Club News Sheet –
No. 160 www.pattayabridge.com
Mon 21st N-S 1st Knud/Lars 66% 2nd Jan/Tomas 61%
E-W 1st Paul(Irl)/Henrik 68% 2nd Mike/Terry 56%
Wed 23rd N-S 1st Albert/Jacques 56% 2nd John G/Emil 55%
E-W 1st Gerald/Derek 57% 2nd Jan/Knud 55%
Fri 25th N-S 1st Chuck/Henrik 62% 2nd Mike/Angels P. 59%
E-W 1st Dave/Gerry 67% 2nd Jim(Sco)/Phil 64%
The standings in the Gold Cup competition are now very close; currently we have (best 30): -
1st Chuck 1884.1% 2nd Dave 1883.8% 3rd Bob 1851.9% 4th Clive 1799.3%
Bidding Quiz Standard American is assumed unless
otherwise stated
Hand A Hand B With Hand A RHO opens 1♠. (a) What do you do?
Suppose you pass, LHO bids 2♠ and this is passed round to you
♠ 9 ♠ AQ6 (b) then what do you do?
♥ A1054 ♥ K52
♦ 63 ♦ Q875 With Hand B RHO opens 1♠ and this goes round to partner who
♣ KQ10843 ♣ 965 doubles. What do you bid?
Hand C Hand D What do you open with hand C?
♠ 8742 ♠ 954
♥ AQ9732 ♥ 1053 With Hand D it’s love all. Partner opens 1♠ (could be 4 card),
♣ 7 ♣ Q754
Hand E Hand F What do you open with Hand E?
♠ KQ104 ♠ 10
♥
AK ♥
K105 With
Hand F you open 1♦, partner bids 1♠ and
♦ Q873 ♦ KQJ962 what do you bid?
♣ A108 ♣ K98
Hand G Hand
H With Hand G partner
opens 1NT, what do you do?
♦ J62 ♦ QJ2
♣ KQJ4 ♣ J105
Hand J Hand K With Hand J RHO opens 1♥, what do you bid?
♠ AK10952 ♠ 2
♥ - ♥ AK102 What do you open with Hand K?
♣ 4 ♣ 3
Rudeness
Being rude to partner (and others) and excessive raising of the voice will not be tolerated at this club. Dave and I agree that if there is any further problem from Thorlief or Ian then they will be banned from both clubs.
For reference, the players currently ‘on notice’ (they will be suspended/banned for any further infraction) are now: Thorlief, Ian, Alex and Jeff. There are a number of others who should be ‘careful’ but I won’t name them, obviously this includes the three other people who have previously been suspended.
Now I wrote the above before two further ‘incidents’ occurred: -
a) John Gavens distributed a leaflet around in which he was rather rude about me. More of this later.
b) I received complaints from regulars about the aggressive attitude of a visitor.
It’s time to make the club policy on a few points very clear: -
1. Rudeness and aggressive behaviour will not be tolerated. The only exception is that I don’t really care what anybody calls me. I generally answer back with a logical reply in the news-sheet (John Gavens gets what’s coming later).
2. The aim of this club is that it is a friendly club and the strict laws of bridge may not apply. There is a copy of the local rules around or it’s on the web-site. The attitude should be to get a friendly game – not to try to get a top on every board by intimidating the opponents.
3. If an experienced player is playing a scratch partnership and asks what a double means and gets the reply ‘I don’t know’ then that is good enough at this club. He most certainly should not be rude/aggressive about it.
4. Towards the end of a competitive auction, if you bid, LHO pauses and eventually passes and partner passes then it is impolite (and incorrect) to pack up your bidding cards saying that RHO cannot bid. This is extremely rude (and wrong) and this type of arrogant attitude will not be tolerated at this club.
5. Anybody who ‘ticks off’ and opponent because of the way the stop card is played is simply being rude. You are asking to be thrown out.
