A B C D E F G H
procrastinator
oirg P 3N 3C 2S 5C 2H 4H HQ
SW P 3N 3N 3C 4C 2H 3S HK
Klaymen
ST
BTDT P 3N 3N 2D 4C P 2C H8
NN P 3N 3D 3C 4C P 3N SJ
veni vidi vici P 3N 3D 2N 5C 2H 2C HQ
Abstract Actuary P 3N P 2D 4C 2H 2C HQ
Leading P 3N 4C 2H 2C HQ
NN didnāt change any of the leaders, but I had failed to notice before that AAās switch on G created a leader there.
A) 3NT. I assume 2S would have been natural as well, and already shown a very strong hand. Partner must have a rock. Pass close second choice.
B) 5C, with little conviction.
C) 3 hearts. Keeping the go high trend from the first two problems going.
D) 2NT, a little temped by 1NT given what counts as an opening bid these days.
E) 5 clubs. First one that seems clear to me in the set.
F) Pass. Donāt expect it to score well, but what I would do at the table. Seems like a misfit deal, happy to be on defense.
G) 3NT Footnote seems to describe what I have. Perhaps a bit strong for the bid, but a bit lopsided for 4D, nothing else appeals.
H) Heart king. I do not like this club holding on this auction. Perhaps I should lead a low heart, hoping for Jx from pd, as if RHO has AJx(x), I do not like our chances, but will be boring. Spade lead seems like it needs too much.
A B C D E F G H
procrastinator 3N 5C 3H 2N 5C P 3N HK
oirg P 3N 3C 2S 5C 2H 4H HQ
SW P 3N 3N 3C 4C 2H 3S HK
Klaymen
ST
BTDT P 3N 3N 2D 4C P 2C H8
NN P 3N 3D 3C 4C P 3N SJ
veni vidi vici P 3N 3D 2N 5C 2H 2C HQ
Abstract Actuary P 3N P 2D 4C 2H 2C HQ
Leading P 3N 4C 2H 2C HQ
Still lacking a leader on two of them. BTW, on H I now think itās pretty clear that the consensusās HQ is better than the HK. On a double-dummy basis there canāt be any difference between those two. and if we win trick 1 we should be better placed on how to continue if we know partner does not have the J, or if partner plays the J to trick 1. Most likely partner will overtake with Ax on either lead, if dummy does not have the J. (If dummy does have the J and partner has the A, we will wish we had led small. and small could be right, but I donāt think we are going to do that.)
A B C D E F G H
procrastinator 3N 5C 3H 2N 5C P 3N HK
oirg P 3N 3C 2S 5C 2H 4H HQ
SW P 3N 3N 3C 4C 2H 3H HK
Klaymen
ST
BTDT P 3N 3N 2D 4C P 2C H8
NN P 3N 3D 3C 4C P 3N SJ
veni vidi vici P 3N 3D 2N 5C 2H 2C HQ
4Sigma P 3N 3N 3C 4C 2D 3N HK
Abstract Actuary P 3N P 2D 4C 2H 2C HQ
Leading P 3N 3N 3C 4C 2H 3N HQ
4Sigma breaks both of the previous ties, but creates two new ties.
On G, Iām currently breaking the tie in favor of 3N, my second choice (and which is an additional factor in the scoring, since my current vote was not for either of the leaders).
On H, Iām currently breaking the ātieā in favor of the HQ. Unfortunately 4Sigma had not read the discussion so far, and from his comments it doesnāt look like he thought about K vs Q. Either way, I (tabulated for HK, my initial choice) had already said I think HQ is better, so that ones not really a tie any more.
I expect to submit those this evening, unless Runewell or ST votes and changes things. (Or perhaps if someone posts thoughts about breaking the tie on G). Must submit something by midnight.
