Problems from Monterey: Answeres

Problems from the Monterey Sectional '95: Answers

Panellists today: Alan LeBendig, Lynn Johannsen, Mike Shuster, Rolf Kühn

Matchpoints, you hold
AK74 65 K7 Q10754
Partner opens 1NT (12-14).
What's your plan?

Rolf
Stayman and bid 3NT unless he shows a 4-card spade suit.
Mike
Stayman. Then 3NT or 4.
Lynn
Is this a trick question?
Jeff at the table
2, followed by 3NT
Winning Action
invite game. Partner held Q2 A72 Q64 KJ962.

OK, this one was obvious, I guess.
Matchpoints, you hold
96 K9652 K A10832
1-1NT; 2-?
2 would be natural and nonforcing.

Rolf
Sigh - 2/1 again:) Well 3 - looks like the normal bid at MP.
Mike
Perfect hand for the 2 tool. Since I can't make a good raise to 3 or a strong preference, I guess I'll bid 2NT.
Lynn
bid 3 showing at least five hearts and at least four clubs and game invitational values.
Alan
2
Jeff at the table
3NT(!)
Winning action
3NT. Partner held AJ732 8 AQ10 Q654.

This is an advertisement for artificial 2 here. It'd work great in a funny sort of way. 2 normally shows 5 hearts and usually 2 spades (some don't worry about the spades) but could be alternatively other decent hands. Partner will bid 2 and now, knowing that hearts are not a good fit, we can bid 3, showing a good club raise, 10-11 or so. Some play that 2NT vs. 3 distinguishes the hand in different ways, too. This is an easy way to get to 3, which is not the best contract. 3NT rolls.
Matchpoints, you hold
Q10 Q10 10864 AQ842
Partner opens 1, playing K/S.
Perfect hand for odd-even signals.

Rolf
1NT - the best bad bid.
Mike
2, LR+. Bare minimum, but opposite a KS opener, we are going to game unless he bids 3 right now.
Lynn
I think this is [barely] a limit raise, so I bid 2, planning to rebid 3 over 2M and 3NT over 2NT. This isn't great, but I find 1NT unpalatable.
Alan
1NT and pray [This seems to be an ecclesiastic set of problems. --J]
Jeff at the table
1NT(!)
Winning action
1NT. Partner held AK62 J8 KQ73 K107.

This is a total nightmare to me. K&R calls it a 9.30-count, and I think they are a trifle optimistic. The suit is good, but it's missing spots. Entries are going to be a problem to take finesses if those are needed. If partner opened a strong notrump, most, however, would find it obvious to bid game. I'm not so convinced; this hand is not as good as its point count. Today, moreover, we are playing matchpoints. That ought to have some effect on the choice; to bid notrump now is to go antifield positionally. Is that good? I think so; Q10 is a great holding for declarer. If I were to bid NT, 2NT seems like an overbid and 1NT (5-8- in KS) is an underbid. Normally, I'd bid 1 on three, but not with a doubleton. The limit raise is an option, but 10xxx just doesn't strike me as the right sort of support to make my first priority. At least it is ok on values. I cannot believe that anyone else even considered 1NT.
Matchpoints, none, you hold
J7 1053 A87 109842

RHO YOU LHO CHO
1 Pass Pass Dbl

Pass 1? Pass 2

Pass ?

(Do you bid 1?)

Rolf
2NT and I hate my hand.
Mike
I think I might have bid 1NT or 1 at my last opportunity. 1 isn't bad though. Partner had a good hand and bidding 2 now would distort my shape. Now I'll bid 2NT and be happy I didn't bid 1NT last time.
Lynn
I think 2 is the least of evils
Alan
2
Jeff at the table
2
Winning action
2NT. Partner held Q82 AKQ8 K65 AK3.

This is a methods problem. I like to play that 2 here shows a yarborough and doesn't say much about shape. If so, anything else is forcing, pretty much to game. 2NT is reasonable then on values.
Does it matter that you are playing Overcall Structure?
Heck, yes. If I'm known not to have a yarborough by my failure to rebid 2, then a 2 bid at this point is just a preference between the majors, not a 4-card suit, because I'd've bid my Jxxx with a reasonable hand earlier. And if I have four hearts, I have five diamonds, so I must really have crap not to bid at the one-level white, and since I didn't bid 2, that means that 2 is no longer a distortion. Strange reasoning, but it seems right to me.
Anyone to pass 1x? Now that's a plus score.
Matchpoints, both, you hold
K108762 K4 AK9 A8
1-1NT; ?

Rolf
3 -- where is my problem?
Mike
If I have methods over 2NT, I'll try that. Otherwise 3 hoping for partner to have at least two of them.
Lynn
I almost always avoid doing this, but I can't see anything better than 2 here.
Alan
I like 2 here as possibly doubleton and nearly forcing.
Jeff at the table
wasn't faced with problem
Jeff's real opinion
2NT, though 2 is reasonable, but an underbid.
Winning action
2. Partner held J9 AJ853 J32 J105.

