Some Problems from the Pomona Sectional: Answers

A good set of problems this time...most of the panelists are unsure what to do; there are almost no consensus answers, and most of the votes are split 50-50.

They are: Brian Oxley, Ed Davis, Mike Shuster, Roberto Scaramuzzi, Barry Rigal, Curt Hastings, Joel Wooldridge, Kent Hartman, Dan Molochko, Rolf Kühn.

Thanks to the whole panel for interesting comments.

All at IMPs, 8-board matches

favorable, you hold
Qxx K108x x 97654

LHO CHO RHO You

Pass 1 Pass 1

2 2 Pass ?

2 was natural. What's your plan?

BINKLEY
I'm forced to bid, so I'll just raise to 3. My hand sure has gotten crappy with that 2 bid.
ED
Pass. Yes, 2 is forcing and I might be missing a non-vulnerable game by passing. However, I doubt I am missing anything and 2 might be the best contract we can reach at this point. If I did bid I'd bid 2NT but I feel pass is clearly the right action.
I play Lebensohl here.
MIKE
It is very unusual that LHO bid a natural 2 as a passed hand and partner then acted in front of me. He must be very short in hearts to not give me a crack at it.
2 is forcing, so no matter how much I don't want to honor that force, I must take another call - partner may even be 5071.
2NT would be Lebensohl without interference and should probably be now too, although it would be simple to convince me otherwise. In either case I don't have a problem* (with alerts or not alerts) since I have both a Lebensohl and non-Lebensohl 2NT bid. Over partner's 3x bid, bid 3. Over 3, bid 4.
[* Oh, yes, you do. If you think your methods are that 2NT is Lebensohl, and partner fails to alert, you are in some trouble. In fact, that's an amazing prediction. Partner did fail to alert 2NT. I alerted (as required) 3 and had another vicious problem. I think that the unauthorized information suggests bidding over passing (partner is no longer denying a huge hand as he would be if he knew 2NT were Lebensohl, so bidding caters to the huge hand). Therefore, I think it's ethically right to pass 3, but I have no idea if passing is a logical alternative; if it's not, then passing is not required. In fact, the bidding problem after 2NT-3 is so hard that I have no idea what the logical alternatives are. My best guess was that pass is not suggested, so I did that. --Jeff]
ROBERTO
Pass. If I had known my K was TP I would have passed 1. As is, I have apparently improved the contract (partner is not forging a spade suit since he has no heart support).
BARRY
Pass, what else? Yes it might be intended as forcing, but why should this two-count produce eight tricks let alone ten?
CURT
Interesting problem. I'll start with 2NT. I assume the same methods apply as if LHO had not interfered, i.e. 2NT is an artificial slowdown. Accordingly, I have no choice on this round. The problem will come on the next round. If partner bids, I will raise 3 to 4 or bid 3NT over any other next call (I think my stopper is a little better than average for this auction). I realize I might be overbidding a little, but I think partner can pass 2NT (I know, I might have made this bid with xxxx, given my comments above, but I think I rate to have some sort of stopper almost all of the time).
JOEL
I'll bid 2NT , if partner bids 3, I'll pass. If he bids 3NT, I'll throw up, and pass. If he bids 3, I'll bid 4. If he bids 3, I'll bid 4. If he bids 3, I'll bid 3. I don't like pass, since if partner has AKxxx x AKxxxx x, we're going to make 4 on the average, and partner doesn't expect me to pass.
KENT
Pass. I have a poor hand that hasn't improved. With a monster pointed two- suiter, partner should bid 3 here, [Even with Joel's hand above? --Jeff] as raises of hearts no longer exist. Two hearts natural is quite a bid to enter a live auction at unfavorable with a hand not suited to a weak two.
DAN
2NT now. If partner bids 3m or 3 I bid 3, if 3 I raise, if 3NT I Pass. 2 is forcing here, and partner knows that my hand may look like this. And yes, I bid 3 even if partner bids 3 over my 2NT (I'm a little tempted to Pass 3 but partner certainly won't expect it) because spades will play a trick or two better than clubs.
ROLF
Pass. I don't think that my hand is worth another bid. It might produce game if partner has a 5-6 distribution. But 2 working HCP and a singleton in partner's suit and only 3-card trump support will not be enough in most cases. I am not going for game especially not in white.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
2NT (Lebensohl) and passed partner's 3.
WINNING ACTION
Nothing. Don't bid too much, but only Joel does. Really, the actual result has nothing to do with the problem, as partner psyched 3 times with Axx A AKxxxxx AQ. (Firstly, he should open 2, not 1. Secondly, he should bid 3NT or 3, not 2. Thirdly, after 2NT Lebensohl, making a non-forcing bid is madness. And if 2NT wasn't Lebensohl, bidding 3 is plain goofy.) 3NT and 5 are reasonable contracts, but as the cards lay, nothing at all makes. Joel got high enough for the 3145 hand sitting over the big hand to double. The rest of us just went minus, sometimes in silly contracts. The real winning action is to double off 2. Dummy has no entries, so we can take four aces and at least two more trump tricks. I don't think we can manage to get our second spade trick.
CONSENSUS
None.

