Bidding Panel - Answers October 2005 - Marked by Neil Rosen

Marking: 2§=10, 3§=7, 4¨=7, 3¨=7, 2©=6, 5¨=5, 1©= 3

Jeremy Dhondy: 2§. I have a high card raise so I will show that. If 2NT in the system was a 4+ card raise to 3, I would prefer this as it would also take up more room.

Anne Rosen: 2§. UCB, values raise to 2 or more diamonds.

Jill Feldman: 2§. UCB showing partner support for diamonds with 'real' points. I know a lot of theses points are wasted, but it means that their side hasn't got them!

David Bakhshi: 2§. Also considered bidding 3¨, 4¨and redouble, but decided to opt for the bid that most involves partner.  Bidding 3¨ or 4¨ may induce partner to make a phantom sacrifice, and assuming that double of 1¨ showed 4/4 in the Majors, North will already know whether they have a Major suit fit, so pre-empting is less likely to be effective.  Tempted to redouble to try and slow the auction down, and maybe even talk the opponents out of bidding game, but settled on 2§ to let partner know that we have a hand likely to contain some defensive values, as well as diamond support.

Gail Hoffman: 2§. Unassuming cue bid showing a good raise in diamonds.

Uriah Jacobson: 5¨. I seem to be rather strong in HCP for all the bidding, so I thought the shapes were big all-round; however South has only promised 4-4 in the Majors.   I would like to have a bid to show defence vs. their FIVE level contract, but even if 4© showed this, I don’t want to give them the chance of bidding 4ª.

Catherine Seale: 5¨. Despite having defensive tricks against a heart contract, bidding 5 straight away puts opponents under the most pressure possible.

Steve Capal: 5¨. Typical tricky start here...make it hard for the opps and who knows? Maybe they will pull to 5©, which we can double. At least this way our side getting doubled is unlikely and favourable vul too!!!

Marking: 6ª=10, Pass=8, 5©=7, 6§=3

Anne Rosen: 6ª. Partner has shown a strong spade raise by bidding 4¨, rather than just bidding 4ª. From the bidding it sounds like the opponents must have the ¨A, on which basis partner would need to have the ©AK to justify his 4¨ bid. If so 6ª will be the right spot.

Jill Feldman: 6ª.  I have an enormous hand, I hope this is enough.

Danny Roth: 6ª. Seems the best practical bid on the hand - no interest in a grand slam - cannot see any constructive way to fiddle about.

Neill Harcus: 6ª. If partner's cue-bid on a singleton than he must have sufficient cover in hearts for 6 to be on.  Would bid 6§ if I thought 7 might be on.

Gail Hoffman: 6ª. Partner must have the hearts covered so I am bidding what I think we can make.

Peter Crouch: 6ª. What Neil bid at the table in our recent Gold Cup match. I had ªJ10xx ©AK109x ¨Q  §xxx and couldn’t bid 4© as a fit bid, as all game bids by unpassed hands are natural in our agreements. Too good for any other action in my view, partner has to have something. A good discussion point for aspiring partnerships is what should 5© mean in this auction. I would suggest a random slam try as it is the only bid available.

David Bakhshi: Pass. An awkward situation, with NS making it difficult to judge the limit of the hand. Definitely like my hand enough to be interested in slam, but obviously lack the space to ask for aces, so how should we proceed?  Partner’s 4¨ bid should set up a forcing pass situation for us, so I plan to pass now, then pull a double to 5ª, or bid slam over 5©.  Passing then pulling a double should suggest a stronger hand than a direct 5ª bid.

Marking:   4§=10, 3¨=8, 5¨=7, 3ª=7, 4¨=6, 3§= 4, 5§=3,

For me the best of the bunch by a distance is 4§. It gets to grips with the main feature which is the quality club suit and combines both pre-emptive intent with showing a fit for diamonds. With a club single-suiter you could bid 2, 3 or 5§ thus the jump to 4 should really be reserved for showing a fit for partner with a good robust club suit.