This is an old chestnut. I think the spades are too weak for 3; if partner passes, I'm going down, which means that it's not a good bid in my opinion. I might even get doubled. (Happened in the SD regional; we got them four on a hand like this. Red.) 2 (or 2 if it's semi-artificial as Alan plays) followed by a 2NT rebid (16-17-) is systemically a little weaker than a direct 2NT rebid (17+-19-) in my version of 2/1; most play some similar set of ranges, so 2 intending to rebid 2NT seems wrong. Intending to rebid 3 is also a bit off; you've just shown 6-4 with extras, which is close, but is less close than a direct 3 bid. On values, a 2NT rebid seems about right, but this is a suit-oriented hand. The bottom line is that there is no good answer.
IMPs, none, you hold
Kxx K10 KQ10x AQ98
Partner opens 1, playing 2/1. What's your plan?

Rolf
2 - let's bid it naturally. It's not even sure that this hand belongs into spades.
Mike
Playing SJS or Majors3, there is no problem. Playing 2/1, bid 2 then spades minimally. Then cuebid clubs. That oughta work. [I don't see how Soloway Jump Shifts would help, but Majors3 (or Bergen raises, same in this case) has a 4 bid to show 16-18 HCP, 3 and a balanced hand. I'm not sure it'd help all that much, but at least we can describe the hand cleanly. --Jeff]
Lynn
Respond 2, then try to show extra values and spades in a NT-oriented hand. Over a 2 rebid, I'd jump to 3NT, ignoring the spade fit. Over anything else, I'll take a spade preference and torture partner a little.
Alan
My plan is to see what partner responds to 2.
Jeff at the table
wasn't faced with the problem
Jeff's real opinion
play Bergen raises Winning action: strong slam invite or blast 6NT as did opponent. Partner held AQJ10x xx Axx Kxx.

At the other table, they found 6NT from the right side via 1-4NT; 5-6NT. Sometimes bridge is an easy game.
IMPs, unfav, you hold
J9xx xx 108xx xxx

RHO YOU LHO CHO
3 Pass Pass Dbl

Pass ?

Rolf
Gulp X is optional? I think I pass. Everything else is probably more expensive. Over XX I bid 3. I lead ...
Mike
I'll bid 3 to keep it low.
Lynn
I'd bid 3 and pray. I see an argument for bidding 3 instead (partner will be less anxious to raise, and he might bid 3, which you can pass). The problem is that if partner bids 3 I think you have to pass also, and that could be a worse contract than 3. [More religion. --Jeff]
Alan
3
Jeff at the table
3
Winning action
3. Partner held KQ10x AQ AQxxx xx.

I think 3 is right. The idea is to get the smallest minus score, and 3 is less likely to evince a raise than is 3. And you get to play 3 if partner has hearts. Good! In practice, 3 gets raised, doubled, and mauled on the 5-0 break. 3 went down a peaceful 100. That doesn't mean much, but the idea seems valid.
IMPs, none, you hold
Axx xxx K9xxxx x
Pard You
1 2
2NT ?

2 was a 3-card raise. 2NT asks in which suit you would accept a help suit game try.

Rolf
Hmm - lost in system space. As I have only 3 trumps and we are in white I'm going to bid 3.
Mike
Bid 3. Over 3, sign off. Over 3 bid game. I guess this is equivalent to bidding 3, but the point is to avoid game if partner needs heart help.
Lynn
3--but I am bidding again over 3
Alan
3
Jeff at the table
3, then pass 3
Winning action
3 or 3 then 4. Partner held KQJ10x x Qx KQ109x.

If one is going to accept clubs, I think it ought to be done via 3...4. That suggests slam interest if partner fits diamonds and nothing more than game if he needs club help. 4 is pretty awful, but rolled when spades were 3-2 (tap won't work), diamonds were 3-2 (no ruff) and the J was onside tripleton (no pair of losers there). I guess accepting in clubs is right, but if partner doesn't want a diamond card, maybe we ought to think of not going to game?
IMPs, both, you hold
xxxxx Q9 K109 98x

RHO YOU LHO CHO
1 Pass 1NT Dbl

2 Pass Pass 3

Pass ?

Rolf
4. Partner has about 15, 6+ and -void. All my points are working and it's Imps. 2NT would be good-bad, wouldn't it?
Mike
Partner gets tapped right away, but with 2 covers I can't justify not bidding game.
Lynn
4 seems fairly clear.
Jeff at the table
Pass
Winning action
4. Partner held --- AJ6432 AQx AJ7x.

4 is pretty clear, I guess. It has no play, but red games at IMPs ought just be bid and let partner work out how to make it. In practice, most things were right and misdefense allowed a make at both tables. If a small club were a heart, it'd be clear to bid in my mind, but this is much more borderline than the panel thinks, I think.
IMPS, none, you hold
xxx AKJ109 J10x Q2

RHO YOU LHO CHO

1 Pass 2 Pass

2 Pass 3 Pass

3 Pass 3NT Pass

Pass ?