6. The bridge sessions start at 1.00. It is polite to turn up at least 10 minutes before play starts so the director can gauge how many tables and decide upon the movement. Turning up at 1.02 two times running is rude/arrogant and totally unacceptable. Do it again and you won’t get a game.
7. Experienced players have to adapt to this club where not everybody is international standard. Chuck learnt this the hard way. Anybody else who upsets people will simply be asked to leave the club. Since points 2-6 were all by the same visitor this week he should take note (I won’t name him but I have spoken to him). Any more complaints and he will be asked to leave.
There are a couple of deals about play this week, let’s start with a great example of the need to unblock: -
Unblock Board 9 from Monday 21st
Dealer: ♠ 2
E-W vul ♦ 10876542 - pass (1) 1♠ pass
♣ 3 2♣ dbl (2) 3NT (3) pass
pass 4♦ (4) 4♠ dbl
♠ - N ♠ AKQJ98 pass pass 4NT (5) dbl
♥ Q953 W E ♥ J874 all pass
♠ 1076543
♥ 6
DUMMY ♦ KQJ
♣ J64
(1) What did you open with this North hand K in this week’s quiz? Pass is correct, it’s a poor bid to pre-empt with a 4 card major.
(2) From a passed hand partner will not expect much more than this. It shows the red suits.
(3) I can’t see the ♦ stop.
(4) North considered his shape worth another noise – especially at this vulnerability.
(5) I still can’t see the ♦ stop.
Anyway, the bidding is not the point. South led the ♦K which was won in dummy with the ♦A. Declarer reeled off the six ♣’s – what three cards should South throw?
South can play it pretty much double dummy – He knows that partner
has 6 ♦’s left and it is imperative that he throws his two remaining high ♦’s away. South
knows North’s ♦ holding and has to hope that North also
has the ♥AK (very likely on the bidding). In actual fact (at this table and
one other in 3NT) South threw his ♥, a ♠ and a ♦. The
point is that if South keeps even one high ♦ then dummy exits with a
♥, North wins, plays a ♦ and south then has to let declarer in with
a ♠.
Now just suppose that South does correctly pitch a high ♦ on the 4th ♣, can declarer foil this excellent defence?
Yes! His only hope is that south has a singleton or void ♥ (very likely on the bidding). He should immediately stop with the ♣’s and exit with a ♥. North wins but South still has one high ♦ left. North leads a ♦ which South has to win and with nothing but ♠’s left he has to give declarer 5 ♠ tricks. Probably even better is for declarer to cash only 3 ♣’s before switching to a ♦ as it’s possible that South started with just two ♦’s.
The bottom lines.
- If you have the top cards in a suit in which partner has more (and also the next top card(s), then throw your cards away to unblock.
- Throw your winner(s) away if you know that you will be end-played to concede (5!) tricks.
Here’s the second of our deals on the play: -
Aces are for taking kings Board 30 from Monday 21st
Love all ♦ Q - - pass pass
♣ AJ9852 1♥ pass (1) 1♠ pass
2♦ pass 2NT pass
♠ K6 N ♠ QJ84 3NT al pass
♥ KJ7652 W E ♥ A
♠ 93
♥ 109843
DUMMY ♦ K1083
♣ 74
(1) I would have bid a Michaels 2♥ (♠’s and a minor) here.
Anyway, it’s not about the bidding, but the play. South led the ♥10 and declarer won per force. A ♦ was then led to dummy’s ♦A and a ♦ came back to declarer’s ♦J and South’s ♦K
♦ - should North play?
♣ AJ985 The answer is that, as usual, you should look
at what partner has
led. The ♠9 is surely top of
♠ K6 N ♠ QJ84 nothing and North should simply play low,
♥ KJ765 W E ♥ - holding back with his ♠A to fell dummy’s ♠K
♠ 93
♥ 9843
DUMMY ♦ 108
♣ 74
And what happened? North went up with the ♠A and declarer then had 3 ♠ tricks and made his contract exactly. 3NT went one down at another table.
