MABC Bidding Forum

   September 1999 Answers

To views the bidding system used click here.

To see a chart of the panel and how they answered - Please click here
Go to problem#  One | Two | Three | Four | Five | Six | Seven | Eight | Nine

Mike Kovacich ask a system question that allows for some more definite agreements; "What about one club, pass, two diamonds or one diamond, pass, three clubs? They would be weak in competition, but are they forcing or invitational without competition?

Pettit: "Pass. 1ª could work out, but +200 is less likely with a 1ª overcall. If I pass, I can judge whiter to bid IF the bidding continues."

One type of immediate action AND planned follow up;
Shaft: "double- and over a probable 2§ I’ll cue bid to force a major suit response and if we end up in NT, everything seems well placed."
I wish he would mention what he would do over a major suit response

Yet another bidder;
Cohen: "2¨ – my diamond length increases the probability of a major suit fit. Four to the King in either suit should give us a great play for game…a six card suit even makes slam a possibility."
He doesn’t say how he plans to follow up his short "Michaels" – after all partner could be 3-3-2-5 also. Another "short" Michaels;
Parker: "2 ¨-Michaels - I have no bid if I double and pard bids clubs. If I pass it will go one of a major pass 1nt, or 1nt and I have no bid plus I will get endplayed at every opportunity. I hope pard has a sense of humor, but we should end up OK since I have lots of offensive tricks.

And another player who makes immediate action; Herrmann: "1ª, can’t sit and pass with this fine and, and Michaels is somewhat silly on this distribution. May bid hearts later if given chance."

Hard to see why the spade overcall is better than the heart overcall - one might loose the other.

==============================

ª=J96 ©-K52 ¨-AQT92 §-64

The only possible question is that this hand maybe too good for a forcing no-trump followed by a limit raise. Would you feel happy bidding only 3ª if opener bid 2¨ or 2ª over your 1NT response and what would 4ª show in your methods?

Looking ahead were Smiths: "1N. Planning to show a 3-card limit raise. If partner rebids 2¨ or 2ª, we bid 4ª.

Another though about another action
Cohen: "1NT…the alternative bid of 2¨ has a lot to offer in two specific sequences. i.e., when opener has a big hand with diamonds or when partner need diamonds in help suit hand for spades. On the other hand, it could pinpoint the best lead for the defense."

ª-A7 ©-AJ92 ¨-KQ52 §-842

The real problem here is what does partner promise with the negative double of 1ª – do you have a way to show four hearts and extra values in this sequence – does this hand have extra values? – Is it good enough for 4ª?

Obviously not a problem for
Robinson: "3 hearts---When I have four hearts, I bid them

This pair thought about it; Gault's: "3ª - 4ª is an overbid" and likewise
Joyce's: "3ª - Of course, everyone wants to compete in hearts to right level. We think 3ª is appropriate because we play Double as a game try with hearts here.

Seems like a good convention (lets you play 3ª when doubler has a real dog – play a jump to 4ª as something else and lets partner pass with the right hand) when you hold 4ª, bad when you hold 4ª and extras.

Another competitive convention coming into play
Kovacich "- if playing good/bad 2NT (maybe we should add it to MABC Standard),
2NT followed by 3ª would show this hand (good enough to compete, but not to
invite game) - if not playing good/bad 2NT, most flight A players play
Double=game invitation and 3ª shows desire to compete."

D Afdahl: 3© I like to play that three hearts is not invitational, thus I would like to bid 2NT (forcing), followed by 3© to show this hand. (Don’t believe MABC Standard has that agreement.)
Also Smiths: "3ª. We would bid 4ª with an invitational hand. If we had good-bad 2NT available, we would bid 2NT."
They don’t think it has any extras - And another very viable convention;
Parker: "3 ª- good values so you must bid. A good system to use in these
situations is to play a free bid in Hearts or your minor is a minimum hand. A
double shows a good hand with hearts and 2nt shows a good hand in your minor.

K Afdahl: 3© With my solid opener opposite partner’s expected values, we should be OK (even 3© X = -100, a better score than -110). It is sufficiently important to tell partner about our 8-card fit.

