Bidding contest

[dkharty]

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.

Will do. As I said, it's a quarterly publication, so it will be a while before the next issue comes out, but I'll definitely post the results eventually.

 

I guess I will just set an arbitrary deadline for answers...how about Saturday, May 29, at 6:00 p.m. EDT? That's a little over 48 hours from now so it should be plenty of time. If Justin (or anyone else for that matter) would like to submit answers but wants to keep them hidden until after the deadline, feel free to PM me and I will keep them secret until Saturday night.

[Jlall]

I thought 4 and 5 were auto (2C and pass). The others are good problems.

 

Disagree with hanp that X would be weird on 5314 shape on the first auction, I think that is by far the most common shape. What else can one do with like 15 and that shape? We have extras, we want to compete, and we don't know what suit to play in.

 

Double with a void is risky as partner might pass, but it keeps hearts in the game quite well. I would be worried after 4C that we might miss hearts, and I also think it's an underbid (it shows a good hand but our hand is extremely good. We would bid 4C if one of our hearts was a diamond).

 

Overall I'd go with double on that board.

 

Hand 2 I would have bid 2N over 2D (disagree with the first pass). Now it's pretty impossible, but I'd probably bid 3D which I think always shows a hand with clubs too good to bid 3C. With say 2344 with 4 small diamonds I would always double first (10+) or just bid 2S now.

 

Over 3H p p I'm sure this is a minority view but I feel pretty strongly about passing. It's matchpoints, and by far our most likely plus is defending 3H imo. If we bid we will very often get to the wrong strain, and possibly the wrong level, and sometimes we'll just start out by being too high. Sure I'm only going to get small pluses but that's what MP is about, and I think bidding anything will lead to a minus very often.

[Jlall]

Also I have to give a big lol to passing 2D and then bidding 3N when partner showed nothing extra. That is completely inconsistent bidding, it is the equivalent of 1N p 3N p 4N to me.

[rogerclee]

1) Double, I have extras without heart support.

2) I would have started with 2N, now I would just guess 3N. I don't like the initial pass at all.

3) 4D, this is the hardest problem to me. Double keeps everything in play, but if partner bids 3S or 4S I have no idea what to do, and these are surely going to be his most frequent bids.

4) 2C, and I think opening was fine, though it has obviously not gone our way.

5) Pass, not enough in hearts to double.

[Jlall]

I think opening vul at imps is absurd on hand 4

[karlson]

Also I have to give a big lol to passing 2D and then bidding 3N when partner showed nothing extra. That is completely inconsistent bidding, it is the equivalent of 1N p 3N p 4N to me.

Partner did show something very important: some club support.

 

How is bidding 3♦ going to help? It isn't clear to me that forcing to 4c is a lot better than forcing to 3n. Besides, is partner supposed to infer a diamond stopper?

[Jlall]

Also I have to give a big lol to passing 2D and then bidding 3N when partner showed nothing extra. That is completely inconsistent bidding, it is the equivalent of 1N p 3N p 4N to me.

Partner did show something very important: some club support.

 

How is bidding 3♦ going to help? It isn't clear to me that forcing to 4c is a lot better than forcing to 3n. Besides, is partner supposed to infer a diamond stopper?

Partner might X with 5422, and that looks very likely right now.

 

Partner does not have to infer anything, if he bids 3M we can bid 3N. That let's us have a shot at 5C if he actually does have short diamonds and club support and extras, and it lets us play 4C if partner's hand is minimum. I don't see how you can think getting out in 4C is not a win vs playing 3N if partner has some random 12 count, and partner will know not to play 3N if he has that.

 

Where is the gain in just bidding 3N?

[cherdanno]

Disagree with hanp that X would be weird on 5314 shape on the first auction, I think that is by far the most common shape. What else can one do with like 15 and that shape? We have extras, we want to compete, and we don't know what suit to play in.

LOL. The Mikeh-hanp debate was whether to double with 5=1=3=4.

[jjbrr]

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.

fwiw these were my answers exactly except 3♦ on #2

[Jlall]

Disagree with hanp that X would be weird on 5314 shape on the first auction, I think that is by far the most common shape. What else can one do with like 15 and that shape? We have extras, we want to compete, and we don't know what suit to play in.

LOL. The Mikeh-hanp debate was whether to double with 5=1=3=4.

haha my bad! 5134 wtf. I knew i never disagreed with hanp !H

[hanp]

edited !h

[cloa513]

Is noone asking for a direct 3C bid over 2D before the double- seems obvious then opening can cue with 3D to get 3NT.