The bottom lines: -
- Don’t waste an ace on this air if you know it can capture an honour later.
- Michaels is weak or very strong; 5-5 or better shape is ideal.
Balancing - part 1 Board 1 from Monday 21st
Love all ♦ AJ104 2♠ pass pass pass (2)
♣ A76
(1) What did you bid with this
South hand A(a)
♠ QJ43 N ♠ AK1082 in this week’s quiz? I would overcall 2♣.
♥ Q82 W E ♥ KJ7 (2) What did you bid with this South hand A(b)
♠ 9 died at a low level and partner must have
♥ A1054 values. Double is possible (but a 3♦ response
♦ 63 would be awkward) so I think that South
♣ KQ10843 should bid 3♣.
And what happened? 2♠ made exactly for a top to E-W. At other tables E-W were pushed up and went down or else N-S were making 3♣.
The bottom line. Understand balancing – don’t let the opponents play in a comfortable contract if you can compete.
Balancing - part 2 Board 23 from Wednesday 23rd
Love all ♦ 1042 pass pass dbl pass
♣ 10873 1NT (1) pass pass (2) pass
♠ AQ6 N ♠ 52
♥ K52 W E ♥ QJ93
♠ J10873
♥ A104
♦ KJ6
♣ Q4
(1) What did you bid with this West hand B in this week’s quiz? When partner has made a balancing double you should assume that he is bidding 3 of your points and so deduct 3 points from your hand. Thus 1NT in this position is about 9-12 as partner may have as few as 8 points for his double. I was West and bid 1NT here.
(2) Chuck was East. He knew exactly what my bid was (he too understands balancing). He said later that he was close to a raise to 2NT and would have bid on if West has jumped in ♥’s.
But with lousy ♠’s and no fit he decided not to raise 1NT to 2NT. I totally agree.
And what happened? 1NT made +1 for a top to E-W. At other tables E-W usually bid to 3NT going 1 or 2 down
The bottom line. Understand balancing: –
- 1NT opposite partner’s balancing double is about 9-12.
Something Different
And now it’s time for something completely different – we have an input from another player. Now I’ll start with a little background. The Wednesday club is run by Dave and so I have a ‘day off’. I generally do this with a relaxing game with Chuck.
That means that Dave has to be the odd one out and play with anybody left over. On Wednesday 16th John Gavens was left over. Now a year or two back John was extremely rude to Dave and Dave has refused to ever play with him again. So Chuck and I had to put ourselves out – I played with John Gavens and Chuck played with Dave.
Now I have made my policy on not mentioning names very clear. If somebody makes a foolish bid or play then I may or may not write it up but I won’t mention names. But if somebody makes a foolish bid/play and then tries to blame me at the table, then the gloves are off. Here is another typical John Gavens classic blunder/try to blame partner. I wrote up the hand but did not publish it – I simply gave a copy to John and expected a simple acceptance that he had made a mistake. How silly of me! John Gaven never makes mistakes, and he gave me his written answer, distributed it around the club, and insisted I print in full (it appears later). Anyway, have a look at these two problems first, it’s the same bidding. N-S were playing a weak NT and 4 card majors – hence the 1♠ opening: -
DUMMY ¯ West North East South
- - - 1♠
N ♠ 63 pass pass dbl pass
W E ♥ AKQ98 1NT all pass
♠ QJ107
♥ J4 Problem 1 You are South. Partner leads the ♠9, you play the ♠7 and
♦ KJ42 declarer (West) wins with the ♠A. He leads a ♥ to the ♥Q and
♣ AK2 then the ♦3 from table, what card do you play?
________________________________________
♦ A76 then the ♦3 from table, ♦4 from partner, ♦9 from declarer,
♣ Q754 DUMMY ¯ what card do you play?
N ♠ 63
W E ♥ AKQ98
♣ J108
- Answers next pages. There is no catch – these really are the trivial problems that they appear to be, but there are an amusing couple of pages ahead.