This panel member wishes his hand were better;
Shaft: "3ª-I wish I was a little better but this was what I was dealt."
Does this mean he would have passed with the ª-King instead of Ace?

And very close in thinking; Murphy:" 3ª. Although this is a very good minimum, I have a responsibility to protect our plus score first. Pard can have as few as 8. He'll know what to do with opening bid.

This player thinks partner will play him for at least this good of hand;
Herrmann: "3ª…partner will raise to four with 10-11 points."

ª-AK9 ©-T643 ¨-KJ95 §-86

On the aggressive side;
Gault's: "2NT. Yeah, yeah-- we know, 10 fourth ain't much of a stopper, but hey, this is match points and there's no such thing as a bad bid at match points-- right?"
Even at matchpoints a bad score is a bad score...is a bad score - -right?

Less aggressive, but with a question; Kovacich: "1NT- without 1ª bid, 2NT would be a game force per MABC Standard. Uncertain if still applies in comp, but without true heart stopper will call this 10 count and bid 1NT."
Good question, but would you really like a 2NT call if it were invitational? Partner would raise to 3NT with many hands that the opponents could take the first five or more tricks". Will partner pass with a hand that might make game? Yes, since he expects some heart values for any NT bid (possibly opposite his extreme shortness).

For a "flexible" call; Joyce's: "Double - This hand is a bonafide problem. Nothing is great, but double is more flexible--- may get the no trump played from the right side, allow us to later show our point count, etc., etc."

Cohen: "Double and yes I know I have only three spades, but they are AKx and spades should play well if partner has four. Intend to follow with 2ª over 1ª to show extras and hope partner can work out to bid his distribution."

Again, planning ahead;
Smiths: "Double -Planning to raise 1NT to 2NT and pass a 1ª response."

For another reason;
Pettit: "Double – 1NT and 2NT unacceptable from this side."
Very true, if NT is the right contract won’t partner be able to bid it or cue bid?"

Another flexible call..Murphy: "Pass. Maybe I'll have more info at my next turn to bid."

Yes, partner will almost always reopen and you might be in a better position, although partner will probably not play you for this good of hand." (You better have an agreement on what it would mean if you bid 2 © on the next round)

ª-AQ5 ©-AJ9 ¨-AQT962 §-8

One possibility;
Gault's: "3¨. First real problem! (Others may have seen the other hands a little different) 3¨ is pretty conservative, but they might have 4ª on the left and if we miss a game we are not vulnerable and there is no major disaster. Generally when you have a tough decision at IMPS bid safely non-vul and aggressively vulnerable."
Maybe, but it is still a nice swing if you are not in game and they are? Also, there may not be four spades in the doublers hand or partner might have King-Jack fifth or the like?

Another three diamond bidder, Herrmann: "Instead of raising spades to the 3 or 4 level on the speculative assumption partner has 5 , I am going to follow through on my original 1¨-3¨ plan." Likewise; D Afdahl: 3¨ Picture bid. Six+ diamonds and extra values. We can still play in spades if partner bids three hearts.

Really? A lot of folks play that 3©  here ask for a stopper for no-trump and does not promise a five card spade suit!

More aggressive
Joyce's "3ª - Lots of things to consider here. First, at imps we stretch more to show a fit than at matchpoints. Secondly, partner often has a 5+ card suit to bid over a double. Thirdly, both diamonds and spades rate to break poorly, and both with the length in front of the long suit. And lastly, if WEST has a big hand with long hearts or clubs, we are eating up a lot of his/her bidding room."
But, won’t partner expect a fourth trump?

Another three card jump raiser; Shaft:" 3ª- Pard rates to have 5 spades and if he’s broke we may be talking them out of a cold 4©."
Again, pard will EXPECT a fourth trump and won’t think about a possible no trump contract with something like ª-xxxx ©-Qxx ¨-Kxx §-Axx or 6¨ with ª-Kxxx ©-xx ¨-Kxx §-AJxx...AND with a heart holding AJ9 and a bidding partner I don’t think I would really be worried about their making 4ª.

It must be contagious; Murphy: "3ª Most likely game is 4ª so I'll encourage pard as much as possible and hope AQx is good enough. We can't always have four, but we usually do.

