J963 
63 
KJ5 
Q1043
| CHO | RHO | You | LHO |
|
| | ? | |
- CHRIS
- Double. A great BAM problem. In the other room, it
rates to start
1 -(2 )-DBL, and we'll often get to play2 . So, sometimes -670 won't be any worse than -110. [He's right about that. In fact, at both tables, he's right about it! --Jeff] I hope partner has strong hearts. [Or a strong heart if they score an overberry! --Jeff] - LEN
- Do I know what my counterpart plays? If he plays Flannery, and
I know I am a better (or worse, or equal) defender, that might
affect my decision. [Probably they are not playing Flannery. --Jeff]
In a vacuum, X looks right.
- MARSHALL
- Dbl. Very close but I think we are more likely than not to set them. Obviously not at IMPs. [Or even matchpoints...this is a BAM problem only, I think. --Jeff]
- BOBBY
- I have good diamonds, and it doesn't look like we're going anywhere. Pass.
- ED
- I have a little under two tricks expected in diamonds, about one-third of a trick expected in clubs and we have an eight-card and a seven-card fit. If I had to bet, I'd say the opponents will not make but it is close. Too close to double and possibly negate a winning result at the other table. If I pass, LHO may take a shot at 3NT... which I will not pass.
- ROBB
- Pass. I have some pesky cards for defense that will not
pull their weight on offense. LHO may even bid! I don't
expect to make
3 and I don't expect to play it undoubled. - DAVIDC
- This one is tough. The allure of +200 is tempting. Plus 140
would be good but the possibility of -200 is threatening. -110 and
+100 is for wimps. Put me in the high testosterone BAM law abiders
(no more than 17 and hoping we have half the deck); the
- BARRY
- Pass smoothly and hope partner can reopen—not impossible if I bid in tempo. [Nearly impossible. Partner almost never reopens after Flannery because you don't play negative doubles after it. --Jeff] Then I'll have to decide what to do of course!
- JJ
- Double—Lead a heart
Yes my double is aggressive (I was at the actual tournament and believe the double is wrong on the actual hand, but so what!) but BAM calls for aggressive doubles when the opps are vul and we rate to make a part score. (
2 looks like a favorite.) - MIKE
- Pass. No reason this shouldn't be a nine-card fit and it
is easy to see how my slow club winners could be either finessed
or ruffed away. The offensive potential is non-existant and
I don't think we are making
2 (and if so, they are probably -2), so a plus score should be good enough to win the board and -110 is probably normal when they are making. - DAVIDW
-
3 . Despite my dearth of high cards, I want to boost them once more. I will pound4 , albeit with some trepidation—if the diamond queen is on my left, my hand might collapse. - JEFF AT THE TABLE
- Double.
- WINNING ACTION
- none, but doubling is -670 and
passing is better than that.
3 is -200. LHO has an easy double. Nothing works because teammates were also -670 in2 x. - CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Dbl 6 Pass 5 3 1 - JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- Chris' point that much
of the time, our cards will get to play
2 at the other table is important—if3 makes and they get to play2 , we have lost the board no matter what. On the other hand, if partner has a stiff diamond, won't the auction go1 -(2 )-Dbl-(3 );3 -(pass)-pass-(Dbl)? That rates to go for 200, which means that doubling could blow our teammates' already won board. On the other hand, if partner has two or more diamonds, we rate to get to play2 , so doubling is necessary. Which is more likely? I don't know. It's a very close call. At matchpoints, doubling is less necessary because some of the field is getting to3 x or3 or other odd spots, so -110 isn't a zero, though it rates to be a poor score. At BAM, however, there's only the one pair to compare against, making double a real candidate.
76 J762 A95 A1053
| CHO | RHO | You | LHO |
| | | |
| | ? | |
- CHRIS
- Pass. Nonforcing auction, no trump tricks, I consider doubling in front of partner to be horrible.
- LEN
- X. In a nonforcing pass situation, X shows extra values.
