Bob Munson

Recap Of 6/21/2017 28 Board IMP Individual

In this week’s game, there were a total of 9 double digit swings, with 8 decided by successful/flawed bidding choices and only one decided by declarer play.

It all began on the first board…

 
1
None
North
N
Munson
109
A86
KQJ98652
 
W
Madalena
AJ875
Q10432
5
103
K
E
Bill
6
K95
KQ9742
A76
 
S
Gary
KQ432
AJ876
J103
 

 

W
Madalena
N
Munson
E
Bill
S
Gary
5
5
Dbl
All Pass
 
 
 

 

W
Dan
N
Bruce
E
Mark
S
Jack
5
All Pass
 

 

As dealer, non-vulnerable, it seems that the opening 5 bid is automatic and that was the bid at both tables.  Our teammates at the other table did not disturb that bid, so 5 bought the contract.  But, at my table, East decided to venture forth with 5 which was immediately doubled.  Holding 5-5 in the majors, West certainly thought there might be a better spot, but was fearful of picking the wrong major ( both majors were ‘wrong’! since South was also 5-5 in the majors, but hearts would have fared better), so with no where to run, E-W ended up in the ill-fated 5X contract.

The defense started with the K, won in dummy with the A.  At this point, declarer should play a diamond off dummy and start to extract some trump.  Instead, they ruffed a spade and led a heart up to the Q, which was ruffed.  Then, North led the K and the A was ruffed out, A cashed, another heart ruff, top club cashed, and a club ruff while declarer follows suit.  Then yet another heart ruff with the A and another club was led – declarer was growing weary at this point (only one trump was outstanding) so they can simply ruff high (K) and then their hand is high, all trump played from the top.  But when declarer actually ruffed low, partner scored yet another club ruff with the J.  All told the defense got one high club, the A, and all 6 of their diamonds, one at a time, for -6, +1400.  The quiet 5 contract at the other table failed by 2 tricks for +100 and 17 IMPs to start the day.  A good start to the day, but many bad results lay ahead for me.

For interested readers, there is a bit of a back story to the 5 bid.  Just a couple of weeks prior to this hand, a different hand occurred which plants the seeds of ‘are the opponents stealing this hand when we should be playing it instead?’  If you want to read more about that episode, I posted the hand here:  http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/grand-theft-larceny/?cj=508795#c508795

East, who bid 5 on today’s hand, was involved with this ‘theft’ that was reported in bridgewinners.  After the hand, I asked him if he was thinking about the hand reported in bridgewinners and he acknowledged that, yes, he was.

 
2
N-S
East
N
Munson
96532
AJ2
K4
732
 
W
Madalena
AQ10
1086
J865
QJ5
A
E
Bill
8
Q9
AQ109732
1084
 
S
Gary
KJ74
K7543
AK96
 

 

W
Madalena
N
Munson
E
Bill
S
Gary
4
Dbl
Pass
4
All Pass
 

 

W
Dan
N
Bruce
E
Mark
S
Jack
3
Dbl
5
Dbl
All Pass
 

 

And here we are, board 2, the very next hand, and most of the IMPs go back the other way.  Again, an opening preempt (which is designed to make the opponents guess) was involved.  At the other table, a seemingly normal 3 preempt was doubled and West, with a 4-3-3-3 balanced hand, decided to further the preempt by bouncing to 5.  North doubled 5 to end the auction.  The four card trump fit opposite the preempt can be powerful, but 3-3-3 in the side suits can produce lots of losers.  Plus, queens, are rarely helpful when partner preempts (because, by the time a queen is useful, partner is out of the suit and can ruff it).  But, those same queens can often provide tricks when playing defense  (when both opponents are short in diamonds, they often have length in all of the remaining suits).  Against 5 the opponents can cash their two ace kings for down 2, and then it is  a matter of declarer deciding to finesse for the K or play for the drop.  Declarer decided to play for the drop and ended up down 3, -500.  Still that result would have been a good save against 4 making.  However phantom saves (when you sacrifice against a contract that was not going to make) can be especially costly.  At our table, my 4 game failed by a trick.  Obviously, looking at all of the hands, I could have made my game.  However, I played the hand that preempted to be shorter in hearts (he was) and odds were for the hand longer in hearts to hold the Q (he didn’t).  So, I lost a heart and with AQT over the KJ, there were 3 spade tricks to lose for -1 in my 4 contract, -100 paired with -500, lose 12 IMPs.

