Neither is a slam dunk, but leaning toward double on each. Small risk it will make, but it’s a pretty small risk. Since we might have a game, better sure we’re not getting only 50 per undertrick.
I am less sure of setting this and I think game is far from a favorite. I’ll bid 3S at both forms of scoring, since +140 or +170 beats +100, and -50 beats letting them make. If they bid again then I will double.
I would only double 3H if they were vulnerable at matchpoints.
I’m bidding 4S at IMPs. Less certain on MPs. Probably DBL.
I can see 4S at IMPs if you were vulnerable. You don’t want to know what I think of it non-vulnerable.
I do want to know. I am a novice at this game, and welcome any opportunity to learn.
(Replying to the IMPs question): At 7 losers, 15 HCP, and balanced with doubleton support, and good controls, this is a clear invite (with whatever 2NT gadget you play) if RHO passed. When your side is vulnerable partner is much more likely to have a good weak two (since he’d pass the cheesy hands he might open when not vulnerable) AND the extra score for making game means you only need 4S to be a 35-40% proposition to justify bidding it; 2NT not being available means you have to guess, and 4S is a reasonable guess.
When not vulnerable, partner may just have total cheese, and you need 4S to be 45-50% to justify bidding it…and it’s just not that good. Under those circumstances, 3S or double (depending somewhat on what you think of the opponents’ overcall style) are better choices than 4S. I probably wouldn’t pass, but I’d rate that ahead of 4S also.
I like double at matchpoints. Total trumps is 8 (spades) + approximately 8 for hearts. That means that only 16 tricks are available, and we have the preponderance of the points, so go for 300. Start with club ace, and look around.
RHO had some reason to bid. I think it’s quite likely there are more than 16 total tricks. I’d still double if I only needed to set it one, but here you need to set it two to get a good score.
I answered with 3NT for IMPs, along with my matchpoint double. 9 tricks are often possible on these hands. Of course, if doubled, I’ll reconsider!
NN gets 100; I get 90. The vote was much closer at imps than matchpoints. At matchpoints 3S was second, but not a close second.
The only one (conceivable) call absolutely out for me is 3H. 4H is almost as far out. Preempting at unfavorable, when we have the spades, seems very wrong. Really the only thing in favor of 4H now is that we don’t want to miss a vul game.
2S is a strong jump shift, so not even conceivable, but with 4 hearts I wouldn’t consider it. The problem with 1S is that on the next round we are too weak (and two unbalanced) for 3H, but even more too unbalanced for 2H. Ditto for 1NT now. So 2H now looks best to me. Predict panel’s vote to be 2H > 1S > 4H.
2H is clear at matchpoints for the reasons you say. At IMPs, I think it may be too likely to miss game. 1S followed by 2H over 1NT or 2C but by 3H over 2D or 2H may make sense. 1H-1S-1N-2H typically shows some values, so the only truly troublesome rebid is 2C.
2H. I wouldn’t like it as much if we didn’t have the long spades. 4H was my first instinct.
You guys are very optimistic. For me, 1N followed by 2H
Why would you show misfitting dreck when you have an eight-loser hand with four-card support? Besides, the main advantage of starting with 1NT and then bidding 2H when you have four-card support is so that the opponents are put off balancing. Here you have spades so you don’t really even care much about that. (Compare xxx xxx Kxx Kxxx, where 1NT followed by 2H makes sense also because you have ten losers and don’t want to get too high. The fourth trump, the singleton, and the side suit all matter a lot for playing strength when you have a known fit. This hand jumps in value from a good 3 count to a good 7 or a mediocre 8 when partner opens 1H. I’m willing to bid it up a bit more red at IMPs because 6-4 and 5-5 hands can’t really rely on game tries in those situations. You bid it up and hope either you buy well or they lead poorly.)
Problem set: September 2021
Respondent: Steve White (D4)
Problem 1A
Steve White: Two hearts. Panel should be unanimous at matchpoints. Even though it likely won’t be.
Problem 1B
Steve White: Two hearts. Partner understands there’s a bonus for vul games, so 2H is best.
2H stands out. Frankly every other choice is swinging. We’re expected to have 6-9 or so, and 3-5 hearts. So, wtp?
2H was the top vote getter at both matchpoints and IMPs. In fact the panel votes were identical on both forms of scoring: 8 for 2H, 2 for 1NT, 2 for 4H, 1 for 1S. Despite that apparent consistency, there were several panelists who did not vote the same on both, but the various changes all canceled out.
To my surprise, I have moved into a 4-way tie for the lead after 9 months. (The two lowest scores are dropped, but do get used as a tiebreak. Good chance I’m trailing at least one of them in the tiebreak.)
Not so easy. Partner’s failure to make a support double shows at most 2 hearts. From the bidding presumably at most 1 spade, so likely 5 diamonds and 5 clubs. 3 clubs is surely making, but do we have a game? (probably 5 clubs, if there is one).
My initial reaction at matchpoints was to double, and I’m still leaning that way, but it won’t score many matchpoints if 2 spades makes, and might not score enough if 2S X is down 1.