It’s Your Call December 2017 Results

38 Unit 431 members participated in the December 2017 quiz.

A player who wishes to remain anonymous won with a total of 450 points (out of a possible 500). To see all results, scroll to bottom of page (after Comments).

If you would like to see what the experts bid on these deals, look in the January 2018 Bridge Bulletin (page 40). The e-version should be available around January 1st  (logon to MyACBL on ACBL‘s website). The print edition usually arrives in your mailbox a week or two later.

Now that the January Bridge Bulletin is out, here’s what the experts actually bid:

The January 2018 edition of It’s Your Call, Victoria is now posted on the website. All Unit 431 members in good standing may participate.  Click here to play the January game.


Several players commented on the hands. Here are the comments we received.

If you want to reply or add your own comments, please send them to the webmaster. They will be added at the end of this section.

David Todd:

2. I hope/assume it is as easy to take 9 tricks in no trump as it is in clubs.

3. Negative doubles at the 3 level, how do we find out if partner has a spade stopper, it is possible that our 7 missing points are the ace + king of spades.

5. Should be enough for game opposite a good opener.

John Miller:

Problem 2, I bid spades, likely 3NT is the place to be but if partner is unbalanced in the minors, 5C might be better. 3S suggests I need help in hearts for 3NT.

Problem 4 is interesting, partner must be short in hearts and slam needs to be bid but we haven’t found a fit, 5D should be forcing, if partner retreats to 5S I’ll bid 6C.

Tony Farr:

#3 – Hopefully double is for takeout in Bridge Bulletin Standard. Looking for slam, but where?

Ernie Tradewell:

Problem 4 Too good to dbl at this vul. Looks like slam.. 4NT pick a slam I hope!!

Mike Dorn Wiss: As was the case last month,  Mike had a very comprehensive and opinionated analysis for each hand:

1) 2D.  There is no reason to hang partner for what may be a light balance. Clearly he doesn’t have a Spade one suiter hand type, but does have at least two places to play and an inability to bid NT. If he has a Spade/minor hand in a typical 4=2=4=3 or 4=2=3=4 shape with a minimum I will pay off to playing in the Diamond Moysian, but otherwise I will be well placed when balancer has a good hand and is able to advance the auction. Should responder now chirp in with 2H and the auction comes back to me rebidding 3C will be easy. Should partner advance with a 2H cuebid and a strong hand I will recue 3H to look for 3NT from his side if holding Qx in a hand such as AJxx,Qx,KJx(x),KQx(x). Should he rebid 2S with a hand unsuitable for an original jump to 2S like a 5 bagger with a side minor such as 5=1=4/3 or 5=2=2/4 I also have an easy 3C rebid. Should he raise D’s or even rebid 3C I have an easy 3H available. Bidding NT from my side at any stage is unappealing due to the wrongside, and starting with 2D will leave us with a comfortable auction in a majority of situations.

2) 3H.  Playing a standard approach partner is showing limit raise and invitational values. Clearly he is unbalanced enough to have little interest in a NT landing spot, and despite my S holding I am inclined to agree with him, as should he have a stiff or dubby H a holdup scenario is unlikely to be fruitful for us since we would need eight more cashers before the opps got in. Partner’s minor shapes could be 4=6, 4=5, 5=5, and even – ‘though less likely – 6=5 or 5=4, since I may from his viewpoint hold three pups in the C suit. Therefore his most probable game interests are in the minors, and certainly he has a likely stiff or possible void in one of the majors. With such a great C holding more than may be expected, a third round control in partner’s D’s, and a first and second round control in the majors I think a 3H burp is clear, and must agree C’s in all likelihood, but may be in a hand with great 3 card D support and a max with controls such as Kxx,Ax,Kxx,KJxx – too good to have rebid 3D, which also suggests no more than four C’s. With a hand such as xx,x,AQxxx,Axxxx (or reversed majors) – or even AJ9xx D’s, or x,Kx,Axxxx,Axxxx we are good for game and partner will love to hear my 3H.