I’m not sure what inspired Bill to try the opening preempt of 4 vs. 3 (perhaps the -1400 on the prior board?), but it is often good practice to mix up your preempts to keep the opponents guessing.  In this case, Bill’s partner was not tempted to further the preempt, so I arrived in the normal 4 contract, failing.  On a different day (give the J to me instead of dummy) and I would be scoring +620.  Or, on a really different day, perhaps my hand would try 5 over the advance save of 5 and fail.  That is when the advance sacrifices really pay off – before the opponents get a chance to bid their game, you are already at the 5 level and they guess to try to make 5 spades when only 10 tricks are available.  Bruce was not tempted to bid on and simply doubled the 5 bid.

 
5
N-S
North
N
Munson
Q765
103
J983
Q107
 
W
Mark
K
AKQJ97
Q104
863
6
E
Jack
AJ1043
865
AK2
K9
 
S
Madalena
982
42
765
AJ542
 

 

Mark
Jack
1NT
4
4
6
All Pass

 

Bruce
Dan
1NT
2
2
4
All Pass

Here two different evaluations (slam invite, slam force) by the West hand had a curious end result.  At my table, holding no tenaces (thus, no need to declare and get a lead into your honors), a Gerber ace asking bid followed by bidding the slam left declarer with a dummy exposed to the opening lead.  To me, the auction suggested an aggressive lead, so I was going to be leading from a black queen.  Which one?  I’m not sure what David Bird would choose, but when I ran Lead Captain (not sure I ran it correctly), it was a tossup.  So, I mentally tossed a coin and it came up … spades.  Wrong!  A club lead beats the slam as long as partner plays the required J, but this club lead is only effective if West is declarer.  With East as declarer, the 6 contract, as the cards lay, is cold.  With my spade lead, declarer had sufficient entries  (due to 2-2 trump) to draw trump, establish spades for a club discard (with another club going on the A), so 12 tricks were there, -980.

Meanwhile, our teammates tried a Jacoby invitational auction (in conjunction with Texas transfers, a Jacoby 2 transfer to 2 followed by a jump 4 promises 6 trump, sets hearts as trump, and is a mild slam try).  The player that opened 1NT is to look at their hand in the context of that invitation and decide whether to advance to slam or pass and play game.  Holding all primes (aces and kings), 3 card trump support, and a side 5 card suit – this hand appears to me to be a clear slam acceptance.  That 5th spade turned out to be the crucial 12th trick, but when only game was bid, +480, lose 11 IMPs.

 
10
Both
East
N
Munson
73
J102
Q10632
972
 
W
Dan
QJ
Q765
A9
J1085
4
E
Gary
AK9852
AK
J4
KQ3
 
S
Mark
1064
9843
K85
A64
 

 

Dan
Gary
2
2
2
3
4
4NT
51
6
All Pass
(1) 0-3 keycards

 

Bill
Bruce
2
2
2
3
4
All Pass
 

 

Here again, Dan is making the crucial slam decision on this hand with an identical auction up through 4.  Here, to my dismay, this time he took the aggressive route (thinking that ‘if partner can open 2 then I have enough to go on’).  I think he was right.  The QJ in trump and A have to be huge slam cards.  Hopefully the Q or J will combine with partner’s hand in some useful way – as it turns out, both the Q and J were crucial to making the slam cold.  In any case, the collection of assets seem worthy of a continuation over 4.  At the time, Bill thought ‘Bruce can’t cue bid between 3 and 4‘ but that isn’t possible with a 2 opening bid.

The play becomes slightly awkward after a diamond lead, but since there was no diamond lead, 12 tricks were easy with a diamond discard on the Q (which is what you would also do if a diamond were led at trick 1, you would just have to win the A, cash the AK, cross to the QJ and then cash the Q discarding your diamond prior to drawing all of the trump).  Our teammates played the game, not pursuing slam.  -1430 vs. +680, lose 13 IMPs.