Pettit: "3ª, the best of a number of imperfect choices. If I bid 3¨ and partner bids 3NT I will not be happy putting this dummy down."

Even more aggressive;
Parker: "4 §= Splinter. Opposite as little as Kxxxx of spades and the King of diamond we have a slam, why not make a try.

Another aggressive call, but with a lot going for it – shows extra vales, allows for a NT contract and does not rule out the possibility of playing in spades:
Kovacich "2ª, this must be forcing - if partner rebids spades, can bid 4."
Agree about the forcing part and if you ever get a chance to support spades it will imply club shortness.

Wisdom (and Cohen): "…especially if playing a Lebenshohl style over reverses, with partner obligated to rebid a 5 card spade suit, I’ll start with 2ª."

K Afdahl:: 2© (Natural and forcing.) If partner raises hearts or rebids spades, we’ll play spades. If partner prefers to diamonds, we’ll play diamonds. If partner bids clubs or NT, I’ll show my three card support for spades and let partner decide. I do not usually (as in NEVER) lie about suit length when reversing, but would like to know more about partner’s strength and suit length. 2© shows the strength of my hand and allows partner to freely describe or inquire without the fear of being passed.

The 2©call really has a lot going for it – shows extra values, implies long diamonds and if you get a chance to support spades will not overstate your trump length.

ª-7 ©-A4 ¨-AQ752 §-KJ643

· = Namyats; stronger than 4ª opening

Bid	Votes*	Score
4NT	7	100
4S	1	90
D'ble	3	80
Pass	4	50
One misread the problem

For the passers;
Gault's: "Pass. Action at this point is unnecessary! You have the luxury of waiting to see what happens. It is not inconceivable that pard will act over the coming 4ª bid or LHO will do something illuminating-- time enough to guess later. " Yes, that is possible.

This player has his mind made as to what action he will take if 4ª is passed back to him. If you are going to take action then, why not now – your partner may have something to say if they compete in a major.
Smith’s: Pass. Planning to bid 4NT over 4ª. An immediate 4NT might be construed as a 3-suit takeout. Good questions for partnerships - What is an immediate double? What is 4ª?"

For immediate action;
Joyce's: "4NT - Realizing, of course, that double digit losses come sometimes from bidding, sometimes from passing.

Kovacich "4NT - There is risk, but taking no action is probably wrong. If you double partner might assume hearts and bid 5© over 4ª. 4NTis a two-suitter and partner should bid lowest ranking playable suit."

Another reason to act now; Murphy: "4NT. Unusual for the minors. Better to act immediately rather than wait and let them have a double shot. They have already committed to 4ª so a double by me may only serve to right side the contract for them."

And another way of getting into the auction...Robinson: "Double---I can show diamonds without risk. I might later bid 5clubs.

A regular partnership should work out a way to use the extra room. A possibility is the double is for takeout of opener’s real suit, a cue bid to be a strong (or weak) minor two suitter and 4NT the opposite. There are endless possibilities and with some many pairs using this type of opening it will pay for your side to have a defense ready.

ª-Qx ©-T84 ¨-A9 §-KQT854

The most aggressive answer;
Gault's: "3NT. Guessing we're only ones to bid this-- not designed to win a bidding contest, but could win the prize at the table! Once again- this is MATCHPOINTS! Only have to apologize to one partner!" 
This would seem like a more likely all over a fourth seat opening

For the most conservative action, but with protest;
Joyce's:" 1NT, under protest - When we asked the question on the first set of hands about jump shifts being fit-showing by passed hands, we meant 1ª-3ª, or 1¨-3§; NEVER, 1ª or 1ª-3§, because you can't bid this hand  playing Drury. We would always bid 3§, but it would not be fit showing, but natural with almost an opening bid and 6+ clubs."
I also like that treatment, but it is hard to have both ways in a consensus system.

And a different type of protest; Herrmann:( Robinson likewise) "1NT – this is another example of why open light. I would have opened this hand 1§ in first seat."
Those Tennessee people do like to bid; Smiths: "1NT Hopefully, partner will keep the auction open if there is a game. We would have opened the South hand.

A bit more aggressive; Cohen: "2NT as all other options have been taken away by system restraints. This is why I play invitational jump shifts over major to show the six card suit and about 10-12 points."

Disregarding the system;
Kovacich: "3§ - natural and invitational.
And violating the system in another way (small lie about length in partner’s suit); 
K Afdahl:: (Also Dar) Non-forcing, although fit showing. Partner is aware of system constraints."

Would this have been a problem if the suits were diamonds? Possibly, but TWO conventions help cause this problem – Dury and fit-showing jumps by a passed hand. Maybe the players who wanted to open 1§ with this hand have the right idea; open light when your most natural call as a passed hand would be conventional.
==========================================================

ª-AK952 ©-62 ¨-QJ5 §-975

For the very conservative call that will probably end the auction (even when opener has a little extra);
Joyce’s "2ª - We have no fit, so we'll make the conservative bid."

More aggressive and possibly the value bid...Smiths: "2N is the choice vulnerable at IMPS. 2ª would be a close choice at matchpoints or not vulnerable at IMPS."

Kovacich: "2NT - hand is not good enough to force to game. 2NT is probably a slight overbid, but 2ª or pass gives up on game."

Another 2NT bidder who thought of another bid;
Shaft: "2NT- would like to bid 2 1/2 spades but I understand the rules don’t allow it."

Herrmann: "2NT, there are three good choices here; 2ª, 2ª and 2NT are all acceptable."

Covering that possibility; White: "2NT - Partner should bid 3ª with 3 card spade support and a willingness to accept."

ª-K84 ©-6 ¨-AJ94 §-QT842

A lot of questions...assume that 4ª showed a three card limit raise, is that enough on this hand? What would 4ª have shown? Does the double fit suggest removing the double? Would have a pass by opener been forcing?

Agreeing with 4ª and making a very valid comment for passing;

Joyce’s: "(a) Yes - When the diamond fit becomes known, 4ª is no stretch. (b) Pass - We have solid values for our bidding. Partner's double says he that he/she wants to play 5ª doubled; the most frequent reason is trump stack, and we have no reason to think 5ª would be a better proposition."

Yes, if partner has any values in hearts our hand is not quite as good as it seems.
Kovacich: "a: Yes - after 3¨ by partner, game should be bid b: Pass - partner knows what I have - could have made a forcing pass if partner wanted me to make the decision. Partner should play me for 3 spades and one heart."
Not sure that partner can be sure of singleton heart, they could very easily have a 10 or 11 card fit, but the part about the forcing pass is well taken. Partner should pass with no heart values, regardless of length.

This pair could not completely agree;
Gault’s: "Annalee agrees- 4ª. Greg does not-- 3ª. Actually Annalee likes 4ª Q-bid for diamond slam. Greg is old and tired and thinks pard should do the work on this hand. (Greg) Surely pard can work out I have a limit  with three trumps-- I didn't have to bid and did! [Might not 3ª just be competitive with something like Ax and good values?] Partner has more room over 3ª and I can make the "crunch" decision later." 
They both agree that the pass is now obvious – "you have described the hand and pard has x after hearing your bids."

Here are some panel members that did not agree with the earlier bidding;
Wisdom: "No, Had South bid 4ª over 3ª at his second turn he would have consider pulling the double now."
And some more
Brown Jr: "No, I would have bid 2§ instead of 1NT and now call 5ª."

Pettit: "No, would have bid 2§ on the first round. Now I pass as this is a forcing pass situation and partner does not want to hear from me again. The presence of a 5th diamond would make me overrule partner."

Along the same line, Smiths: "No We would bid 4ª over 4¨ showing a very good hand for one or both of partner's suits. - Pass Anything else would now be a guess·

Robinson: "No---I would have bid 3 spades directly. I strongly believe that one should be able to make a limit raise on only three trumps, if one has a singleton. 1ª-3ª-4ª is much harder to defend and opponents could be frisky thinking that you usually have a nine-card fit. (b)Pass---I showed my hand and partner doubled. I don't bid five over five without a strong reason.

This panelist not only does not agree with the previous bidding, but is adamant;
Parker: " No, I would have bid 4 hearts earlier to show a monster fitting hand.  Now 5ª - I pull the double, captaincy be dammed. Pard cannot know I have a double fit and a singleton. He must double with 2 or 3 small. 

Top of page