Bidding Panel - Answers, January 2004

Marking: 1NT = 10, Double = 5, Pass = 2

This problem definitely showed me the clearer-thinking members of our panel. The poor major suit structure, plus the strongly positional AJ of diamonds (imagine partner with 10xx for example) leaves 1NT as a clear choice. Panellists worrying about the diamond stopper are really failing to grasp that in the protective seat the stopper requirement is nothing like the same as in the direct seat.

Gail Hoffman: I would double for take-out as it looks a little risky to bid a protective 1NT with only AJ of diamonds.
Peter Kaufmann: Double. Preferable to bidding 1NT as will be ruffing in short hand when partner bids spades and can bid NT if partner bids 2/3D.
Catherine Domenico: Double. With the principle of transfer of King in protective position Pass is not an option. Choice between 1NT (protective) or X. X give opportunities to play at the one level or for partner to convert to penalties.
Uriah Jacobson: Double. My first instinct was to re-open with 1NT (11-14), but half my points may produce only one stop. I now prefer X; I shall pass or make a minimum response to any forcing bid by pard which would probably imply that he held Diamonds.

One man prepared to back his judgement:

Richard Bowdery: Pass. 1NT is a real possibility. I think this is the most difficult hand of the set. We play 11-14 after 1 minor opening, but ... Is this collection worth 11? 5 hcp in 2 cards in their suit, not for me. Only 10.4 Binky points ! A = 4 & 3/6th , K = 3 , Q = 1 & 4/6th , J = 5/6th. Easier than trying to feel your way around working and non-working cards.

For the mainstream:

Steve Capal: 1NT seems like the only practical bid available here in the protective seat and well within the 10/11-14 pt range and partner MAY just have had to pass with a good 13 or 14 pts and is the only way of reaching an easily missed game
Jill Feldman: 1NT. I prefer this to X, I think it's more descriptive. If partner has got points and hearts we won't miss our heart fit as we still play 'systems on' in this position. We know partner hasn't got 5 spades and points because he didn't overcall.
Andre Gubbay: Although you could Double I choose 1NT protective in 4th seat to allow partner to stayman.
Anne Rosen: 1NT. I’m happy enough with this. In fact I don’t really need to have a stop in their suit in protective position. I don’t fancy doubling here with three small spades.
Jeff Alper: Partner seems to have some values but was unable bid without a five-card major. There is always danger but I would make the natural bid of 1NT.
David Bakhshi: 1NT - Close decision between 1NT and Dbl.  Dbl most likely to gain on a partscore deal opposite a hand with 4H's, but feel 1NT is likely to make it easier for partner to choose our final contract.
Neill Harcus: 1NT. No point making a take-out double with such a poor major-suit holding and AJ in opener’s suit

Marking: 2H = 10, 2NT = 5, 3H = 3

A five–loser hand, but not one to overbid with. Any hand with a fit and 2 key cards will surely be making a move over 2H. With no fit, 3NT will surely never have a chance with the tricks just being too slow. Let’s start with our optimists; for whom game at imps seems to be a licence to overbid?!

Jill Feldman: 3H. Might be a slight overbid and we might end up in 4 of a major missing 4 aces but it's teams and the hand is too good to bid a quiet 2H.
Steve Capal: 3H hmm a tricky one here but playing teams,I go for game! Lots of aces missing but very few cards needed from partner,I am never knowingly underbid!

Two panellists chose to show the point–count over their shape:

Jeff Alper: 17 points without an Ace is not ideal but to leave all options open I would raise to 2NT.
Peter Kaufmann: Not happy, with this aceless hand but Vul at Imps must bid again and don't want to play in a 4-3 Heart fit, so won't bid 3H.

The rest sensibly stalled with 2H, expecting partner to move on either with 3H or 2S before then exploring higher matters

David Bakhshi 2H. Choice of 2H or 2NT. 3H would be an overbid.  2NT will gain when partner is 1-3 in the Majors with around 8 points (when he'll probably Pass with 3NT likely), but risks losing a 4-4 H fit. Will bid 2NT over 2S.
Neill Harcus: 2H. An aceless 17-count with nice suits. 2H followed by 2NT over the expected 2H preference or raise 3S to game.
Richard Bowdery: 2H. WTP. KQ doubleton and xx doubleton discourage 2NT. I would want a 5th heart or a better hand to bid 3H. If partner passes 2H we won’t have missed game very often. 2 major Aces would be enough, but even then he might squeak.
Uriah Jacobson: 2H. Very tempting to rebid 3H, but the absence of primary controls suggest caution, so I rebid only 2H. Pard has probably denied 3x S unless he has a 6-card suit and was too weak to bid at 2-level.
Catherine Domenico: 2H: have downgraded this hand as honours in short suit, it is Aceless and you are not strong enough to force to game. Partner with either 2 Aces or 1 Ace and KQD holding support for one of your suits would surely make a try.
Anne Rosen: 2H. As partner has not raised spades I’m much more likely to make a game in hearts than anything else. Not good enough to game force with 3H. Considered 2NT, but don’t think 3NT will be a good contract opposite most hands. If I bid 2H, partner should raise this on 8 or 9 wih 4H and I will then bid game. If he passes 2H I’m sure I’ll have done the right thing.
Gail Hoffman: I would bid 2H and if my partner responds 2S or 3H I would then either 3S or 4H.