Pass 5

2NT 5

3 1

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Pass is probably the best chance for a good score on this hand, but in the long run, I want my partners to know that I don't pass forcing bids, so I won't do it. I hope to win more IMPs as a result than I lose on disasters like this one.
no one vul, you hold
10xxx 9x Qx K10xxx

LHO CHO RHO You

1 1 1NT Pass

3NT* All pass

(*After some thought)
What's your opening lead?

BINKLEY
A pedantic low club.
ED
If 3NT is based on a long good diamond suit, I'd better hope we can beat them in clubs. If it is balanced, hearts is probably better. The long thought before seems to be something other than 18 balanced so I'd lead a club.
MIKE
A club could blow a trick or beat it outright. With long running diamonds, I don't think LHO would have a problem. I think his diamonds are broken, so with RHO's expected filler that leaves partner with one probable diamond trick. A club doesn't help if they can hold up long enough, but I don't think we'll get the hearts going fast enough, so I'll be a hero and lead a club. Of course dummy will have Qx and declarer Ax and I'll give 'em their ninth trick. Such is life.
ROBERTO
x; I hate to believe the opponents instead of partner, but it sounds like they have hearts stopped. The diamond position is ominous, so I'll hope we can run 5 quick club tricks.
I will apologize if this is wrong.
BARRY
9. I cannot get too involved in this one. There is no good reason to lead clubs as opposed to hearts (or indeed spades), and when partner makes a non-space consuming overall he tends to have a reason. Keep the idiot happy, I say. Here neither of my suits is close to setting up -- and I do not have an entry. I could find partner with QJx and it might still be wrong to lead them.
CURT
9, mildly agricultural. By the way, I've never had much success inferring anything from the tempo. LHO could have been thinking about trying for slam or he might have been stretching to bid game, maybe with long semisolid . OTOH, I've had a lot of success leading partner's suit when he has our sides values. He should be able to read the 9, and will frequently shift when it's needed.
JOEL
Fourth best club. I'm afraid dummy's going to hit with a long strong diamond suit, and on a heart lead, they'll take 9 tricks quickly, while we can run clubs (or set them up quick enough).
KENT
9. If RHO thought 10xxx was a stopper, partner is going to be mighty pissed if I don't lead one. Partner overcalled and I don't have anything clearcut as an alternative.
DAN
9. No reason that this shouldn't be the killing lead; after all, she did bid the suit. Club lead is only for Chicken Little: "the diamonds are running, the diamonds are running!"
ROLF
A lot of diamond tricks seems to be waiting in dummy. I am going for fast tricks and lead a small club.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
9
CONSENSUS
Club: 6, Heart: 5
WINNING ACTION
Club. The layout was

AQJx
xx
AKJ10xx
x

10xxx
9x
Qx
K10xxx xx
KQJx
xxx
AQxx

Kxx
A10xxx
xx
Jxx

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
The club leaders' arguments seem a little better than the heart leaders'. Perhaps partner should not have bid 1 (although I think I would have). Next time, I'll probably lead a club. And be wrong again.
KJ10xx
x
KQ8x
A8x

Ax
A10xx
AJ102
J10x

Dummy Declarer

1 2

3 4NT

5 5NT

6 Pass

a) What do you think of the bidding?

