July 2018 - 39

1=4=4=4 shape, and JoAnna signed off
in the best game.
Kit's 2♣ denied 1=4=5=3 shape (he'd
rebid 2♦ with that), which would
factor later in the auction. Sally's 2♥
was fourth-suit forcing, and the auction proceeded naturally. She chose
to commit to a suit contract, knowing
they had at least an eight-card club fit.
Kit didn't think Sally would bid 4♣ if
she could play spades opposite a low
singleton, so he bid the club game.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1♦-1♠;
2♣-2♥; 3♥-3♠; 3NT-Pass.
Scores: 4NT 10; 4♠, 5♣ 5
Stansbys 28, Woolseys 29

Problem 6

East deals. E-W vulnerable.
West
♠A54
♥3
♦ J 10 9 8 6 2
♣KQ5

East
♠K
♥ A J 10 8 7 4
♦AQ
♣AJ94

JoAnna

Lew
1♣
2♥
3♥
4♣
4♥

1♥
3♦
3NT
4♦
Pass
Sally
2♣
2NT
3♥
4♣
4♥

Kit
1♣
2♦
3♣
3♠
4♦
Pass

JoAnna's 1♥ response to the strong
club showed any 8- to 11-point hand
with fewer than five spades. Four
natural bids followed, and Lew went
into the tank. He decided to bid on,
thinking that JoAnna might've bid 3♠
with good spades and weak clubs, but
would be forced to bid 3NT with the reverse. JoAnna rebid her diamonds, but
Lew feared getting a poor matchpoint
result if he bypassed 4♥. JoAnna had
nowhere to go.

Sally's 2♣ showed a game force with
diamonds, and 2♦ initiated a relay sequence. With her next three bids Sally
showed heart shortness, then 3=1=6=3
shape, then exactly three controls (not
counting a singleton ♥K). 4♦ asked
about honor location, and 4♥ showed
either both top diamonds or neither,
leaving Kit at the crossroads: "I know
Sally has at least
♠A x x ♥x ♦J x x x x x ♣K x x.
She might have a little more, but at this
point 4♥ looks like the percentage
action." One of the downsides to relay
systems is "responder" rarely gets to
express an opinion. Here, West had
nice diamond fillers and the valuable
♣Q, not enough to move over partner's
signoff.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1♥-1NT;
3♣-3♦; 3♥-3♠; 4♦-6♦; Pass.
Scores: 6♦ 11; 6NT(E) 8; 5NT(E) 7;
5NT(W) 5; 4♥, 6NT(W) 3;
5♦, 5♥, 7♦ 2; 6♥ 1
Stansbys 31, Woolseys 32

if the ♥Q were the king," said JoAnna.
Lew and Kit liked their hand for diamonds, but there was no guarantee that
partner even had four of them: Such
is the cost of the nebulous opening.
JoAnna liked her five-loser hand and
gave it one more try, after which Lew
came to life with a 4♦ invite. JoAnna
couldn't have much more, so she bid
game happily.
Kit had the luxury of knowing that
they wouldn't end up in a seven-card fit
when he bid 2♦: "If Sally is 1=4=3=5,
she'll bid 2♥," which Kit may well have
passed at matchpoints. As it was, Sally
feared a possible misfit, so she passed
to protect the plus score, a key in pairs.
Bridge Bulletin auction: 1♦-1♠;
2♣-3♦; 5♦-Pass. Easier for East to
invite facing known diamond length
and a standard-strength opening bid.
Scores: 5♦ 10; 4♦ 6; 1NT, 3♣ 4;
2NT, 4♣ 2; 3NT 1
Stansbys 41, Woolseys 38

Problem 8

West deals. None vulnerable.

Problem 7

South deals. Both vulnerable.
West
♠J
♥Q5
♦AKQ93
♣K9743

East
♠A643
♥K86
♦ J 10 5 2
♣Q6

JoAnna
1♦
2♣
3♣
5♦

Lew
1♠
2♦
4♦
Pass

Sally
1♦
2♣
Pass

Kit
1♠
2♦

After the 1♦ opening (two-plus)
and normal response, our Wests had
the option of jumping to 3♣ with at
least 5-5 in the minors, good suits, and
strength just shy of an opening 1♣ bid.
Both felt they needed better clubs or a
slightly stronger hand: "I'd have bid 3♣

West
♠KJ7
♥AKQ98
♦QJ
♣Q95

East
♠ A 10 6 5 4
♥-
♦ 10 9 8 6
♣ A K J 10

JoAnna
1♣
1NT
2♥
2NT
Pass

Lew
1♠
2♦
2♠
3NT

Sally
1♣
2♣
2♠
3NT
4♥
Pass

Kit
1NT
2♥
3♠
4♦
4NT

Lew's 1♠ response to the strong club
was natural, promising five spades and
a game force. 1NT started a relay, and
2♦ showed exactly five spades, a side
continued on pg. 50 ➤
July 2018 Bridge Bulletin

39
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of July 2018