Blame me for your blunder …. Board 11 from Wednesday 16th
Love all ♦ A76 pass pass (2) dbl (3) pass
♣ Q754 1NT all pass
♠ AK82 N ♠ 63 The bidding is not important, N-S were
♥ 762 W E ♥ AKQ98 playing 4 card majors and a weak NT and
♠ QJ107 doubled at (3) and a final contract if 1NT
♥ J4 by E-W was reached.
♦ KJ42 And now onto the play: -
♣ AK2
North led the ♠9 which ran round to
♦ A7 Declarer has 7 tricks – but why not try for an
♥ 105 DUMMY extra one? - who knows, the defence may do
♣ Q754 ¯ something
stupid?!
So
West led a ♥ to dummy’s ♥Q and led a ♦
♠ K82 N ♠ 6 back, inserting the ♦9 when South played
♥ 76 W E ♥ AK98 low, and North ducked!
♠ QJ10 Obviously if North had simply taken the ♦A
♥ J and led another ♠ then N-S get 2♠’s, 2♦’s
♦ KJ2 and 2 ♣’s.
♣ AK2 So West has now already got his absolute top but there is still ‘worse’ to come: -
Declarer rattled off 4 ♥ tricks and South was ‘squeezed’. He ‘knew’ that declarer had ♦AQ10 (since partner could not beat the ♦9) and so had to keep his ♦KJ2. So on the ♥’s he had to throw the ♣2, ♠10 and ♣K!
Declarer then led a ♦ from table and South covered. Since West is known to hold ♦AQ10 it made no difference which card he played – he (I) played the ♦K which partner took with his now bear ♦A. The ♦Q gave West an (unneeded) 2nd overtrick.
Now I had said nothing, but then John commented on my ‘silly’ play of the ♦K. This really is rather stupid – John had already gifted them the top with his bad bid and bad play and then tried to blame me! He added that I should not try to blame partner for my mistakes!!
And what happened? E-W got 150 for a complete top, the next highest score was 100 their way. 1NT making exactly would have been about average. Had North bid 1NT then N-S get a good score whatever, if East competed to 2♥ then that goes down and if North is left in 1NT then one down is just 50 away.
Blame me for your blunder …. cont Board 11 from Wednesday 16th
I gave the previous page to John Gavens, expecting that he graciously accept that he had made a mistake. I print his reply in full, as he insists. He wrote it in capitals and I keep them so that you can distinguish his writings from mine. The bracketed numbers are my addition:
I WILL USE CAPITALS WHICH MAY HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THE ‘CLASSIC BLUNDER’ WAS ENTIRELY YOURS (so John means Terry). THE OPENING LEAD DREW THE ♠A – DAVE(1) IS GETTING FAR TOO GOOD NOT TO HOLD UP UNLESS HE HAD ANOTHER STOP – WHICH COULD ONLY BE THE KING – ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN HAND – AND HE CROSSED TO THE ♥’S WHICH HE WOULD HAVE RUN HAD THE ♠A BEEN SINGLETON. HE DID NOT BUT LED A SMALL ♦ – BE YOUR AGE TERRY – 11 POINTS IS MOST UNUSUAL FOR 1NT (2) – SO UP WITH THE ♦K, SHOW THE ♣A, GET A POSITIVE AND WE COME TO 6 TRICKS.
YOU MAY BE A GRAND MASTER OF HINDSIGHT BUT YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT A G.M. AT THE TABLE. BLIND TO THE MENACE OF A ♥ SUIT WITH JUST A DOUBLETON – AND YOU HAVE THE TEMERITY TO TRY TO BLAME ME(3)!
(4) A TWO PAGE LETTER POINTING OUT WHY I PLAYED A CERTAIN HAND INCORRECTLY INITIALLY CALLED FOR NO COMMENT – NOT EVEN YOUR DANCING ON YOUR SEAT WITH RAGE, WHICH CONTRIBUTED TO MY LATER GROSS ERROR.