BINKLEY
Suspicious--it is generally taboo to leap off to Blackwood with a suit (clubs) wide open. But what do I know? I think cuebidding might have kept these hands at a safer level, but perhaps not after declarer hears dummy bid 4.
ED
The critical choice is what to bid over 3. Since 3NT, 4 or 6 could be right, I think 3 is best as long as partner does not insist that you must have three spades (you could always jump to 4 with a minimum hand and three spades). Over 3, I would bid 4 and 6 would then be reached. It is certainly a good contract.
If partner raises 3 to 4, I don't need to recover as I will be facing a minimum with good spades or extra length in spades and I expect 4 will be the right contract. [For example, the actual hand? --Jeff] The idea behind bidding 3 is that partner gets to offer more information with his next bid, e.g., partner would bid 4 with KJxxxx x KQxx Qx [I'd bid 2 with that, not 3. The value of this hand depends mostly on whether or not partner fits spades. But 3 could be right. --Jeff] or KQTxx x Kxxx Axx, 4 with Qxxxx x KQxx KQx [I'd bid either 3 or 2 with this garbage. --Jeff] or 3NT with Kxxxx Q Qxxx AKx. With the actual hand he held, we would reach 6. That contract becomes a favorite even with the lead if his spades are KQT rather than KJT. I think the 5-2 or 4-3 major suit fit needs to be explored as a possible contract whenever 3NT is determined to be undesirable.
MIKE
4NT was a little bit wrong. 3 would show three of them and 4 would be a lie. You could try 4 setting trumps hoping partner would come back 4 so you could bid 4 forcing, but that seems dangerous and a long shot to me. South knows that slam is in the picture, but wants partner to bid key card (especially looking at low clubs). I'd try 4 instead of 4NT and try to find out scientifically about the club control. Really partner has to have some sort of club control (is KQJxx -- KQJxx Qxx a possibility? I say no, partner should bid 3 with that) [4? 4? --Jeff] and so no one did anything really terrible.
ROBERTO
A little abrupt.
BARRY
South took control (perhaps because of his aces) when he might have achieved the same result and earned more style points. But I have seen far less elegant (and more unsuccessful) auctions in my time.
CURT
Everything was okay. The final contract isn't great, but if N had the Q as well grand would be almost laydown, and if the Q were the Q it would be significantly better (needing Q doubleton or shorter or 3rd with at least 3 spades). So if the byproduct of being able to find those slams is getting to this one, thats acceptable. Given that N can hardly have no aces, the Blackwood call seems the most direct and best method of exploration available to Declarer.
JOEL
The 4NT bid was hungry. I think he was bidding a lot to go straight to Blackwood. The 3 bid was a great bid.
KENT
Bidding seems fine.
DAN
Since I don't play two-over-one I'm not sure whether North is light for the Splinter or not. My guess is no, as four working cards should probably be enough. Thus South was quite precipitate in applying the Black. South really needs another card (Q, K) to have a decent play for the slam, and should therefore have bid 4 over 3 to see if North wanted to offer more encouragement. Btw, 5NT seems insane. Granding when you're about to float in six looks pretty bad.
ROLF
Three hearts seems insane even if 2 was FG. The slam does not seem too bad though.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
I was declarer (South).
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
The first non-obvious bid is 4NT. I'm very much anti-Blackwood, but I just can't think of anything better. 3 promises three spades, I think, and I don't want partner thinking we are maybe playing spades. 3NT doesn't seem right. 4, a fake cue, might be a good thing; LHO might double, and partner can redouble to tell me we really have the suit stopped. 4 seems like the normal other choice, but I just don't see how it will help. If partner bids 5, the auction will continue 5-6 and we'll've not addressed any problems other than that we don't have two quick club losers. 4 is reasonable, but it almost demands a 5 cue if partner has control there. The question that would arise from that, however, is "will 4 now be a lack of club control, suggesting a 5-2 (6-2?) fit, or is it promising a club control and something extra in spades?" It seems more useful to play it as natural, but I don't know if partner agrees. We could end up playing in a cue bid. 4 is surely wrong; that must show a big double fit (or a minimum with 3 spades if playing fast arrival. I'd play it to show 4+5). That leaves Blackwood. Partner is extremely likely to have two with---if so, we can bid 5NT and tell partner about everything in our hand except the Jacks. This might let partner bid a grand and claim before the lead. As this is the only good thing I can see happening as a result of my choice, and no one has convinced me that their choice will do any better at all, I'm sticking with 4NT. My second choice is to psych 4. And I really don't think that there's much of a chance that we don't have a club control. Partner could maybe have KQJxx x KQxx Qxx. Or one more likely, one more club and one fewer heart. That's about the only hand that makes 6 down off the top. And they haven't led a club yet. Or cashed the second one. Having three small is a lot safer than having two small.
In later conversation with Ed, I realized that by my rules, if I bid 3, key card will never be in diamonds afterwards. ("If we agree two suits, the key suit is the higher one.") That's enough reason not to do it.

T1: 5-x-Q-x (3rd + lowest leads)
T2: 7-A-x-x
T3: A-x-x-x
T4: x-x-K-x
T5: x-x-J-x
T6: 2-x-K-x
T7: x-Q-10-2
T8: J-K-A-9
Claim down 1.
b) What do you think of the play?

