Bidding Box #8

[Paul Hightower]

In this month's ACBL Bulletin (February, 2012) our own Eric Leong pairs with
Barry Rigal against Gaylor Kasle and Larry Koslove. On problem 8, both pairs
produced similar auctions: pass-1C; 1H-2D; 3C (forcing)-3S; 4S-5C (Gary) or
6C (Eric). West held AJx J10xx xx Q9xx opposite xx Ax AKxx AK8xx .Top marks
went to 3NT (10) and 5C (6); 6C scored a zero.

(1) South will hold KQ of spades about 25% of the time, and would usually
lead it. That allows East to grab the Ace, corss to hand with a diamond, and
lead up to the spade Jack to set up a discard for the heart loser. From that
point 6C is likely to make. Likewise a heart lead from or into the KQ could
set up a discard for the spades. Shouldn't 6C score 2 or 3 (12 top)?

(2) Given that 6C was poor opposite East's actual control-rich hand, I would
think chasing slam was a poor bet. I considered 3C as West but decided on
3NT. Opinions?

Eric can tell us whether his bids were "normal" or geared to the artifical
conditions of a bidding contest, where normal actions are generally wrong.

[Barry Margolin]

In article <V8qdnT7We4BMDrTS...@insightbb.com>,

"Paul Hightower" <paulhigh@dont_email.net> wrote:

> In this month's ACBL Bulletin (February, 2012) our own Eric Leong pairs with
> Barry Rigal against Gaylor Kasle and Larry Koslove. On problem 8, both pairs
> produced similar auctions: pass-1C; 1H-2D; 3C (forcing)-3S; 4S-5C (Gary) or
> 6C (Eric). West held AJx J10xx xx Q9xx opposite xx Ax AKxx AK8xx .Top marks
> went to 3NT (10) and 5C (6); 6C scored a zero.
>
> (1) South will hold KQ of spades about 25% of the time, and would usually
> lead it. That allows East to grab the Ace, corss to hand with a diamond, and
> lead up to the spade Jack to set up a discard for the heart loser. From that
> point 6C is likely to make. Likewise a heart lead from or into the KQ could
> set up a discard for the spades. Shouldn't 6C score 2 or 3 (12 top)?

You may also need trumps to break so that you can draw trumps and ruff
both D losers.

--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

[Joachim Parsch]

Am 01.02.2012 20:34, schrieb Paul Hightower:
> In this month's ACBL Bulletin (February, 2012) our own Eric Leong pairs with
> Barry Rigal against Gaylor Kasle and Larry Koslove. On problem 8, both pairs
> produced similar auctions: pass-1C; 1H-2D; 3C (forcing)-3S; 4S-5C (Gary) or
> 6C (Eric). West held AJx J10xx xx Q9xx opposite xx Ax AKxx AK8xx .Top marks
> went to 3NT (10) and 5C (6); 6C scored a zero.
>
> (1) South will hold KQ of spades about 25% of the time, and would usually
> lead it. That allows East to grab the Ace, corss to hand with a diamond, and
> lead up to the spade Jack to set up a discard for the heart loser. From that
> point 6C is likely to make. Likewise a heart lead from or into the KQ could
> set up a discard for the spades. Shouldn't 6C score 2 or 3 (12 top)?

Maybe, but even if you somehow manage to avoid the second major suit
loser, you have not yet found a place for the 4th diamond (if trumps are
31).

> (2) Given that 6C was poor opposite East's actual control-rich hand, I would
> think chasing slam was a poor bet. I considered 3C as West but decided on
> 3NT. Opinions?

3C forcing is probably best, but after the 4th suit 3S, maybe a 3NT bid
would have been better (no maximum, with potentially wasted spade values).
4S should perhaps be a maximum like Axx, K10xx, xx, QJxx or so.

Joachim

[Eric Leong]

In our separate followup email replies to Paul Linxwiler.


Barry:

"If 3D by me over 3C is NOT 6-5 then I should bid it – but unless one has such an agreement I’d not risk it. 3S was supposed to get us to 3NT facing a limited hand – ie this one. 4S should be this hand with eg HK or DQJ additionally.

