Some Problems from the Reno Nationals 3/04

Some problems from the spring nationals and elsewhere.

Some were less difficult than I thought, but some were doozies, mostly borderline judgment calls.

Today's Panelists: Barry Rigal, Mike Shuster, Robb Gordon, David Caprera, Lynn Johanneson, Fred Curtis, Dan Molochko, Ed Davis, Chris Willenken, Len Vishnevsky, Marshall Miles

None vul, IMPs, long match
10xx Axx QJxx J109

CHO RHO You LHO

1 3 ?

BARRY
3. It would be facile to say WTP. A [negative] double followed by correcting 3 to 3 should be a better hand — and I think I ought to have more (cards/length) in hearts.
MIKE
I passed when I held this at the table, and still think it is the percentage action. This hand has excellent defense, but isn't as good on offense (particularly in the cases partner has a club honor). The lack of a spade honor is the final kicker. The real problem is that there is no way to show that I have a maximum pass later in the auction. But being non-vulnerable, I won't feel terrible about missing a good game once in a while. In exchange, we're going to miss a lot of bad ones and go plus much more often.
ROBB
Pass.
DAVID
I would rather overbid slightly with 3 now than pass and bid 4 after partner reopens with a double. This is not a negative double. If I bid now, we can still get to 3NT.
LYNN
I'd pass. If partner reopens with X, I'll bid only 3. However, I'd bid 3 over 3 if you switched my clubs and spades. Even Dale agrees with pass here.
FRED
Pass — if partner cannot re-open where are we going? I have only 1.5 [cover cards] (maybe 2 giving weight to J) and I don't have extras or short clubs.
DAN
Pass. No bid. Outty. When you ain’t got nothing, you ain’t got nothing to lose. In the immortal words of the immortal Neil Young, "Piece of Crap."
ED
3. Close to pass. Exchange the clubs with the hearts or the spades (best) and it would be a comfortable 3 bid. The range for a 3 bid should be this up to a bad limit raise. [My opinion is that it should be a little better than this up to a bad limit raise, but sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do; just because partner expects a little more doesn't mean he always gets it. --Jeff]
CHRIS
3. Easy, though minimum. Take pressure off partner.
LEN
3. A max 2 raise. [I think Len's off by a queen. Make my clubs QJ10 and I'd bid 2. --Jeff]
MARSHALL
3. Very close, but if I pass, what do I do over a reopening double or rebid at 3 level by partner?
JEFF AT THE TABLE
This was from our GNT final match. Partner chose a mildly conservative pass and bid only 3 when I reopened with a double. I made five, though game is on a hook for the K through the preemptor, so if the opponents were to believed, it was a bad game. This was the first time they'd semi-psyched a heavy preempt in the match. They were to do it a bunch of times and every single one worked out.
Instinctively, I would have bid 3 at the table. Yeah, I hate 4333. I don't like the soft cards or the crappy trumps. But in competitive auctions, I like to support partner as soon as I can and if we reach a game going down, they have to beat it to get their five IMPs. But I can't argue with passing a ten-loser hand. This is a close call, and neither 3 nor pass is wrong, in my opinion.
CONSENSUS
Roughly evenly split:

Action Votes

Pass 5

3 7

WINNING ACTION
3. Or bid 4 over partner's reopening double. Game makes, though it was on a hook for the K through the preemptor, who had 11 HCP, six outside his suit.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Upon reflection, it's a toss-up. Which is why I included this as a problem in the first place.
None vul, IMPs, short match
x xxxx xxxxx Jxx

RHO You LHO CHO

1 Pass 1 1

1NT Pass 2* Dbl

Pass 2 Pass 3

Pass ?

2 was alerted and explained as two-way new minor forcing.
a) do you bid 2?

BARRY
No the double of an artificial 2 call is clubs not diamonds. With diamonds I believe one bids them — how quaint.
MIKE
2 was artificial. Undiscussed doubles of artificial bids are natural, so I would have passed 2x. Partner should have something like AJ10xx Kx x AQxxx.
ROBB
not on your life!
DAVID
No, I would have passed the double.
LYNN
No. Dbl shows clubs, and I have acceptable defense.
DAN
No. Why would I? Partner has the blacks; in that context I don’t want to suggest diamonds as a trump suit or as a lead. She implied she could beat 2; sounds good to me!
ED
No. If 2 is artificial, double should be natural, i.e., clubs.
LEN
No.
MARSHALL
No.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
I bid 2. Even if he had a penalty double of 2, they weren't staying there if they were going down. And I wasn't so sure he had one, so I played it safe. If he had clubs, he could bid them and I could pass next time.