[mikeh]

Is noone asking for a direct 3C bid over 2D before the double- seems obvious then opening can cue with 3D to get 3NT.

because for everybody else who has posted, a direct 3♣ shows a strong hand. Different people will have different minimums, but 3♣ (in standard) promises a lot more than you have here.

 

Note: this isn't true for those few who play negative free bids, but NFB's are not standard.

[bluecalm]

Note: this isn't true for those few who play negative free bids, but NFB's are not standard.

 

I think most people who play NFB's don't play them on 3 level anyway, at least this is the case in Poland where 2level NFB's are standard (which means lols play them) but nobody ever heard of NFB''s at 3level.

[gwnn]

In my club 3 level NFB's were standard whenever you were dealt one (this is an unfair and perfidious account that is nevertheless somewhat real).

[nige1]

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

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)

?

My guesses

1. 4♣ An underbid but 4♦ goes past ♣.
   
2. 2N (Yes) - Another underbid but this does show values.
   
3. _X - Hoping that partner passes for penalties.
   
4. 2♣ - Pass (-710 say) could be cheaper.
   
5. 3N - And prefer double to pass.
   

[awm]

1. Double. No obvious reason we have to have a great fit anywhere, and partner could have some cards in diamonds. I have good defensive prospects despite the void. I agree the there are some hands where 4♣ could work out better (like if partner has 2434 shape and decides to leave the double in without a diamond card) but partner could also easily have a diamond honor or two for the bidding.

 

2. 3♣ at matchpoints. It is true that this could miss a game, but more aggressive actions (or bidding directly over 2♦) seem likely to get us too high. At IMPs I could see a case for pushing to get to 3NT here.

 

3. 3NT. Goofy bid, but partner seems marked with some hearts for the non-raise. If partner has a typical hand with scattered values I could easily make 3NT or go down one with 3♥ making. If RHO doubles I can always run.

 

4. 2♣ seems obvious, although I admit I would not have opened this hand.

 

5. Double. I'd like to have more hearts, but the club misift is really dangerous. I think partner is entitled to expect some club tolerance (like at least doubleton) if I pass here.

[MFA]

1. Double. I think 4♣ would be underbidding by a full ace. 4♣ doesn't show the world when we have a good shape.

 

2. 3NT. If that should make any sense I must have a stopper + a suit I have some realistic hope to run, which can only be clubs. So it's "perfect" here. Would have bid 2NT in the first round being so lucky not to play this as a spade raise.

 

3. 4NT. What the heck, we are all nv so -100 or even -150 might be ok if they can make something in hearts. But I'm far from convinced that this action is right. Excellent problem.

 

4. 2♣ but would have passed initially.

 

5. Pass, wtp? I have nothing to bid, so I let it run to partner.

[xcurt]

1. 4C. Really hate dble here. Regardless of agreements or logic partner isn't going to pass this so I'll get another chance. Ideally I can bid 4H next if sufficient.

 

2. 3C. First priority at matchpoints is to protect the plus. Even if partner has 5422 and enough stuff that 3N has a play clubs might go 4-1 (and he could easily be AJxxx AQxx xx xx -- you don't win matchpoint events defending 2 of a red suit nv). The lack of any club intermediates is a big negative. Really dislike 3N here. Not sure the point of the follow up question. I certainly don't have an invite in NT before partner implied some club tolerance with the balancing dble so I pass unless I have a way to compete in clubs nonforcing, and really who does? Negative x is out since if LHO raised and partner bid 3H, kiss the board goodbye.

 

3. 4D. I have a lot of admiration for passing but I will keep the ball in play. Partner has played matchpoints too and wont raise just because he has Dxxx and a card or two. Like problem two our hand really isnt that great because our other suit is so weak. Again dislike 3N. Even if we fade the H suit we need partner to have most of the rest, and if we try 3N and are wrong we get a zero.

 

4. Abstain. Posing this in a bidding panel is rediculous.

 

5. Dble. Close between pass and double but I think the losses for double are 3-4 IMPs when we get only 300 while the gains when we have no game or cannot dind the making one are much larger. My hand suggests defending since 5D is a long way off and with many black cards and a secondary spade raise partner can always bid 3S anyway. Partner and RHO both know this is a gf auction so RHO should be expected to hold good hearts. Therefore partner should not be expecting a huge stack for this call, and Kx isnt too far from expectation.

