Some problems from the West LA Sectional: Answers

All at IMPs, short matches

Today's panelists: Ed Davis, David Caprera, David Milton, Barry Rigal, Kent Hartman, Bobby Bodenheimer, John Jones, Mark Bartusek

A good set of problems, it seems. There are two reasonable lines of play on the first hand; no one mentioned one of them, which happens to be the winning line. On three of the four other problems, the panel is very split; on the only one in which there is a clear consensus, not only was it the losing action at the table, there is a moderate vote for two other choices.

  1. unfavorable
    S: KJxx
    H: Qx
    D: 10xx
    C: A9xx
    S: Qx
    H: Kxxx
    D: KQx
    C: KQJx

    West North EastSouth
    2H: Pass Pass 2NT
    Pass 3C: Pass 3D:
    Pass 3NT All Pass

    Opening lead: H:J
    East plays the H:2 at trick 1, upside down.

    Plan the play.

    Most did something like this, but this is (I think) the best variation on the line:

    MARK
    I will play for the D:A onside (and hope East doesn't also have the S:A and exactly 6 spades). (I will assume hearts are 6-1)
    H:Q winning
    Diamond to Queen
    C:K
    C:Q
    S:Q
    Spade to Jack (if this wins then diamond to King)
    If spade loses then opponents will have to either:
    a) put me back on board with spade
    b) allow 2 club entries to board (to lead up to diamond honor and get back to dummy to cash last spade trick)
    c) play diamonds for me
    d) give me extra heart trick

    (If diamond Ace is offside then hopefully West won't return a diamond; then I can either endplay East in spades or West in diamonds)

    WINNING ACTION
    win the H:Q and continue hearts. The whole hand is:
    S: KJ8x
    H: Qx
    D: 10xx
    C: A9xx
    S: 9xx
    H: AJ109x
    D: Jxx
    C: xx    		 S: A10xx
    H: xx
    D: A9xx
    C: 10xx
    S: Qx
    H: Kxxx
    D: KQx
    C: KQJx
    Which is the right play? I don't know. Playing spades requires hearts 6-1, the D:A onside, and spades 2-5 or better. Playing hearts requires the 2H: opener not to have a second ace. Given that if he did have a 2nd ace and the D:J as well, a lot would open 1H: if it weren't defective, say  S:Axx H:AJ109xx D:Jxx C:x, I think it's somewhat more likely that hearts are 5-2 than 6-1. It obviously depends on LHO's bidding style. Against modern or madcap preemptors, it's clearly best to play a heart. Against traditional or conservative preemptors, playing spades is probably best. I think there are more of the former than the latter out there these days, particularly at these colors. Mark argues that his line is a better percentage line than playing hearts, but judging the two requires knowing LHO's preempting proclivities, as the ratio of hearts 5-2 to 6-1 dominates the calculation. He thinks the ratio is 2-98; I think it's about 75-25. Remember, even if relatively few players would open the 5-card suit, it is dealt much more often than the six-card suit, so it's more likely overall.

    No one mentioned playing a heart early before being told about it, so I don't think the panel's unanimous (except me) vote for something like Mark's line means more than that they didn't consider it. It sure isn't obvious.

  2. none vul

     S:x H:J109xx D:x C:QJ9xxx

    You LHO CHO RHO
    Pass1D: 1NT Pass
    ?

    1NT was 16-19. What's your plan?

    ED
    xfer to H:, bid 3C:. Bid 4C: over 3NT and pull to 5C: if partner corrects to 4H: over 4C:.
    MARK
    2NT transfer....Clubs will be safer at IMPs (and this takes away the whole 2-level from LHO!). Hopefully this will stop the opponents from bidding Spades. This hand would be easier to bid when LHO competes further if playing 2S: transfers to clubs (but that would unfortunately allow LHO an easy double for competetive purposes).

    If the auction continues 3S: by LHO I will probably pass for the remainder of the auction. If the auction continues 3D: by LHO, I will probably compete to 4C:.

    BARRY
    Transfer to hearts and give up. If partner breaks the transfer I'll play 4H: my way up.
    KENT
    If partner has a fit and a bunch of controls in the right places, we have game. Originally I was signing off in clubs. On reflection, I'll transfer to hearts and pass unless partner superaccepts, in which case I'll bid game. The downside is that the opponents may find their spade fit over a signoff, but I can bid 3C: over 2S: and the partscore battle rages anew.
    DAVIDC
    I would bid 2S: as a transfer to C:. [If not available,] I just get to 3C: however I can. I am giving up on game and want to ensure my plus (3C: rates to be better than 2H:).
    BOBBY
    Transfer to hearts, then bid 3C: and 4C:.
    DAVIDM
    I am going to transfer to clubs and sign off. If they then compete with 3D:, I will try 3H:. The problem with transfering to hearts is A - it may not be right and B - you can never bring clubs into the picture if they compete in diamonds.
    JJ
    I'm a chicken. I transfer to H: and if pard superaccepts, I raise. Otherwise, I'm done unless the opps balance.
    JEFF AT THE TABLE
    2D:, then 3C:.
    WINNING ACTION
    drive to a heart or club game. Partner has  S:A10xx H:KQ D:K98xx C:AK. JJ claims declarer's diamonds were Q98xx, but my partner claims he had a 19-count. As the cards lay, it didn't matter.
    VOTES
    PlanVotes
    xfer to hearts and bid 3C:3
    xfer to hearts and Pass3
    xfer to clubs and Pass3
    JEFF UPON REFLECTION
    Very close call. I don't like transferring to hearts and giving up; the hand will play at least as well in 3C: than 2H:. With one parter, I can bid Stayman. If he has four hearts, we can play 4H:; if he doesn't, we can play 3C:. With this moose for clubs, he'd even be able to raise, so we'd get to game. Without that, it seems like a toss-up between trying for game and stopping in 3C:. Transferring to hearts will let us get to game if he superaccepts. If you play superaccepts on all 4-card holdings, that'd be common enough to make it worth playing the inferior partscore some of the time, but otherwise, I think it's not a good tradeoff.
  3. favorable