b) what now?
BARRY
Pass.
MIKE
Given that partner bid 3, he must have more distribution than I thought. Perhaps a more pure hand with a diamond void. Say AJ10xx Ax — AQ10xxx. The club finesse rates to be offside and I don't have enough trumps to establish the spades with confidence, so I think I can pass now. If I had a fourth club, I'd raise.
ROBB
Pass!
DAVID
My hand is good enough that I think he should make, but I don't think it is good enough to raise.
LYNN
Pass, of course. I doubt that partner has what he's supposed to have, but 3 cannot be anything but clubs. (This is clear.)
FRED
Not sure about the "system", but if 2 was natural, double should be takeout, whereas if it was artificial the double was clubs! If partner's double showed clubs my 2 bid was awful, and obviously I pass now. If partner's double was takeout, his 3 bid sounds like a big fit. Assuming he had Michaels available, I assume his only hand for 2-suiters was intermediate 12-15 or similar, and I convert to 3.
DAN
Pass. I must be missing something. Seems like both spades and clubs are breaking badly.
ED
Pass.
CHRIS
I'd be pragmatic and pass.
LEN
Pass
MARSHALL
Pass
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Now he must have clubs, right? Pass.
WINNING ACTION
Bid something. Anything. Partner has a 5440 moose. I don't know why he bid that way, but when I passed 3, he went bananas, screaming obscenities and (intelligently) leaving the room to cool down. Of course, he demanded I play it. I did well, taking 5 tricks. That's better than -180 in 2x because we'd also have a ZT penalty if partner couldn't leave the room. It's not as good as 5 making, though.
CONSENSUS
2 was silly. Passing now is obvious.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Bad problem. It was just a sanity check...I wanted to see if there was anyone who thought partner hadn't lost his mind. Nope.
On the other hand...yes, 2 was misinformation. It was in a sectional team game, though, so I chose not to call the director because:
1. getting the board back would require partner's presence, which would lead to a big ZT penalty and possibly to our ejection.
2. even if we didn't get a ZT penalty for partner's behavior after I passed 3, we surely would get one if he had to talk to the director in the state of mind he was in.
3. given our ludicrous result, it seems as if an AC might not be too far out of line leaving us with our bad result because of a failure "to play bridge." The other side might get an adjustment, but I'm not paying a ZT penalty to ding their score.
None vul, IMPs, long match
AJ Qxx KQxx K1098
RHO opens 2.

BARRY
Dbl. Not 2NT; with a doubleton spade I prefer showing the essentially take-out nature of the hand and not bidding 2NT.
MIKE
2NT. Seems obvious. Partner can have 10xx. Even opposite xxx I can hold up, and this action hardly precludes arriving in hearts.
ROBB
Double.
DAVID
Double.
LYNN
I'd double. Dale would bid 2NT. I wouldn't criticize pass. Who knows—there is no right answer. [One of the best types of panel hands is the "fine judgment" type. Here there are three reasonable actions with little to choose between two of them. Which is best? Who can tell? So the panel vote should be interesting and maybe illuminating. --Jeff]
FRED
I don't love it but prefer 2NT to double or pass. This is a strong NT with 1.5 stops (Txx with partner makes 2 stops) and it is just too good not to take some action. The lack of the 4th heart and the spade honor combination AJ makes me prefer NT.
DAN
Double. Don’t like 2NT for two reasons: the stopper is too short and so are the HCPs. To be honest, I’d double even if the Q were the A. This will be fine as dummy in a Moysian. If we’re playing Lebensohl, that makes double even better.
ED
2NT
CHRIS
Double. I like to double when it's a viable option. [Me, too. Maybe that's why I'm always dummy? --Jeff] We can always get to 3NT if partner has some values, and I think a suit partial will more often be right than 2NT.
LEN
Double. 2NT is good (with all my fillers) if pard has Txx, otherwise I have a bad hand.
MARSHALL
Pass
JEFF AT THE TABLE
This was also from the GNT final. I doubled. Partner Lebensohled into 3 and got sawed off. Good play held the damage to -300.
WINNING ACTION
pass. Double gets you to 3x for -300. Pass gets you to 2NT down 3. Doubled or not, I don't know. Pass yields +50. At the other table, teammates (somewhat reasonably) opened 3, after which it is pretty obvious to pass. 9 IMPs away.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 1