BINKLEY
Unlucky. Losing to stiff Q and the later ruff really bites. Oddly, cuebidding would have had a dark horse payoff over blasting: there was the offhand chance of an enemy double of a cuebid to tip you off in the play (although with these particular hands, the clubs were turned about the wrong way for that).
MIKE
Unlucky. Maybe I'm missing something, but declarer's line seems pretty good to me.
ROBERTO
Not unreasonable, but I haven't really thought about it. I may get back to you later about this.
JOEL
The play was very reasonable. I put full blame on south for his egregious 4NT bid.
KENT
I never know. Looks ok to me--I couldn't come up with a successful line that did not involve taking the spade finesse the right way early.
DAN
I wouldn't expect better (see 3A) Seems reasonable to me.
ROLF
The play seems ok. It covers 3-3 or not worse than 5-2. A little bit unlucky though.
BARRY
I might have done the same here too! Playing spades before trumps did not require much; but it did need the second club honor right (unless Q is doubleton) So the line of winning the trump and drawing trumps then taking the club finesse (or playing K, A then club finesse) and then guessing spades, works -- but that does not make it right. My instinct is that there might be something better and I am missing it (but I did come back from the UK yesterday --blame the jetlag).
CURT
Very unlucky. A small improvement might be to win T2 in dummy and ruff a immediately, makes it easier to avoid the hook if break 3-3 (if Q dub, everything works), e.g.
T2 - win in dummy.
T3 - A
T4 - ruff
T5-7- A, K, ruff high.
T8 - ruff
T9 - overtake trump...
Although this goes down if trump are not 3-2, unless I divine to run the J and crossruff (requiring 4-3 and 3-3 , yeah right). Which of these is better depends on your assessment of the opponents and the table action. The trump return was killing on the actual layout, but with 4-1 trump they might have returned a club to drive out a dummy entry (anticpating ruffout of spade (if your spades are AQ, it's laydown), and you can't use H ruffs to reenter without setting up a long trump for the defense).
ED
I intend to ruff two hearts, draw trumps and play on spades finessing if were 4-1 and guessing which way to play spades (K and ruff is best (53% - yes, I know you knew that) [54%, but who's counting? (If the Q drops stiff, you won't play another before drawing trumps, obviously.) --Jeff] given 4-2 or 3-3 spades) if diamonds were 3-2. One thing that is clear is that it is not a good contract with a lead; it would have, however, been good with any other lead since you can ruff two hearts, draw trumps and, assuming 3-2 , use the JTx of spades to shake the and two clubs to make 6. It seems to me that the ruffing two hearts line is about 9% better than playing for the split, K on and split or no ruff. I make your line .67 (K on) * .68 ( break) * ~.75 (4-3 or no ruff) = .33. The K is more likely to be off since there was no return but the diamonds are more likely to be 3-2 since there was a return - I think the return is more indicative that are 3-2 than it is that the K is off so I'll raise your probability of success to .37. My line is .53 (Q falling) * .68 ( break) + ( .26 (Qx or Qxx on) * .32 (non 3-2 ) ) = .44 and I'll raise my probability to .46 due to the more likely 3-2 diamonds (3-2 diamonds means more to you than to me).
JEFF IN REPLY TO ED
This is a pretty tough one to compute. The inference from the failure to double hearts and the failure to lead them matters, too. It's not unlikely that LHO would lead his highest club when the club hook's off. Some of the time when the club hook's off, RHO is going to think (and sometimes be right) his partner has led a stiff and will return them. I think the club hook is closer to 80-90%. Then there's the issue of the club spot lead. I was certain that clubs couldn't be 6-1 if it was a true card, but I wasn't convinced that it was. LHO was a known tricky man. (In fact, it was a 5th best lead.)
I can recover a 4-1 diamond break if spades come home. (Win A, two/three rounds of spades, draw trumps, cross to A and take a club hook.) If the Q comes down doubleton, I have a claim without the club finesse on 3-2 trumps. On 4-1 trumps, I can also make if the shortness is with shortness (Win A, two spades, diamond to the jack (oops), diamond over, spade pitching a club, A, club ruff high, draw trumps and claim.) Those are chances that you've included in your line, but not mine. That is, I get to change tacks once I find out how spades lie. Your line relies on their being good. On the other hand, when they are good, I'm not home yet.
So, let's see...
1. Q doubleton + 3-2 trumps
     or
3. spades 3-3 + 3-2 trumps + club hook
     or
4. spades 3-3 + 4-1 trumps + club hook
     or
5. spades 4-2 + 3-2 trumps + club hook + no ruff

1. .16 * .68 = .1088
2. .16 * .28 * ? = about .04
3. .355 * .68 * (.67+?) = .162 + ?
4. .355 * .28 * (.67+?) = .0666
6. .32 * .68 * (.67+?) * ? = .1458 * ?

