[Kaitlyn S]

Warning: These involve judgment and may be a bit more difficult that my other problem sets.

Hi - these problems should be very easy for experienced players but a novice needs to think about the right things in an auction. If you are a beginner and get them wrong, don't feel too bad as long as you understand the rationale for the answers. I'll provide the answers later but I'll put a hint as a spoiler. Try to solve the problem without the spoiler. Also, let me know if you would be interested in seeing more of these from time to time.

Assume you are playing Standard American (a natural system with 15-17 1NT openings), IMPS, and nobody is vulnerable.

Some background: When the opponents make a preemptive jump overcall, they are stealing room you need to discuss the trump suit and the level. You may have to guess. Realize that if you bid a new suit below game, it is forcing and think of what partner is likely to do.


1.

---

Spoiler

What will happen if you don't have a spade fit?

2.

---

Spoiler

What information do you really need to know?

3.

---

Spoiler

Is it possible that partner is going to think you bid under pressure?

[Phil]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-October-05, 12:30, said:

2.

---

Spoiler

What information do you really need to know?

Spoiler

And how do I obtain this juicy piece of information

[bravejason]

1. Pass. With a spade trick, two trump tricks, and a partner with an opening bid, I want to play defense.

2. 5 diamonds. The hand seems better suited for offense than defense. I can't articulate why except to say I like the spades and I don't want to defend while holding a single small trump.

3. 3 spades. The four small hearts are a concern, but I'm not sure that the hand would play better on defense and I know I have a 9 card trump fit in spades. I don't understand the spoiler question about bidding under pressure.

[Kaitlyn S]

bravejason, on 2016-October-06, 08:03, said:

1. Pass. With a spade trick, two trump tricks, and a partner with an opening bid, I want to play defense.

You have done quite well on the other sets of problems, but I think this set tells me that you might not totally understand how bridge scoring works. Take hand 1 where there is an extremely important lesson to be learned (don't feel bad, many people would do the same thing when they set foot in an intermediate class.)

You may set them 3 or 4 tricks but you will only get 50 points for each undertrick.

You have enough to make a game, and any game you score will be worth at least 400 points. (I am assuming duplicate scoring; if you play rubber bridge, you 100+ below the line and the first half of the rubber worth about 300.) Yes, I know you have to get to one of the games that makes to get that score, but in my answers, you'll see that this is likely.

If you pass, partner will not know of your values and will probably pass. You are the one that knows your side has the values for game, and have the responsibility of getting to game.

Your idea of wanting to defend is not without merit. Fifty years ago you could have strongly suggested defending and getting a big score by saying "double" which was widely played as a penalty double. You get your opportunity to defend, but the score for undertricks (and for them making!) are greatly increased. Down four gets you +800 instead of +200. If they make it, you get -530 instead of -140. However, looking at 14 HCP in your hand and knowing your partner has an opening bid, wouldn't you rather defend 3H doubled than 3H undoubled? They are contracting to take nine tricks when your side has 2/3 of the high cards, and are unlikely to be successful.

If you do not play negative doubles, or you only play them as high as through 2S or through 3D, or if you are playing in most social games where nobody has heard of a negative double, this option is available to you. If you don't know what a negative double is and your partner is in the same boat, this option is available to you. I am guessing by your answers to problem sets 1-6 that you are studious (you seem to know the basic rules which puts you far ahead of most novices) and likely not only know what negative doubles are, but play them at a level requested by your partners, which is likely to include in this auction.

So if defending 3H doubled isn't an option, why am I taking so long to talk about it? I am preparing to explain a simple principle.

If you believe that your side has the values for game, and has the other side outgunned in high cards, you must not let the opponents play undoubled. You must either bid your own contract or double their contract.

This is important. When you have game values, you should be striving to get a score that is equivalent or better than the score for bidding and making a game. You can get that by bidding and making a game, or you can get it by setting the opponents a lot of tricks doubled.

Here you might not be able to double 3H for penalty and might have to bid your own game. But you have game values and this rule states that passing is not an option, as partner will have no idea that your side has the vast majority of strength.

An example should illustrate the principle.