Double 8

2NT 3

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I still don't know, but it's simply my style to double for takeout in close cases. I'll keep doing it, rightly or wrongly.
None vul, IMPs, long match
xxxx Qx 109xx Axx

CHO RHO You LHO

1 Pass 1NT 2

2 Pass ?

BARRY
Pass. If I wanted to accept a game try I'd bid 2 (with the Q instread of the 10), but here I'd like to stop low.
[After seeing CHO's hand:] How absurd is 3 from partner over 2?
MIKE
2. I will sacrifice the safer partscore for a better shot at getting to our most likely game. In/Out valuation — this hand is worth about 9 HCP (upgrade Q to an ace and 109xx is upgraded opposite length). Keeping the ball rolling is indicated, so the question is 2 vs 3. 11 is a lot of tricks, so I aim for 10.
ROBB
tempting, but pass.
DAVID
It should have play. (I pass).
LYNN
I'd bid 2. Dale would bid 3, and prefers P to 2. I think 3 is too much of an overbid, but I want to keep the auction alive and give partner another chance, in case he's strong.
FRED
Notwithstanding how much the hand has improved I am stil inclined to Pass.
I know my cards are all working Qx, 4 card diamond support and A but where are we going?
I don't even really have to be as worried as I would be over a forcing NT that partner was bidding a short minor to inveigle heart preference. If his hand has not been clarified by the 2 interpose sfficiently to warrant either a 3 cue or a 3 (surely less strong? bid), I cannot quite see game unless he has perfect cards 64.
[After seeing the hand: ] Given the availability of 3 cue, I reckon that opener's hand is marginal for 3 — don't you?
DAN
Pass. I’m not nearly strong enough to raise diamonds and I don’t want to false-preference as it seems diamonds will play at least a trick better than hearts. The danger of getting too high (by bidding 2) seems much greater than the danger of missing game.
[After seeing the hand: ] I may have played too much Acol in my youth, but that sure looks like a 3 bid to me. 100% partner's fault.
ED
Pass. Not enough for 3 and a false preference to 2 may result in a minus score when 2 makes. If I had QT9x, I'd raise to 3.
CHRIS
3. Barely, but my cards are all good. If pard has big shape, we could easily have a game, and I have 3 available for a strong raise.
LEN
3. Pard should have some shape and we might have game.
MARSHALL
2, so I can bid 3 next round if opps compete
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Pass. If my ace were not the the opponent's suit, I'd bid 2.
WINNING ACTION
bid something. Partner has xx AKxxx AKQxx x and either red suit game makes.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 7

2 3

3 2

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
It's closer than the vote seems to indicate.
There is a theory issue. Several panelists suggested that since 3 was available as a game force, 3 should be invitational. I don't think that follows, and without discussion, 3 is surely forcing. On the other hand, with a takeout double available (yes, I know this isn't standard, but most expert pairs play it), partner might have chosen that (if I pass, that's not too bad) and then corrected 2 to 3. That might get across his power better than 2. This time, moreover, it would have got us to game.
If 3 is still game forcing, and complicated 3-suiters can make a takeout double, what's 3? Probably a Western Cue..."I was about to bid 3NT, partner, but I'm not sure about a club stop...what do you think?"
The panel oft suggested that with the Q, it'd be enough to take another call. To me, if the A were the A, it'd be good enough. It's that close.
Favorable, IMPs, long match
xx KQJxx J9xxx x

LHO CHO RHO You

2 2 Pass* ?

Pass forced game.

