September 2017 - 43

What the heck's a Bluhmer?
4♦ by Weinstein, who offers a playby-play on what's transpired to date.
"Wow, I have a great hand! 2♥ would
show a good 4=3=1=5, so 3♥ is the
same shape, just shy of a 2♠ jump shift
- probably with chunky hearts. It's
hard to imagine we don't have a slam.
Because 4♣ would be a signoff, 4♦
seems like the best way to start."
Colchamiro identifies the bid. "It's
a Bluhmer [named after the late Lou
Bluhm]. Partner has shown an enormous hand with a stiff diamond. If he
had:
♠A K x x ♥K x x ♦x ♣K Q J x x,
2♥ would be enough, wouldn't it? So
maybe he has the same hand with the
♥Q. I have a fabulous hand in context,
and I can't imagine stopping short of
6♣ - which is my second choice."
Rigal recognizes it, too. "4♦ is a
Bluhmer, showing a very good hand
in context for my bidding so far, with
nothing wasted in diamonds. Partner
may think we are going forward in
hearts, but if he bids 4♥, I bid 5♣; if
4♠, I bid 6♣."
4♦ by Hampson, who says, "I have
a monster, so I make a strong raise. If
partner bids 4♥, I will have to decide
whether to advance with 4♠ or settle
for 5♣."
Lee nods, "I have a monster now, way
too much for 5♣, and this is our only
cuebid available."
Cohen bids 4♦, saying he would
have bid 3♣ the previous round rather
than 2♣. "This hand is humongous!
5♣ is not enough. To see why, picture
hands such as these:
♠A x x x ♥K Q x ♦- ♣K Q x x x x
♠A K Q x ♥K J x ♦x ♣K Q J x x.
My second choice would be 6♣,
though I expect votes for only 5♣."
Lawrence says there are only two
choices - 5♣ and 4♦- but he makes
the more compelling argument for 4♦.
"I have a sensational hand under the
circumstances. Partner has a singleton
diamond, so he should suspect I'm not
showing the ace. I must be showing
something like what I have. I know he

has a stiff diamond because he would
have opened 1NT with any balanced
hand including whatever values he is
showing."
Robinson is content with 5♣. "I
wanted to bid 4♦, but partner might
think I have five hearts. It's important
to set trumps."
Slam isn't on Meckstroth's radar.
"5♣. Easy at teams to try for the game
bonus."
Sanborn agrees. "Sure, if 4♠ is a
splinter, we might get to a good slam,
but partner might worry about asking
for key cards. I'm hoping there is too
much wasted in spades for slam to be
good."
Shi drives her monster hand straight
to 6♣. As does Korbel, who says, "It
sounds like partner is quite strong with
a singleton or void in diamonds, a hand
such as:
♠A Q x x ♥K Q x ♦x ♣K Q J x x.
Simply bidding 2♥ would have shown
a good hand, so this shows a near jump
shift. It's hard to imagine not making a
slam, so I will bid it. Funny auction!"
Donn bids 6♣, too. "Unfortunately,
I don't think there is a forcing bid to
agree clubs without a special agreement."
Boehm steps out with a 4♠ splinter. "5♣ is straightforward, but 4♠,
logically a splinter since 3♠ shows
delayed support, is better to reach 6♣
opposite the likes of:
♠A J x x ♥K Q x ♦x ♣K Q J x x.
In the IYC club, I'm never sure how
fancy one can be and still feel safe. The
age-old issue: theoretical perfection
versus practicality. OK, let's strive for
perfection. I'm assuming a fine partner
and showing total disregard for IYC
panel points."
◾

Please participate in It's Your Call! Go
to acbl.org and click on It's Your Call under the MyACBL login tab at the top.
You may submit answers for a given
month until midnight on the 20th of that
month, at which point the next month's
problems will be available.

TOP ONLINE SCORES FOR JULY
Sandy Birnholtz, Sylvan Lake MI
Michael Bodell, Santa Clara CA
Eve Bodman, Niagara Falls ON
Richard Bryant, Ocean Springs MS
Howard Cohen, Oceanside NY
Pierre Daigneault, Montreal QC
Thomas Devine, Ferndale WA
Miki Dzugan, Sedona AZ
James Endicott, Montgomery AL
John Euler, Sun Lakes AZ
Rick Giles, Springfield MO
Eric Holm, Wilmington NC
Dianne Isfeld, Coquitlam BC
Jacqueline Karlen, Ocoee FL
Mitchell Karlick, Herndon VA
Stephen Kemic, Los Alamos NM
Andrew Krywaniuk, Burnaby BC
Steve Lake, Las Vegas NV
Patrick Long, Austin TX
Bill McKenna, Darien IL
Stephen Osiecki, Vero Beach FL
Rick Prouser, Portland OR
Michael Shortridge, Jefferson City MO
James Wheeler, Edinburg PA
Dan Wong, Pleasanton CA
Royald Zell, Tampa FL
Herbert Zweig, Woodland Hills CA
Tansu Aksu, Orlando FL
Mel Chaplin, Brentwood CA
Ken Cohen, Philadelphia PA
Jay Cohodes, Sunrise FL
B. Susan Crutchfield, Incline Village NV
Clay Cuthbertson, Quincy IL
James Diebel, Wood Dale IL
Rob Fought, West Vancouver BC
Ned Hager, Tulsa OK
Wesley Hanson, Brookfield WI
Gail Havens, Bluffton SC
Tad Hofkin, Aurora IL
Jordan Karol, Denver CO
Susan Lee, Smithers BC
Carl Levesque,
St-Honore-de-Temiscouata QC
Erwin Linzner, Santa Rosa CA
Kent Livingston, Vancouver WA
Hardin Matthews, Belmont MA
Richard Paulsen, Cincinnati OH
John Rogers, Paradise Valley AZ
Jean Savoie, Rosemere QC
John Scibelli, Las Vegas NV
John Strauch, San Diego CA
Philip Sugar, New York NY
Kenneth Wanamaker, Las Vegas NV
James Weeks, Palm Desert CA

500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480
480

September 2017 Bridge Bulletin

43
http://www.acbl.org
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of September 2017
