|
Bidding Problem #15, October 07: In October, our panelists were asked what to do with a shapely hand and some key values after partner shows a big hand in an auction jammed by a pre-empt. Thanks to Mike McNamara for submitting this problem:
Matchpoints, none vulnerable
As dealer, you pass, LHO pre-empts with 3 ,partner doubles, RHO passes, you bid 4 , LHO passes, partner now bids 4 and RHO passes. YOUR CALL. Panelists were also allowed to suggest an alternative action to their 4 bid.
AKxx
JTxxxx
xx
 x
Votes:
5=7
4NT=4
6=4
Pass=3
5=2
Is this a time for science or just bid what we think we should make? We welcome to this months' panel one of Unit 188's most famous former members, Larry Cohen. Larry is in with the majority on this one and thinks science has the answer. 5 asks partner to bid 6 with first or second round control in the Opps suit (). Partner is too good to overcall with 3 so his hand must feature QJ long in spades, some holding in the rounded suits headed by AK and questionable diamond length. Rick & Laura Goldstein, Henry Deutsch, Peter Kalat, Rob Stayman and Rich Laufer also agree with the scientific bid, but Rich is not done yet. If partner q's say 6, Rich feels that will show first round control in and he will then go on to 7
The Blackwood bidders (Nancy Molesworth, David Huber, Arthur Jacobs, Dana Rossi) might have the best route to 7, but will hearing that partner has 2 of the 3 outside aces and the Q of trump really solve their dilemma about whether 6 can make? I think the key question that a few of our panelists touched upon, but no one addressed directly are the alternative bids available with big hands. Arthur Jacobs says you must have systems to deal with these hands, but in general, 4 shows a big 2-suiter and a jump to 4 over 3 shows a huge hand, but how huge and how different from doubling and then pulling our response to 4? On the current auction, Nancy can't imagine partner pulling to 4 with a topless suit and not having play for 12 or 13 tricks.
Cliff Nebel thinks his partner may have a hand like: QJTxxxx,A,x,Axxx but could also be 2-3 in the minors with 2 fast losers so he is in with the passers. So how much more would pard need to have started with a jump to 4? Maybe the K also or the A? In any case I think we need a clearer distinction between these two auctions. The other passers, Marshall Frank and Gene Fisher also feel that for his pull, partner needs a big hand, but not necessarily the World's Fair. Marshall did say that the scoring influenced him and that he would try 4NT at Imps.
Carlos Munoz was our lone dissenter with the initial 4 call over the double. Carlos likes the flexibility of 4 but doesn't say how he will respond if partner answers with 4 or 5. On the given auction, he likes 5 after 4 to show partner he has some useful cards for him. Jason Fuhrman also bids 5 leaving room for partner to show a diamond control. He feels partner almost certainly will be looking at the A in his hand and this action points to questions about the diamond suit.
Lastly, we have the camp of "just blow to 6" which includes Bruce Rogoff, Jeff Allen, Pat Callahan and myself. Bruce is the only one who actually stated a hand good enough to jump to 4 directly, citing QJTxxxx,Ax,x,AKx. Had his partner jumped to 4 Bruce would have invited with 5. As it is, on this auction, he thinks partner is better than the hand above, in which case he certainly has values for slam, or else partner possibly has some flexible hand, like a 5-2-2-4 with 19+ HCP. He feels partner would be nuts to introduce this spade suit with 3 hearts and is uncertain whether partner would bid NT with say a doubleton K. The good news here, according to Bruce, is that the play should go very quickly in 6, especially after the opponents cash the first two diamonds..............
ED Z. |
