|
Bidding Problem #3, June 2005:
This months' problem simply asks where you draw the line between a simple raise and a limit raise. Once again, many of you may have systemic agreements to describe this "good simple raise," but for this problem, only the following agreements are in place:
Bergen raises apply only by an unpassed hand.
1 NT over 1 of a major by a passed hand is semi-forcing.
2 clubs over 1 of a major by a passed hand is reverse drury, a limit raise with 3 or 4 card trump support.
Simple raises are not constructive. Your hand:
 K942
 T93
 J985
 A2
At matchpoints, vul vs. not, you are the dealer and after passing, lefty passes, partner opens 1 spade in 3rd seat and righty passes. What is your next call?
This months' panel voted as follows:
2: 10 votes
2: 5 votes
The 2 spade bidders (Rick Goldstein, Carlos Munoz, Cliff Nebel, Jeff Allen, Sue & Dick Kraner, Nancy Molesworth, Rich Laufer, Peter Kalat and Robin Brown) expressed a variety of comments along with their bids. Almost all to a tee said they would jump on any invitation by partner and accept to game. Carlos Munoz feels this is essentially a 7 point hand albeit with a 4th trump, but he will accept a game try if partner invites with 3 clubs and presumably would bid only 3 spades over 3 diamonds and pass a 3 spade invitation. Nancy Molesworth was the strongest in coming out against a 2 club bid here, feeling that this hand is not even close. Robin Brown could not bring herself to make a limit raise with a 9-loser. Rich Laufer noted that this type of problem comes up quite a bit and while he feels 2 clubs is not a bad push, he still settles for 2 spades and trusts partner to do the right thing. Peter Kalat thinks this hand is borderline to a limit raise, but he is bidding 2 spades also and will wait for partner to make a game try. Some of the 2 spade bidders felt that the system imposed here was greatly lacking and their partnership agreements would help them handle this hand more easily. Rick Goldstein and Laura Brill play 3 clubs here to show this hand as a constructive raise with 4 trumps and Jeff Allen also wants to play some sort of Bergen Raise even by a passed hand to show this baby, whether that be 3 clubs or 3 spades in his agreements. Among the 2 club bidders, Bruce Rogoff was strongest in his support for showing a limit raise here. He likes the 4th trump, ruffing values and the red suit spot cards so this looks like a 10 pointer to him. Bruce also points out that he is influenced by the ability to show a limit raise at the 2 level, giving the partnership some wiggle room in the auction with the ability to still get out at the 2 level if partner opened a dog, or even at the 3 level if partner opened with a sound minimum. Jason Fuhrman opts for 2 clubs also, given the constraints of the system imposed here, but mentions that in order for this system to be workable there must be further room for opener to find out about the quality of responder's limit raise. For example, after a 2 club response and a 2 diamond or 2 heart rebid by opener, responder's 2 spades should now show the barest of limit raises as opposed to a jump now to 3 spades which would show an even better hand. Nancy Widman does not play Drury, but if she did this hand feels right for the 2 club bid. She likes the "in and out" valuation (king of spades, ace of clubs) and 4 trumps and qualifies this hand as a limit raise. Pat Callahan goes with the 2 club bidders also and will make a game try if opener shows a non-minimum. Joan Gerard opts for 2 clubs also as the best of bad options, but says she will only play this system if someone puts a gun to her head (Cliff-I guess we may have to consider revising this system-Ed).
I bid 2 clubs at the table and on this day it worked- 650 scored up while the traveler had a slew of 170's and 200's and no other games made, so apparently the field that session was a bit more lopsided to the 2 spade bid than our panel here. The most important thing to take from this hand is to make sure your system has some accomodation for it. Thanks for your input-
Ed Zuckerberg
|
