Bidding contest

[dkharty]

My local ACBL unit (137) has a quarterly newsletter called "Table Talk". A regular feature is "It's Your Bid", a Master Solvers Club-style bidding contest with a panel of experts, to which readers are invited to submit their answers. The expert panel is very strong; it contains more than one national champion and a regular forums poster to boot. I thought it would be interesting to submit a "BBO Forum Consensus" set of answers and see how it scored compared to the panel. If enough people are interested and post answers, I'll compile and submit them to the editor.

 

Bidding is presumed to be 2/1 with standard (but minimal) gadgetry.

 

The latest issue poses the following five problems. You are always South.

 

1. IMPs, both vul. South deals. ♠KJ973 ♥A73 ♦-- ♣AKT82

 

1S - (2D) - dbl- (3D)

?

 

2. MTPTs, unfav. North deals. ♠4 ♥875 ♦QT5 ♣AK6543

 

1S - (2D) - p - (p)

dbl - (p) - ?

 

also asked: Do you agree with South's first call, and if not, what would your call have been?

 

3. MTPTs, none vul. West deals. ♠A3 ♥5 ♦AKQ54 ♣Q7643

(3H) - p - (p) - ?

 

4. IMPs, both vul. North deals. ♠6 ♥T985 ♦764 ♣AQJ63

p - (p) - 1C - (1H)

dbl - (p) - ?

 

5. IMPs, none vul. South deals. ♠AQ762 ♥K9 ♦KT962 ♣6

1S - (p) - 2C - (3H)

?

[Jlall]

The best way to get a real forum consensus is to have people PM you their answers imo. Posting can definitely bias the results.

[jjbrr]

The best way to get a real forum consensus is to have people PM you their answers imo. Posting can definitely bias the results.

lol i saw jlall was the last person to post in this thread, then I read OP and i lol'd. I'm glad you posted what I was thinking!

[dkharty]

The best way to get a real forum consensus is to have people PM you their answers imo. Posting can definitely bias the results.

Works for me. If anyone's interested...

 

Also, I'm not really concerned about being scientific or anything...if someone posts something particularly persuasive and brings others around to his or her point of view, that's fine in my book. Yes that's "biasing" the results, but if it produces a good set of answers along with some interesting points to make about the hands in question, that's enough for me.

[dkharty]

Some interesting answers so far, thanks all...

[hanp]

Somehow I doubt that the answers will give a consensus. Here are my answers:

 

1. Double, this one seems easy.

 

2. This kind of problem props up fairly often, and this time there are many possibilities, including a direct 2NT, a delayed 2NT, a direct 3C (my clear choice at IMPs), a delayed 3C and pass. I'll go with the delayed 3C at MPs but I find it a difficult call.

 

3. At MPs 4D. Double can work out well but we'd be stuck too often.

 

4. 2C. We are not doubled yet, pass is too pessimistic.

 

5. Pass, will bid 5D if partner bids 4H.

[jjbrr]

I think 2 is the most interesting. I chose 4♣ fwiw but I'm not happy about it for obvious reasons.

[hrothgar]

Somehow I doubt that the answers will give a consensus. Here are my answers:

 

1. Double, this one seems easy.

 

2. This kind of problem props up fairly often, and this time there are many possibilities, including a direct 2NT, a delayed 2NT, a direct 3C (my clear choice at IMPs), a delayed 3C and pass. I'll go with the delayed 3C at MPs but I find it a difficult call.

 

3. At MPs 4D. Double can work out well but we'd be stuck too often.

 

4. 2C. We are not doubled yet, pass is too pessimistic.

 

5. Pass, will bid 5D if partner bids 4H.

Hmmm...

 

My answers looked quite different

 

1. 4♣. With AKTxx in clubs, I prefer to show shape rather than pussyfoot around with a responsive double. I'm also going to be VERY unhappy if partner chooses to pass. We almost certainly have a slam. I don't want to risk defending at the three level.

 

2. I also like the direct 3♣. Given that I'm stuck, I prefer a 3♦ cue. If partner can bid 3N, I'm going to be happy. If not, I'll be able to show my clubs.

 

3. 4D (Wow, we agreed on one)

 

4. 2D (Couldn't last)

 

5. Pass (Agreed on 2 out of the 5 bids)

[billw55]

Are you seriously saying that I opened 1♣ on hand 4?

[Lobowolf]

I was going to suggest anonymous posting also, but I'm not sure if that's just because Justin thinks it would be a good idea.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#0 I agree, that PM may be better, similar one could ask for answers

in hidden mode.

