-0, the problems may be unsolvable on a heart lead. As I mentioned above, I think partner could have guessed that, but it's pretty tough.
Some think that the opponent's 5 call set up a force for us. I don't agree with that. RHO knows that if he bids 4, he's going to hear 4 pretty much no matter what, so bidding 5 should not deny a good hand; it should just be putting the wood to us. In general, I don't believe that auctions should be judged forcing or not based on the opponents' bidding tactics. I've played with and against far too many creative bidders to be willing to do that.

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@gg.caltech.edu, May 10th, 2001

What to bid now:
Pass	10
7	4
What to lead:
A	3
A	5
x	1
What would you have bid last time?
6	10
Pass	1
5NT	1
6	1
7	1

Partner	You
1	1
2	?

LHO	CHO	RHO	You
Pass	Pass	2	Dbl
4	Pass	Pass	?

Dbl	9
Pass	3
4NT	2

RHO	You	LHO	CHO
1	Pass	2NT	Pass
3	Pass	3	Pass
3NT	?