Table Talk bidding contest pt. 2

[daveharty]

Last year I posted the questions from the MSC-style bidding contest in one of the issues of my local unit's newsletter, "Table Talk", with the intention of submitting a "forum consensus" set of answers (which scored pretty well by the way). I thought it generated some interesting discussion, so I'm going to do it again, as I just received the latest issue yesterday. Here are the five questions:

 

All questions are MATCHPOINTS.

 

1. None vul, South holds: AKQJ3 A4 87 KQ54

West North East South

1H 3C 3H ?

 

2. None vul, South holds: KQT9 AK42 73 T85

West North East South

2S dbl pass ?

 

3. Both vul, South holds: 2 K754 K832 A732

West North East South

-- -- -- pass

pass 1C 2D ?

 

4. None vul, South holds: A73 J4 J654 Q532

West North East South

2H dbl 3H ?

 

5. NS vul, South holds: AJ74 AKJT6 KQ85 --

West North East South

pass pass pass 1H

pass 1NT pass ?

 

As before, bidding is presumed to be 2/1 with standard (but minimal) gadgetry.

 

Also as before, I'm more interested in the discussion generated than anything else, but I will tally the results and submit a set of answers to be compared with the expert panel, so if anyone is really concerned about biasing the results, feel free to PM me if you wish. I will also keep track of individual sets of answers and tell everyone what the top scores were. Last time around, there was only one question which didn't receive a significant majority vote (or at least a standout plurality), and in that case I submitted a "split vote", taking the average of the two scores assigned by the moderator.

 

Here's the old thread if anyone is interested, or if you missed it when I announced the results (there was a pretty long delay as I waited for the next issue to come out):

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/39367-bidding-contest

[MrAce]

1- 7♣

 

2-3NT

 

3-DBL

 

4-pass

 

5-2♠

[mtvesuvius]

1. Over 7♣, RHO is probably not leading a heart, so I think I'd be inclined to try 6♣, which is much more likely to buy a heart lead. Partner might also have a stiff diamond.

2. While we do have hearts, this hand has so much in spades that I think 3N will be right more often than not.

3. Double only promises 1M here, and we have an easy retreat... This one is clear IMO.

4. Not enough to bid here IMO...

5. 2♠ seems normal enough, the thought of bidding 3♦ is making me a bit sick.

 

My answers:

1. 6♣

2. 3NT

3. Double

4. Pass

5. 2♠

[MrAce]

You maybe right (At MP they may lead ♥ just to avoid an overtrick vs slam)

 

But what worries me is, 3♥ is supposed to be an ok hand. One of the 3 players b4 us, does not have his bid (at least not in a std way) If pd has A 7th ♣ what did they open with and what did they bid 3♥ with ? only 17 hcp max outside if pd has ♣ ace, so we both might be dreaming :D

 

But if it works, i have a better story than yours to tell after the session :P

[655321]

It would be a pity to bid 7♣ and escape the diamond lead, only to discover that partner has AJTxxx clubs and out, and there are only 12 tricks.

[nigel_k]

1. 6♣.

 

2. 3NT.

 

3. 3♦. I want to show club support immediately and this is too good for 3♣. If partner has hearts he will bid them and I will raise.

 

4. Pass. The right hand type for double but too weak.

 

5. 2♠.

[nigel_k]

It would be a pity to bid 7♣ and escape the diamond lead, only to discover that partner has AJTxxx clubs and out, and there are only 12 tricks.

It would even more of a pity to then find that 6♣ would have been worth almost all the matchpoints.

[Mbodell]

1. 5♣

2. 2nt leb (planning on 3♠ next to show 4♥ and spades stopped)

3. X

4. P, but I think X is close

5. 2♠

[MrAce]

It would be a pity to bid 7♣ and escape the diamond lead, only to discover that partner has AJTxxx clubs and out, and there are only 12 tricks.

 

You are absolutely right. I hate my 7♣. Besides, there is no rule that says partner CAN NOT have stiff ♦, unlikely but still, we may have a legit slam and i maybe ruining it by gambling.

[phil_20686]

Mostly agree with posters above.

1) 6c

2) Pass

3) Dble

4) Pass

5) 2S

 

 

Think its probably % to defend 2sx. Could be convinced 3N is better, feels reasonably close. Will feel bad if I bid 3N for 430 when 5 or 8 was on offer. Cannot imagine that we are not getting at least 300. We appear to have the balance of the points with 2.5 trump tricks.

[bluecalm]

I remember last time you posted it. Very interesting hands and a lot of discussion :)

 

1.

3♠ This could be important if partner has S support because we want to be able to bid 5S over their 5H.

 

2.

3NT for me. I don't want to play in hearts because of spade ruffs and imo they are making/going down 1 too often to make pass better option.

 

3.

DBL, I don't see alternatives for this bid.

 

4.

Pass and again looks wtp.

 

5.