#1 4C

#2 3C, if I have the option to go via 2NT, to show a better than min

hand for the 3C bid, that would be good, if not, I still would bid 3C

#3 4NT

#4 2C, the 1C opening is just ..., but ok I subbed in, so 2C it is

#5 Pass

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: The idea is a good one.

[Hanoi5]

This was my private reply:

 

1. 5 Clubs. I was thinking 4 might be enough but there are many hands where partner would pass when game is on. X could be interesting, too.

 

2. 3 Diamonds. I agree with the first Pass unless we were playing negative free bids or something. I expect partner to bid 3Nt with a diamond stopper, in which case it could be our game.

 

3. Double. It's Mp's and I can't let a penalty in my partner's hand get burned by my 4NT or 4 Diamonds.

 

4. 2 Clubs. Why did I open?

 

5. Double. If my partner bids Diamonds or NT I'm happy. Spades is doubtful (does he have real support or just 2 cards and nothing to say?) but I guess I'd bid 3NT then. 4 Clubs is the worst, I'd have to bid 4♦.

[jjbrr]

I think 2 is the most interesting. I chose 4♣ fwiw but I'm not happy about it for obvious reasons.

Uh. I just looked at my answers. I apparently chose 3♦. lol at myself.

 

It just shows that I thought there were a lot of bids that could be right.

[mikeh]

my answers are, I suspect, too late to create the bias justin was concerned about, and, anyway, my answers appear to be somewhat idiosyncratic :P

 

1. I choose 4♣: not a sign of weakness in my book, and highly suggestive of 5=5 blacks. Partner's negative double implied nothing about clubs, so I have to have shape and power to bid 4♣. Double seems insane to me: surely we'd all double with say 5=1=3=4 shape or many 5=2=2=4 hands with extras. Partner will often leave it in. Enough said. I'd rather bid 4♥ than double, but we can get back to hearts sometimes, when it is right, over 4♣, and never get to clubs over 4♥.

 

 

2. 3N: assuming the clubs run, we have 7 tricks in our hand. No number of clubs seems right, even if we played a form of lebensohl here. And bidding 3♦, expecting a reopening partner to hold a diamond stop seems weird. Besides, if he has a diamond stop, there will be no real advantage for him declaring on most holdings...thanks to our possession of the 10.

 

Partner will know we don't have a perfect hand: we didn't bid 2N the first time, nor did we sit for the double.

 

 

3. 4♦, given that I have no idea whether we have a gadget to show the minors here...so I make the 'obvious' bid. Double could well be best, given the sequence to date, but it will be very wrong whenever it is wrong. I found this to be the toughest problem and wouldn't be at all surprised to find that tougher mp players than I choose double. Or even, dare I say it: pass. After all, pass may lead to a plus when any other action, including a takeout double, leads to a minus.

 

4. Why did I open? I hate light minor openings, which do little to preempt the opposition (yes, most pairs have far fewer agreements after their side overcalls than when they open, but they also get to make a takeout double of 1♣). I had to look twice...can we even think of any call other than 2♣?

 

 

5. double. Seems obvious. BTW, this hand seems to be a useful companion to (1)..... and I see double on both as suggesting extra values combined with a willingness (not a desire) to defend. I have that here: I don't have the willingness to defend on (1).

[rbforster]

My answers

 

1. X

2. 3N, planning on running my clubs :P

3. 4D, unhappily

4. easy 2C

5. pass, and glad we're playing 2/1

[dkharty]

So far the only thing everyone seems to agree on is that the 1C opening (#4) was garbage.

 

My own answers, which have been duplicated by a couple of others:

 

1. 4♣. Double was a close second but I always seem to regret doing it with a void in their suit.

2. 3NT. Sure hope clubs are friendly.

3. 4♦

4. 2♣. Yeah I don't like it either.

5. pass

[pooltuna]

So far the only thing everyone seems to agree on is that the 1C opening (#4) was garbage.

 

My own answers, which have been duplicated by a couple of others:

 

1.  4♣.  Double was a close second but I always seem to regret doing it with a void in their suit.

2.  3NT.  Sure hope clubs are friendly.

3.  4♦

4.  2♣.  Yeah I don't like it either.

5.  pass

My choices are below

 

1] 4♣

2] 3NT

3] X

4] 3♣

5] pass

[mikeh]

So far the only thing everyone seems to agree on is that the 1C opening (#4) was garbage.