BARRY
5. If LHO is balanced he may have to double here. With spades I may not be able to close him out unless I bid 7...which does have some merits! But I know the deal of course.... [I showed it around in Reno. --Jeff]
MIKE
I'm not about to give LHO an easy rebid. So the choices are 5/6/7 (or I can check their agreement by psyching spades, but I don't really think that will fool anyone and LHO may be coming in clubs anyway). It looks like 6 is about right. I'm afraid 7 will force them to bid a making 7.
ROBB
5
DAVID
How "straight" is my partner? I smell a funny. The value bid looks like about 5 (perhaps 6). I am tempted to bid 2. I think it may not cost much. If it goes double-pass-pass, then I really am not much worse off than bidding 5 directly. My current partner might try 4, hoping it goes 4 all float. I like this problem. Put me down for 5 without much conviction.
LYNN
6. I'm trying to buy it. If I were trying to keep them out of a grand, I think I'd try 5, hoping for 5-P-6. If I thought my LHO might believe that doubles or "cue bids" of my suits were all takeout, I might try 3 now.
FRED
Does partner psych? [No. --Jeff] The straightforward call is 4, with clever calls of 4NT (to stop them BW and getting spades in), 5 also possible. 4 splinter suffers from the disadvantage of being low and that you have no cards outside hearts. 4 fitshowing suffers from the lack of high cards in the suit. Either of those bids could work — as could 5 or 6 (but they exclude partner — presumably you won't bid on double-guessing him if they then bid slam will you???). A lot depends which gadgets and system you have available — but I quite like 4NT to stop them Bw (although I use a double of such 4NT bids as Bw personally!!!)
DAN
5. The right bid is 3 (which seems eminently safe and disruptive) but I’d never suggest such a thing in a public forum. This is a goldilocks hand; 4 is not nearly enough and 6 too much, as it doesn’t leave (much) room for them to make the mistake of underbidding. 5 is unlikely to go for more than 800, and 5X might well be the par spot
ED
2. If I was sure that 3 would be interpreted and alerted as a fit bid, I'd try that.
CHRIS
5. Partner hasn't denied defense, so the 5 bid will tell him that I have none. He should be well placed over further bidding. Plus, I may play 5x when they have an easy slam. 4 seems all wet, and 6 doesn't seem to have much upside — are they really bidding a grand after my 5 bid? Pard can always save later over a small slam.
LEN
5 seems obvious. Pass might work, though.
MARSHALL
5
JEFF AT THE TABLE
5. I was torn between 5 and 7.
WINNING ACTION
hard to say. They are cold for 7. Opener has AKQJxxx — x AKQxx and responder has xx xx Axxx Jxxxx. At the table, 5 gave opener lots of room for very strong slam tries, but opener didn't take his strongest action (pass followed by 6). Responder rejected and we took -1460. I mentioned that I considered 7. Opener said he'd pass that. I polled a whole bunch of people; no one did anything but double that as responder. I've concluded that passing 7 is a mistake. Partner will never do anything but double. So you need to take the bull by the horns and bid 7 yourself. You know 7x is a really cheap save, so the IMP odds are huge to bid 7.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

2 1

4 1

5 7

6 2

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
At the table I only considered 5 and 7. Fooling around might work great if they get confused, but it might allow them to pass a lot more information early. I think a big bid is called for early. 5 seems about normal; there's just enough room for West to invite slam or a grand and for East to decline. The less they bid the better.
Does anyone have useful agreements over the 2 psych? I play 3 is natural and forcing and double is a balanced big hand. I think 4NT should be key card in spades, but it never occurred to me before.
Then again, I would never have had this problem in the first place. I play an opening 4NT is specific ace Blackwood. So my auction goes 4NT-5; 7. Ka-ching!
None vul, MPs.

AKQxx
Qx
K109xxx
— xxx
xxx
Axx
J9xx

West North East South

1 Pass 1NT Dbl

2 Pass 2NT* Pass

3 Pass 4 All Pass

2NT was Lebensohl.
Spades were 3-2. Diamonds were 2-2. Making six on a club lead. Assess the blame.