I don't like problems which shows holes in the system we are supposed to use.

Normally 2NT or 2C depending which one contains 5-4GF hands. In "standard" I bid 3D or 2S and I hate it.

2S could lose D fit, 3D could be problematic when reaching 3NT.

[wyman]

3N (this was close, but I think shortness in D is unlikely in P's hand, and 3N is more likely to get a H lead than any number of clubs)

3N (close to pass, but I think 500 is kind of unlikely. I need 3 tricks from pard, and I need to score 3 spades, neither of which is a guarantee).

X (I have options later)

P (i'm light as it is, and my spots are so, so bad)

2S (didn't think this was that close)

[Fluffy]

1. 7♣ for me, if the opponents don't ever lead a heart here this is explotable, and the opponents might also lead a trump.

 

2. Very close, opponents have normally 4 spade tricks and if partner is minimum about 10 HCP outside, this will translate in 2 tricks normally, but on a good day only 1. Add to this that partner might not be minimum and pass is a long term winner IMO

 

 

3. Double is normal. I can se it not working often, but I'd still do it.

 

4. Pass, too wak as others said.

 

5. 3♦, I want to focus on the suit we might win slam on. Spades can be bid latter.

[nige1]

MATHCPOINTS. 2/1 with standard (but minimal) gadgetry.

 

1. None vul, South holds: AKQJ3 A4 87 KQ54

West North East South

1H 3C 3H ?

 

2. None vul, South holds: KQT9 AK42 73 T85

West North East South

2S dbl pass ?

 

3. Both vul, South holds: 2 K754 K832 A732

West North East South

-- -- -- pass

pass 1C 2D ?

 

4. None vul, South holds: A73 J4 J654 Q532

West North East South

2H dbl 3H ?

 

5. NS vul, South holds: AJ74 AKJT6 KQ85 --

West North East South

pass pass pass 1H

pass 1NT pass ?

IMO

1. 3♠.
2. 3NT.
3. Double.
4. Pass
5. 2NT.

[Flameous]

1. I think I might try 6♠. That should at least get the opps confused. And after it gets lightner doubled I retreat to 7♣ and let's see them leading diamonds now. (Still has the problem that we might be a trick short)

 

2. 3NT, consider it pretty close

 

3. X

 

4. Pass, but I think this is quite close too.

 

5. 2S

[han]

1. 4S. If partner has the ace of clubs then the opponents have bid 1H.. 3H on a combined 17-count at most. And even then 6C might go down on a diamond lead. 4S will sometimes make when partner has no ace (for example when partner has xx x Qxx J10xxxxx), and will likely outscore any other game. 3S is not forcing, 3NT is the wrong game too often imo, and is much more likely to attract a diamond lead than 4S.

 

2. Pass. Game is not a lock, and 2SX may still outscore games.

 

3. Pass, will pass partner's reopening double. +200 is likely and will often be very good. I don't understand the wtp-doublers, how can pass not be an option when you are not that likely to have a game and pass will often lead to +200?

 

4. Pass. close to double.

 

5. 2S then 3D. Better description than a direct 3D.

[bluecalm]

3. Pass, will pass partner's reopening double. +200 is likely and will often be very good. I don't understand the wtp-doublers, how can pass not be an option when you are not that likely to have a game and pass will often lead to +200?

 

Yeah, I didn't think about trying for +200. I like the pass after reading your explanation.

 

3S is not forcing

 

It seems that I don't know standard agreement well enough.

It's forcing for people I play with.

I definitely see the point in playing is as NF, I even think it's better agreement.

In Poland simple: "new suit in comp at level 1 and 3 is forcing at level 2 not forcing" is standard though.

[pooltuna]

1] 6♣ is probably >50% because of lead problems for opps in ♦

 

2] I can't restrain my IMPS preference...pass

 

3] pass in tempo

 

4] pass in tempo

 

5] 3♦ partner has no biddable 4 card ♠ suit but he might have long ♦s

[daveharty]

IMO

1. 3♠.
2. 3NT.
3. Double.
4. Pass
5. 2NT.

 

 

Interested in your answer to #5 nige1, do you have a conventional treatment here? I kind of assumed this particular question was a two-horse race.

[nige1]

Interested in your answer to #5 nige1, do you have a conventional treatment here? I kind of assumed this particular question was a two-horse race.

Afraid not :( I don't understand 2/1 and have no cunning plan for this 454. I assume partner has denied spades hence I prefer 2♦ or 3♦ to 2♠. My vague thought was that 2N was less likely to deter a pointy lead against the likely 3N or 4♥ contract.

 

I'm lucky to play sometimes with John Matheson, a 2/1 expert, who has broken in the wild Gazzilli :)

He would would probably ride it to 6♦ opposite ♠ x ♥ Q ♦ Jxxxxx ♣ Txxxx (Don't ask me how).

[han]

Hand 5 has little to do with 2/1.