Marking: Pass = 10, 2H = 5

I’m sure the majority of our readers will be shocked at our clear majority verdict here. To remove with 5 points or less is fine when it is your partner that has been doubled – then you know that you have a minority of the values. This does not and should not apply here. To remove ought to show a 5 card suit. Indeed -180 / -380 could even be your smallest minus score!

Anne Rosen: Pass I suppose, but no strong feelings I might bid 2H but I normally have a fifth heart, but seems the best shot.
Uriah Jacobson: P. I would like to have known N/S methods after the X; presumably they are not playing a Compulsory XX, as South’s pass was not alerted; if it had been alerted I would pass and decide after S’s next bid. Unless pard can take 1NT off in his own hand, the likelihood is -380, so 2 off doubled would show a profit. However, I do not think that the risk is worth it, so I PASS.
Richard Bowdery: Pass. Not too difficult for me. I don’t have anything to pull to, partner may well have it beat in his own hand, even if I pull, we might be going for a bigger number than we are conceding when they 1NT X + some number.
Neill Harcus: Pass. Yuch! With this hand opposite opener I would bid 2C and wait for the opponents to mess it up. It’s hard to know if there is a right contract for our side but partner’s shown a strong hand; I’ll pass. Either one of the 9s or even the 8 could be the setting trick.
David Bakhshi: Pass. Not my style to pull partner's Dbl unless unbalanced in the 0-3 range.
Jeff Alper: In this sort of situation without an obvious bid I would Pass and hope partner has enough to beat the contract.
Peter Kaufmann: Pass. Automatic.

An exclusively female group chose to remove partner’s double!

Gail Hoffman: 2H. With 5 points or less I remove the penalty double.
Jill Feldman: 2H. Looks like they could be making +180 (or more). Sorry partner if we should be taking 800!
Catherine Domenico: 2H. Horrible problem! Could have a hand helpful to partner ... or not. However, I always remove the double with less than 4 points so why change now?  We are also not vulnerable and 1 off (? ) better score.

I think Richard Bowdery’s comments sum up the hand very well.

Marking: 3D = 10, 2D = 9, 3S = 5

A very difficult problem considering the premium of scoring game vulnerable at imps. I am very surprised and pleased that the panel really got to grips with the key issue which is that just to bid 3S or 4S doesn’t involve partner’s judgement when the diamond holding could be absolutely key.

A dead-heat between 2D and 3D was split by me in favour of the more aggressive 3D as this 4 loser hand really does look to make game enough of the time to insist.

Two panellists chose to make the simple limit bid:

Anne Rosen: 3S, reluctantly, I’m a bit good. However, 3D would be game forcing and I’m not good enough. If I could guarantee partner had a doubleton S, I would like to bid 4S, as I don’t need much from partner, especially as its teams.
Steve Capal: 3S. Just want to get the hand off my chest with this one and hope partner has at least a doubleton or he will convert to 3NT.

The rest chose either 2D or 3D. Here is a sample ...

Gail Hoffman: 3D since this is a 4 loser hand.
Catherine Domenico: 3D. Fewer points but fewer losers than Question 2. Lots of controls and needing so little from partner, think it’s right to force to game.
Jill Feldman: 3D. Again teams, again a slight overbid (well you always call me a wimp!) but I don't really want to hear partner pass my 3S bid with xx, Axxx, Jxx, xxxx.
Jeff Alper: I like 6/4 hands which have potential. Partner needs little to make 4S or 5D and so I would bid 3D and over 3H repeat my spades. If partner bids 3NT I pass.
Peter Kaufmann: 3D. May be cold for 6D.

Or the more circumspect ...

Andre Gubbay: 2D. Not enough to jump.
Uriah Jacobson: 2D. I think that I must be getting older. The hand is not strong enough for 3D and I would have liked the 10 of spades before bidding 3S.
Richard Bowdery: 2D. Good 6-4’s should bid 2nd suit, before showing 6. Again partner may pass 2D, but if he does, I won’t be too worried.