BARRY
We had a similar auction, maybe with no double of 1NT — as happened at my table East should bid 4?
MIKE
This hand belongs in 4, not 5. I would have opened the West hand with 1 [Me, too. --Jeff], as this sort of problem is quite predictable. Partner unsure that you are really 6/5 and lacking an honor in your suit (which shouldn't come as a surprise to you, eh?) will be hard to convince that the hand belongs in spades. I bet 3 over 1NTx'd would have been a self-splinter. [Of course. --Jeff] So that leaves the much more normal approach of opening your 5 card major. Also, given the lack of high-card strength in the hand, it seems that reversing is going to predictably lead to a lot of poor 3NT contracts. And look what happened over Lebensohl — West couldn't bid 3 so had to show even more extra values with 3!
Still East should have bid 4, as with 4-3-6-0 West would bid 3 and with 4-2-6-1 probably 3. So he should be 5-6. (Could he have AKQx Ax KQxxx Kx? Probably bid 3NT with that — East must have believed that some sort of massive 4252 hand was possible though).
West 55%, East 45%.
DAVID
I think east was "slightly chicken". Could have raised 3 to 4. Hot at IMPs I think it would be clearer. But obviously neither game is a "lock".
LYNN
I'd raise 3 to 4 as East. Dale and I both think that's automatic, and neither of us can see a good reason for 4 to be forcing. Dale also thinks West should bid over 4. I don't agree. East's auction seems consistent with xx Jxxx Jxx KJxx, and no game is good.
FRED
East failed to appreciate the power of a double fit, and that huge A opposite a 6-5 hand. Ignore the Q in the West hand and how weak could it be? I appreciate that it was matchpoints and a not vul game but the bidding suggests misfit and exit. East should bid 4 and hope over the 3 bid. How much worse could West be?
DAN
East 100%. What were West’s alternatives? Some might open 1 but that’s a huge mistake as the hand is certainly of reversing strength. As to the fourth round, is West supposed to unilaterally drive to game when partner has shown weakness twice? Bidding 5 says, "partner, you don’t know how to evaluate your hand, so I’ll do it for you." I would have been extremely surprised (not to mention dismayed) to see those spades hit in dummy.
(I guess) I could understand East’s passing 3, but 4 seems weird. Maybe East thought it was forcing? Still...
ED
I would have passed 1 but 1NT was the winning choice. West showed five spades with the 3 call so East should have raised. If West didn't really have five spades, it would be his problem.
LEN
West certainly didn't underbid. East 90%, for picking diamonds instead of spades. South 10% for gumming up the works.
CHRIS
Seems like an easy raise to 4. Why not?
MARSHALL
Cannot understand failure to bid 4 over 3.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
I was East. I thought 3 was an unconditional game force. Any hand less than that bids 3. So you don't want to play 3 with the West hand? And if partner holds xx xxx x QJ109xxx you still want to play spades, not clubs? And if he has 8 clubs? With spades likely to be 4-1, I wanted partner to suggest spades one more time before we played 4 instead of 5. Yes, partner could have garbage with only clubs and we'd want 4 not to be forcing, but isn't that an "Intelligence Transfer error?" The reason we want 4 not to be forcing is that we don't have our 3 bid, not that it shouldn't be forcing opposite a significantly stronger hand.
Chris argues against one of these points well: "Also, I have a theory about hands like these: when the opponents are not contesting the auction vigorously, these light games are more likely to make than otherwise. Over 2, might advancer not try three of some rounded suit with short spades?"
Therefore spades are probably not 4-1. So 4 is better than 4. Then again, if partner has AKxxx A KQJxxxx —, where do we want to be?
CONSENSUS
East should bid 4.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Chris convinced me that 4 is better than 4 because spades rate to break.
No one has convinced me that 4 isn't forcing. West made a game forcing 3 bid. (With less, he bids 3.) This is not a "bail from 3NT with no stoppers" auction, so a game force is a game force. We are happily thinking that 4 shouldn't be forcing because East could have no cover cards, but that is irrelevant. West should have nearly game in hand. With this shape, opening 2 requires a total mountain, so why can't West be able to make 4 or 5 opposite the hands quoted? The fact that West is very light for his action doesn't change the meaning of the auction; it just confuses us because it sort of makes sense to play 4 with West's hand opposite some garbage. But West can't have his actual hand, so that's an "if false, then..." argument. 4 is forcing.
If West can't stomach playing clubs because his spades are so good, he should have opened 1 in the first place.
Both vulnerable, MPs.
AJ6 652 A1093 543

LHO CHO RHO You

Pass Pass 2 Pass

Pass Dbl Pass ?