.1088 + .04 + .162 + .0666 = .377 + .1458*(no club ruff) (That's clubs 4-3 or the stiff with only 2 trumps. If we just figure clubs 4-3 as 62% and leave it at that, we get about 47%. There is some vig in this calculation, so it's probably closer to 55%. But I'm guessing. And have probably forgotten something.
If diamonds really rate to be 3-2, say 80% of the time, then I get a little more. Hmmm...I've forgotten to calculate in the fact that we know that diamonds are not 5-0. That's worth an additional percent or two.
Tough hand. I guess I should've given it as a play problem.
ED AGAIN
I shortchanged you but you are high with "the vig" (since feel less optimistic about about the K's being onsides) and, since we are calculating the percent of the time you make and not the percent of the time you make when diamonds are not 5-0, you don't get "an additional percent or two". I figure I owe you about .035 from 2. and the .0666 from 4. and an extra 2% from other considerations. I also shortchanged myself since I can play spades more advantageously based on the heart and diamond lengths that I find out about. So I'll put the two lines at being just about equal at around 50%. What an unsatisfactory conclusion outcome from this analysis!
JEFF MUCH LATER
I forgot about stiff Q. That's about 2.5%, but the contract isn't cold yet. Then again, I may end up losing some play when LHO drops the Q from a doubleton. (Nice play!)
CONSENSUS
Other lines might be better. Or might not. Hard to say.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Good. If I had made 6, we'd've won the event. Because I went down, we ended up 4th. Stopping in game would lead to a 3rd-place finish, so bidding it is clearly best and the play was good enough if no one can show that another line was better without a lot of effort.
As dealer, both white, which, if any, of these hands would you open a 10-12 NT?
a) Q32 K43 K972 Q32
b) A742 AKQ 7642 32
c) AJ92 975 QJ2 AJ10

K&R
a. 8.55
b. 13.30
c. 12.15

BINKLEY
a. No -- too weak unless you have a partnership agreement for such junky honors, structure and shape
b. Isn't this a 13-count? And a super one at that?
c. Another 13-count, and pretty good too? What, are you baiting us now?
I take it you ask this question to humiliate the culprit behind these hands? <gaffaws> [Nope. In fact, two choices ended up as pushes and the other was a big gain. --Jeff]
ED
c.
MIKE
Just A. A 10-12 denies the values for an opening bid. I would happily open 1 with C. B is very close, since 1 doesn't thrill me and I don't play 4 card majors so I can't open 1 A is close the other way, but I prefer a 9-11 type scheme when allowed (ACBL restrictions suck) which would make all 3 non-problems. I bet K&R says to open only B a 10-12. (I'll make that bet without checking, too!!!!) [Nope. But, yes, changing the range of 1NT would make them all non-problems as they are all borderline 9-10 or 12-13, of course. --Jeff]
ROBERTO
None
BARRY
a. Yes of course.
b. No of course (blimey what do you take me for?)
c. Maybe depending on our partnership agreements about the same hand with the A as the 3 -- if we do open good nine-counts then we should not open good 12-counts. [Not in the ACBL. Opening 9-counts is illegal. --Jeff]
CURT
only A. B has too much potential as a dummy for either pointed suit, and too much defense. C also has too much defense, and the honor texture more than compensates for the lack of shape...both the protection of the jacks and the presence of a high spot in my 2 best suits.
JOEL
Neither of the first 2 hands, I think the last one is borderline, but I'd still not do it--too much potential to miss a game. The first one, it's a good way to go for 1400. The 2nd one, it's too concentrated, and we don't even want to play it from our side. The last one is good, since nt is what we want to convey to our partner, and our side is probably best.
KENT
None of them. Second choice, A only Gad those are bad spots! B and C are too strong.
DAN
Only A because the other two hands have 13 HCP. That may sound flip, but it's the real reason. I believe that one should not often adjust the 10-12 hands up or down. The best way to think of it is that while one point is only about 6% of a strong 1NT, it's 10% of a 10-12, so the adjustment is more significant. 9+ to 13- is an unplayably large range, whereas 14+ to 18- is not.
ROLF
a) No, too weak.
b) No, too strong, but close.
c) No much too strong.