Me:

"I thought if Barry had the had he did he would have bid 3H. Why not show where you are at? I would now bid 3NT and we are done.

With a five card heart suit I would have rebid 2H so I am hardly going to bid 4H.

I thought 3S was natural. Surely, with S KQx H x D AKxx C AKJxx Barry would bid the same way.

Also, while I have a limited hand, why do I necessarily have only a limited hand where the partnership limit is only game?

One hand I could have had is S KQx H Kxxx D xx C QJxx. Why do we belong in 3NT rather than a cold 6C?"

In short, I really did not like the 3S bid. I feel as a matter of principle that in a strong forcing auction you bid where your cards are. After 3S, I was never getting it right because that is not the bid I would have ever considered with the opposite hand if I was on the other side of the table. Having said that bidding on after the first two rounds of bidding that includes a reverse had not been thought about or discussed much. I have to think more about this.

Eric Leong

[paul]

On Feb 1, 2:51 pm, Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <V8qdnT7We4BMDrTSnZ2dnUVZ_hCdn...@insightbb.com>,

I certainly am not going to draw three rounds of trumps before ruffing
the second diamond! Possible line: win the Ace of spades, cross to a
high diamond, lead toward the Jack of spades, win the return, cash the
other high diamond, ruff a diamond, cash the Queen of trumps, cash the
Jack of spades (pitching a heart), trump back to hand, attempt to ruff
the second diamond. This will succeed if trumps are 2-2 or the long
trump hand has four diamonds. Return to hand with a heart ruff and
pull the last trump if they were 3-1. Requires some luck but as I
said, I think you are more likely to make than not on an opening lead
from the KQ in either major, or into North's KQ of hearts. On a minor
suit lead there may be squeeze possibilities. Six clubs isn't a lovely
contract but it looks far from hopeless and will surely score a top if
it makes.

[Barry Margolin]

In article
<4287f610-6bf7-45dd...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>,

I suspect they simply don't bother with such low-percentage contracts.
Also, I think they assume excellent, almost double dummy defense, so if
the favorable lie also requires a favorable lead, you don't get the
latter.

[Travis Crump]

That can't be right. See the scoring of 3N for problem 1. The scoring
has always been rather haphazard and random. Don't get me wrong;
scoring is a hard and subjective job, but that doesn't really change the
assessment. I suspect you are right though in that they just didn't
score the contract as opposed to explicitly scoring it a 0. Though it
does seem odd that they wouldn't go back and add a score for anything
the competitors achieved.

28% is epically bad[and an extra 2-3 matchpoints wouldn't improve this
that much], though their opponents 38.5% was hardly anything to brag
about. Perhaps the scoring was a little harsh overall on hard
problems[I didn't actually bid them with a partner], though they did
earn a couple of their zeroes by overbidding to 2 slams down on
guaranteed trump losers.

[judyorcarl]

For how many rounds was 3C forcing?

Carl

[Eric Leong]

Forcing to game.

Eric Leong

[Frances]

> Eric Leong- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

This sounds very much like a US/UK difference in bidding approaches
(and although Barry has lived there for a long time, I doubt he's
forgotten his roots...).

In the UK approach, 3S is fourth suit forcing and generally denies
much in spades, although it might have something like Axx looking to
right-side 3NT. It's used in the same way as FSF in non-game-forcing
auctions, to allow other bids to be more precise: so 3D would show
5-6, 3H promises three hearts etc. So when I saw the auction, I
thought responder had an obvious 3NT bid over 3S, because opener's
hand was not a surprise.

In the US approach, bids in a forcing auction are 'natural' as you
have said you think it ought to be.

There are pros and cons of both approaches. The UK version gives you
a pass-the-time-of-day bid when you don't have anything more
constructive to say, allowing other bids to be more precise. UK
bidders say there's little point having the 4th suit as natural, you
can just bid NT if you have values there and if you bid 3S on
something like KQx or AQx and partner bids 3NT you might well be wrong-
sided. US bidders say they want to bid where they have values, and
this works better on slam bidding auctions because you have bid out
your high cards.

Most people think the version they have grown up with is better.

