November 2011 - 32

The Bidding Box

strong for a jump rebid of 3, hence
a manufactured 3 rebid. Opener
next rebids spades to show this hand
type. Players who have this agreement might well treat Engle's 4 as
natural, not a cuebid.
Andrew
2
3
4
Pass

Richard
1
3
3
5

Andrew preferred a game-forcing
2 response at his first turn, and
rebid the suit when Richard continued
with a value-showing 3. 3 was a
probe for a notrump game, but when
Andrew denied a heart stopper and
raised clubs instead, Richard bid the
club game.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1-2;
3-3; 3 [heart stopper?]-4 [no,
but club fit]; 4 [control bid]-5; All
Pass
Scores: 5 11; 5 10; 6, 6 5;
3NT 3; minor-suit partials 2; 4 1
Weisman-Engle 12; Jengs 13

Problem 3

South deals. E-W vulnerable.
West
AQ83
AQ
Q854
K74

East
 K J 10 9 5 4
K
 10 3
AQJ2

Weisman
1NT
3
4
6
Pass

Engle
2
4
5
6NT

When Engle transferred to spades,
Weisman "super-accepted" with 3,
showing four spades, a doubleton
heart and a non-minimum. Engle then
showed a control in clubs; Weisman
one in hearts. Engle knew that his
partner did not have the A because
32 Bridge Bulletin November 2011

he failed to cuebid that suit over 4.
With the leap to 5, however, Engle
believed he was asking Weisman to
bid slam if he had a second-round
diamond control (the king). When
Weisman bid 6, Engle - who then
believed his partner held the K -
decided to protect that card on the
opening lead by converting to 6NT so
that West would declare.
Weisman, however, did not interpret
5 in that manner. He believed it
asked him to continue to the six level
with a maximum, so he obeyed.
Andrew
1NT
3
4
Pass

Richard
2
4
4

The Jengs also employed a superacceptance of the Jacoby transfer.
3 shows four spades and a nonminimum. 4 and 4 are control
bids. Richard, suspecting his side was
missing a diamond control, settled for
game.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1NT-2
[transfer]; 3 [super-accept]-4
[control bid]; 4 [control bid]-4;
Pass
Scores: 5 10; 4NT 8; 6NT 5; 6 3;
6 2
Weisman-Engle 17; Jengs 23

Problem 4

West deals. Both vulnerable.
West
 10 8 6 4 3
K3
AKQJ
 K 10

East
K72
 Q J 10 6
53
A984

Weisman
1
2
4

Engle
1NT
3
Pass

Engle responded to the 1 opening
with a forcing 1NT, planning to jump
to 3 on the next round to show

a three-card limit raise of opener's
major. This is a common tactic in 2/1
bidding. When Weisman rebid 2,
Engle followed through.
Weisman, with extras, had an easy
4 call, although it's tempting to try
3NT on the way. The catch with that
idea is that some partnerships treat
3NT as a slam-try, making it unavailable for a natural interpretation.
Andrew
1
3
Pass

Richard
1NT
4

Richard embarked on the same plan
as his counterpart. When Andrew
took a very aggressive view of the
West hand and jumped to 3, however, Richard had to bid 4 to show
the invitational hand.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1NT-2
[Stayman]; 2-3NT; Pass
Scores: 3NT 11; 4NT 8; 4 6; 2NT 5;
3 4
Weisman-Engle 23; Jengs 29

Problem 5

North deals. None vulnerable.
West
 J 10 3
54
 A K Q J 10 4
76

East
A765
A72
-
AJ9853

Weisman

Engle
1
1
3
Pass

1
3
3NT

Both pairs earned a goose egg on
this tricky layout, although by different paths.
Engle bid his hand naturally, although he stretched for his third
bid over Weisman's invitational 3.
Weisman, believing his partner was a
strong 4=3=1=5 based on the auction,
bid the normal-looking 3NT, only to
discover the bad news in diamonds.
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of November 2011