     S:x H:AQ9x D:A10xxx C:10xx

    LHO CHO RHO You
    1S: 2NT Pass ?

    ED
    4S:
    MARK
    5D:...Seems clear-cut. I don't want to hear 4S: from LHO, so let him make the final guess.
    BARRY
    5D:. WTFP? I would not go looking for slam and would not let the oppo in cheaply.
    KENT
    5D:. At favorable, partner doesn't rate to have enough to make more, and someone has a lot of spades. We should have a play for this. I know what strain we're playing in--bid what I think we can make now.
    DAVIDC
    4D:. Invitational. (Yes, I do play it that way).
    BOBBY
    4D:. All my cards are working, so if partner has anything, we should be in game. Even if partner has dregs, the 4 level should be safe.
    DAVIDM
    5D:. If I were the one bidding 2NT opposite me (I take my unusual 2NT calls very seriously), I would perhaps splinter with 4S: and correct clubs to diamonds. But, these days, most people really abuse the unusual 2NT call.
    JJ
    The good news: I have 5 card support, 2 aces, a stiff in the opps' suit. The bad news: pard was white on red, C:Txx is UGLY!. The chance that dealer may wish to bid 4S: eliminates any thought of my bidding below 4S:. Thus, only 4S: (splinter in support of a minor (pard temporarily assumes C:, not D:)), and 5D: appeal. The chance that the opps may be bidding again sway me to make the more aggressive splinter bid to get more help from pard. If I bid 5D: (it's very close) then I will double 5S:.

    [I don't understand the reasoning behind the last two sentences. I know what to do if the opponents bid over 5D:; I don't need partner to help. Moreover, I want them to bid. 5D: might not cold, but I think it's a favorite. And I think they are getting butchered in 5S:. Doubled. 4S: discourages them from bidding on, so that's its downside. Its upside is reaching a possible slam. --Jeff]

    JEFF AT THE TABLE
    5D:
    WINNING ACTION
    strong bidding; partner has  S:Qx H:x D:KQxxx C:AKQxx. But don't let the hand get played from partner's side; clubs are 5-0.
    VOTES
    ActionVotes
    5D:5
    4S:2
    4D:2
    JEFF UPON REFLECTION
    5D: seemed obvious at the table. I considered 4S:, but rejected it.

    4S: certainly is better this time, but do I really want to tell the opponents I think it's our hand? I guess, "usually not," because one of the common ways for 5D: to win is for the opponents to take action, either to double us when we are cold, or to bid to 5S:, which I shall double. Bidding 4S: will prevent those wins, trading them for successful slams when partner has a good hand and two spades. That's an easy trade; the latter probably happen less than 10% as often as the former.

    This is the only problem in the set in which there is a strong consensus.

  4. unfavorable

     S:KQ8xxx H:x D:AQ10 C:Axx

    RHO You LHO CHO
    2C:* 2S: 3C: 4S:
    5C: ?

    2C: was Precision, 6+C: or 5C: + 4-card major, 11-15.

    ED
    5D:
    MARK
    5S:...We might be cold for 6, but it is impractical to try for it. We won't get rich defending 5C:, so let's bid our vulnerable game which should be 90% (partner rates to have a stiff club). Note that partner did not cuebid 4C: showing a good 4S: bid.
    BARRY
    5S:.. OK they've talked me into it. Pass is NOT forcing so I have to commit, and I am rashly optimistic that I'll buy a stiff club -- of course I do not have to! Facing e.g.  S:Axxxx H:???? D:??? C:x we might easily get only 300 from 5C: but still be laydown for 5S:.
    KENT
    5D:. Given that he is short in clubs, partner's failure to cue or make a fit-showing jump indicates less than limit raise values. Partner saw the vulnerability. I'm more concerned about missing a cold slam opposite  S:Axxxx H:xxxx D:Kxx C:x. I don't know if I'd cue 4C: with that or not, but I think at this vulnerability I'd bid 6 with it over 5D:. 3C: can be anything, particularly at favorable.
    DAVIDC
    5D:. Is  S:Axxx H:Axxx D:Jxxx C:x too much to ask for? (Or  S:Axxx H:xxxx D:Kxxx C:x but I don't know how to get to 6 with that.)
    BOBBY
    I don't think pass is forcing in this auction. It's close. I doubt they are making 5C:, but 5S: should have play. Does it have enough play to warrant bidding it? I think so. 5S:.
    DAVIDM
    Do I bid 5S: and settle or try for magic with 5D:? I think I will just try 5S:. Partner should have something like  S:Axxxx H:Qxxx D:xxx C:x as a minimum at these colors. If he is  S:Axxxx H:Qxxxx D:xx C:x even better. I expect to lose a heart and a diamond.
    JJ
    5S: might be a double game swing, thus I bid.
    JEFF AT THE TABLE
    5D:. Partner bid 5H: and I bid 6S:.
    WINNING ACTION
    invite or drive to slam. Partner has  S:J10xx H:AQJ9x D:98x C:x and the red kings are where they ought to be.
    VOTES
    ActionVotes
    5D:4
    5S:5
    JEFF UPON REFLECTION
    Bidding 5D: seems free and therefore the right choice. I expected someone to double 5C: ("the five-level belongs to the opponents") but no one did.

