{"id":83736,"date":"2024-01-29T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-01-29T08:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/funbridge.com\/blog\/?p=83736"},"modified":"2024-01-24T10:17:37","modified_gmt":"2024-01-24T09:17:37","slug":"january-bidding-contest-the-results-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/funbridge.com\/blog\/en\/january-bidding-contest-the-results-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"January Bidding Contest: the results!"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"Bidding<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The experts’ answers<\/a>
Deal 1: Ruff-and-discard on the horizon<\/a>
Deal 2: Prolonging the sequence<\/a>
Deal 3: Cumbersome minors <\/a>
Deal 4: Disobedience?<\/a>
Deal 5: Fight or flight<\/a>
Deal 6: Hide-and-seek<\/a>
The winners<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The experts’ answers <\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Deal 1: Ruff-and-discard on the horizon<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n
\n
\n

This is all a question of strategy. Clearly, if the opponents play in 6♣, we will be on lead and all will be well. But how do we go about getting partner to lead a heart against 6♠ and not giving a ruff-and-discard in Diamonds? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cronier <\/strong>had the time to think about it since it was he who submitted the problem to me: “5♥. I know this deal. At the table, I recommended bidding 5♥, a bid going for 6♦ but with a heart lead against an opposing spade or club contract. I still advocate that.” The other experts were not of the same opinion and most preferred to leave the problem for later, more or less aware of the danger. I have chosen the most detailed and convincing explanations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

For the waiting bid of 3♦: L\u00e9vy and Tignel:<\/strong> “3♦. I wish to play 6 Diamonds as offensive and defensive, as I doubt that the opponents, both with a diamond void, will easily allow me to play in 5 Diamonds… But if they sacrifice in 6 Spades, North absolutely must not give away the contract by leading the Ace of Diamonds. Yet, if I double 6♠ (Lightner), my partner will probably think that I have a club void. My idea is therefore to be able to mention Hearts at some point in the auction (5♥ over the probable 4♠ or 5♣ by the opponents), hence the timid 3♦ bid, it not being possible for the sequence to end there. The other bids entail risks: bidding 4♦, 5♦ or 6♦ will prevent me from mentioning Hearts if the opponents bid slam before my next turn. And bidding 3♥ (or 4♥) might be punished by a bid of 6♥ by Partner…” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For a bid that means we get to have our cake and eat it too (and was therefore chosen by the majority…): Schmidt:<\/strong> “4♣. Up to which level will we bid and how can we direct the lead? I envisage there being three strategies: a smokescreen (6♦), as either of the opponents could get carried away with their diamond void and bid over the top when I have a possible Lightner double against 6♠ (provided it is not misunderstood). Saying 5♥ before changing to 6♦, which tells Partner what needs to be done… as well as the opponents! Or finally, not rushing things, by bidding 4♣ in anticipation of a future Lightner double. I choose – regretfully – the latter option. I hope both to better be able to diagnose which level to go to and to make my potential Lightner double very clear (as with a club void, I would have bid 5♣ and not 4♣). If my partner leads the Ace of Diamonds regardless, we will have to explain over dinner.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Toffier:<\/strong> “5♣. A 5♦ bid with a club shortage. This bid showing some strength, my partner should work out that I have points in Hearts…” There is still time before the 12th August to go through this sequence… <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For more offensive bids, to put the opponents’ backs against the wall but which might be more dangerous: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thomas Bessis: <\/strong>“5♦. If they do not bid 6♣ with their double void in Diamonds, that would be really unlucky\u2026 However, I am a bit afraid of them bidding 6♠ and my partner getting the lead wrong if I double… But I do not really see how to avoid that, except perhaps by bidding 3♥ now; but how would that look if my partner bid 5♥ over that?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kerlero: <\/strong>“5♦. Are my opponents making a slam? Rather unlikely with me having the Ace-King of Hearts! Can we make 6 Diamonds? Rather unlikely after the opponents’ strong bids. So no use in broadcasting my singleton. If they bid 5♠, I will say 6♦ but if they bid 6♣, the lead has already been found!”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chemla: <\/strong>“6♦. The situation is extremely dangerous. We have to cater for two necessities: avoiding a ruff-and-discard or a club, looking for a void, on lead. By doubling 6♠ or 7♠, I am strongly suggesting a heart lead since I have not cue-bid Clubs.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To avoid that, other experts chose to bid Hearts first, such as Rocafort:<\/strong> “3♥. First of all, I will discreetly check whether everyone took their cards from the same board. Then, this is a matter of strategy rather than technique. Of doing one’s best to dissuade Partner from giving a ruff-and-discard on lead if they end up in Spades and of bidding on quietly to leave East-West room to let off some steam so they leave you be at the 5-level feeling like they have done their duty” or Rombaut: <\/strong>“4♥. To give Partner a lead. Then, I shall bid Diamonds at the necessary level.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With such disparate responses, I am leaving the scores as they are but I must say that I am not convinced by the heart bids. In any case, with Partner holding the Ace-King of Diamonds, he will not imagine that you hold seven and will never see why he ought to lead a heart rather than a diamond. I am much more convinced that it is necessary to double 6♠, having denied a club void, in order to have a chance of Partner leading a heart, since the double will have forbidden him from leading a diamond.<\/p>\n\n\n\n