3) 4D/S.  In a worst case scenario partner could be xx(x),KQxx,Jxx,AKQ(x) and no slam is available, or Ax(x),Kxx(x),Jxx,AKx(x) and we also need to pick up the HQ. (A good partner would also hold the T!). Also, since the pesky opps are white on red, partner can easily hold either of the S tops, and if that topper is the K and not the A the opps have a S ruff available should we get to a suit slam. Therefore, for a NT slam when opener has the SK but not the A we require him to hold the right cards outside the S suit to give us ten more tricks. Assuming the D’s come in for five tricks we now require four more in the rounded suits to go with our HA. The HKQ and the CA will suffice (along with the hoped for DJ or three small if partner does not have that card). Further, partner may have a hand with the SA and three or four D’s; again we need him to hold the CA in either case. The 3S interference has successfully narrowed our ability to discover information. I like 4NT here to be quantitative (with a top S of my own) and a 4S cue to be the equivalent of Blackberries (The Dorn 4S Convention). In my opinion the first step of 4NT showing 3/0 should be ignored since opener cannot be aceless and have opened 1NT, and the 4S control ask should not be used unless the first step be agreed to start at 4NT = 1. Therefore any response above 4NT = 2. A 5C response = 2 with a C suit, 5D = 2 with D’s, and 5H = 2 with H’s. Over any of these we know exactly where to place the contract. On this hand even if opener has SAxx and the opps have a ruff on the go if we play in 6D or 6H from opener’s side, we still make our slam. Who cares at IMP’s if it’s in NT or not? If in 6NT even in the worst case scenario of opener having Ax(x),KQxx,Jx(x),AQxx and overcaller having both black K’s even a strip-squeeze on an initial red suit lead won’t be needed as the CJ grows up the suit for the extra trick. Without my 4S convention available I will bid where I live with 4D. Should partner have the garbage hand with Sxx he will simply raise to 5D. Should he bid 4H now I will bid 6NT as he very likely holds at least one black ace to make up a minimum of 15 HCP. Should that be the CA and he happens to have xxx,KQx(x),Jx(x)x,AKQ(x)x where we can make only 5NT and will go bait in a D game, I will have to pay off to that scenario. Drat.

4) 5H. Although partner’s S suit is likely six cards (or longer) all he needs is solid five bagger to be odds on for the moon: KQJTx,void,Kxxx,xxx. Of course with a sixth card the T is not needed and with a seventh even the J could be superfluous. A D contract is also a live possibility should partner hold that hand or similar. Would partner bid 2S with a solid six or seven bagger lacking the DK such as KQJxxx,void,JTxx,xxx and if I start now with a forcing 5D would he then shotgun 5H or just raise to 6D, ignoring the H control bid unless also holding the DK? In that case we belong in a C grand as we get to tickle a H in dummy. I’m going to “chance” partner not holding stiff H with my LHO having bid a five bagger as some frisky players are wont to do and control bid his H void for him. If he has a hand with only a C dubby he will likely be 6=5 in the pointed suits. Should he rebid 5S I will then bid 6D and he should infer enough to choose the right grand. This won’t get near the votes of a 5D choice, but what do I care? I love finding bids of both imagination and practicality.

5) 4S.  As partner would rebid 1S with a hand in the minimum range of 11 to a bad 15 he now holds one worth a great 15 – 16 (with 17-18 he would rebid 3S, letting me off the hook with the same hand I have minus the DK, which would be the dead minimum for my initial action, and with an unbalanced holding worth 19+ he would have bid a game right there). Since I do hold that card, and a hand worth a full 9 in support points, it would behoove me not to chirp a pusillanimous 3S with a timorous call into the briar patch, despite that fact that the scoring is not IMP’s. A Double in my opinion would be completely misdirected.


NameTotal Score
Name withheld450
Pumpsie Green (aka David Todd)440
Audrey Mactier420
Bob Coburn410
Jon Gage410
Name withheld410
Russell Page410
No name entered400
John Miller390
Eileen Lugossy380
Ruth Cain370
Louis Sandmaier360
Frank Stanford350
Holly Boudreau350
Name withheld350
derek nurse340
Michael Cockerell340
Jordan Tessarolo330
No name entered330
Tom Braybrook330
Raymond Wickland310
Tony Farr310
William Birney310
Brenda Fox290
Rob Feldstein290
Name withheld280
Name withheld280
Bree Watts270
No name entered270
Name withheld260
Name withheld260
Ernie Tradewell240
David Buckman220
Name withheld200
Mike Dorn Wiss170
Joanna Daam160
No name entered160