(4) WHEN I CALLED FOR A ♦ ON ANOTHER OCASSION YOU HAD THE GALL TO TELL ME THAT I DIDN’T KNOW THAT YOU HAD NO MORE ♥’S.
YOUR PARANOIA TO CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM LOWERS YOUR STANDARDS.
(5)
PERHAPS YOU WILL
CARE TO PUBLISH YOUR LETTER AND MY COMPLETE ANSWER.
(6) YOUR ‘BOTTOM LINE’ COMMENT IS COMPLETELY TRUE – SO WRITE IT WITH NAMES AND LOOK A COMPLETE PRATT!
JOHN GAVENS.
Now I won’t bother to reply to this drivel, but I will correct the obvious & clarify a point or two:
(1) I don’t dispute that Dave is a fine player. That, however, is irrelevant as declarer was Gerry and Dave was not at the table – he was playing with Chuck elsewhere as Chuck and I had put ourselves out to ensure that John got a game.
(2) If you understand balancing then declarer is indeed marked with about 11 points.
(3) I only ‘blamed’ John after he had criticised my play.
(4) I have no idea what these two paragraphs are referring to, presumably they are references to earlier John Gavens errors, but John did ask me to print his letter in full.
(5) Done, and (6) done (I added his name to the ‘bottom lines’).
Who’s the ‘Pratt’?
Everybody makes mistakes. One of the main reasons that I enjoy playing with Chuck is that he is good enough to (politely) point out my mistakes, and I appreciate this (and it goes the other way round also). I simply cannot comprehend the mentality of somebody who simply refuses to accept that they have made the most obvious of errors (plural) and then tries to blame it on partner.
As I said, I won’t even bother to answer John’s nonsense. There’s a
free beer on offer for anybody who can come up with a logical reason for not bidding
and for not playing the ♦A. But I did give the ‘problems’
1&2 to members of the club…
Everybody said that they would have bid with the North hand (and then there would be no problem). Everybody played a low ♦ (as I did) for problem 1. Chuck at first considered playing the ♦K but then accepted that it could never gain and could be disastrous if declarer held something like ♠AK82 ♥76 ♦Q10976 ♣96 (or any hand where partner has a singleton ♦A or ♦Q – quite likely as declarer is playing on ♦’s). Everybody played the ♦A as John did not for problem 2. When I asked for a comment on ducking the ♦A the answers I got were varied, some unprintable. Absurd was typical for the milder comments.
Gerry diplomatically did not answer the questions. He simply correctly stated that there would be no problem had North bid 1NT.
I asked Chuck what he would say to partner if he was South, played a low ♦ and North failed to play the ♦A. Chuck said that he would say nothing (as did I). I then asked him what he would say if partner then tried to blame him for the bottom on the board. His answer was ‘If you want to know the source of your problems, John, then look in the mirror’.
So, according to John it seems that everybody in the club except John Gavens is a ‘pratt’!
So, John. I gave you the sheet privately to politely point out the errors of your ways – repeatedly blaming partner when you made beginner’s mistakes. You insisted upon my printing it together with your ridiculous reply in order to be rude and make me look a ‘pratt’. Seems to have mis-fired somewhat, eh?
The bottom lines: -
- Don’t blame partner when you have made a silly bid.
- Don’t blame partner when you have made a silly play.
- Don’t blame partner when you have done both of the above on the same deal!
- I really cannot see the point in publicly being rude to somebody who has gone to the trouble of writing up a hand to privately inform you of the errors of your ways.
- Do not pass partner’s opening with 6 points, especially with 3 card support for his major.
- Generally speaking (unless there is a very good reason to do otherwise), 2nd hand plays low and 4th hand wins.
- 1NT opposite partner’s balancing double is about 9-12 pts.
- Accepts you mistakes graciously.
- John has an excellent command of the English language, including a few words that I would never use. It’s a shame that ‘sorry partner’ are not in his vocabulary.
- And finally, as Chuck says, ‘Look in the mirror’ before you rudely open your mouth?