Of course, I have a min, but the A's are good. Pard might
have something like
- MARSHALL
- Dbl. I think I had a minimum offensively for
my
3 bid but, of course, very good defense. My3 bid showed a limit raise or better, Pass should show better (or at least a max or my bid based mostly on distribution. [Marshall obviously thinks pass is forcing. He is in a minority of one. I for one disagree vehemently. But I'm used to that. --Jeff] - BOBBY
- I double. I don't think they're making.
5 doesn't look good. - ED
- Dbl. Of course they could make... the Angels could also win the World Series. But neither is likely (unless the Angels trade for Randy Johnson). I have good defense and not exceptional offense for my bidding and I must express my opinion to my partner. [It wasn't likely the Angels would win the Series two years ago, either, but it happened! --Jeff]
- ROBB
- Double. Second choice is pass, not forcing.
- DAVIDC
- Pass. American Airlines are nice but I have the minimum limit raise I promised. My pass is not forcing at anybody's vulnerability.
- BARRY
- Pass; not a forcing auction in my book. My limit raises do not set up
forcing passes at the four-level. Partner's
4 call instead of4 or4 does not announce ownership or invite me to bid so my only choice is double and two small trumps does not cut it for me! [You can still act. After all,3 is not limited. Surely you'd do something with another ace. --Jeff] - JJ
- Pass (not forcing). Pard has a better shot of getting this right than I do.
- MIKE
- Pass. The
4 bid in a live auction might show extras, but it also might just show long hearts. If partner was bidding to make, presumably he will double. Otherwise, at this paint any other action is hazardous. - DAVIDW
- Double. Nothing certain, but two aces in their suits
ought to provide sufficient defense. I hope CHO is not the
secretive sort who would conceal a club suit when bidding
4 . - JEFF AT THE TABLE
- Double.
- WINNING ACTION
- none. Passing leads to -450. Bidding
5 leads to -500 or -800. Or -450 if they take the push. Teammates, not surprisingly, didn't find this game.3 was a bit of a push, but2 was also unduplicated having been bid on a 5332 11-count. In fact, our teammates were never in the auction. - CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Dbl 7 Pass 5 - JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- I think it's very likely that
teammates will not find
4 .3 looks like a strange bid (it was) and sound teammates might well not find it. If so, playing4 undoubled can't be right. If it's going down, we need to double in order to try to cover teammates' small minus. If it's making, we need to "save," hoping either to push them to5 or make or they forget to double and only get us one. But we don't have to decide. Partner is still there and can also tell that playing4 undoubled is probably wrong. This time he has nowhere to go. Neither do you in a sense, but you don't get to find that out until later. Is your very high defense to offense ratio sufficient to double in front of partner? The panel thinks it's close. I agree.Only Marshall thinks pass is forcing. I think he's simply mistaken. This auction is covered by two of my forcing pass rules: (1) limit raises do not create forces, and (2) if one side bids
4 and the other bids4 , normally passes are not forcing.
AK7 J4 A94 J8754
| CHO | RHO | You | LHO |
| Pass | | Pass | |
| Dbl | Rdbl! | | |
| Pass | Pass | ? | |
Redouble was a 3-card spade raise.
- CHRIS
-
2 ??? Hope partner doesn't have - LEN
- Give pard
3 earlier, at least. Since I didn't, I want to bid5 or more, but it's certainly not safe. I guess double is my best call. - MARSHALL
- DBl. This seems clear-cut, but I would have
bid
3 the previous round. WKhy hide my offensive values? I didn't know the opponents were going to bid4 . - BOBBY
- Double. Seems obvious.
- ED
- Pass. Tough call. It would be nice to punish LHO for such
impudent bidding when we hold more than half the deck. However,
LHO is bidding to make and I have no surprises for him. He is
certainly distributional and we may not beat this if LHO is
void in clubs.
- ROBB
- Very close. If they are just too high, shouldn't matter.
But if they are in a "normal" contract, advantage to double
is to warn partner off disasterous club lead from Kxxx.