---

Your side has about 26 HCP and the opponents have about 14. If you pass, you are letting the opponents steal from you; giving you 50 points for each undertrick. Also, since you've shown only six points, partner won't know that your side has the strength and may defend 4H undoubled.

You must either bid a game here, or if you don't think you can make a game, you must double. (I would choose 5D myself, but double is a lot better than pass.)

Now, if partner is already clued in to the fact that your side has enough high cards to make a game, and has another bid, you don't have to be a hero and decide. If you have a clear preference for defending, double. If you have a clear preference for declaring, bid. If you don't have a clear preference, partner also knows not to allow the opponents to steal the contract undoubled, and maybe he has a clear preference. I almost didn't put this paragraph in for two reasons - first, your partner should know that he shouldn't pass, but he might pass anyway and let the opponents steal, and second, you might have to think about the situation and force partner into an uncomfortable situation where the director will adjust the score against you because your opponents will claim that your partner took advantage of the information that you had a problem.

I'm glad you answered. This is a common issue but not one in my cognitive space when creating problem posts. Perhaps in the future you'll see a problem set concerning which side owns the hand (i.e. whether you should expect to get a plus score, implying that your side should bid or double and not pass.)


On problem 2, the scoring gives you a large bonus for bidding six or seven when you can make it. Consider if you have the strength to make a slam opposite your partner's opening bid.

[NickRW]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-October-06, 09:19, said:

This is important. When you have game values, you should be striving to get a score that is equivalent...

One principle that I picked up quite some time ago from a couple of different sources that is relevant especially in the age of lots of take out/responsive/whatever (i.e. not penalty) doubles is to strive to get at least the score you would have got without the interference. Don't worry too much if the penalty would have been better, so long as you can get at least the score you would have got.

Of course, the corollary is, when the opponents are pushing you beyond the level which you think you can make, you'd better double (e.g. your side bid to say 4♠ and you did that fully believing it is a probable make, opponents come over the top of you with a 5♦ call that sounds like they are prepared to go down and 5♠ feels like it is too much of a stretch, well, 5♦ two or three off undoubled is likely to be a bad score whatever the form of scoring).

(Of course, developing judgement as to when you're likely to not make 5 and how likely it is that opps are really sacrificing as opposed to bidding distributional monsters is quite an art that takes time to develop and none of us always gets it right)

In matchpoint terms, an average is good. Play for the top, or at least protect your position as much as you can, when the opponents really have forced you to.

[NickRW]

bravejason, on 2016-October-06, 08:03, said:

3. 3 spades. The four small hearts are a concern, but I'm not sure that the hand would play better on defense and I know I have a 9 card trump fit in spades. I don't understand the spoiler question about bidding under pressure.

The 4 little hearts are how much of a concern? Think about how many the overcaller probably has. How many does that leave for the other two hands?

Also what would you have bid minus one of those picture cards? Is your hand a good deal better than that?

[Kaitlyn S]

Answers: Material for more advanced novices is in blue. There's a lot of blue in this post because these problems were a bit more advanced than the other sets.

1.

---

Hint: What will happen if you don't have a spade fit?[

Answer: You have enough for a game, but don't know which game you want to play in. If East had not overcalled, you would plan to play in 3NT or 4S (unless partner showed significant extra values.) You would respond 1S, forcing, [If partner doesn't support spades, you would make another forcing bid (bid a new suit) to give him a chance to show 3 cards.] If you don't find a spade fit, you will likely bid 3NT (unless partner shows a maximum opening hand, in which case you'll bid slam.)

Here you don't have that luxury. The good news is that if you bid 3S here, you are showing all five of them. [This is true whether you play negative doubles this high or not, but if you do, your negative double would show four spades.] However, you should look ahead and consider what will happen if partner does not have a spade fit for you. Partner is very unlikely to have a heart stopper and will bid something higher than 3NT, and you will no longer be able to play 3NT, and no guarantee of finding a minor suit fit, which will require eleven tricks (which may be pretty tough when you consider that West might get a heart ruff.)

Even if partner does have a spade fit, 3NT is a reasonable contract. You have the values for game and two heart stoppers, and it's not likely that the preemptor has enough entries to set up and run hearts. My advice would be to forego the attempt to find spades and just bid 3NT

[With the preempt, 4S is no bargain even if partner does have three. The preempt makes it more likely that spades break 4-1, and there's a good chance that West will have a singleton heart and ruff one of your heart winners at trick 2.]