JEFF AT THE TABLE
I held the latter two and opened them each 1NT. I would not open the first one; it's not good enough, and I've opened some real dogs 1NT.
WINNING ACTION
Opening the first one will get you too high. Depending on the later auction, you may be able to salvage a plus score by passing originally. Partner has Kxx AQJxx Qxx Kx. He'll probably open 1 (but at the other table, the auction went pass-1NT; 3NT). You can bid 2-only-hearts and partner has a marginal game try. If he passes, RHO will balance with 2, which you can double. And maybe can beat. Given that partner has opened in 3rd seat, come to think of it, perhaps you shouldn't double. +50 would be a fine result anyway. Partner might double. Joy.
Opening the 2nd one will prevent you from getting to a no-play 25 HCP game and will get a plus score. In practice, however, if you open 1, LHO will bid 2NT and go for 300. If you open 1NT, he'll bid hearts and clubs to the 3-level and go for 300 for a push.
Opening the 3rd one 1NT was a massive win. LHO overcalled 2 for the majors with 6432 KJ108x Ax xx (very sick). Partner cracked it and RHO bid 2 (also an error, I think) with Q10x xx xxxx Qxxx. They are entitled to the diamond Ace. 1700. I play that passing 2 doubled means that I want to play 2 doubled, so I'd bid 2 with advancer's hand. While it's normal to show your preference, when you are getting the crap kicked out of you, a 5-2 fit plays much better than a 4-3, so I'd start with 2. I might end up in 2 anyway (after testing the waters in 2 and 2), but at least I might survive. And I might find out that we belong in hearts. If 2 is doubled and partner bids 2, I should pass, figuring that partner is 4-5 in the majors. That choice would save a lot of undertricks; they can take four tricks in hearts.
CONSENSUS
None of them.

Yes No Maybe

a. 4 7 0

b. 0 10 1

c. 2 8 1

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Obviously, there is a question of partnership style involved, but given that one plays "10-12," not "9-11" or "11-13," I think that means we should (if we could) open great 9s and rotten 13s. It's illegal to open 9-counts in the ACBL, but I'd still reject crappy 10s and include bad 13s. I think one should be conservative with 4333 hands, and I tend to downgrade them a point. I agree with the K&R assessments of (a) and (c), which make (a) too weak and (c) at the top of the range, an option. The Kleinman variation on K&R puts the 2nd hand in the 10-12 range, too (12.725). It discounts values in suits that have no low cards, such as the heart suit on this hand. That's exactly why the 25 HCP don't add up to 9 tricks. So I stand by my original assessment: (a) is too weak, should be passed. (b) is an option; if you feel like doing something a little strange, it's OK. (c) is a clear cut 1NT opener.
Dan's argument that a point increases the range of the 10-12 range is interesting, and accurate in a way, but his calculations are off (it's not the case that strength of hands is linear in point count, nor is frequency of hands) but more importantly, his assumption is flawed. If one plays 9+-13-, one removes some 10s and some 12s. One assumes one's evaluation skills are such that one can tighten the range, rather than enlarge it. In the ACBL, since good nines cannot open 1NT legally, using judgment on each end should shrink the range.
both vul, you hold
108xxx AKxx xxx x
Partner opens a 15-17 NT. What's your plan?

BINKLEY
IMPs, right? Invite game, suitable to my pattern, if possible. If not... hmmm... here are my plans:
1NT - 2; 2M - 4M
1NT - 2; 2 - 2*; 3 - 4
1NT - 2; 2 - 2; 2NT - P

* = If not a weak sequence
ED
2. Raise 2 to 3, raise 2 to 4, pass 2.
MIKE
2 - 2 - 2 = distributional invite with 5 spades. Fits this hand to a T. Can't imagine anything else. If partner bids 2, then raise to 4.
ROBERTO
2; raise 2 to 4, raise 2 to 3, bid 2 over 2 (invite).
BARRY
Stayman then 2 over 2 shows invitatiuonal unbalanced with 5. 2NT asks etc... If you do not play that then I can't help you. guess well.
(Stayman then 2NT invites, non-specific re spades, and partner responds 2 to Stayman with both M max, 2 with both M min.)
CURT
Stayman, 4/2, 3/2, 2 pick over 2, if partner corrects to spades, I'll raise him to 3.
JOEL
If I have a way to show an invitational 5-4, I'll do it. Otherwise, stayman followed by 2. If partner bids 2M in response to stayman, I'll raise 2 to 3, and 2 to 4.
KENT
Stayman. Invite over a major, bid 2 over 2.
DAN
Stayman. I'll bid 2 over 2, 3 over 2, and 4 over 2. This seems obvious. [I guess it is. --Jeff]
ROLF
Bid via stayman and get to game if partner shows up with 4. I will pass 2. If we have a double fit I hope that opps will bid or double clubs.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
1NT-2; 2-4. I was planning to raise 2 to 3 unless 2 got doubled, in which case, I was bidding game. I hadn't decided what to do over 2. I think I'd bid 2 (unbalanced invitational) but it might be right to pass. If I did and partner raised to 3, I would leave him there, not bid game.
WINNING ACTION
4 was cold opposite a nondescript 15-count. Win 10.
CONSENSUS
Stayman. Bid game over 2, and 3 over 2. Generally bid 2 over 2 (but one passes and one bids 2). No one else (except Rolf) considered that they may double 2.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I thought many more would simply transfer to spades or at most invite game, missing it. They did at the other table.
unfavorable, you hold
x Jx KQxxx QJ9xx

You LHO CHO RHO

Pass 1 Pass Pass

?