Where things go wrong, as on this auction, is where the two sides of
the partnership are treating the 3S bid differently: you think it
shows length/values in spades, Barry thinks it shows the opposite.

[Lorne]

"Eric Leong" wrote in message
news:26942730.2181.1328126028768.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prie27...

On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 11:34:37 AM UTC-8, Paul Hightower wrote:
> In this month's ACBL Bulletin (February, 2012) our own Eric Leong pairs
> with
> Barry Rigal against Gaylor Kasle and Larry Koslove. On problem 8, both
> pairs
> produced similar auctions: pass-1C; 1H-2D; 3C (forcing)-3S; 4S-5C (Gary)
> or
> 6C (Eric). West held AJx J10xx xx Q9xx opposite xx Ax AKxx AK8xx .Top
> marks
> went to 3NT (10) and 5C (6); 6C scored a zero.
>

In short, I really did not like the 3S bid. I feel as a matter of principle
that in a strong forcing auction you bid where your cards are. After 3S, I
was never getting it right because that is not the bid I would have ever
considered with the opposite hand if I was on the other side of the table.
Having said that bidding on after the first two rounds of bidding that
includes a reverse had not been thought about or discussed much. I have to
think more about this.

Eric Leong

..............................

For me 3S is a 2-way bid. Either shows a minimum with nothing in spades
(maybe Axx wanting to right side 3N) willing to pass 3N by partner (or sign
off in 5C after any other bid) or is an advance cue bid that will be shown
by continuing over 3N or co-operating if partner bids something else. Since
you are min with a good spade stop why not bid 3N - your partner will not
pass it if he has the hand you hoped for given you have already forced with
3C.

[barryrigal]

For me 3H over 3c would guarantee three hearts, no ifs buts or ands.
it might get us to the right contract 5C, but would never get us there
facing five hearts (unless partner would have bid 3NT over 3S too).
The real issue is when you bid 2H (not GF but planning to force later)
and when you bid 3C.
With

KQx/Kxxxx/xx/KJx I might bid 3C not 2H, planning to lose a heart fit
unless partner bid 3H over 3C.

I'm big on raising clubs when i can and setting up the GF, not
rebidding a heart suit worse than QJ9xx if i have an alternative call.
But Eric and i haven't discussed anything like that -- ever.

Barry

[Paul Hightower]

"Joachim Parsch" <ne...@bunuel.franken.de> wrote in message
news:4f29981b$0$6629$3ca0...@newsspool2.vodafone-ip.de...

I still don't see why 3C is better than 3NT over the reverse. East could
hardly have a better hand for slam and 6C was poor. Why chase any contract
but 3NT? I'm all for describing my hand, supporting partner, etc., but on
this occassion it looks like bidding anything but 3NT has a low upsdie and
big downside -- you might miss 3NT. It would be different if West's spades
were Axx rather than AJx.

[jogs]

On Feb 4, 12:49 pm, "Paul Hightower" <paulhigh@dont_email.net> wrote:
> "Joachim Parsch" <n...@bunuel.franken.de> wrote in message

P - 1C
1H - 2D
3C - 3S
4S

3C seems like the best call. I didn't understand why both Eric
and Kasle bid 4S. 3NT here to slow the auction down. This
hand is minimum for the 3C call. Also 3NT may be the best
place to play.

[ttw...@att.net]

> place to play.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Perhaps I'm wrong, but wouldn't Fourth-Suit-Forcing be off after a
suit agreement?

[Eric Leong]

As I said in a previous post, I thought Barry could bid this way with something like:

S KQx H x D AKxx C AKJxx

and 6C is cold. Four trumps and a doubleton diamond is a big holding.

My plan was to alert partner to the possibility of slam in clubs.

I was planning to pass 5C like what happened at the other table.

Eric Leong

[jogs]

On Feb 5, 10:53 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, February 4, 2012 12:49:39 PM UTC-8, Paul Hightower wrote:

> > "Joachim Parsch" <n...@bunuel.franken.de> wrote in message

I think you're right. 3S should show spades.
At the table I would probably have bid 3S
with Barry's hand. Now after days of thought
3S seems like the wrong bid.

P - 1C
1H - 2D

3C - ?