2.

---

Hint:: What information do you really need to know?

Answer: First, let me show you what you don't need to know. There is an excellent diamond fit and this is IMP scoring so even if you knew you had a spade fit, making 5D as compared to 4S or 6D as opposed to 6S is going to cost you 2 IMPs, and considering that one opponent bid 4H, you are probably getting bad breaks, and could easily have a spade loser if partner doesn't have the jack, and the opponents could easily score a diamond ruff in a spade contract. I think it's safe to say that the answer to "where" is diamonds.

Now, you need to answer "how high?". If you strictly counted points, you would say 17 HCP plus 4 for shortness, but since you're pretty sure you have the long hand, you might say 17 HCP plus 2 length points That's 19 points opposite partner's opening bid, and while there's no guarantee of 33 points, if I have to guess, I'm bidding 6D.

But do I really have to guess?

Essentially, the level of the contract you can make is determined by how many aces your partner has. If he has one, you can make 5D. If he has two, you can make 6D. If he has three, you can make 7D. (I wouldn't bid 7NT because partner might need to trump my small spade.)

Can I find that out? Yes - the Blackwood convention will tell you how many aces your partner has. Bid 4NT. His answer will tell you how many aces he has and you will bid the appropriate number of diamonds and collect the largest slam bonus available to you on this hand.

[While it's possible that partner's high cards are the H-AK and D-AJ and you have two club losers, this is highly unlikely, and even if it's so, a non-club lead will allow one of your clubs to be discarded on partner's extra heart winner after drawing trump. I would just pretend that partner has the CA or CQ since there is very little chance that isn't true.]

The search for a trump suit on this acution brings up other interesting points. Without interference, if you bid 1S over your partner's 1D bid, you show four spades and it's forcing Here, after the 4H overcall, if you bid 4S, you are strongly suggesting that 4S is the correct contract - your bid is not forcing and you are very likely to play in 4S regardless of partner's hand. That won't be much fun if partner has a small doubleton spade.

[If you do play negative doubles this high, a negative double looking for a spade fit is misguided for a couple of reasons. First, if partner doesn't bid spades, you will lose your opportunity to ask for aces which is the information you really need. Second, at this high level, the double is often left in, with partner figuring that collecting a penalty is more likely than guessing a game at the 5-level. With your tremendous diamond fit, you really do not relish the prospect of defending.]

3.

---

Hint: Is it possible that partner is going to think you bid under pressure?

Answer: You pick up a hand and hear partner open 1S. This should be a nice easy hand to bid - 11 points (counting 1 for the doubleton - you're going to be dummy in a trump contract), and four trump. 3S, a limit raise fits perfectly. [If anybody plays Bergen, you have a different bid to show a limit raise. I suspect that most novice readers of this post have never heard of the Bergen convention, and that's quite all right.]

So if you were going to bid 3S, isn't it right to still do so? No problem!

But wait, there is a problem. While the preempt hasn't taking your 3S bid away, it has taken your 2S bid away, and you will want to bid 3S now on many of the hands which would have bid 2S without the overcall.

As NickRW suggests, what would you do here?

---

With at least nine trump, you want to compete to 3S, but partner may have a hand that makes reopening the bidding dangerous opposite a responder who has passed. Passing may very well let the opponents make 3H when you can make 3S.

This is what I meant about bidding under pressure. You don't really have the values to play at the three level if partner is minimum (two minimum hands try to stay below 2NT unless pushed by the opponents), but you do really want to compete to 3S and if you bid 3S here, it is strictly competitive.

So if you bid 3S on the actual 11-point hand, how will partner know whether you are just trying to compete or you have a solid invitational hand? He won't. He will probably pass when you can make four.

I believe you should resolve partner's dilemma and bid 4S yourself. You may not make it, but your chances are pretty good. The point of the hand is that you know you are close to a game, and partner doesn't know that, and a 3S bid won't tell partner that. So bid the game yourself and blame the well-timed preempt if it doesn't make.