2 was game forcing.

Rolf
Pass. I don't think we will beat it even with a -lead if opps know what they are doing. Even worse: I might run into XX -- and then?
Mike
Since it's imps, double seems like the percentage action.
Lynn
Presumably you want me to X, but I don't. [I don't want anything, but yes the decision is whether or not to double. --J]
Jeff at the table
double
Winning action
pass

Rolf's point about the redouble seems good; if they send it back, we are in trouble, but who is going to be able to do that? For all they know, I could have only four hearts; partner's entry will be enough to beat it.
I think the IMP odds favor doubling if it is at all close. If we beat it, we win 10 by doubling. If they make an overtrick, we lose 6.
In practice, doubling left declarer with a KJ guess at trick two to make the contract. Passing concedes -430. I don't know what's right seeing all four hands. Come to think of it, it's an interesting play problem: As declarer with nine tricks in the pointed suits and KJ of clubs, what do you do when RHO doubles, wins the 9 (is that best? Ought I conceal a spot?) and shifts to the 2?

The remainder are Overcall Structure problems.
Matchpoints, both, you hold
Q1093 943 A7 J632
(1)-3*-(pass)-?
3 (overcall structure) = 6 good or any 7 hearts, 11-17 HCP, 4.5-6 losers, one suited hand.

Rolf
4 - this is a guess. 3NT or pass might be the winning bids.
Mike
Not worth a slam try. Can't really envision this hand as more than 2.5 covers, so 4 is an overbid. 4.
Lynn
Pass. Surely we are a favorite to have too many losers, and this isn't a vul game at IMPs.
Jeff at the table
4
Winning action
3NT. Partner held 4 AKQ752 J94 A109.

No conclusion from the panel. One thought to pass, one to bid game and one to make a slam try (almost, then rejected it). I think it's close; the J would be a big improvement to the hand. 3NT never crossed my mind, but it's probably making on a normal lead.
Matchpoints, favorable, you hold
A82 KQJ107 AJ95 J
(pass)-pass-(1)-?
Methods are overcall structure.

Rolf
Pass or do hands like this one nowadays have any future?
Mike
matchpoints it may pay to pass here. Imps I'd be tempted to P.D.
Lynn
Playing any methods, it seems clear to pass and hope to X a heart or NT contract.
Jeff at the table
power double
Winning action
power double, in a sense. Partner held K109 xxx xx Q109xx.

Pass is the right thing, I'm convinced. If I were playing normal methods, I'd probably overcall 1NT. A power double just nails you if partner bids 2. On the other hand, I got myself into a no-play 3NT that made, so maybe double isn't so bad.
Matchpoints, both, you hold
--- 1098732 8 AK9862
(1)-Dbl*-(1)-?
Dbl = 15+ HCP, tends to be balanced, usually a 1NT overcall. Dbl now would be takeout, 2 natural, 2 game forcing.

Rolf
2
Lynn
I think the best plan is to bid 4, then bid 5, then respect partner's decision if the opponents bid on at the five level.
Jeff at the table
too ashamed to admit it
Winning action
let partner double 4. Partner held KQJ9 KQJ5 52 QJ4.

Yes, partner's power double is pretty ugly. This is only about a 13-count. I have no idea how to find the right contract. Lynn's approach seems reasonable, although we could hit a stiff heart in partner's hand. We also know that they'll be bidding more spades, so bidding slowly ought to work. It turns out that nothing matters early; we just get the decision whether or not to defend 4x. I chose "no" and stick to it, but 5 happens to go down on a club ruff. Oh, well.
IMPs, unfav, you hold
K8xx Ax xx KJxxx

RHO YOU LHO CHO
Pass Pass? 1 1NT*

Pass ?

1NT is OS: light 3-suited takeout

Rolf
3 -- we have arrived although I don't know how strong "light" might be.
Mike
I'd open 1NT at any other vulnerability. Pass is clearly right. Now I'll bid 3. jump over the pass at unfavorable shows a decent hand .
Lynn
I would bid 3, whether or not I was a passed hand.
Jeff at the table
2
Winning action
figure out how to get to 5 from this side. Partner held Ax Jxx KQx Q10xxx.

I didn't know that 3 was constructive at unfavorable; it's defined as "blocking." As a passed hand, I wondered if anyone would take the normal steps to show an invitational hand: cue and bid 3. No one did. Even that won't likely be enough to get us to 5, though, since partner remembers that we are a passed hand.
What if you were not a passed hand?
Then it'd be tougher still.
(Playing 12-14 NT, would you pass originally?)
Yes. Unfavorable in 2nd is not the time to open an offshape light weak notrump. Even if that were a choice, I'd not open 1NT; I think 4+5 ought to open 1 and show itself as unbalanced. 5422 is a suit distribution.

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@tintin.jpl.nasa.gov, Feb. 6, 1996

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

Pard	You
1	2
2NT	?

Problems from the Monterey Sectional '95: Answers

The remainder are Overcall Structure problems.