BARRY
2NT, natural with no Lebensohl facing a passed hand! Second choice 2.
MIKE
Blech is an understatement. Unfortunately, weak 2's in Diamonds aren't all that common, so this isn't a field problem. I'll bid 2NT. I think we are more likely to take 7 or 8 tricks in NT than to take 6 in diamonds.
ROBB
2NT
DAVID
At first I was going to bid 2, but as I plan to play this on a cross ruff, I think I need play in spades to keep control. Even though 2NT should not be artificial, I don't want to play it there. 2 may be harder for them to double if I am in trouble because I have honors. 2
LYNN
Pass, with absolutely no confidence. Dale and I play 2NT here as natural, not Lebensohl, but we'd still pass. Why not hope for six tricks on defense instead of eight on offense? (I'm leading the 2.)
FRED
I know CHO is a passed hand but where are you going on this hand? Pass and hope: I assume that he won't be 5+5+?? from failure to open.
DAN
Pass. I’m a pretty big fan of taking out takeout doubles, especially when the opps have the balance of power, but this is a special case. They shouldn’t make more than eight tricks, so I’m going to be -180 or better. If I bid, I’m probably -200 or worse. If I did bid, I’d bid 2, btw.
ED
Pass. We'll probably beat it half the time and have a near top when we do. If they make 2 (-180), we will still get some matchpoints from those that pull and go down one or more doubled or two or more undoubled when playing an inferior trump suit or getting a bad trump split. [Dreamer! When was the last time 2x -180 gave you anything but an awful score? --Jeff]
CHRIS
I'd pass, trying for the magic 200, although I know that bidding was the winner in real life. If I could make a responsive double of 2, I'd do that, but here I may pick the wrong strain if I bid (I'd guess to bid 2 if I bid out).
LEN
I'm not worried about -180. I am worried about -580. 2 (super-Vondracek). [Len obviously remembers the hand. "Vondracek" refers to "The Vondracek Phenomenon," an article from The Bridge World, in which the author suggests that with equal-length fits, often the weaker suit ought to be trumps. After years of research, the current answer to that question is, "with equal-length fits, the weaker suit ought to be trumps...sometimes." --Jeff]
MARSHALL
Pass. 50+% chance for a good board, 50-% chance for bottom. If I bid, my expectancy is less than 50%.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Wasn't there. Partner passed and we went -580. If we had cashed our spade trick, we'd only be -380. It wasn't a zero. Some pairs doubled off 3 and went -670. I would have bid 2, but I think it's close between 2 and 2. If partner's off-shape, he is more likely to have longer hearts than spades, and he can equal-level correct over 2 more easily than he can over 2. But 2 could be a calamity with trumps this bad. My goal is to minimize the chance of calamity, and 2 seems best poised to do that.
WINNING ACTION
bid something. 2 is +110. 2 is -100. 2NT isn't any good, -200.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 7

2 1

2 2

2NT 2

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
Again, closer than it looks with 7 passers and 5 bidders. I don't like 2NT at all. You know 2NT isn't making and rates not to be close. Partner doesn't have to have a 10-count to double here. That puts it in -200 territory.
Pass looks pretty normal, but (a) I hate passing takeout doubles without trump stacks, (b) I hate passing takeout doubles when I think they are making, and (c) if they are cold for an overtrick when partner has a maximum, perhaps passing isn't right?
I still think 2 is best.
None vul, MPs

K1063
A932
963
QJ

A52
KQ5
KQJ74
96 Q7
J864
A82
8643

J984
107
105
AK1072

South West North East

Pass 1NT 2* Pass

2* Dbl 2* Dbl

2 Dbl All Pass

2 = diamonds or both majors (Suction)
2 = pass or correct
2 = majors

After trump ace, trump, declarer made ten tricks. Assess the blame.