[This hand is better than the point count indicates. For your opponent bid 3H and you have four small hearts. Partner has short hearts. How much can he have wasted in the heart suit? Quite likely, very little. Your partner has short hearts and needs you to have values in diamonds, clubs, and trump. You have no wasted high cards in hearts, and your high cards are in just the suits where he needs them. I would be very surprised to go down in 4S with this hand. That doesn't change the point of this hand, I would still bid 4S with an "average" 11 point hand in this situation, but good hand evaluation makes the decision a lot easier.]

[How will partner know that you are stretching to bid 4S, and aren't interested in a slam if partner has more than a minimum opening bid? You bid 4S. If you had spade support and a better hand, for example about 16 points, you would bid 4H, a cue bid, instead. This is an advanced bid so don't pull it out unless you're sure that partner will understand you.]

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2016-October-05, 12:43, said:

Spoiler

And how do I obtain this juicy piece of information

How do you think you obtain this information, Phil?
Are you seriously asking this and about to suggest in this particular forum that 4 NT is something other than asking for keycards/aces?
But I have a feeling that you suggested Kaitlyn to ask this question to readers? If so disregard my comment please.

@ Kaitlyn: Nice examples. Keep up this good work IMO.

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2016-October-06, 22:06, said:

How do you think you obtain this information, Phil?
Are you seriously asking this and about to suggest in this particular forum that 4 NT is something other than asking for keycards/aces?
But I have a feeling that you suggested Kaitlyn to ask this question to readers? If so disregard my comment please.

@ Kaitlyn: Nice examples. Keep up this good work IMO.

Timo it depends on the audience but I suspect it isn't RKC for you and it certainly isn't RKC for me.

It's fine to ask the question, what do you need to know, call 4N RKC and leave it that. At some point in a players development they will learn that 4N isn't always ace asking.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2016-October-06, 22:23, said:

Timo it depends on the audience but I suspect it isn't RKC for you and it certainly isn't RKC for me.

It's fine to ask the question, what do you need to know, call 4N RKC and leave it that. At some point in a players development they will learn that 4N isn't always ace asking.

Ok, I misunderstood your previous comment then. Just disregard please.

[Kaitlyn S]

MrAce, on 2016-October-06, 22:06, said:

But I have a feeling that you suggested Kaitlyn to ask this question to readers?

That was my assumption too.

Phil, on 2016-October-06, 22:23, said:

At some point in a players development they will learn that 4N isn't always ace asking.

As far as this sequence goes, I guess that point in my development came tonight. I can really see 4NT being used as an attempt to find the best game, but I don't think I've ever seen it used as anything but ace asking here. Without agreement, if partner bid 4NT, I would be shocked if it was anything but ace-asking.

[bravejason]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-October-06, 09:19, said:

...
You have enough to make a game...

When I looked at the hand, I didn't see game. Part of the issue is that I don't know what partner has. Partner could have three diamonds, or six of them. Maybe there are spades, maybe not. The ambiguity of the 1 diamond bid makes it hard to judge. Also, a substantial chunk of high card strength in an opposing suit.

I understand your point about the scoring.

[bravejason]

NickRW, on 2016-October-06, 10:16, said:

The 4 little hearts are how much of a concern? Think about how many the overcaller probably has. How many does that leave for the other two hands?

Also what would you have bid minus one of those picture cards? Is your hand a good deal better than that?

I can't quantify the heart concern. Sure, partner shouldn't have more than two, but it is still 4 cards that won't build tricks.

With a face card replaced by a spot card, I might bid 3 spades anyway. Law of total tricks, right? Hopefully wouldn't go down too much since it's potentially a 9 trick, 20 HCP contract.

[Kaitlyn S]

bravejason, on 2016-October-08, 13:03, said:

With a face card replaced by a spot card, I might bid 3 spades anyway. Law of total tricks, right? Hopefully wouldn't go down too much since it's potentially a 9 trick, 20 HCP contract.

Nick's point (I think) was that if you bid 3S on this hand and the other one, partner won't know when to bid 4; and since the likelihood of making 4 is good on the actual hand, bidding 4 on this hand will be more helpful to your partner when you hold the weaker hand and bid 3; since partner can know that you can't have this much.