 
11
None
South
N
Munson
AJ
K83
K75
A8632
 
W
Dan
75
Q1072
A1083
Q109
7
E
Gary
8632
J4
J92
J754
 
S
Mark
KQ1094
A965
Q64
K
 

.

Munson
Mark
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
4NT
5
6
All Pass
 

 

Jack
Madalena
1
2
2
3
3NT
All Pass
 

 

Now, on the very next hand, after losing these slam swings, I decided to take the aggressive route, and so did my partner.  We contracted for 12 tricks when only 10 or 11 were there.  I was not proud of my 2 call with only 2 trump, but that kept the auction low and slow – in theory allowing us to probe for just the right game.  I considered 3 for my second call, but I rejected it.  I felt I was holding a good strong 1NT opening and had higher aspirations.  At the other table, the 3 choice of rebids resulted in a 3NT response from opener which ended the auction.  At my table, partner and I just kept bidding merrily along until all of a sudden we were ‘there’.  One of us should have finally put on the brakes, but momentum carried us all the way.

At the other table, the opponents managed 11 tricks in NT for -460 to go with our -50 (West rose with the A when given the chance, fearing a singleton was the basis of the 3 bid).  Lose 11 IMPs.

 
12
N-S
West
N
Munson
109762
K53
92
AQ9
 
W
Dan
A
AJ964
K54
KJ105
8
E
Gary
Q8
Q8
AQJ106
7432
 
S
Mark
KJ543
1072
873
86
 

 

Dan
Gary
1
21
3
3
3
3NT
4
5
6
All Pass
(1) Not meeting everybody’s requirements for game forcing 2/1

 

Bill
Bruce
1
1NT
2
3
3
5
All Pass
 

 

So, here we have this hand, the very next hand following our debacle on the prior board.  I guess the opponents were so mesmerized by our bidding on our prior deal that they decided to try some of it themselves!?!  Played by East, with South leading a club, 6 was not a success.  After taking Q, A and a club ruff, declarer still had the K to lose for down 3, +150.  Meanwhile, after not treating the East hand worthy of 2/1 game force, our teammates ‘right sided’ the diamond game.  The ‘effective’ club lead from South (that occurred at our table) is not nearly so effective for North vs. 5.  And, later in the hand when North wins the K, they STILL can’t lead clubs.  So, as declarer, West can score 5 diamonds, the A, a spade ruff in the short hand, and 4 heart tricks.  11 tricks.  Game bid and made.  +400 to go with our +150, win 11 IMPs.

 
19
E-W
South
N
Munson
AQ86
Q104
Q9852
4
 
W
Bill
KJ7
J52
103
QJ1083
Q
E
Mark
1095
7
AKJ64
K752
 
S
Bruce
432
AK9863
7
A96
 

 

W
Bill
N
Munson
E
Mark
S
Bruce
1
Pass
1
Dbl
RDbl1
2
4
All Pass
 
(1) Support redouble showing 3 card spade suit

 

W
Gary
N
Madalena
E
Jack
S
Dan
1
Pass
21
Pass
2
Pass
4
All Pass
 
(1) Not meeting everybody’s requirements for game forcing 2/1

This hand presented the only swing of the day that resulted from declarer play.  Double dummy, due to the favorable spade position, 11 tricks are available.  But, at my table, Bruce was focusing on getting his clubs ruffed and in the fullness of time, the J was promoted to a trick, losing 1 diamond, 1 heart and 1 spade.  At the other table, South played the same contract without the information about the minor suit oriented takeout double that happened at my table, but with the same lead.  I don’t know how, but South went down 1 at that table for +50 to go with our +420 to win 10 IMPs.