BARRY
Double of 2 was insane! East would have reopened with 2NT or 3, and normality would have ensued. [Unless South bid 3. --Jeff]
MIKE
West should have held down the second overtrick with a small trump lead. [Ooohh...that would have saved a lot of matchpoints! --Jeff] I assume the double of 2 was natural, although takeout would make more sense... and I bet that even this West would have perpetrated such a double holding AJ9x KQxx xx KQx (if my guess as to who was whom is right). But the double of 2 should have actually helped on this hand. Double of 2 is normal, double of 2 seems like an error, despite the fact that a small trump lead stands out (although not to this West). Pass of the double is clear. Had West passed 2, East could double with some appropriate 3-card holdings and with a hand like he actually held, bid 3.
Partnerships should strive to avoid defending 8-card fits at the 2-level if there is a decent alternative.
West 100%. I don't see what East could have possibly done differently.
ROBB
West 100%. Pretty basic to have 4 trump (maybe 3 great ones).
DAVID
You have to give a bit of credit to North/South for being enterprising and having methods that worked on these hands, some blame to East/West for methods that did not deal particularly well with the NS methods, it was not the greatest defense, but "bridge blame" on west for doubling 2 on A52. I view that as a bad bid. Advertisement - if double by either partner shows a doubleton, the partnership has an easy auction to the spot of 3 (If NS go on to 3, west would be advised to lead the K). So I score N +10, S +10, E -10 and W -110 (not to be confused with his actual minus 870 or whatever)
LYNN
Very sad. I'm not inclined to be seriously critical of anything but West's final X. Axx just isn't enough. If West had passed, East might find the winning 3 call, or a 2NT bid that West could convert. Also, I'd lead the K. If I really wanted to lead a trump, I'd lead low. East's X of 2 was aggressive, but I suspect people who win more matchpoint events than I do would consider it routine. [I think it's routine --Jeff]
FRED
Standard defence is to assume that if a bid is correctable, the double is takeout. [True over Multi. Not true in general in the US, though the idea is quite reasonable. --Jeff] On that basis West's double of 2 is hideous. Maybe they don't have that agreement, but if they did, West's double and subsequent pass is mandatory. West might have passed 2 but given his length and strength in hearts was entitled to assume cards from partner. Once he did bid this way the very least he could have done was lead the 2...Anyway unless the first double explicitly showed diamonds, 99% West (East gets 1% for playing with West). [The first double was undefined. Undefined doubles of artificial bids are usually natural, showing length and/or strength in the suit bid. See above. --Jeff]
DAN
West 45% / East 35% / methods 20%. Over 2 suction, East’s double should be "they made a mistake." East doesn’t need Stayman, because if North has diamonds there will be a takeout double available and if North has majors, well, let them try to take eight tricks.
West’s double of 2 just shows a suit and doesn’t imply any desire to double 2M. It lets East balance in 3 with the appropriate hand (like the one in the diagram!). East misunderstood this, but even in a different context the double of 2 is poor. Bad trumps, only two-plus tricks, too many diamonds. West’s final double is worse, though: only three trumps, and bad ones at that.
ED
If double of 2 and 2 were penalty in the East-West methods, then those are reasonable bids. However, West does not have a good defensive hand versus 2 and double is not a reasonable bid. Had West passed 2, East would have passed or bid 2NT for a minus score or bid 3 for a plus score. On defense, a small spade would have been a better opening lead than the A. However, as usual, the real gain or loss is in the bidding and West gets all the blame in my view.
CHRIS
West 100%. Double of 2 is poor with no defense (KQ of hearts are horrible cards on the auction), and spade ace lead is lousy.
LEN
East 35% (doubling 2 looks wrong) West 65% (doubling 2 is wrong)
MARSHALL
West 85%. Only purpose in doubling 2 is to suggest playing 3, and that seems unlikely. Double of 2 seems clearly wrong. Perhaps East should have bid 3 over double. Low spade lead better than ace.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
I was East. I vote 95% to West. He has an obvious pass of 2, which would lead to a great score in 3 or a really rotten one in 3x. But maybe 100% is too much...if N/S bid 3, which seems likely unless West doubles 2 and East pulls, E/W are doomed to a very poor score.
CONSENSUS
Bad problem. Everyone says West should not double 2 and should lead a small trump.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I think it's less clear than everyone else does. If the double of 2 is natural, should it require 5 pieces? If so, then opener does not have four spades and East should pull. Regardless, of course, West has a good offensive and a bad defensive hand, so he shouldn't suggest defending, but that doesn't mean that East's pass is completely clear-cut. I don't happen to agree with any of the givens, though. I don't think double is natural (it should be takeout), and if penalty, it needn't be 5 pieces, particularly since four good ones suggests strongly that North is about to bid 2, so with good defense against the majors as well as diamonds, it'd be good to double 2 to get partner involved in crunching them. And get him off to a good lead perhaps against two of a major whacked.
There's another issue...let's say that West passes and East bids 3. Isn't South going to bid 3? -140 is a disaster for E/W. Upon reflection, while I think West's bidding and lead were pretty bad, I don't think E/W had many matchpoints coming to them. So giving West a lot of blame isn't really fair. He was never getting a good result. His choice just looked ugly.
Both, IMPs, short martch
10xx Jx 98x AKxxx
1-(1)-?
Sorry, double shows four spades.

BARRY
Pass. Hope to get out alive — reopen with 2NT over a heart raise?
MIKE
Pass. 1NT seems like an error and 2 is too weird, even for me.
ROBB
Pass.
DAVID
You have no choice but to pass in standard. I play negative free bids in a strong club based system. I have other problems, but not this one.
LYNN
I'd bid 2, but I play weak NT. In standard, I think it's borderline between 2 and P, and I'd probably choose P. I'd lie about a fourth trump to make a negative X on some auctions, but not on this one. I'd need another K for 2, given the five-card suit.
FRED
Hope the "system" has some compensating features. Under these circumstances Pass and hope — feeling ill with only a doubleton heart ...but if 2 promises a rebid that is just too sick within partnership structure.
DAN
Pass. I’m not bidding 2 because I’m too weak. If I bid 2 there’s too great a chance of getting overboard (if partner made a game try over 2, I’d want to show the clubs but my trumps are too weak to cooperate so there’s no vig).
ED
Pass. Why is this a problem? [Looks like it isn't. --Jeff]
CHRIS
Pass. No strong opinion between pass, double, and 2. With the heart jack in diamonds, I'd try 2.
LEN
Why would double show four spades? Does 1 show this hand? 2, I guess, though pass is probably right.
MARSHALL
Dbl, even if it showed 4 spades. Dbl probably gains when partner bids 1NT, 2 or 2, even 1 if no one bids too much. Lots of bidding is unlikely when I have 8 points with a balanced hand. Double only loses when the bidding is wild like 3 by LHO, 3 or 4 by partner.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
I bid 2.
WINNING ACTION
none, really, but passing leads to -80 and everything else is worse. Bidding 2 led to a 3-3 fit and -200. A negative double will get us to 1. I don't know if that makes or goes down.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 8