(snip)

My choices are below

 

1] 4♣

2] 3NT

3] X

4] 3♣

5] pass

3♣ on No. 4?????? I suspet a typo or a misread of the problem (by either you or me)

[hanp]

On the first one, I have a hard time imagining a double on a 5134 shape. I think I would only do this on a very strong hand planning to bid 4C next, it is not a shape partner will have in mind for my double.

 

On the second hand I think that a direct 3C is more attractive than a delayed jump to 3NT.

 

On 3, what are people planning to do if partner bids 3S or 4S? I think this is pretty big risk at matchpoints.

 

On 4 Pooltuna jumps to 3C on a 7-count and hrothgar reverses. It's a strange world.

 

On 5 I am assuming that 2C is forcing to game and double by us is penalty and says nothing about extra values (which we don't have anyway?). If partner's 2C really showed club length then I can understand doubling but as it doesn't, I think I will leave the decision up to partner.

[hrothgar]

On 4 Pooltuna jumps to 3C on a 7-count and hrothgar reverses. It's a strange world.

I'm responding to a negative double.

 

The 2♦ rebid doesn't promise anything like the same strength as a a normal reverse.

 

I didn't expect 2♦ to be popular, however, at the table its what I'd chose. I'm going to score some club honors regardless of what happens. If I'm going to make this hand, I need to get some ruffs and ruffing Spades with Diamonds is looking good right now.

[bluecalm]

My answers before reading any posts below:

 

1) DBL - wtp ? :ph34r:

2) 2NT assuming it's natural and we don't play any kind of lebensohl here; I am not especially happy about it; I think I can be easily convinced there is much better option but I don't see it for now.

3) DBL - wtp again for me;

4) 2♣; If I am reading it right I opened the bidding with 7hcp and partner made t/o double (showing 4spades I guess). I can't see anything but 2♣ to be honest.

 

5)Very difficult without agreements because it's not clear if partner interprets our 3NT as showing extras here. I bid 3NT.

 

EDIT:

 

After reading replies:

 

I choose 4♣: not a sign of weakness in my book, and highly suggestive of 5=5 blacks. Partner's negative double implied nothing about clubs, so I have to have shape and power to bid 4♣. Double seems insane to me: surely we'd all double with say 5=1=3=4 shape or many 5=2=2=4 hands with extras. Partner will often leave it in. Enough said. I'd rather bid 4♥ than double, but we can get back to hearts sometimes, when it is right, over 4♣, and never get to clubs over 4♥.

 

Yeah that makes a lot of sense to me. I am just too afraid partner has hearts and I think I have to pass 4♥ from him. I would definitely choose 4♣ playing negative free bids because then I can make a move toward slam after 4♥.

 

2. 3N: assuming the clubs run, we have 7 tricks in our hand.

 

Yeah, 3NT was 2nd call I considered. I am used to very light style of reopening though (every time with xx of ♦). Is your style of reopening different or do you bid 3NT regardless ?

 

I still can't believe anybody would choose anything different than 2♣ in 4th.

I am also very surprised people aren't doubling in hand no. 3; So many disasters waiting for us if we don't double (miss penalty, miss 3NT, miss 4♠ on spades 5-2 or even 6-2 if partner is weak). I really really hate 4♦. I frankly prefer 3NT and pray over 4♦. I think it's just that bad.

[dkharty]

Somehow I doubt that the answers will give a consensus.

True to a certain extent, but at this point there is only one problem which doesn't have an outright majority answer. Here are the results so far, with 13 sets of answers submitted:

 

1. 4♣. 7 votes. Strong minority vote for double (4 votes). One vote each for 5♣ and 4♦.

 

2. This is the closest vote. 3NT is the largest single votegetter (5 votes), with significant support for 3♣ (4 votes) and 3♦ (3 votes). Also 1 vote for 2NT.

 

3. 4♦ (8 votes). Other options are double (3 votes) and 4NT (2 votes).

 

4. 2♣ (11 votes). The strongest consensus, with several people commenting on how much they hated the 1♣ opening bid. 3♣ and 2♦ garnered 1 vote each.

 

5. Pass (10 votes). Double (2 votes) and 3NT (1 vote) were also mentioned.

[jjbrr]

I don't hate the 1♣ opener as much as others, I guess. I don't think I would have done it (it's either too strong or too weak, depending on how you look at it), but partner is unlikely to hang us after a 2♣ rebid, and the opponents are likely to bid anyway.

[Jlall]

I was going to suggest anonymous posting also, but I'm not sure if that's just because Justin thinks it would be a good idea.

haha

[bluecalm]

OP, don't forge to keep us informed about choices of the panelists once they become public.

Justin, don't forget to keep us informed about your choices once no more people post theirs anymore.