Marking: 3H = 10, 4H = 8, 4S = 5

On her own, and really not getting to grips with the terrific slam potential this hand has opposite not a great deal more than AKxxxx and nothing else.

Anne Rosen: 4S. 2S from partner is just natural and not necessarily a club fit, but should have some values (10+). The 2H from North could be on nothing. I think I can underwrite game on my hand as I’ve got good controls in the other suits and a source of tricks. In fact this may be an underbid. Unless we’ve got AH and a trump to lose we may well make a slam.

Sadly the top mark was shared between those making game tries only (heaven forbid!)

Catherine Domenico: 3H: must show a hand too good for 3S. 4S is an alternative but it is possible to construct a hand in which partner has useless honours and they would still have made a constructive/non-forcing bid.
Gail Hoffman: 3H using the unassuming cuebid to show a good raise in spades.
Andre Gubbay: 3H. UCB.

..... and those sensibly waiting for more information from partner

Neill Harcus: 3H. 2S was a free bid opposite an overcall so partner should have something decent. With as little as SAKxxx 12 tricks could be on but how do you get there? I’ll bid 3H. If partner’s got wasted heart values he’ll bid 3NT; he might just be able to cue-bid the DK or HA but will signs off in spades and I’ll make one further try.
Richard Bowdery: 3H. I am going to continue to make strong noises. 4H would leave partner guessing too often.
Jeff Alper: One of the easier problems. A pleasant surprise to hear partner bid spades and I certainly want to be in game. For the moment I will bid a quiet 3H and await developments.

Finally we have a group who prefer the 4H splinter. Whilst it has the merits of simplicity I feel partner will rarely, if ever, be able to bid more than 4S here so nothing really will have been achieved. It is your hand with the terrific side suit controls – not partner's.

Steve Capal: 4H. A splinter bid here, could easily drive to a possible slam aces and a singleton will be very handy here opposite a free bid from pard.
Jill Feldman: 4H. Splinter, nothing more to say!
David Bakhshi: 4H. Like to play a change of suit as constructive, NF opposite Overcalls. For me, 3H would now tend to deny support, Would prefer to have 4S to Splinter, but risk the slight overbid in the hope of catching S AKxxxx, and CQ for Slam.

Marking: Double = 10, Pass = 7

Another problem with only two solutions offered by the panel ............... sorry! We’ll try to make it better next time.

Is pass forcing? I think not and if so, double should probably be competitive / take out. If pass is forcing then double is definitely for penalties and as such, not an option. Our panel generally fall into the first group.

Peter Kaufmann: Double. For takeout.
Catherine Domenico: X. I have no idea what this double would/should be. If a pass would be forcing that might be better. However, I think the double caters for everything as not too worried about what partner does. At imps being slightly wrong shouldn’t cost too much.
Richard Bowdery: X. Take out for most of us. Just what I appear to have, a good, well better than min, hand, some support for partner, extra length in my suit, support for the unbid suit. I won’t be too disappointed if partner passes.
Neill Harcus: Double. Double is take-out. I can stand any suit partner may care to bid (it might go off but then 4H is supposed to be a pressure bid). If a maniac has bid 4H missing most of the top H honours then partner will choose to pass. He’ll be "under" declarer but with no expected entry to dummy declarer won’t be able to finess partner’s trump honours.
Anne Rosen: X. This is take out, but partner can pass it. 4NT would also be take out. However, as I don’t know if we want to play or defend I’ll let partner choose.
Jill Feldman: X. What does X mean here? Oh yes, partnership agreement. I've agreed that I want it to be take-out because I don't know if the right place to be is spades or clubs.
David Bakhshi: Dbl (Unless Penalty!) - In all my partnerships, would be able to Dbl for T/O, which I would do in order to leave flexibility over the choice of Trump Suit. Worth acting with shortage in opponent's suit even if on the aggressive side. Would Pass if Dbl isn't T/O.
Steve Capal: Double. Anything could be right here but gives extra options.

Two dissenting voices only ...

Jeff Alper: Pre-empts like this make life difficult and I consider a pass by me forcing. Lets see what partner has to say.
Uriah Jacobson: Pass. This is one of the hands that make me like system. If you play 2-over-1 as FG, then you have a good forcing pass. I must admit that I only play 2-over-1 as F2NT so like free-wheeling ‘Acolites’ I still have a problem as pard could have a 9-10 HCP hand w/ 6(+) Clubs. However my 1S opener tends to be slightly stronger because pard cannot pass a 2S rebid by me, so I, reluctantly, pass and leave the decision to him.

Marking: Pass = 10, 1S = 9, Double = 5

I think double stands the very real chance that partner may errantly compete in clubs over 2H. That would be disastrous.

David Bakhshi: Dbl. Tempting to Overcall 1S, but prefer not to make 4 Card Overcalls if there's a decent alternative. Had I not already Passed, would probably Pass, but feel more secure now that partner knows we're only out to compete! Like to make 1 bid which gives Partner a chance to choose the final contract.
Andre Gubbay: Double. We have the majority of points.

I personally feel that 1S is very much the right thing to do here; it has good lead directing qualities, it is the boss suit so we may compete effectively to 2S, it may well deflect them from reaching the best contract, you are already a passed hand. I have up-graded this accordingly (I can’t give it 10 marks though – sorry!).

Anne Rosen: 1S. I’m not very good a 4 card overcalls, but I don’t mind this as a passed hand as partner is not going to get over excited and will know I am just competing the part score.
Richard Bowdery: 1S. I don’t often overcall 4 card suits, but this one looks like the right time.
Jeff Alper: I don’t often bid four cards suits in this situation but I would bid 1S and as it outranks hearts we may buy the contract. The heart queen may be useful.

The rest of the panel stay very much on the straight and narrow, and aren’t tempted. They range from the undecided .................

Steve Capal: Pass! Very unlike me but every now and then one has to give in, especially after a passed hand and lefty may have passed with 11 points too!
Jill Feldman: Pass. I know the winning answer here is X, but at red, sorry, I'm not brave enough! (I'm not brave enough to bid 1S either).
Neill Harcus: Pass. Both West and East have passed so it may be safe to intervene on this lacklustre collection with half its points in doubletons. A take-out double has a slight edge over a 1S bid: if you get do get doubled in 2C (perhaps a pre-emptive 3C even) then at least you’ll have a good honour doubleton opposite partner’s 4-card suit.

............ to those with greater conviction

Catherine Domenico: Pass: vulnerable and no good 5 card suit (don’t think spade quality good enough to introduce a 4 card suit). See what happens ...
Uriah Jacobson: P. With the 3 of D transferred to Clubs, I would X. If N bids a new suit at the 2-level after my pass, I shall be passing again. However over 1NT or 2H by N, or 2C or 2H by S, I shall X.
Peter Kaufmann: P. I'm not making a vulnerable overcall with this *!*!

Marking: 3NT = 10, 2NT = 5, Double = 4

Near unanimity here.

On his own:

Neill Harcus: Double. You could pass and hope partner makes a take-out double you can pass for penalties, you could bid 3NT with a singleton in partner’s suit and hope there’s an entry to his hand. If partner is weak then both those bids are a bit of gamble. Double leaves room for 3NT, 5C and 6C.

Is this for take-out or penalties in your book? The Ace of Clubs system for future reference has all low level doubles for take-out.

A distinct underbid would be a non–forcing 2NT ...

Gail Hoffman: 2NT

The rest all make the same pragmatic (dare I say obvious) leap to 3NT – with of course the attendant risk that you may now receive an unwelcome 4H bid from partner.

Andre Gubbay It is a bit of a gamble but 2NT could be passed out.
David Bakhshi: 3NT. Dbl and 3D seem most likely alternatives. Would prefer to have 4S or 3H to Dbl (T/O). Though 3D would show a good hand, we have D's covered so no need to create a potentially murky auction, when likely to make 3NT opposite most minimum 1H responses. Not worried that partner will think I have 2H (balanced hand), as I should Pass with 15-bad 17, and could bid 2NT with good 17-19. Therefore, 3NT consistent with a hand with a source of Tricks.
Jeff Alper: With potentially a source of tricks in my own hand and a bid from partner I think 3NT is clear-cut.
Richard Bowdery: 3nt. The 2nd most difficult hand of the set. Hammon’s law. If 3NT is an option then bid it! Possibly be too strong for it, but I think partner will play me for 7.5/8+ tricks, mostly in clubs, diamonds stopped. If he has an extraordinarily good hand he will probably know what to do next. For me 2nt would be a good H raise, not natural. Can X with a strong balanced hand.
Peter Kaufmann: 3NT. Running suit and KS likely to be on side
Uriah Jacobson: 3NT. No need for system!

Playing a slightly different system, but arriving at the same answer:

Jill Feldman: 3NT. I play that a 3NT rebid shows about an 8 playing trick hand with clubs, and hopefully this is what I've got.

So there you have it. I hope this has been a fun experience for competitors and interested club members alike.

Congratulations to Neill Harcus on his winning score of 73!