June 2020 - 43

Rigal: "5NT, pick-a-slam, planning to
correct 6♦ to 6♠, and over a 6♣ passthe-buck call ... not sure."
Lawrence's approach is the same,
except he has an answer if partner
passes the buck. "If partner bids 6♣, I
will risk bidding 7♥."
Donn bids 5♠, pointing at the flaw in
the problem. "This is the danger with
failing to support immediately."
Shi, too. "I must admit that I would
not have bid 2♥ originally; I would just
have supported my partner's spades.
I would then be well placed for a 5♥
bid at this point. As stupid as it seems,
I guess I bid 5♠ now. We are not in a
force, so partner's lack of double just
says they are minimum, but I think I
have enough to make the five level."
Sanborn calls this hand far too offensive to double. "5♠. I have a pretty
good hand in support."
5♠ by Boehm. "Perhaps an underbid,
but the splits may be bad."
Cohen, 5♠: "Yes, I know all the adages about the five level, but I've just
got to show my support."
Robinson doubles, but not without
registering his objection to the earlier
part of the auction. "I strongly believe
that you set trumps ASAP, which
means that I would have bid 3♣ over
2♣, showing spade support with at
least limit-raise values. In a bidding
contest moderated by me, I would
give 2♥ a poor score because it would
confuse the auction, like it does here.
Double shows a good hand, so I'll let
partner make the last mistake. One
should not bid five-over-five."
Double is Meckstroth's call. "I hate to
get pushed around. We might be able to
get 800."
Grossack doubles. "At matchpoints, I
think I have a lot of equity in the board
by scoring 800, which is quite possible,
if not probable. Most people nowadays
are overly aggressive when white on
red (Me? Guilty?), and I have no idea
if we belong in 5♠ or 6♠ or even
hearts. For me, it's a tougher problem
at IMPs, where missing slam could be a
disaster."
Colchamiro's 5♦ prompted a flurry

of e-correspondence. 5♦? What is
that? Is it even forcing? Colchamiro
patiently explains. "The logic is that
5♦ must be forcing because South has
to be prepared for North to bid something else if diamonds are not acceptable. For example, with:
♠A Q x x x x ♥K x x ♦x ♣A x x,
North would bid 5♥. To be able to
stop exactly in 5♦ is a mighty small
target indeed. With a minimum hand,
North would have doubled 5♣. North's
pass of 5♣ is a forcing pass because
2♥ showed 10-plus points. North has
to have a forward-going hand, giving
South the OK to bid on. So, the choices
for North over 5♦ are 5♥, 5♠, 6♣,
6♦ and 6♥. But not pass. Playing with
a non-expert, I just would bid 5NT
(pick-a-slam) to avoid any confusion."
5. Matchpoints. North-South vul.
♠A J ♥9 ♦10 7 4 ♣K J 9 8 6 5 3
West

North

East

Pass

3♥

3♠

Call
3NT
Dbl
Pass
4♣

Votes
7
6
3
0

South
3♣
?
Award
100
90
70
40

All the matchpoints
Was there ever any doubt? Meckstroth, 3NT: "Top spot at matchpoints."
3NT by Sanborn. "If not now, when?
Partner should not pass without help
in clubs or spades."
Weinstein, 3NT: "What I would have
bid if East had passed; his bid didn't
make it worse."
Donn: "3NT describes my decent
hand with a spade stopper."
Becker bids 3NT. "I have a high-card
max and with a little help (♠10-x-x),
can stop spades twice. Double is a solid
alternative. As a preemptor, I can't
have much more defense."
Colchamiro's 3NT: "Presuming 3♥
is forcing [it is], the ♠A J makes 3NT
an easy call.
"I try 3NT," says Korbel. "I have

spades well stopped and partner won't
often pass this without the ♣A; he
knows I won't have both a spade stopper and great clubs very often."
Double by Shi in all capital letters.
"I have a maximum, good defense, and
partner's 3♥ was intended as forcing, so I think defending here is a good
option. If partner has a club fit and was
joking around, they can always pull."
Boehm likes his chances on defense.
"Double. I have a good lead and a promotable spade. Besides, this may be the
path to 3NT."
Rigal: "I think double suggests a
singleton heart and decent defense.
So I will try it rather than 3NT, which
rates to need to run nine tricks on a
spade lead."
Lee doubles. "I don't think this shows
a stack, just a preference to defend."
Grossack doubles. "Whoever said
preemptors don't bid again can call me.
I have a defensive max with cards in
their trump suit and no heart fit. 3♥
was forcing, and partner knows I can't
have too many spades. I don't see much
of a downside - partner is welcome
to pull with an unsuitable hand for
defense."
Lawrence makes a disciplined pass.
"Bidding over 3♠ is not good partnership bridge. What am I to do? Bid 4♣?
Double? 3NT? None of these feel appetizing. Because my values feel about
par for three vulnerable clubs, I'm OK
with letting partner do whatever suits
him."
Pass by Robinson. "I did open a
vulnerable preempt, so I should have a
good hand. I'll let partner decide."
Pass by Cohen, who with nothing to
say, says nothing. Except, "Yes, double
is tempting - and macho."
◾

Top Online scores on pg. 72
Please participate in It's Your Call!
Go to acbl.org and click on It's Your Call
under the MyACBL login tab. You may
submit answers for a given month until midnight Central Time on the 20th
of that month, at which point the next
month's problems will be available.
June 2020 Bridge Bulletin

http://www.acbl.org

June 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of June 2020