[dkharty]

Current stats, with 19 sets of answers submitted:

 

1. 4♣ (9 votes), double (8), 5♣ (1), 4♦ (1)

 

2. 3NT (7), 3♣ (6), 3♦ (4), 2NT (2)

 

3. 4♦ (10), double (4), 4NT (3), 3NT (1), pass (1)

 

4. 2♣ (16), 3♣ (1), 2♦ (1), 1 abstention

 

5. Pass (13), double (4), 3NT (2)

 

Looks like #1 and #2 (possibly #3) might need a runoff election.

 

Also, I'll keep track of everyone's individual votes, so I can let anyone know if their choices would have scored better than the consensus picks.

[MarkDean]

Here is what I had before reading anybody else's answers:

 

1. 4♣ - I am a simple guy, I bid my suits.

2. 4♣ - I would have bid 3♣ last round, feel pretty stuck this round.

3. Pass - nasty problem.

4. 2♣ - seems clear to me.

5. Pass - seems clear to me.

 

After reading others answers:

1. To be honest, I did not think of double, certainly think it is reasonable, but I will stick with bidding my good five card suit.

2. OK, yeah, 4♣ is not great, I will join the 3NT bidders: hopefully pd can work out I have this hand type.

3. I see it is unpopular, but I will stick with pass.

4 and 5, I still think are clear.

[xcurt]

Further thoughts

 

3. Im big on just letting them drift off when they preempt at matchpoints and we have no clear direction but I figured they are making too too often to try that here. At none vul -140 might be a disaster since our downside for bidding rates to be 50 or 100 most of the time. RHO most likely has some heart length so probably not totally loaded -- that plus our good trumps and side ace means not so likely to get hit in our contract. Problem with dble is that partner is a big favorite to bid spades, after 4S we just hope and after 3S (our good scenario) we want3N to be thishand but I dont think it is - spunds like too much for direct 3N. Cannot just invent agreements.

 

Oddly I thought the first two were the clearest and those are the ones with a split vote.

 

4. If you are tallying answers I might as well provide mine -- I pass 1Hx and hope the scoring table protects me if we can't beat it.

 

5. Doubling now does not preclude 3NT (our most likely game). Partner with eg Kx xx xx 6solid would pull. If we pass partner, likely with no stopper, likely to be endplayed in auction, since he cannot convey "good clubs" below 3N. Also at this point in the auction 2C not likely to a balanced gf unless 3244 exactly or holding 3 hearts. Latter case probably wants to defend anyway.

[Jlall]

since our downside for bidding rates to be 50 or 100 most of the time.

I really don't agree with this at all. We could very easily be doubled, our hand is not that good, and if RHO also knew they were making he won't hesitate to double us. If it was true we weren't getting doubled when wrong very often I'd be on board with bidding something NV.

[bluecalm]

Why are people happy to bid 3NT on 2nd one but not 2NT. Isn't 2NT invitational there which is what we have ? (at least strengthwise)

[dkharty]

Okay, final results are as follows, with 20 sets of answers received:

 

1. 4♣: 10 votes

double: 8

other: 2

This is so close between two popular choices that I am thinking that I will submit it as a split vote, and ask the editor to give us a score equal to the average of the scores given for 4♣ and double. So unless anyone wants to change their vote so that we have an outright majority, that's what I'll do, unless I hear a better suggestion.

 

2. 3NT: 8

3♣: 6

3♦: 4

other: 2

Similar situation as #1, except there are more than two contenders here, so there is more room for movement. The "other" votes were both for 2NT, which I am tempted to lump in with 3NT as the most similar option, but if anyone who voted for one of the less-popular options wants to support one of the others as a second choice, that could work too. If that leads to a two-horse race like #1, I will do the same thing and submit a split vote.

 

3. 4♦: 10

double: 4

4NT: 3

others: 3

Even though this isn't quite a majority vote, 4♦ was still more than twice as popular as its nearest competitor, so I will submit that as the consensus pick.

 

4. 2♣: 17

others: 3

I will submit 2♣ as the consensus pick.

 

5. Pass: 14

double: 4

others: 2

I will submit "pass" as the consensus pick.

 

Thanks to everyone who submitted answers and comments, I thought it was really interesting. Also, as I said before, I'll keep track of everyone's individual votes and report individual scores to everyone privately when the next issue comes out, so if the "consensus picks" don't match your own, you can have bragging rights. :)