September 2015 - 40

It's Your Call
DIRECTOR: SUE MUNDAY

We frequently hear from It's Your
Call followers who want to know partner's hand or the rest of the deal or the
real-life outcome of the problems we
present. That curiosity, while understandable, overlooks the real purpose
of IYC.
This feature focuses on the thought
process at the table during a live
auction. You pick up your cards, the
bidding proceeds and then, just when
you have no idea what to do next, the
spotlight's on you: It's your call. The
panelists share what they're thinking:
the presumptions, assumptions and
inferences that determine their next
action. There's a lot to be learned by
seeing and hearing these experts in
action.
Just this once, however, in a rare
moment of madness, the director is
breaking with tradition. The following
deals come from "Famous Bidding
Decisions" by Terence Reese and
David Bird, published in 1996 as part of
their Master Bridge Series, and appear
here with Bird's permission. There are
only four problems, so the scoring this
month is on a 125 top. Following the
column, you'll see the full layouts and
recaps including some of the original
players, the circumstances and how
things turned out.
But just this once.
1. IMPs. None vulnerable.
♠A Q J 4 ♥10 7 ♦Q J 10 4 3 ♣Q 8
West
Pass
Pass
Pass

North
1♥
3♣
4♦

East
Pass
Pass
Pass

40 Bridge Bulletin September 2015

South
2♦
3NT
?

Call
4NT
4♠
5♦
4♥
6♦

❘ SCORES: KAREN WALKER

Votes
8
4
4
1
0

Award
125
105
105
75
30

Uncooperative
4NT, the consensus call on this problem, is not Blackwood or key card or
anything at all forward-going: It's a big
stop sign that says "I had no interest in
going beyond 3NT and I still feel that
way."
4NT by Weinstein, who calls this
problem "a question of where to bail,
not if I should bail. I choose notrump
because I can see using hearts,
diamonds or clubs for my source of
tricks."
Falk uses 4NT to demonstrate his
lack of enthusiasm for proceeding
further. "I have only one ace, and it is
probably opposite a void." He samples
five different North hands and concludes, "5♦ may not be cold and 6♦
may be anything from good to terrible,
with terrible more likely. So I go low
and avoid guessing just how partner's
honors are distributed. By the way, I
do not think it possible that North has
four-card diamond support. With any
such hand, I'd have heard a 3♠ splinter
on the second round."
4NT by Boehm, too. "With a lot of
spade waste, little in partner's suits,
topless diamonds and a likely trump
lead, it's time to put on the brakes.
Even facing:
♠- ♥A K x x x ♦K x x ♣A K x x x,
slam is no bargain."

Meckstroth shares that dim view.
"4NT. I have a poor hand with too
much in spades. 4♠ by me would be
positive in diamonds."
Abdou, too, bids 4NT, citing wasted
spade values. "I disagree with the game
force on this amorphous 12 count."
Lee bids 4NT. "I have a lot in spades
and a minimum, so I'll just make a
regressive bid."
Rigal also hits the floor with 4NT.
"No controls where they matter and
a minimum hand. 4NT seems clear,
which generally means I'll be in a minority of one."
Ditto Meyers: "Partner is inviting. I
don't have an acceptance."
On a more positive note, Lawrence
says 4♠ feels automatic. "My ♦10
may be important if partner has ♦A x
or ♦K x. Yes, wasted spade cards ... but
other pluses make up for them."
4♠ by Korbel, who believes he owes
partner one cuebid. "Although I have a
lot of values in spades, he could have a
hand like:
♠x ♥A K x x x ♦K x x ♣A K x x
to go past 3NT. If he has a weaker hand,
he is unlikely to get us too high on his
own."
Hampson chooses the 4♠cue. "I am
borderline for being worth any cooperation, but I will make one noise."
Stack cooperates. "4♠. The diamond
suit is decent and we have an ace and a
possible fitting club card, so we will advance with the spade cuebid. If partner
does not bid 6♦ after this, then we will
be happy with 5♦ and hope we make
it."
The Sutherlins explain the benefits
of 5♦: "We have a minimum 2♦ bid,
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of September 2015