Disadvantage is that they may be cold and I chucked half a
board.
I would double and prepare to apologize.
- DAVIDC
- This problem wouldn't be here unless they made it,
[Hah! A triple-cross! --Jeff] but I want to discourage
partner from psyching passed hand take-out doubles in the
future. Let me guess that partner is
3 in response to the takeout double? - BARRY
- Double. I can't sell out now—can I? Well even if I can, I won't!
- MIKE
- Double. This time I got 'em.
- DAVIDW
- Pass. A vulnerable opponent who bids like this expects to make it, so I am cautious. My hand is way too promising defensively to save; in fact the double looks so obvious that it feels like a trap for the panel. I lead the jack of hearts and hope CHO can take a trick.
- JEFF AT THE TABLE
- Double. Finally I doubled something we could beat.
- WINNING ACTION
- none. +100 was the best we could do, but was a loss anyway.
- CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Double 9 Pass 2 This time the panel was mostly of one mind. It'll be the only time in this set.
- JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- I think
2 is plenty, despite others' claims that they would have bid more. For what it's worth,3 should be preemptive with2 being a strong raise somewhere. Better still is that2 is a good hand with clubs and3 is a good hand with hearts. But partner is a passed hand and he didn't bid 2NT this time, so hoping for a reasonable 5-5 from partner is too much. The perfect 5-4 is possible. And vs. that, game is still not cold. Add another jack to that hand and partner would open it. Giving up on game seems right to me.Doubling seems obvious. Finally I doubled something and beat it. Not that it helped to win the board. Despite it's obviousness, is it really right? If
4 is a normal spot for them, will it be doubled at the other table? Seems pretty likely. It also seems likely that they are going down. So we probably should double. If4 is not a normal place for them, should we double? If they are making, our teammates are not going to be able to halve the board, so the double won't cost. If they are going down, we might as well double. Moreover, we may have a partscore to protect and we may well get them two. So, yes, even at BAM, we should double. I think this is the sort of reasoning one needs to use for all close BAM doubles.Sometimes these decisions are just best solved using one's personality. Let's see if there is a pattern:
Panelist 1 2 3 Chris Dbl Pass Dbl Len Dbl Dbl Dbl Marshall Dbl Dbl Dbl Bobby Pass Dbl Dbl Ed Pass Dbl Pass Robb Pass Dbl Dbl DavidC Dbl Pass Dbl Barry Pass Pass Dbl JJ Dbl Pass ? Mike Pass Pass Dbl DavidW 3 Dbl Pass Jeff Dbl Dbl Dbl Nope, no correlation. And Mike, JJ, and Marshall knew the boards...and no two of them matched answers!
AJ KJxx J98x Kxx
| You | Partner |
| |
| 1NT | |
| ? |
- CHRIS
-
3 with an understanding partner. Looking for short diamonds, maybe - LEN
- P. I play NMF of some kind, right?
- MARSHALL
- Pass. Partner could be very weak. I might have
raised if I had the
- BOBBY
- I think it's very close between pass and raise. I raise.
- ED
-
3 . Worth the risk, e.g. - ROBB
- Pass, but tempting.
- DAVIDC
- Partner can have a 10-count. If he is short in
3 . - BARRY
- Pass; second choice no bid—no third choice. Wrong minor suit cards,
though bad diamonds is better than good ones. Give me
- JJ
- Pass, I've missed games before by passing hands like
this, but it's not quite enough to merit a
3 bid. - MIKE
- Pass. I like that my diamonds are bad, as partner would
upgrade a borderline hand with secondary diamonds to our
detriment. That said, this hand needs a perfecto to make
game. I want partner to continue to bid
2 with5 +4 and a bad hand—and have a chance that something good will happen. If everytime he catches a fit he has to play at the three-level that is counter-productive. If you bid3 here, does that mean you expect partner to pass1 holding2 over 1NT? [Likewise, do you want him making game tries with - DAVIDW
- Pass. Gee, I have a great hand considering it is a
minimum. But unless CHO is 6-4 and is void in diamonds,
game is unlikely to be cold. In my preferred methods, CHO
could invite via
2 with as little as3 . - JEFF AT THE TABLE
-
3 . - WINNING ACTION
- pass. +110 is the maximum on the hand.
- CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Pass 7 3 1 3 4 - JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- I think it's extremely close.
At matchpoints, passing is obvious; there's no
reason to risk the plus for what is unlikely to
be a cold game. But red at IMPs, partner can have
4 is pretty good. Even with his minors reversed,4 is up to par. You know you aren't getting doubled in4 , so you are risking five IMPs (for +110 vs. -100) to try to win ten. I'll lay 2-1 odds that we aren't going down at the 3-level.Should
3 be weak diamonds and good clubs or should it be an artificial3 bid stronger than3 ? Since bidding to the 3-level at all is very rare, probably we don't need such a fine distinction, and letting partner know that3 . Given that the panel thinks bidding vs. passing is about 50/50, the vigorish from3 tips it, I think.
x Jxx Jxxxxx xxx
| RHO | You | LHO | CHO |
| Pass | | |
| Dbl | Pass | | Pass |
| Pass | ? |
- CHRIS
- Abstain. Would want to be at the table, know my opponents' habits, etc. [They were unknowns. First match. --Jeff]
- LEN
- Hand improved when pard showed heart support.
I would have bid
6 , lead directing, my last turn, but6 is too rich. I pass. [I admit that I have no idea what he's talking about. His further explanation didn't enlighten me, either. --Jeff] - MARSHALL
-
7 . I suppose, theoretically, I shouldn't sacrifice ahead of partner, but partner won't realize how bad my hand is. With the - BOBBY
- I pass. We'd have to take 7 tricks to make 1 IMP, and have the possibility of losing a lot more. I lead a heart.
- ED
- Pass. Nobody said they were going to make it (partner
could win the
7 . Better to take our chances against6 . - ROBB
- [
7 .] I think pard can take 5 tricks and they can take 12. Only question is whether they can take 13. I take a chance and bid hoping pard can take 6 tricks. - DAVIDC
- Don't see why I wouldn't lead a
- BARRY
-
7 . OK; I think they will make and I've been had for a sucker before. - JJ
- Tough, tough call. It's likely to be 8 IMPs if I am
wrong (1430 vs. 1100) It might be helpful to know what
the double of
4 would have been. [Good point. Most play some form of Rosencranz (or Guildenstern), but I think at this vulnerability, it should be suggesting a save. --Jeff] However, if5 was a good save against4 then7 must be a good save unless they are going down. I'd very much like to be at the table for this one. However, if the6 bid was made quickly and confidently by a sound player, I'd probably save. If those conditions aren't met then I'd pass. - MIKE
- Pass. I'm afraid they may bid seven if I save—or we'll probably be down 1400 anyway. I don't think we're beating them, so it is pretty close.
- DAVIDW
- Pass. Although I don't expect to beat this, I have no reason to believe the save will be cheap, or that teammates will bid the slam. So I may as well hope for a plus.
- JEFF AT THE TABLE
- wasn't there. I'd probably pass.
I don't like high-level saves without any tricks
for partner. It wouldn't surprise me that I have
one entry and one trick, which I'll have to use
at trick 2. If I had a fourth heart, I'd save.
My teammate bid
7 , which worked out very poorly. - CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Pass 8 7 3 2/1 in favor of passing. Sort of a consensus.
- WINNING ACTION
- don't bid.
6 has no play at all.7 x goes for sticks and wheels. - JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- Tough call but I'd pass.
RHO thought
5 was too high. LHO's bidding was inconsistent. Maybe he was wrong. This may just be a personality test. I'm not a big saver; I tend to defend. I also figure that partner can play me for this much help and save on his own if it's right. Now give me a fourth trump...There is a theory issue. Partner bid
5 rather than doubling4 . Assuming no Rosencranz (double means lead clubs) or Guildenstern (double means lead diamonds), which I think is best at favorable, why did partner bid instead of soliciting your opinion with a double? Maybe he has some defense and knows what to do at the slam level? Maybe he was trying to blow away their Blackwood and get them into slam off two aces. If so, saving in front of partner will get you serious egg on your face. Maybe he just has a huge offensive hand and was putting more pressure on them. Who knows? If it were easy, it'd not be here.
Q1098x xx xxx xxx
| CHO | RHO | You | LHO |
| 1NT (10-12) | Pass | ? | |
Methods are 2-way stayman and transfers at the 3-level only.
- CHRIS
- Two of some major. I think
2 might get me in trouble, but it is probably the best bid. - LEN
- I guess I pass, but
2 is fine. - MARSHALL
- Pass. I think the opponents are more likely to
enter the bidding if I bid
2 (perhaps by doubling) than if I pass. Oh, I didn't look ahead to see the range or how we were playing. Tempting to bid2 or2 , but don't want to risk a disaster. - BOBBY
- I think
2 is right then. It has some reasonable preemptive effect, and it's very difficult for them to double us for penalties. After
it seems a lot easier for them to do the right thing, whatever that is.1NT P 3 X P P 3 X - ED
-
2 (before the penalty doubling starts). Here's a good story. Many years ago at a National in St. Louis, I opened a 1st seat 10-12 1NT. LHO passed and Mike Smolen, my partner, had[Many years ago, I had a similar occurrance. I was playing a regional pairs game with someone I'd never met before. We didn't have time to discuss methods, so when I held
- ROBB
-
2 . Let's have some fun. - DAVIDC
- This one is classic. I bid two of a major—hearts.
- BARRY
-
2 . Natural and to play? Good enough for me! - JJ
- I bid
2 , (transfer, even if pard thinks it to play!!!!!) My 2nd choice is to bid Stayman and pass either2 or2 , (or correct2 to2 ) If pard bids2 , then I could raise to3 . In any case, I try to make it difficult for the opps to find their probable game (4 or 3NT). [I don't think Stayman will help very often. LHO will double and partner will show a major or not. If he shows spades, you might choose to jump to4 , knowing they can make4 . Problem is, they can't go wrong.4 will probably go for 500 and5 will make anyway. If partner doesn't bid a major, they shouldn't have much trouble finding hearts and game. --Jeff] - MIKE
- Pass. This puts immediate pressure on LHO to bid or
end the auction. [Pressure? I think he rates to be
itching to bid. --Jeff] If we're doubled, I can still
run to
2 , but I think this will make it slightly harder for them to find game, as2 gives RHO another shot. If they were vul and I had a sixth spade, I would consider 3NT. - DAVIDW
-
2 . I would like to transfer to2 (yes hearts, not spades), but apparently my methods don't allow that. So the question is which lie will sound plausible. Maybe we can win a few IMPs for down 5 or 6 against their game. I will pass CHO's response, correcting to2 if they wake up and double. [I don't understand why transferring to hearts is better than simply bidding them. --Jeff] - JEFF AT THE TABLE
-
2 . A total psych. - WINNING ACTION
- none. (Detect a pattern here?)
After
2 , the opponents bid 2NT-3 ;3 -3NT. Did they know what they were doing? No. 3NT was cold anyway. Yes, they had a 4-4 heart fit. - CONSENSUS
-
Action Votes Pass 3 2 1 2 6 2 2 Hah! A majority psychs!
- JEFF UPON REFLECTION
- I like
2 . Good and honest opponents play doubles of2 as takeout and 2NT as minors. (Maybe that's not best...perhaps 2NT really ought to be a good balanced hand?) We could easily play2 undoubled down five or six to win a few IMPs.Most of the panel psyched something (some passed, which I think is a psych, but most bid their short major.) Next time this comes up and the ACBL powers that be get on my case, I shall quote this result that shows that the "normal" action here is to psych.