3H - Barry says this bid guarantees three hearts.
--- Agree.
3S - Should show spades.
3NT - probably QJx or KTx of spades.

That leaves 3D. Barry should probably have bid 3D.
5-4 occurs about 25% of the time. 6-5 or more
distributional occurs less than 2%. Why reserve
a bid for such a low frequency shape? We have
found a nine card club fit. 3D could be 2=2=4=5
with no spade stop. A heart card is possible but
not necessary.

[judyorcarl]

On Feb 4, 3:49 pm, "Paul Hightower" <paulhigh@dont_email.net> wrote:
> "Joachim Parsch" <n...@bunuel.franken.de> wrote in message

Here is the problem with 3NT (rather than 2NT, say). It will NEVER
allow playing in clubs when opener has only 5. No subsequent club bid
by responder will ever suggest 4-card.

Carl

[Stu Goodgold]

Another poster decided what his bid was after a few days of thought. Of course this cannot be done at the table, but what about this contest?

Eric, since you have first hand knowledge, please tell us how The Bidding Box contest is run? Are you both physically in the same room? Do you have a time limit on your bids? Are you told in advance if North or South will come into the auction (if possible)? Do you know your scores at the end of each hand or only at the end of the contest?

-Stu Goodgold
San Jose, CA

[Eric Leong]

The hands were emailed shortly before we were to start.
The bidding was done over a conference call.
We didn't know the results until the next day by email.
I think sometimes Paul could talk to either one of us without the other hearing.

Eric Leong

[pgmer6809]

I dont see the point to traditional 4sF once the auction is already
game forcing AND a suit has been agreed. However you still might need
a temporizing bid of some sort. Here Opener cant bid NT without a
spade stop, and (I agree with Barry) should not bid 3H without 3 (Even
if resp has only 4, the 4-3 moysian might be the best game) so unless
he is willing to bypass 3NT to bid 5C (not always desirable at MP) 3S
as a 'punt' is all that is left.
pgmer6809

[jogs]

http://www.bridgeguys.com/FGlossary/GlossF.html
This definition of 4th suit forcing from the bridge guys is
more comprehesive. For it to be 4th suit forcing it must
be made by the responder on his 2nd turn to respond.
Therefore the 3S bid, while it is the 4th suit, is not part
of the 4th suit forcing convention.

Fourth-Suit Forcing
A bid of the only remaining unbid suit, therefore the fourth suit to
be bid, that does not necessarily show a desire to make that suit
trump. This is a convention, introduced by Mr. Norman Squire of
England, however, under the stipulation that the fourth unbid suit
could be bid by the responder at his second turn to respond, and
promises nothing about the length or strength of that suit. As used,
bidding the fourth unbid suit is forcing for one round only and
promises a range of 10-11 high card points, if made on the Two Level
or higher. It is a partnership agreement whether or not this bid is
deemed artificial, as in most partnerships, or as natural. If the bid
is artificial, then the partner must have a stopper in that suit
before a contract in No Trump can be considered. In general, any Three
Level bids of the fourth suit are considered to be game forcing..

[OldPalooka]

On Feb 7, 9:30 pm, pgmer6809 <pgmer6...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Only if you (as Barry did) define 3D as showing 5. I imagine defining
3D as the punt is much more useful in many more cases than showing the
fifth diamond when partner has already expressed a game forcing
preference in clubs.

[Steve Willner]

On 2012-02-01 2:53 PM, Eric Leong wrote:
> bidding on after the first two rounds of bidding that includes a
> reverse had not been thought about or discussed much.

I think this is exactly the key point along with the transatlantic
culture difference that Frances mentioned. Considerations are whether
responder _must_ rebid a 5c suit or can use judgment and whether the
reverse itself is often or seldom into a short suit. I don't think
there is any "right answer," though like everyone else I have my own
preferences. Reverse auctions are uncommon, and even a cursory
discussion of what's forcing and what's weak will get you through most
of them, but getting difficult bidding problems right takes detailed
agreements.

It's perhaps worth mentioning that Eric and Barry finished 9th in the
Blue Ribbon, so they must have gotten a few auctions right.

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 swil...@nhcc.net
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA