February
'07
Question
1 : George
Jones
WEST
AQ10xxxx
x
Jxxx
x
EAST
void
KQ10xx
Ax
AKQxxx
West is Dealer and bids 3 Spades.
How do you, as East, bid this hand?
Panel's
Responses
Tom
Kniest
Unlucky
hand - I would bid 3NT with the E hand - sometimes pard has
a few clubs or one useful red card.
Roger
Lord
The
next time I hold the East hand, I will pass 3S. Then, if West
holds this exact hand - S AQ10xxxx H 9x D xx C Jx, my partner
might complain that I should have responded 4 clubs after
which we would get to 5C. (Fat chance !!)
Tom
Oppenheimer
Bid
3 no trump. Your clubs should be a source of tricks. If partner's
spades are so solid that they can play opposite a singleton
or void, partner can bid 4 spades.
Nancy
Popkin
At
matchpoints, I would pass; at imps I would bid 4 spades and
just hope that partner had good trumps.
Ed
Schultz
Pass
at match points, 4S at IMPs. Conservative at mp's, a little
more aggressive at imps.
Karen
Walker
My
action with responder's hand would depend in part on the vulnerability
and form of scoring. White at matchpoints, I'd pass and hope
for a plus score. Red at matchpoints or white at IMPs, I'd
be thinking longer and might or might not bid 4S, probably
depending on how lucky I was feeling that day. Red at Imps,
I'd bid 4S and pray.
En
Xie
It's
hard for me to pass partner's 3S bid with 18hcp, especially
in imps games. The only time I might think about pass is when
we are non-vul and they are vul. Then partner might make preemptive
bid with junky hand (you need to know your partner's bidding
style). In other cases, I would bid 4s and let partner worry
about how to make it. For the example hand you showed, you
need to have some luck to make 4s or 3nt.
Milt
Zlatic
It's
hard to say without knowing the vulnerability or the pre-emptive
style. 3NT may be right but if you pre-empt with good suits,
I would raise to 4 spades. West's hand is going to be useless
in 3NT.
Question
2 : Bill
Van Loon
I
have started playing duplicate bridge again after a long break
from the game.
We started back in playing SAYC
in the open section at Kate Buckmann's in Toronto and after
about a month we are now competitive in this section, most
nights.
Have just read a book by Paul Thurston
called 25 Steps to Learning 2/1.
Is it possible to introduce ourselves
to the system by playing 2/1 only after a major opening and
leave the rest our version of SAYC based mostly on Ned Downey/Ellen
Pomer book Standard Bidding with SAYC.
My first impression is that 2/1
system after a major opening bid is superior to SAYC and the
only 2/1 auction that occurs after a minor opening bid is
1D-2C
Panel's
Responses
Tom
Kniest
I
haven't read Paul Thurston's book, but 2/1 is certainly
a system that can be learned in increments. One
of the issues is whether to play "Eastern Scientific"
or west coast style. Major styles are Roth Stone, KS,
Walsh, and Max Hardy. Of course, you can now add Precision
to those systems, which modifies them somewhat. Mike
Lawrence has done a ton of writing on his style - a good way
to learn. Many who play 2/1 have incorporated all or
a portion of the Bergen system. The short answer is
to read the same stuff your partner does and come to agreements.
Roger
Lord
We
don't know what SAYC is. Neither does the encyclopedia.
With
respect to the last paragraph, we play 1D-P-2C as game forcing,
and we play 1D-P-3C natural and invitational - usually aiming
for 3N.
Tom
Oppenheimer
Not
sure what SAYC is...standard American? I like 2/1 but you
do not have to play every aspect of a system.
Nancy
Popkin
Yes,
it is possible to merge 2/1 and SAYC as many people who play
online do that. Some people even only play 2/1 after a major
opening. Others include 1d/2c as game forcing. One bid you
need to agree on is whether say 1h/2c/2s = a real reverse
(showing 18-19 point range) or whether it is just showing
the shape of your hand.
Ed
Schultz
Not
familiar with Paul Thurston's book, or with Ned Downey/Ellen
Pomer book Standard Bidding with SAYC. 2/1 is easier than
not playing 2/1, but would recommend Max Hardy's 2/1 Game
Force or Mike Lawrence's book on the same subject although
there are probably good books on the subject that I am not
familiar with.
Karen
Walker
My
preference for 2-over-1 is the Mike Lawrence approach. His
recommendation is that 2-level responses are forcing only
after a major opening, and the auction 1D-2C is not forcing
to game. He also builds in the exception that opener can pass
if responder rebids his minor in a non-fitting auction (1S-2C-2S-3C).
The alternative is the Max Hardy approach, which makes all
2-over-1 responses forcing to game.
You
can play just about all the other SAYC conventions with any
2-over-1 system, but you need to add the Forcing 1NT convention.
This web page has a description of the Hardy and Lawrence
systems and a fairly detailed set of Lawrence-style bidding
guidelines: http://www.prairienet.org/bridge/2over1.htm
. The page has a link to a description of the Forcing
1NT convention.
En
Xie
I
think it's possible to play 2/1 only after major opening and
leave the rest of your version as SAYC. I am not convinced
that 2/1 system is superior to SAYC though. Even I play 2/1
most of time. As I know, there are many excellent new versions
or modified versions of SAYC. In my opinion, they are as good
as 2/1 system.
Milt
Zlatic
There is nothing wrong with doing
it that way. I played it that way when I started playing 2/1.
Make sure you note that exclusion on your convention card.
You can also play that a rebid of responder's suit is not
forcing.
Question
3 : Da
Moderator
You
arrive at a tournament and find that your partner has abandoned
you (chose the boat over a table).
After failing to find a victim.I mean partner.on your own,
you find yourself at the Partnership desk filling out Da form.
Within a few minutes, the partnership organizer, eyeing you
skeptically, has identified for you 3 potential partners (not
known to you) with similar table etiquette but with unique
skills:
Player
A - known to be a tough defender. Knows all about breaking
up double, upside down, hang oneself squeezes.
Player
B - oh, what a beautiful bidder !!!! Can let you know whether
he/she has the club 10 or the spade 8 !!!!
Player
C - by the time he/she finishes declaring, all the spots are
off the cards.
Who
would you choose to play with in an IMPs event? MP event?
National Pairs game ??
Panel's
Responses
Tom
Kniest
Player
A will do well for you in all events.
Roger
Lord
IMPs
- Player B
MPs
- Player A
National
Pairs - Players A, B, and C
Tom
Oppenheimer
As
the old saying goes, you declare 25% of the hands, defend
50% and bid 100%. I will take the bidder.
Nancy
Popkin
In
all 3 cases, I would choose the best bidder because you are
never going to do well if you get to the wrong contracts.
Ed
Schultz
I
would choose to be a kibitzer and not play. Not given that
choice, and without information, I would choose the guy who
was the better defender. IMPs event. I would prefer not to
play a matchpoint event with a new partner.
Karen
Walker
No
matter whom I choose, I'm going to win the event and become
rich and famous, because it's obvious this is a dream. In
real life, these three people would never be at the partnership
desk.
Forced
to make a choice, though, I'd take Player A because good defenders
usually have the card-play skills to excel as declarers, too.
The
downside to the other two players is that it sounds like it's
going to take far too long to fill out a convention card with
Player B, and far too long to play the hands with Player C.
En
Xie
I'll
let them decide first. The winner will play with me.
Milt
Zlatic
Player
C would be good in an IMPs event because the contract will
be made even if you're in the wrong contract. You may lose
a few IMPs but there'll never be a game swing.
Player
B would be good in a MP event since plus scores are a premium
and getting to the right contract makes that possible.
Player
A would be good in a National Pair event. Many hands play
themselves and on others you'll get some field protection.
A lot of matchpoints can be won if hands are defended properly.
|