Incidentally, this is by no means the first time that this sort of
thing has happened. John Bourne, Dave and Sid have all refused to play with John
G because of his rudeness and repeatedly incorrectly criticising partner. He
knows that he will be kicked out of the club if I get another complaint.
Luckily for him I do not mind if people are rude to me – I simply turn it
against them.
Well, wasn’t that fun! Isn’t it refreshing to have somebody else’s opinions even if they are rude garbage? Not quite the general tone of the news-sheets (I am rarely rude to people, especially in print) but I guess others have their own idiosyncrasies. Let’s get back to reality, and my usual polite jovial self: -
Shape is more important than points Board 10 from Wednesday 23rd
Both vul ♦ Q4 dbl (1) 4♥ (2) dbl (3) pass
♣ QJ108 4♠ (4) pass pass dbl (5)
all pass
♠ AK10952 N ♠ 32
♥ - W E ♥ QJ10
♠ Q86
♥ AK742
♦ A96
♣
(1) What did you bid with this West hand J in this week’s quiz? A Michaels 2♥ perhaps? Now a Michaels bid would show 5-5 in ♠’s and a minor and is best played as either weak or VERY strong. In my opinion this hand is in-between – I only play the strong version with a VERY strong hand. So I believe that double is best – and if partner bids ♣’s then bid ♠’s. Anyway, these are my personal opinions and I was West so I doubled.
(2) Excellent bid. Weak, 5 ♥’s and a singleton. Even Chuck approved.
(3) With two defensive tricks this is also excellent bidding.
(4) But with 6-6 shape I did not fancy defending, especially at this vulnerability.
(5) 16 points, so double? Actually it made little difference if South doubled or not as West has found the top spot.
And what happened? 4♠ doubled made +1 for the E-W top. Two other E-W’s found 4♠ and made exactly for good scores. South was allowed to play in 4♥ four times (3 times not even doubled). Do people not realise the trick making potential of a decent 6-6 shape? 4♥ went just one down for good scores to N-S.
The bottom lines: -
- It’s usually best to be declarer when 6-6 with all of the points in these suits.
- A double followed by a pull of partner’s penalty double at the 4 level shows a very shapely hand, so don’t double it expecting to make AK of your suit, declarer is surely void.
- Michaels is weak or very strong; 5-5 or better shape is ideal.
Being Devious Board 25 from Wednesday 23rd
E-W vul ♦ AK954 2NT (1) pass 3♣ (2) pass
♣ 64 3♥ (3) pass 3♠ (4) pass
4♠ (5) pass 4NT (6) pass
♠ K63 N ♠ AQ 5♣ (7) pass 6♥ all pass
♥ KQ72 W E ♥ AJ1084
♠ J975 (3) no ace to cue
♥ 53 (4) cue bid (ace)
♦ 10863 (5) cue bid (king)
♣ 832 (6) RKCB
(7) 1 key card (1430)
Obviously the auction needs explaining: -
(1) What did you bid with this West hand H in this week’s quiz. A direct 4♥ is best played as weak and the best treatment is to play Jacoby 2NT: Promising 4 ♥’s, a sound raise to 4♥ or better and no singleton/void.
(2) A singleton/void ♣! No, this was not a matter of pulling the wrong card; it was Chuck being ultra devious. He was always going to slam and so ‘invented’ ♣ shortage hoping for a ♣ lead rather than a ♦.
And what happened? Despite Chuck’s finest effort, South led a ♦ anyway! So 6♥ made exactly, scoring just a bit above average as two Easts also bid the slam but did not get a ♦ lead.
The bottom line.
- You can deceive partner and lie with your bidding if you are in charge.
Pass for penalties? Board 18 from Wednesday 23rd
N-S vul ♦ A853 pass 1♠ 2♥ (2) pass (3)
♣ AJ106 pass dbl (4) pass pass (5)
pass
♠ KQ63 N ♠ 8742
♥ J86 W E ♥ AQ9732
♠ 10
♥ K105
♦ KQJ962
♣ K98
(1) What did you open with this East hand C in this week’s quiz? Pass is best – it is usually best not to pre-empt (so 2♥ here) with a 4 card major.
