Preempts Work: Answer
None vul, you hold:
--- K106542 Q104 Q1032
CHO|| RHO|| You|| LHO|
1|| Pass||1|| 2|
If balanced, partner can have 13-18 HCP
(though I wouldn't hold my breath about 18).
IMPs, short matches.
I'll bite. 4. I guess worst case is that partner
bids 4. I'll now end the auction at 5. I'll pass
4. [Isn't partner going to think 4 is forcing? --Jeff]
Just too much offense to defend and a pass (my second
choice) rates to end the auction. 4 is too unilateral.
I may miss the 6-2 fit but am willing to take that chance.
I have too little defense to double here. My failure to
do so should be informative to partner.
4. Who needs spots (or values, for that matter)? If
partner has a balanced minimum without too much wastage
in spades, this will have some play. Of course, if he
has some 3154 (or so) minimum it could be a disaster,
but I think on balance it's worth a shot.
No idea! Pass could easily be right (our smallest
minus/a way to go plus). Yes there is a big downside -
but why be undisciplined here?. Pass and accept my
small minus/plus. bidding turns the board into a lottery.
I don't expect to get this one right...
I'll continue bidding out my hand, even though I
don't really have the values for it, with 4.
Hopefully, partner will then pick a suit, rebidding
4 or trotting out 4 (perhaps). I'm a leery of trying
4 myself since he could easily have a 3-1-5-4 hand
(although I am a little curious why they are in 3,
not 4 in that case). In Panglossia, partner will
pass 4 with that hand, but in truth, 4 is forcing,
so he'd raise to 5. On the grasping ["Gripping?" --Jeff]
hand, 5 just might make (give him AKx x Axxxx KJxx
maybe? cash our tops and cross-ruff the remainder, or
on A, x lead/continuation, try to setup hearts).
4. If we have a game it is most likely to be 4.
I think partner will have at least two hearts most
of the time on this auction. When there is a choice of
bids where no bid will be right much more often than
another as there is here, I like choosing the one with
the most to gain (a game bonus in this case). Of the
alternatives, 3NT or double for takeout would appeal
most but I think 3NT is needed as natural, e.g.,
Kx Axxx KJxxx Jx, and double should be cards,
e.g., xx AKxxx Jxx Kxx.
Seems right to take another call with a void in the
opponents suit. Bid 4. I expect partner to be
4243 or 4252. He might be 4144 or 4153 - oh well.
He might have 3 hearts, too. They'll probably bid
4 anyway - and now, partner might be able to double.
Basically, I'm screwed. I'm going to double and hope
that partner, who probably has three or four spades,
can work out it's takeout, but -730 vs. our own game
or slam is quite possible, especially since partner is
likelly barred by my tank by now. Second choice, 4;
third choice 4.
Pass. We might make 4 but I don't see any bid that
will get us there and partner's most likely response
to my double is pass.
Partner is not supposed to have more than about 15 on this
auction, but I'll deal...anyhow, I'll probably bid 4. I
can't stomach x, because if partner passes, I'll puke. At
least this will gain if partner bids 4 (I pass), or 4 (I pass).
If partner raises clubs, I'll say a short prayer. I don't
like giving up with a spade void, and I don't like 4, since
partner can still have 4-0-5-4. I'll take the game swing
against, in exchange for a few partscore swings our way when
partner has 2 hearts and can't bid 4 (since he would if he's
Sometimes preempts work... I think 4 is the best shot.
I don't think any other game is likely to make given partner's
pass of 2 (wouldn't he have doubled with 15-18 balanced?), and
even if you're not making you may induce a phantom 4 sac.
[He'd double with 16+-18, surely, but he expects us to expect
IMO there are only three reasonable actions, Pass, 4 and 4.
Pass is not my style, and God gave you three tens so that in the
post-mortem you could point to them and say, "that's why I bid!"
As between the real choices, the advantage of 4 is that it is a bid
and it's a contract, and it's obvious that the 4-level may be high
enough. (LeBendig to the contrary, bidding 4 and then passing 4 is
I like 4 just a tad better because of all the 4-4 club fits that get
lost if I raise diamonds. If we're going to play in game, I don't see
why we shouldn't find the best one.
People who bid 4 on this hand should be shot. Shuster first!
- JEFF AT THE TABLE
Drat...one of the 4/4 bidders want to change to 4
so we can have two of each of the five cheapest
- WINNING ACTION
4 or 4. Partner has KJx QJx Kxxx AJx.
After my 4, partner bid 4NT (natural, presumably)
which I corrected to 5. Partner recorrected to 5
and went down 3. 4NT was down 4. Pass yields -140.
Double produces -530. 4 gets +420. 4 will get
partner to bid 4, for +420. Seems to me that 4
should also get partner to bid 4, but it didn't
work out that way.
At the other table, they opened that garbage a
strong NT and Texas'ed into game. It's not cold
from that side; on a spade lead, I'm not sure
10 tricks are there single dummy (K is off and J
is off and we don't have the 9 or 8). Teammates
brought back -420.
- JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I bid 4 because we could stop below
game if partner was weakish, and they can't double
and get us there. (Hartman's Law.) If 4 is wrong,
it could get doubled; if everything's wrong, we
could be going for our lives, but they'll think
twice about doubling 4. I guess that's a corollary
to Ed's argument: if anything can be wrong, pick the
choice that if it's wrong, probably won't get doubled
I figured partner would bid 4 when it's right, or
just try to find a 5-3 on the way to 5. I gave
up on clubs, but I try to talk my partners out of
opening 1 on 3145 hands. This hand'll do it!
Upon reflection, I think 4 has the best upside; we
are likely to get to our best fit, albeit at the
wrong level. In practice, I think 4 or 4 should
get to hearts when there's a 6-3 fit most of the time;
my result was ... hmmm ... this could be a "you be
the judge" followup. Nah.
Roberto wonders what partner's double and 2NT would
have been at his 2nd call. We were playing double
as business and 2NT as good/bad, but this partner
always forgets G/B (why do we play it? He wanted
to!) so in fact, it wasn't an option. Double really
ought to show 16-18 balanced using these methods,
not a spade stack, but again that really didn't
matter much, since partner was closer to a 10-12 NT
than a 16-18.
- DAN REFLECTS
I'd like to remark on partner's actual hand - No
4 bid???????? Wow. This was a reasonably interesting problem,
but there are no right answers if partner is going to bid like
that. No YBTJ needed, 100% for partner.
Aug. 12, 1998