Peter Crouch: 4§. If partner has only 4 diamonds then the opponents will have at least a nine card major suit fit on the basis that he would bid a Major before diamonds in this position. The key to this hand is probably partner’s club length; if he has length with me we should be bidding over 4M. Redouble would be a good hand (if you play support doubles/redoubles consider inverting redouble and 1NT in this position) therefore partner will not play me for the world and 4§ does show a diamond fit. If I have missed 3NT so be it, the opponents will surely be bidding 4M over that.

Steve Capal: 4§. This shows for me a good long club suit agreeing diamonds. As usual I am sure I will score maximum points on this deal!!!

Danny Roth: 4§. In my method, this shows diamond interest as well as big clubs - this sort of hand.  With short diamonds, redouble first.

A poor bid for me, 5¨ could easily go for a huge penalty on a bad trump break.

Gail Hoffman: 5¨. I am bidding pre-emptively to cut out the opponents.

Catherine Seale: 5¨. Opponents have a huge major fit. I think this is a case for making life as difficult for opponents as possible.

Neill Harcus: 5¨. Partner's only responded 1¨but surely one of the sides must be able to make game. Either it's us or we've got a cheap save over four of a major.

A more gentle approach which has the downside of letting the opponents in cheaply at the 3-level as well as slightly understating this extreme hand.

David Bakhshi: 3¨. Not an easy situation to judge, as NS rate to have at least one nine card Major suit fit which makes it attractive to deny them space, but the fact that we are vulnerable, and that suits are breaking badly for them argue against bidding too high.  Think that 3¨ strikes the right kind of balance.

Peter Kaufmann: 3¨.

Appreciating the potential of the hand but coming up with the wrong solution…

Jeremy Dhondy: 3ª. I am worth game so would like to direct partner to the best chance of finding a slam. I don’t think splintering with a blank king is likely to help. If 4§ shows clubs and diamonds then this is also worthy of consideration.

Jill Feldman: 3ª.  Splinter. Really didn't know what to do here. This could be a hand worth 9 or 17 points, depending on what's working. Do we want to be in our diamond fit, or do I want to stress my long club suit? By splintering here it takes away a lot of their space forcing them to bid at the 4-level.

Marking: 4§=10, 3¨=8, 3©=7, 4ª=6

I thought this the most sophisticated of the problems. Our panellists mainly did well in my opinion to appreciate that this hand has slam potential. The question is how best to proceed?

The majority went for the simple splinter – a very reasonable choice.

Jill Feldman: 4§. Splinter.

Peter Kaufmann: 4§ First easy hand.

Peter Crouch: 4§. In a weak NT base partner will have something extra, either high cards or shape. If he has a perfecto ªKQxx ©x  ¨AKJxx §xxx, 6ª is easy, if he has ªKxx  ©Kx  ¨AKxxxx  §xx then 6¨ is much better, if he has a 3451 hand then any slam (6©) is likely to be at best on a finesse. If partner co-operates I will offer 6¨ as an alternative. The problem with 3© here is that partner will not know that his club holding is the key to any possible slam.

Gail Hoffman: 4§. Splinter with a view to a possible slam.

Uriah Jacobson: 4§. Partner has limited his hand to 12-14 HCP.  ªQxx ©Kx(x) ¨AKxx(x)§???  and slam is probably no worse than a finesse.  I think the splinter best conveys this message.

Jeremy Dhondy: 4§. I am worth game and maybe more if partner has the right cards. A splinter will be best to help him evaluate his hand.

I like the following effort. It starts to get to grips with helping partner to evaluate the combined assets, something that the 3© bidders really do not achieve.

David Bakhshi: 5ª. Would expect partner to have a good diamond raise with short hearts for his 4© bid, so confident of our chances of making at least 6¨.  Would like to pass 5©, then pull a double to 5ª to show extra strength, as in problem two, but concerned that partner may not give me the opportunity, so bid 5ª now in the hope that partner with A§ and a first round heart control will make a Grand Slam try by bidding 6§, in which case I will bid 7¨.