(2) A bit on the weak side for a two level overcall, but the vulnerability is right, and partner knows that you are a passed hand.
(3) What did you bid with this South hand F in this week’s quiz? Pass is correct. 2NT is wrong as that would show a much stronger hand since partner has only promised 6 points. With no other agreement (such as the Support Double), double here would be for penalties (shows a 4 card ♥ suit).
(4) North’s bid here is not that easy. Double is forward going but passable; it is not for penalties but in principle offers the possibility of penalising the opponents. I would not double because I would not like to defend 2♥ when partner is known to have a maximum of three ♥’s and at this vulnerability N-S should bid game rather than defend. I would bid 3♥ - asking partner for a ♥ stop.
(5) Over the double South has a tricky decision. Since (I assume in their methods) South has denied 4 ♥’s then passing looks reasonable to me (presumably North has something in ♥’s when he doubled?) although I would certainly not argue with 2NT and at this vulnerability it may be best to bid.
And what happened? 2♥ doubled was just one down and scored a top for E-W as N-S bid game at most tables.
Contacting Others
We now have a list of some member’s/guest’s telephone/e-mail details on the web-site. When you open the main page there is a ‘contact members’ link in the left column. When you click that you’ll be asked for a password. At the moment it contains 20+ entries, if you would like your details included then give them or e-mail them to me and I’ll include them and tell/e-mail you the password.
Deduct a point for 4333 and miss game? Board 17 from Friday 23rd
I was approached by someone on Friday who said that a reasonable game was missed because his partner took my advice and devalued a 4333 type hand. Let’s have a look: -
Love all ♦ J62 pass pass (2) pass
♣ KQJ4
♠ AJ532 N ♠ 7
♥ Q3 W E ♥ 1097542
♠ KQ104
♥ AK
♦ Q873
♣ A108
(1) What did you open with this South hand E in this week’s quiz? More than one player opened 1NT. It’s 18 points with OK shape and two tens – it really is too good for 1NT.
(2) What did you bid with this North hand G in this week’s quiz? I too would pass.
And what happened? 4 pairs bid 3NT, mostly making or making +1 and everybody in 1NT made 9 tricks.
The bottom lines: -
- A decent 18 count with two tens is too good for 1NT. Open a minor and then bid 2NT.
- As always, it’s correct to knock off a point for a 4333 type shape hand.
Bidding Quiz Answers
Hand A: (a) 2♣. I would overcall with this decent 6-carder. I don’t like double because 2♦ from partner will be awkward. Pass is a reasonable alternative.
(b) 3♣. This time you are in the balancing seat and really have to say something. Again, I don’t like double because of a possible 2♦ reply (I would double if the ♣’s and ♦’s were reversed) so 3♣ must be best now.
Hand B: 1NT. This shows around 9-12 opposite a balancing double.
Hand C: Pass. It’s usually best not to open with a pre-empt when you hold a 4 card major.
Hand D: 1NT. Even though it’s totally flat you clearly have to bid, especially as you have 3 card support for partner’s major and you are non-vul.
Hand E: 1♦ (with a view to rebidding 2NT). It’s too good for 1NT.
Hand F: Pass. 2NT is incorrect as it shows a better hand because partner may have as few as 6 points.
Hand G: Pass. Knock off a point for the totally flat 4333 type shape and it’s not worth an invitational 2NT.
Hand H: 2NT, Jacoby. If you don’t play Jacoby 2NT then you have to fall back on bidding 2♣ and 4♥ next go. A direct 4♥ is played as weak.
Hand J: dbl. I will not bid Michaels 2♥ (♠’s and a minor) with a hand of this strength. For me Michaels is either weak or very strong.
Hand K: Pass. It’ best not
to pre-empt with a 4 card major, especially one this good.