    Two minor points: (1) is pass forcing here? No way. Just because we've bid a red game doesn't mean we have the balance of the power; neither of us has taken a strong action. If partner had bid 4C: over 3C:, then we'd be in a force. (2) Is 5D: a clear slam try or a fit bid or something else? I think it's a clear slam try. We are on lead vs. clubs, so we aren't setting up the defense. If it were a fit bid, it would authorize partner to bid over their 6C:. Which makes it by definition a slam try. Does it promise control in diamonds, length in diamonds, or is it artificial? I don't know, but most would assume a control. It's probably most useful as an artificial slam try in theory, giving partner a 5H: waffle, but I doubt anyone has that agreement.

  5. favorable

     S:KQ109xx H:x D:AQx C:AJx

    LHO CHO RHO You
    1D: PassPass ?

    ED
    Is this too good for 2S:? Close. Change a spot card to the S:J or D:J and it is too strong. Take away the D:Q or C:J and I'd bid 2S:. I'm going to double and jump in spades on this hand.

    The alternative to 2S: is double and then ???. It is probably best to play a jump after the double in the balancing seat is the one-suiter too good for an initial jump, thus non-forcing. A direct seat jump after a double is one-suited very strong, probably needing just one card for game. This is available because you can double and non-jump bid your suit in the direct seat with a hand as strong as  S:KQT9xx H:x D:AQx C:AQx; therefore the jump should have AKJ instead of AQx. The situation is not as well defined in the balancing seat since my max for overcalling 1S: is about 14 HCP.

    MARK
    2S:...This hand might be a tad heavy, but it looks like the perfect call. It will likely shut out the opponents' hearts. Note that the D:K is likely to be offside.
    BARRY
    Double then bid spades, by my reckoning this is the D:Q too strong for a 2S: intermediate jump.
    KENT
    3S:. With the spade jack instead of the nine, I'd bid 3S: faster. The hand feels too good for 2S:, and I'd like to take up some room in case the opponents have not discovered a major secondary fit. I think this auction invites a raise if partner has sharp stuff. As partner couldn't cough up an overcall, what strength he has is outside hearts, which suits this hand well.
    DAVIDC
    Double. Too good for 2S:.
    BOBBY
    Dbl and then change suit to spades.
    DAVIDM
    This hand is almost good enough to balance with 3S:. If the C:J were the C:Q, that is what I would bid. Partner should then raise with anything resembling a trick. On this hand, one trick isn't going to cut it so I need more from partner. I am going to balance with 2S: although I wouldn't argue too much if someone said I had to double.
    JJ
    2S: seems about right in balancing seat. This is near a maximum, but about what it should show: a minimum double followed by bidding my suit. Even if I were heavy for a balancing jump in the partnership methods, I might try it because the alternative of doubling and encouraging CHO in H: is so awful (I hate having THREE OPPONENTS on a hand).
    JEFF AT THE TABLE
    2S:
    WINNING ACTION
    anything. Partner has  S:— H:Kxxxx D:xxxx C:Kxxx.
    VOTES
    ActionVotes
    Double4
    2S:4
    3S:1
    JEFF UPON REFLECTION
    This is obviously a choice between double and 2S:. I think 2S: is nominally 11-15, so it's a mild underbid. The downside of doubling is that partner might bid lots of hearts. Since he didn't preempt or overcall, if he does that, his hearts will stink, forcing us to correct to spades at an uncomfortable level. If the vulnerability were different (it's favorable) I think this would be more worrisome; given that he'll preempt aggressively at favorable, he's unlikely to bury us now, which seems to me to make double the best action. If we were red, I'd like 2S: better.

    I have never heard of Ed's systemic tweak, that double followed by a single jump isn't significantly stronger than double followed by a correction, just more oriented towards the one suit. It seems sensible, but only in the balancing seat. I wonder if it should be restricted to jumps to the 2-level, or should it be on at the 3-level as well? (E.g. 1D:-pass-pass-dbl; pass-2C:-pass-2S:/3S:.)

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@gg.caltech.edu, May 27, 2003