A B C D E F G H Total
procrastinator 3N 70 5C 30 3H 100 2N 50 5C 100 P 60 3N 90 HK 90 590
oirg P 100 3N 100 3C 0 2S 100 5C 100 2H 100 4H 70 HQ 100 670
SW P 100 3N 100 3N 60 3C 90 4C 50 2H 100 3H 0 HK 90 590
Klaymen
ST
BTDT P 100 3N 100 3N 60 2D 70 4C 50 P 60 2C 80 H8 80 600
NN P 100 3N 100 3D 80 3C 90 4C 50 P 60 3N 90 SJ 70 640
veni vidi vici P 100 3N 100 3D 80 2N 50 5C 100 2H 100 2C 80 HQ 100 710
4Sigma P 100 3N 100 3N 60 3C 90 4C 50 2D 70 3N 90 HK 90 650
Abstract Actuary P 100 3N 100 P 0 2D 70 4C 50 2H 100 2C 80 HQ 100 600
Submitted P 100 3N 100 3N 60 3C 90 4C 50 2H 100 3N 90 HQ 100 690
P 100 3N 100 3H 100 2S 100 5C 100 2H 100 4D 100 HQ 100
3N 70 5C 30 3D 80 3C 90 4C 50 2D 70 3N 90 HK 90
3N 60 2D 70 P 60 2C 80 H8 80
3C 0 2N 50 4H 70 SJ 70
The Submitted 690 tied for 47-55 in the Honor Roll, the lowest score making the roll. VVVās 710 was the only individual score which would have made it, in a tie for 27-33.
A: 3D. Would be good to know what 2D, 2H, 2N, 3D, 3H and 3N all mean. Presumably 2D and 2H are too weak here. Likely 2NT is as well. Assuming 3D shows the right strength, I like this as our best chance to figure out if we have a heart fit.
B: 4S. Iād like to know what 4H means. If it is a cue bid and implies enough strength, I may jump straight to blackwood, because we really just need to know about AKQ of spades. If 4H is natural, shows 5-5, or shows strength, but not enough to explore slam, then that could lead to 4S or pass.
C: 2C. The simple game force seems simple enough and gives us the most room to explore.
D: 2H.
E: 4C. Presumably 4C is Michaelās implying 5/5 in the majors and strength. Maybe implies a little too much strength for the hand, but Iām leaning aggressive here even though weāre vulnerable. My majors holding is too good to pass up. If 4C isnāt Michaelās, then I would go 3S.
F: 3NT. Seems worth the risk.
G: 3NT. Hmmm. With double stops in opponents long suit, no risk there. And partners strength plus my support in 2 of the other suits feels like enough to make 3NT.
H: DA. Also considered the 6 of Clubs which I believe would be the bot lead. With 3 little spades, I think opening the Ace of diamonds with the hopes to ruff a third diamond trick feels optimal. Once you lead the ace can then look at Dummy and potentially change plans.
A. 2D. Close second choice 2NT.
B. 5H. Extremely subtle, maybe too subtle. The clearest thing is that this must show some control in each minor. With a control in only one minor, we surely would bid it, and with a control in neither we would just bid 4S. Does it show both aces? Not totally clear.
C. 2N. We donāt have quite enough to force to game. If we were sure that 2C would do a better job than 2NT for getting us to the right denomination, that could tip the scales in its favor, but 2C is mainly catering to partner having 3 hearts but not enough to bid over 2NT.
D. 2H, though fairly likely I would just pass at the table.
E. 4C. It think the system notes say this shows both majors.
F. 3D. Not bidding 3H on a doubleton 10. Not going past 3NT.
G. 4S. And hope.
H. Club 10. Anything could be right. The only suit Iām sure I wouldnāt choose is diamonds.
For my personal schedule, I may need to submit by Friday, Aug 23. So please try to get your votes in much earlier than normal.