The principle is that when you take pressure off your partner when you can (like bidding 4 on this hand rather than making him guess), when you don't take pressure off your partner, he can infer that you didn't have an option to take the pressure off of him, and therefore hold the weaker hand that is just bidding 3 to satisfy the Law of Total Tricks.

Let's look at it another way. You have a guess between 3S and 4S. With the interference, you could have a lot weaker hand for 3S. Let's say that hand evaluation isn't an issue and it's really a close decision for you. If you bid 3S, you have to guess right, and then partner has to guess right. (Of course, if you can only make 3S, that happens by default.) If you bid 4S, only you have to guess right.

Now, when you bid 3S, it's partner's turn. He may have to guess whether you have 8 or 11. However, if he thinks you would have already guessed to bid 4S with 11, he can eliminate the stronger responding hands from consideration and he'll get his guess right a lot more often when you do only bid 3S. It also allows you to bid 3S more often competitively if you wish because partner is going to take 11-counts out of the picture so you won't be in the position "I can probably make 3S sometimes but when I can make 3 my partner is going to bid 4S."

I'm beginning to think that this was a pretty advanced idea and not appropriate for this forum. I realize that what I am saying here isn't going to make a whole lot of sense to some beginners or novices. Come back to this after playing a few months and hopefully it will. I thought I had two reasons to bid 4S (hand evaluation saying the hand is better than 11, and taking pressure off your partner) but both of these are pretty tough concepts for most novices and I apologize to anybody who thinks this forums should be for them but didn't grasp either concept. If that happened to you, it's not your fault - I was really pushing the envelope in a novice forum and I'll try to be more careful in the future (but can't guarantee it won't happen again.)

[helene_t]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-October-06, 11:38, said:

your negative double would show four spades.

Maybe this is a bit off-topic (since I certainly agree with 3NT), but I don't believe negative doubles on 3♦ and higher should promise any particular suit. It is clear to make a negative double on 3♥ with xx-Axx-Kxx-AQxxx, and you could construct hands with only two spades for which double would probably be the best call.

A consequence of this is that opener should try to avoid bidding 4♠ in response to the double when holding a balanced 18-19. Normally either 3NT or pass is better.

[MrAce]

helene_t, on 2016-October-10, 04:31, said:

Maybe this is a bit off-topic (since I certainly agree with 3NT), but I don't believe negative doubles on 3♦ and higher should promise any particular suit. It is clear to make a negative double on 3♥ with xx-Axx-Kxx-AQxxx, and you could construct hands with only two spades for which double would probably be the best call.

A consequence of this is that opener should try to avoid bidding 4♠ in response to the double when holding a balanced 18-19. Normally either 3NT or pass is better.

I hope you did not seriously suggest negative double with xx-Axx-Kxx-AQxxx over 3♥ preempt when pd opened 1♦
Yes there are hands where we do not have 4 card spades for our double, and I am one of those who said this to others many times.
But why on earth would you DBL with this hand when you have an easy 3 NT bid? Why would you risk leaving 3 NT behind? Why would you disallow pd from bidding 4♠ with hands that he has better than just 3♠ would show, which may not even be 4 card spades?

I do not believe you will find too many players, if any, to DBL 3♥ with this, let alone it being clear.


EDIT: You made me question myself so I set a bidding poll for it.

http://bridgewinners...m-2-jztu1t6yyr/

[helene_t]

MrAce, on 2016-October-10, 18:47, said:

I hope you did not seriously suggest negative double with xx-Axx-Kxx-AQxxx over 3♥ preempt when pd opened 1♦

Oh sorry, I meant Axx-xx-Kxx-AQxxx. My bad.

[MrAce]

helene_t, on 2016-October-11, 04:25, said:

Oh sorry, I meant Axx-xx-Kxx-AQxxx. My bad.

I knew there was something wrong!!
I know you would not DBL with the former. I was shocked!

[helene_t]

MrAce, on 2016-October-11, 04:42, said:

I knew there was something wrong!!
I know you would not DBL with the former. I was shocked!

Lol, my typo did manage to attract a couple of votes in your bridgewinners poll but maybe they were misclicks

[NickRW]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-October-08, 14:48, said:

Nick's point (I think) was...

You surmised correctly.