2018 WBF YOTC Solver Problem 1st by Ilai Baniri & Fernando Lema

Discussing some hands of this event with my friend Ilai Baniri (ISR), we decided to consult some hands with friends. I for my side and he for his, combining experience with youth, and the results are as follows.

All the info about the event click here

Problem 1: Denmark against Ukraine Category U26

Dealer West N/S Vul

K 10 x x  K Q x  A x x  A xx

West	North	East	South
Pass	1	Pass	1
Pass	2	Pass	2*
Pass	3	Pass	?

Game Force

Roberto Figueira de Mello(BRZ) WGM: 3NT

3NT – 3from my partner after 2game force is the weakest bid he could have done. 

Marcelo Castello Branco (BRZ) WGM: 4 

Slam interest                                   

David Bakhshi (ENG) WIM: 3

Not an easy hand to evaluate.

Possible to make slam, but could also be that 3N is the last making game. I would expect partner to have at most 2 spades and 3 hearts and at least 6 clubs but a lot depends on where their high cards are.

We may need to protect a diamond holding in partners hand, so I would bid 3H. If partner can bid 3N then I will pass. If she bids 3I can bid 3N now which should imply some doubt about strain. If she bids 4then I can bid 4to show my diamond control. 

Krzysztof Martens (MON) WGM: 3NT

I play after 2 witch denies 4 ( 2 is natural and F1R) – 3= minimum. 2H by opener = Maximum.

Partner after 2should bid 2 with 2 cards, then 3suggest spade short.

Brian Senior (ENG) WM: 4.

Usually, if 3NT is making so is 5.

It is worth taking the risk that this is one of the exceptions in case 6is good. It is interesting that partner did not bid 2FSF over 2. He could have a seventh club with A and K, for example.

Dennis Bilde (DEN) WIM: 4 

On the first hand I would just bid 4. Too many hands where we make a slam, and I think we would have to be unlucky for 5to go down.

Mikael Rimstedt (SWE) WIM: 4

 I bid 4on this one. Not forcing to slam. But will for sure give it a shot. After some cue bids I will Sign off in 5 and let partner decide where we belong.

I would bid 3NT. It is possible that we miss 6, but if I am looking for slam I will have to bid 4… and I think it is more likely that 5goes down and 3NT makes, than 6makes.

Christian Bakke (NOR) WM: 4

 I wanna make a slam try, and 4is easy to understand. Might end up in 5, where 3NT is better, but might easily have a lay down or very good slam.

Bar Tarnovski (ISR) WIM: 4

If system is natural ( 3d/h over 3– natural ) so I would bid 4would try for slam .

another thing to mention. if 3is 7 clubs 100% ( by system ) – I might find a reason to shot for a slam if range is limited. in my system I would thing Grand is possible after 3bid.

The key question revolves around our follow-up agreements on 2. In particular, to what an extent does 3limit partner’s range within the 2range. In my agreements, as 2 precludes the possession of 4, a 2response assumes two functions:

    i. Default.

    ii. Maximum.

Consequentially, a 3 response accounts primarily for minimal hands, with a good club holding.

If partner has significant wastage in clubs, slam is virtually impossible. Therefore, in order for slam to make, partner must possess Kxxxxxx in clubs. Even so, quite a bit is required considering the fact that Hx in spades is virtually precluded.

Expressing any doubt regarding 3N, let alone bidding 4Cx, would most likely see us playing 5Cx, which is certainly the inferior game.

 Conclusion: 3NT.

Adam Stokka (SWE) 3

Jeff Rubens (USA) 4