A B C D E F G H
procrastinator
oirg 2N P 2N 2H 4C 3S 3N S2
SW 2D 5C 2N 2H 4C 3D 4S C 10
Klaymen
ST
BTDT
NN
veni vidi vici
4Sigma
Abstract Actuary 3D 4S 2C 2H 4C 3N 3N DA
Leading 2H 4C
2 with 3-way agreement, but 4 with not even 2 voters agreeing.
A B C D E F G H
procrastinator
oirg 2N P 2N 2H 4C 3S 3N S2
SW 2D 5C 2N 2H 4C 3D 4S C10
Klaymen
ST
BTDT 2D 5H 1N 2H 4C 4C 3N C10
NN
veni vidi vici
4Sigma
Abstract Actuary 3D 4S 2C 2H 4C 3N 3N DA
Leading 2H 4C 3N
Now with 3 leading choices, but still with 2 with no agreement.
For my personal schedule, I may need to submit by Friday, Aug 23. So please try to get your votes in much earlier than normal.
Still would be nice to submit by Friday Aug 23, but doesnāt look like thatās likely.
A. 2NT. Thought about 2D, but worried partner will not expect this much, too easy to miss game.
B. 6 spades. May not score well in a contest, but what I would bid IRL. Hard to construct a hand where slam is worse than a finesse, and donāt see how to find out when spade jack and heart queen are both important pieces.
C. 3 Hearts. Heart 98 convince me.
D. 2 hearts. Passed hand, including no weak 2, partner should know I donāt have great hearts.
E. 4 clubs. Could be convinced 4 spades is better, partner needs a pretty big major suit disparity for hearts to play better.
F. 4 clubs. Qx of hearts I might bid hearts, but Tx not enough. With partner bidding 3C instead of 2S, do not think 3NT is likely to be right, so ok bypassing it.
G. 3NT. Hammanās rule.
H. Heart 6 (or 8 if BWS convention is 3rd and low). No logic, just gut reaction.
I see all others are falling into the 2 range. Is this a difference of opinion with level of strength? Or am I incorrect that a 2-level bid shows a weaker hand. E.g., 2H or 2N both could get passed.
Can someone help with what partnerās 4H means. I like the idea of exploring slam, which feels where others want to go. Maybe I mean to change my bid to 4NT.
2NT (my choice) is invitational, so can be passed, but shows a decent hand.
2D and 2H are both not forcing. 2H is relatively likely to be passed, and 2D is often either passed or corrected to 2H.
On B, I think it is slam exploration and not a cue bid, but rather shows āwhere he livesā. Maybe AQJxx AQxxx Kx x. Others may not agree and think it is a cue bid (I play natural more than most), but think it being a slam try will find wide agreement.
Yes, 2H and 2N could get passed. Not necessarily a bad thing. If 2N is passed I donāt think we would want to be in 3N, though itās conceivable we would want to have been in 4H.
Thereās also a question of what 3D shows here. We are a passed hand. Are we going to have a game forcing hand when partner only rebid his suit? Very unlikely. So maybe 3D is natural, highty encourging but not forcing. Or maybe 3D should imply a club fit (since otherwise we are getting the auction pretty quite high with potentially no fit).
Itās certainly expressing interest in slam, since otherwise he would just bid 4S since he knows we have a spade fit. (With some hands he would just have passed 3S, but once he goes on anything besides 4S is expressing some slam interest.) We obviously have a super hand for him, about the best we could have for this sequence. I would FAR rather bid 6S than 4S over 4H and will not be at all surprised if 4S gets a 0. The challenge here, in my opinion, is whether our side has a reasonable way to choose between 6 and 7.
A B C D E F G H
procrastinator 2N 6S 3H 2H 4C 4C 3N H6
oirg 2N P 2N 2H 4C 3S 3N S2
SW 2D 5C 2N 2H 4C 3D 4S C10
Klaymen
ST
BTDT 2D 5H 1N 2H 4C 4C 3N C10
NN
veni vidi vici
4Sigma
Abstract Actuary 3D 4S 2C 2H 4C 3N 3N DA
Leading 2H 4C 3N