BINKLEY
Pass. Where are the hearts? We could try and axe 1, but my RHO would just bail out to 2. I suppose we could then try to scramble into 3m, but being red, I'd be concerned about my LHO's axing that. I'd like to hear, though, that I am being a coward--it is more fun to bid with this hand than to pass.
ED
2NT. I can describe my hand accurately and make it dangerous for LHO to bid again all with one bid. Partner will be well-placed to judge what to do over 2NT. The other choices, 2 and pass, are poor alternatives in that they make life too easy for the opponents and fail to accuretely compete when game is possible our way.
MIKE
Where are all the hearts? I dunno. I think 1NT in this auction should be takeout for the minors [It's not; it's 10-12-- balanced with spades stopped. --Jeff] and the vulnerability speaks for bidding (if they recover a game, it isn't red - and probably won't make since partner is markeed with spades). OTOH, 1NT is dangerous, since partner and I might not be on the same wavelength - given that, the risk of that call is too great. 2NT is too much. Double is wrong. That leaves 2 and pass. I think 2 is aiming at too small a target (if partner has a good hand we can recover 2NT, but he may be forced to pass too often). So I pass. Without strong conviction.
ROBERTO
Pass. It is very unlikely we have a game, and the opponents may be cold for 4. This would be even clearer if lefty had opened 1.
BARRY
Pass. who knows? not my style generally but this leads to less tears I find.
CURT
Pass is clear. Problems with bidding include moving them to a superior partial (), and allowing them to reach a game in either major or NT. While bidding might gain by forcing a plus in a partscore battle (we make 3 or 3, they make at most 2 of a major) thats a fairly specific target, and if partner has defense to both majors and a fit for one minor, he will be short in the other minor...given that neither minor will establish quickly its unlikely that we can then make much of anything with a trump lead or switch. The big win for bidding is that we can make a game. However, its difficult to imagine a hand that couldnt bid on this round, yet makes 5 of a minor - I need at least 3 aces and a working king or specifically K K and 2 aces. As for making 3NT, the same problems about establishing my suits apply, and they might be able to make 4 anyway.
JOEL
I'll bid 2, but I'm a secret admirer of pass. I think 2NT is bidding too much, and x isn't right, since if partner sits, we don't have adequate defense.
KENT
Pass. First inclination was 1NT, but I think the downside is too great. Yes, my stuff is in my suits and I can bid at the one level. I would make that call at matchpoints. However, partner needs to have at least strong NT values for him to pass and for us to make a nonvulnerable game. Assume that partner has spade length and a fit with me somewhere. Then opener is either on top of one of my suits which should stop our minor suit game, or has hearts, which is probably a better strain for them than spades. I am more concerned with the opponents being frigid for four hearts or for us going for a large number.
DAN
2, and then 3 over partner's 2M. We have many more games than they do, so bidding is clearcut. I would prefer more body in the suits to bid 2NT.
ROLF
Pass. WTP?
JEFF AT THE TABLE
wasn't there. I'd bid 2NT if I were.
CONSENSUS
Pass

Pass 7

2NT 2

2 2

WINNING ACTION
bid. Partner has Q109xx A10x Axx K10. (Lovely 10s.) 2NT will catch a raise. 2 will get 2NT. After 3, you'll stop in 3, I think, as partner will infer that you were too weak to bid 2NT immediately. +130 is a little better than the +50 available in 1. +600 in 3NT (probably 630 unless they cash) is better still.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I'd bid 2NT. It preempts hearts (if LHO has a huge 5-5, too bad, but he really is sticking his neck out if he bids 3, as partner may have a nasty axe for him) and shows my hand. Partner sometimes will be able to make a good decision. It's close, though; as it is, game depends on some spots and is a perfecto. There'd be no problem if my hand didn't have the 10, right?
1NT is not minors, and if it were, I'd not do it. It's the same as it would be by an unpassed hand, 10-12- balanced, some semblance of a spade stop. (It'd be a little stronger by an unpassed hand, perhaps as big as 15 or 16, depending on agreement.) Many play that 2NT is natural and strong, but, of course, by a passed hand, it has to be minors.
And yes, Roberto, if LHO had opened 1, anything but a pass is suicidal.
both vul, you hold
A9742 xx --- K108xxx

You LHO CHO RHO

Pass 2 Dbl Pass

?