Double 1

2 3

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
OK, 2 was weird.
MPs, both, dealer
KJx 10xxx AQ Qxxx
Do you open?

BARRY
Don't care. My view is to open 12 counts with club length (the Drury corollary) particularly if clubs are good. Here I just don't care (copyright Irina Levitina).
MIKE
Yes.
ROBB
I don't but most do.
DAVID
Obviously a question of style and partnership agreement, but yes I would I and I don't need the 10 to do so.
LYNN
Dale would, regardless of method. I think I'd pass playing standard, but open a weak NT if I'm playing them.
FRED
Yes weak NT : 12 HCP, normal distribution and 3+controls. Do I love my hand — no I don't.
Even playing a strong NT, 5 card major system (yuk!) I open: My hand is a barely acceptable minimum, I am opening in my long suit and am happy to raise hearts, while otherwise my descriptive NT rebid will limit my hand both by distribution and shape...pity that it is not for the lead but then it is not my system...
DAN
Yes, if the bottom of my 1NT is any 15. If it’s 15+ to 18, then no.
ED
No. This hand is not worth 12 HCP. Do you want to be in game if partner has the same type of hand, i.e., AQx Qxxx KJ Txxx? [One notrump isn't cold vs. those cards. --Jeff]
CHRIS
I'd pass vul. I hate -200 in 1NT, or even -100 instead of -90. Equal red is the passers' vul. [Good point. --Jeff]
LEN
No.
MARSHALL
Yes, but wouldn’t criticize a pass.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
No.
WINNING ACTION
bid. It gets us to hearts (though a weak NT is no good here) for +110 and, more importantly, preempts their diamonds which made -110 against us.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 6

Bid 5

Don't Care 1

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
It's a toss-up. I open light hands with shape, but this one is balanced crap. I'm a little conservative on those. I'd open it a 12-14 NT too. Or a 10-12. Note that weak NTers and strong NTs open about as many hands. Just different ones. Weak NTers open more crappy balanced hands. They pass more unbalanced hands with minors. Shrug.
You can put me in the "don't care" camp. If I can open it 1NT, great, whatever the range. If I can't, I don't care if we open or not. There are advantages to opening and advantages to passing. Who knows which outweighs the other?
For what it's worth, K&R calls this 9.90. I think that's low. It looks to me like a bad 11 or a good 10. If I opened a 10-12 and partner invited in NT, I'd go. And expect to go down a little less than half the time despite 26 HCP.
On the other hand, I've learned that at matchpoints, it's just wrong to downgrade any 15-counts that the field is opening 1NT. At IMPs, there's a reasonable chance that your judgment will allow you to stay out of a bad game or slam by doing so. At matchpoints, you much more often just end up changing the auction. That might get NT played from a different side or change the opening lead. Or let them get a lead-directing overcall in or the like. These things happen often enough that not opening 1NT is essentially rolling the dice, setting your side's matchpoint score pretty much entirely on your one decision. Personally, I'd rather have my score determined by my play of the hand and the opponents' defense or our partnership bidding when I hold a balanced 15, so it just doesn't pay to open one of a minor on those hands. Why take 50% when we rate to do better than that? Perhaps, therefore, this is a corrollary—if the field is going to open 1, just do it and don't worry about the fact that it's a mild overbid.

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@gg.caltech.edu, Apr. 5, 2004

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

West	North	East	South
1	Pass	1NT	Dbl
2	Pass	2NT*	Pass
3	Pass	4	All Pass

	K1063 A932 963 QJ
A52 KQ5 KQJ74 96		Q7 J864 A82 8643
	J984 107 105 AK1072


AKQxx Qx K109xxx —		xxx xxx Axx J9xx