[whereagles]

Setting: matchpoint pairs against a field of intermediate level. Expert but erratic partner. You're playing 2/1 with gadgets.


1. Opps vuln. You hold

♠ J42
♥ 96
♦ T953
♣ KQ52

RHO LHO
1NT 2♦
2♥ 3NT
pass

Your lead?


2. Opps vuln. You hold

♠ Q
♥ KQT
♦ T863
♣ AKQ42

LHO pd RHO you
1♠ p p X
3♠ p p ??

What now? Double would be for take-out.


3. Vuln vs not. You hold

♠ A2
♥ T85
♦ 532
♣ A7652

LHO pd RHO you
2♠ p p ??

Do you bid or pass?


4. NV vs vuln. You hold

♠ QT94
♥ A432
♦ KJ98
♣ 9

LHO pd RHO you
--- p 1♣ X
1♦ p 1♥ p
2♥ 2♠ 4♥ ??

What do you think pard has and what do you bid now?


5. Vuln vs not. You hold

♠ A92
♥ QJT6
♦ 954
♣ Q82

LHO pd RHO you
1♠ 2♦ 2♠ X
3♠ 4♥ 4♠ ??

A vulnerable 2♦ overcall is 6 cards, fair hand. What do you do now?


6. None vuln. You're to declare 4♠ on the following hands and auction

Scoring: MP

---

LHO pd RHO you
--- --- 1♥ p
2♥ X p 2♠
3♥ 4♠ (all pass)

When LHO opens the ♥Q, you manage to hide your disgust at partner's bidding and mutter "nice dummy pard". You ruff and play the ♣Q to the king and ace. A small spade follows, the king appearing from LHO. Take it from there.

"Solutions" in two days

[mikestar]

1. Low club is a possibilty, it only needs JC from partner but can blow a trick. A low diamond is fairly safe but needs partner to have quite a bit to develop anything, small spade is a bit risky--likely to work only if partner has spade length (and he would overcall on some of theose hands). I'd lead the diamond without any enthusiasm for my choice at MPs (at IMPs where I don't care about the extra overtrick I lead the club).

2. Double--this type of repeated double shows extra high cards (your first double showed the shape) and partner will leave it in fairly freely with something in spades and no good suit. Pass isn't horrible (I might prefer it at the opposite colors)--that QS is a big minus for our offense. 4C commits us to playing the hand and bypasses 3NT. I know some people who will try 3NT themselves on this hand--somtimes it makes and sometimes it leads to some weird looking scores like -250.

3. Pass--it's far more likely that RHO has a stong but misfitting hand than partner has a strong hand that couldn't find a bid.

4. Let's look at what partner doesn't have. He doesn't have opening count, he doesn';t have a good six-card suit (no 2S on the first round). He doesn't have five good spades and 7-10 points (no 1S on the second round). I'm guessing he has a few points and five bad spades (maybe even four good spades) and is trying to push then to 3H. Pass is best--if RHO bid 4H because he was going to anyway, he has a decent chance of making it. If he bid it because he's impressed with his stiff spade, he may not be able to handle the bad splits in trumps and clubs. Putting them down one if the field is staying out of game could well be a top. I have some sympathy for double but it's too greedy for me--if RHO had bid only 3H and LHO had strecthced to game I'd find it more attractive.

5. Your hand is right down the middle for your responsive double--good trumps but bad shape. Pass the decision to partner.


6. I'll analyse this some more and post latefr.

[Fluffy]

1: ♦10: it is a ♣/♦ lead, ♣ is may be too risky when RHO opened 1NT, but remember partner failed to double 2♦.

2: Double, we ahve something more to show than a balancing double, LHO looks very strong, but he will defend alone.

3: Double, depends on partnership style, I tend to pass a weak 2 with less than 15.

4: Pass, partner didn´t bid on first round because he is ultra-weka, afraid of us getting too high, so we won´t do it now, probably we woudl be 1100.

5: Double, We have exactly the minimum we showed, even less because it seems ♠A is opoosite void, yes, we have a unshown third ♦, but we don´t have 5th ♥. Pass should be a much more offensive hand.

6: ♠A + top ♦+♦ ruff, we are in a superb contract hard to find, lets try 3 trumps are our only losers.

[whereagles]

Hum.. was hoping more people would reply Anyway thanks to those who replied, and here are the hands:

1.