BINKLEY
Pass--whee! <clears throat> Um, sorry about that. Actually, I'll bid 4 and see what partner wants to do. It would be fun to pass, but 200/500 is little compensation for our game or slam. My LHO is in 2nd seat, red: his preempt ought to be quite sound, say good spades and a side high honor.
ED
Playing Lebensohl, it is close between 3 and 4... I'll give the edge to 3. Not playing Lebensohl, 4.
MIKE
If I wasn't a passed hand, 4 would be forcing, since we play Lebenoshl. If I start with three spades the auction could develop very poorly (...4 - 5... perhaps partner thinks I'm bidding this way with Axxxx xxxxxx x A ??). I'll make the Molochko bid, not open to any misinterpretations and still offering a good chance of getting to slam. 5.
ROBERTO
3, constructive (I assume we are playing Lebensohl).
This hand will not play so well in clubs with righty overruffing spades, and I am not sure we can set 2. [I'm not sure we can set spades 1100, but I'm sure we can set it. --Jeff]
BARRY
3. Giving up on the money --for someone, but its too much to expect partner to be balanced- - he may well have GF with a red suit and may be quite skewed.
CURT
Problem with pass is that it precludes a slam and might be a disaster if partner has a lightish hand with a spade void. Additionally, Assuming the opponents have some type of McCabe methods available, RHO doesnt rate to be void in spades frequently; consequently partner probably doesnt have any holding that will produce more than one defensive trump trick for us, in addition to any diamond ruffs. Partner will lead whichever suit he doesnt have the ace, which will bad for us. A club might not be much better, since every time we tap declarer he will win the trick. All told, defending rates to bring in 2-500. So skip 5 seems like a decent risk. Unless there is an intelligent way to force in clubs at a lower level, I'll settle for reaching slams only when partner is able to raise on the basis of having a generally good dummy for clubs.
JOEL
PASS!!. Maybe we're making a grand slam in clubs, or maybe we're making a small slam in 2 x'd. Either way, I'm taking the plus right here.
KENT
4. More than a minimum, but stuff is not in the right places. If partner has more than a min with a fit, he'll bid 5. I want to leave the possibility open that he has a red two suiter I don't like my heart holding with the 2 on my left.
DAN
4, but I wouldn't be all that surprised to go down. If partner doesn't have four clubs, game is surely out of the question. I'm not at all sure that we're going to make the right decision after I bid 4, and at the table I might just be content with 3. Pass makes me ill, but of course could be a big winner. I'd expect to be able to read righty's reaction some of the time and know when it's right (state-of-the-match and all that to Pass.
ROLF
3 especially if 2NT is Lebensohl. Pass seems the big loser if partner has a normal t/o double (incl. clubs) and the big winner if partner has a strong hand.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Pass
WINNING ACTION
Lots of clubs. You can make 13 tricks, and will if there. The small slam is cold vs. --- Axxx AKxxx AJxx. They go for 800 in 2x.
CONSENSUS
None:

5 2

4 3

3 4

Pass 2

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I like 5. I'm not worried about partner's having a big red two-suiter; we play 4 shows that hand and is almost completely forcing. (On anything but zero covers and a misfit.) It prevents the disaster of missing game. It gets us to a slam fairly often. (Although not always only when it's making.) Second choice is to pass. I expect either 500 or 800. If we start clubs, we may win with the tap. If we start diamonds, we may get a bunch of ruffs. If we start hearts, it might not be a disaster. I expect to hold them to five trump tricks and maybe an ace. (If their ace is diamonds, I may get to ruff it away. Or they may not have one.) If I'd've thought of 5 at the table, I'd've done it, but I didn't. I couldn't come up with a club bid that had a higher expectation than +500, so I took the money. I wonder why bidding game myself didn't occur to me?

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@tintin.jpl.nasa.gov, Jan. 28, 1999

	AQJx xx AKJ10xx x
10xxx 9x Qx K10xxx		xx KQJx xxx AQxx
	Kxx A10xxx xx Jxx

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

Pass	5
2NT	5
3	1

LHO	CHO	RHO	You
1	1	1NT	Pass
3NT*	All pass

	KJ10xx x KQ8x A8x

	Ax A10xx AJ102 J10x