 
23
Both
South
N
Munson
K
10987642
KQ
KQ4
 
W
Jack
A108654
Q
AJ53
93
A
E
Dan
Q9
AKJ53
42
A1082
 
S
Bill
J732
109876
J765
 

 

W
Jack
N
Munson
E
Dan
S
Bill
Pass
1
2
Pass
Pass
Dbl
Pass
Pass
RDbl
Pass
3
Dbl
All Pass

 

W
Madalena
N
Mark
E
Gary
S
Bruce
Pass
1
2
All Pass
 

 

With negative doubles played pretty universally, players still have to find a way to extract a penalty double when it becomes available.  The opponents at my table had no trouble (although it is possible that pursuit of the game bonus in 3NT could provide a more profitable outcome).  Here, with my partner void, he hoped there would be a safer place to land than 2X, so he tried a redouble.  I bid my longest suit and we played 3X in our 4-3 fit.  I could only manage 6 tricks, losing -800.  Defending against 2, when a high heart crashed partner’s Q on defense, our teammates could only manage their 3 aces and 3 heart tricks for -1, undoubled, +100.  Double dummy, I was scheduled for -1400 in 3X, but -800 was still pretty painful.  Double dummy, 3NT by East has 10 tricks, but actual play/defense might have been a different result.  So, two significant bidding problems were faced by E-W on this hand.  Should East pursue 3NT or make a penalty pass, hoping partner reopens with a double?  If East passes, should West reopen with a double holding meager support for clubs?  Both Easts passed (less than optimal on this hand, but taking the sure plus is often winning bridge).  Even though they do hold 2 aces, only one West chose to reopen with the double.  In any case, +100 was a paltry score with the E-W holdings, and paired with our -800, lose 12 IMPs.

 
28
N-S
West
N
Munson
AQ6
73
AJ8763
65
 
W
Bruce
103
J108
Q954
AQ104
2
E
Gary
J742
Q2
102
KJ092
 
S
Jack
K985
AK9654
K
73
 

 

Munson
Jack
1
1
2
2
31
3
3
4
42
5
All Pass
 
(1) Not liking this bid, but bidding clubs, hearts spades or NT at this point seem more misdirected
(2) Now I should have tried 4H

.

Dan
Bill
1
1
1NT
4
All Pass
 

 

And, ending on board 28, the last hand of the day, the carnage continues.  This was all about bidding. After opening 1 I can’t say that a 1NT rebid even occurred to me.  I’m well prepared for a spade lead, but my clubs are certainly lacking and my diamonds aren’t quite ready to run in NT, so this seemed more like a suit oriented hand to me.  As you can see from the footnotes in the bidding, partner and I ended up on different wave lengths as the auction progressed.  He could have bid 4 over my 3 and I should have bid 4 over his 4.  Our temporary landing spot of 4 has some chances, but the defense will certainly prevail.  We had to get to 4 but we didn’t.  The less revealing auction at the other table resulted in no club lead, so a club was quickly discarded on the  A and 11 tricks were made, -650.  At our table, they took their two clubs to start and their 2 trump tricks later, -2, -200, lose 13 IMPs.

How about anybody else?  Does a 1NT rebid look right?  If 2♦ is your rebid, then what do you bid over 2?  Certainly 3 sounded like I had a 7th diamond and/or the Q.  If I had held the Q instead of the Q, 5 would have had decent chances.  But I did not, so 5 had no chance.

That’s all folks.


3 Comments

Bob RichardsonJune 24th, 2017 at 3:08 pm

#28 – I like 2D. After Jack’s 3H bid a 4H call, rather than 3S seems clear. Your prime values with no body is better suited for a suit contract rather than the 3NT contract you were urging partner to bid with your 3S call.

LarryJune 24th, 2017 at 3:36 pm

Although the honors look like a suit oriented hand, I would rebid 1NT since I don’t have a singleton. Later, raise hearts with a doubleton after responder rebids hearts.

bobmunsonJune 24th, 2017 at 9:39 pm

Larry/Bob, thanks for the feedback. Clearly I mangled the auction and almost any alternative sequence has prospects of a better result.
RE: bidding 4H over 3H – clearly correct if 3H showed a 6 card suit. I wasn’t sure – perhaps I should have been, but I wasn’t sure. Thus, I pursued the 4-3 spade fit (not trying for 3NT, but still just exploring). Certainly over 4D, 4H should have been my bid. And, as you suggest, perhaps 4H over 3H is even more direct. I just wasn’t sure of the 6 card suit.

Leave a comment

Your comment