Scoring: MP

---

West East
1NT 2♦
2♥ 3NT

West decided stick to 3NT despite the 4-card fit! Club lead beats it, but I think a diamond is much more sensible in this auction and at matchpoints. 11 tricks for 660 was an obvious top for E/W, as nobody managed more than 650 playing hearts. Pard vowed not to fail to open 3♣ next time, lol.

2.

Scoring: MP

---

East S W N
1♠ p p X
3♠ p p ??

At table North doubled again. South for some reason decided to pass... declarer blew a trick, so he could "only" manage 9 tricks. Double is aggressive, but should perhaps be made at matchpoints.

3.

Scoring: MP

---

West N E S
2♠ p p X
p 4♥ (all pass)

South huddled for a long time but managed to scrap up a balancing double! That left North very pleased. North could have bid 3♥ the first place, but he reasoned South, marked with spade shortness, would balance if he had any sort of competitive hand.

4.

Scoring: MP

---

South W N E
p 1♣ X 1♦
p 1♥ p 2♥
2♠ 4♥ 4♠ p
p X (all pass)

That went 4 down for -800. South's 2♠ was underpar shape-wise and encouraged North to sacrifice in 4♠, playing pard for a more normal hand, with 5 spades. I think 2♠ was a bit futile. What was the point of bidding it, if not to suggest a save, to which South's hand was clearlt unfit for? Still, with a normal 3-2 spade break, the save would probably have gone for -500 for a clear top, so maybe the bidding wasn't too bad after all...

5.

Scoring: MP

---

East S W N
1♠ 2♦ 2♠ X
3♠ 4♥ 4♠ 5♥
X (all pass)

North was unsure who could make what, so he took his chances in 5♥. It could make if South had the right cards (♥K, ♦AK), or it could go 1 down vs 4♠. Not to be.. though 4♠ does make (requires good timing, though), the defense got their diamond ruff for -2. At imps North would have bid 5♦, going for the obvious -200. Perhaps North should have doubled 4♠, as the opponents were likely to misplay it and go down, LOL.

6.

Scoring: MP

---

West N E S
1♥ p 2♥ X
p 2♠ 3♥ 4♠

East leads ♥Q. After ruffing and leading the ♣Q to K and ace and a spade back to the K, North reasoned correctly to take his ace and give away three trump tricks. However, he still needed to establish diamonds. Now he could either go back to hand with the club 9 to finesse the ♦Q (50%) or to ruff a diamond, playing for diamonds 3-3 or doubleton queen (52,5%). He took the latter line and went down when the queen failed to drop in three rounds oops. Perhaps there's a better play?

[mikestar]

On #6 I like the diamond hook. The bidding and your hand suggest the diamonds are less likely to be 3-3 than normal.

[whereagles]

Indeed. Both the bidding and play so far (♠K appearing omens a 4-1 break) hint at the diamond finesse having more chances than 50%.

[Chamaco]

1) 2S: reject hearts, pard did not double for siamonds, so choice betweem clubs and spades. At MP clubs may blow a trick or gain a tempo, spades is less aggressive but still constructive.

2) it also depends on the methods opps use. Do they use preemptive raises ?
If not, then RHO has at most 3 card support.
Also, do we play responsive doubles a this level ?
If we do, pard would double holding 4-4 in minors and a few hcp (8+).
If we do not, pard's double would be penalty.
In any case, I think pass is the percentage action.

3) pass

4) I hate when pard does not show support immediately and comes in at a later round of bidding leaving opps the room to exchange info. Here it costs them fining the heart fit at a comfortable level.
If he has to bid spades, he'd better bid them right away.
In any case, I pass, not enough defensive tricks nor offensive potential for any action.

5) to my standards, vuln vs not, 2 diams must promise a full opening hand not just 10 hcp with a 6 bagger.
Pard has 6-4, if we defend we may score a spade, one diam if pard has the ace, and 1 heart. The club Q is suspect.
In a 5 level cointract we probably lose no diamonds, no spades, a club and a heart.
If we lose more, they have a laydown spede contract in any case.
So I guess I just bid 5 hearts.

[luis]

Maybe late but here ar my answers:

1) Diamond Ten
2) Pass
3) Pass
4) Pass
5) Double
6) Abstain :-)

[Trpltrbl]

whereagles, on Jun 16 2004, 04:47 AM, said:

Hum.. was hoping more people would reply Anyway thanks to those who replied

I like to solve 1 maybe 2 problems at a time not 6 in same thread.
Am sure many feel same way.

Mike