Recap of 2/10/2014 28 board IMP individual

I have spent an insane amount of time (getting ready for local GNT events) over the past 2 weeks reading and rereading the amazing books (one on suit contracts and one on NT) on opening leads by David Bird.  For those who have not read these books, there is lots to learn.  Today I proved I was a slow learner, where the right lead, by the book, would have been far better than my feeble attempt at an opening lead.

The lead challenges begin on the very first board.  David Bird has many strong recommendations and they include items that have largely been heresy in prior books on recommended opening leads.  Doubletons are far down the list of recommended leads and suits that contain jacks – either length or shortness are also on the list of ‘don’t try this at home’.  Here, I am certain Bird’s extensive modeling would have determined that the best opening lead is the ♦J.

Board 1

At the other table, East actually got in a heart bid and, rather than lead partner’s suit, West (Bob Pastor) led the ♦J.  As you can see, the ♦J was quite effective.

At my table, hearts were not bid, so my heart length, headed only by ♥QJT suggests that by the time I get a trick set up, they will be ruffing hearts, so look elsewhere (read diamonds).  The book doesn’t begin to suggest that their leads always work, just that a given lead on 5000 hands is effective more often than another lead.  No one gets to hold the same hand 5000 times in a lifetime, so having a computer to run the numbers and a book to recap the results has been great.  Now if I could just remember the principles when I am on lead!

Actually, the diamond lead wasn’t necessary to defeat the contract.  Upon winning the ♥A at trick 1 and noting the fall of the ♥K, you can see zero future in hearts.  A club return, shortening declarer’s clubs, coupled with a club after winning the second round of spades will leave declarer a trick short.  He is unable to enjoy all the clubs and will lose 4 tricks total on that defense.  The diamond lead only achieved -1 at the other table, so we could have pushed the board in spite of my inferior heart lead, but we didn’t.  The club return at trick 2 into dummy’s strong clubs proved too difficult for partner to find.  4♠ making 5, vs. 4♠ down 1, lose 11 IMPs.  The point is, on this hand, a diamond lead made the defense very easy after trick 1.  Declarer is never making the hand after a diamond lead.

Board 4

I felt my playing strength warranted carrying on to game, since partner felt he could bid freely at the 3 level.  Double dummy, any non-spade lead with subsequent best defense/declarer play will defeat 4♥.  Somehow the other table played 4♦ and made 5, +150.  So, if our 4♥ comes home we are winning 10 IMPs.  After the ♠A lead, the contract is cold.  But declarer has to play carefully.  Trick 2 saw a club go to the ♣K and ♣A.  The ♥J at trick 3 was won by the ♥A and a diamond shift was won in hand.  Now pard must play a small heart and life is good.  Actually, 8 of the remaining 9 cards in the hand can be led at this point and bring home 10 tricks with best play.  But pard placed the ♥10 on the table and when LHO showed out, he ducked.  After winning the ♥Q, the ♠K tapped dummy and the ♥7 was promoted into the setting trick.  This result was actually a 16 IMP swing, since we lost 6 (-100, -150) instead of winning 10 IMPs.

Board 7 

The same bidding at the other table, except that the Stayman 2♣ bid was doubled for the lead.

I was dummy and Mike Schneider was in charge of bringing this home at my table.  My double dummy program says no lead can beat the hand  It sure looks like 2 spade losers and 2 diamond losers in spite of the friendly lie of the clubs and the ♥K in the slot.  

In any case, a club was led (as requested via the double of Stayman) at the other table, with declarer now knowing he has a strong ♣10 in his hand.  Upon winning trick 1, a high spade (or the ♦J or ♦10) must be led at trick 2 in order to make the hand against best defense.  Declarer did lead the ♠J, covered by the ♠K and the ♠A won as South followed with the ♠2.  Double dummy, the only lead (from dummy at trick 3) that can now bring in 10 tricks is a heart to finesse the ♥K.  Instead declarer led a spade at trick 3 to the ♠9, losing to the ♠10.  Another club followed, declarer winning the ♣10.  Now ♣K, ruffed by North (second trick) and a diamond ducked to the ♦Q (third trick for the defense).  Now a club lead by South promotes partner’s lone remaining spade (♠8) into the setting trick.  When a club wasn’t led at this point, 10 tricks came home, since declarer could now draw trump and had the ♦J/10 to finesse against the ♦K with North and another finesse against the ♥K with South, both working and a trump left in dummy to ruff a heart (or pitch the heart on the 13th diamond).  So, there were missed opportunities to make the hand followed by missed opportunities to defeat the hand which left my team -620.

Moving back to my table against the opening lead of the ♥10 which was covered all around.  The ♠J was led at trick 2 and held.  Now, amazingly, a high diamond, a high club (giving up the winning club 10!?!?) or a high heart can be led at trick 3 and make the hand against best defense.  In fact, the ♠Q was led at trick 3 (hoping for the doubleton ♠10 offside), but when the ♠Q was covered and RHO showed out, the hand could no longer be made.  The end result was that declarer lost 2 spades and 2 diamonds.

Basically, successful declarer play may be double dummy.  I haven’t really been able to sort out what card combinations are covered by the successful declarer line of play.  That is, could a more likely card holding for the opponents torpedo what would be the only winning line of play on this particular layout?  Or, is the winning line of play on this hand a ‘best’ line of play?  I don’t know.

To make the hand against best defense, you have to strip hearts from dummy/declarer and strip clubs from the north hand (you don’t need the seemingly valuable ♣10!).  Then throw North in on the 3rd round of diamonds with the ♦K (while establishing the 13th diamond in dummy).  North would have only a long heart and spades left and whatever they get out with after winning the ♦K, declarer has an answer.  Instead, we lose 12 IMPs against the game making at the other table and down 1 at mine.

Board 10

Oops

I envisioned a more useful hand such as ♠xx ♥xxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx that would never jump to 3♥ but might be able to make 3♥.  And, if pard is a little better than that, could reasonably have a shot at a red game (you know, never bring back a red 170 to your teammates).  So, I bumped pard’s 2♥ response to 3♥ and bought the contract.  Pard had to play it.  Trick 1 South led the ♣2 (a spade lead can ensure -3).  If declarer ducks the club and stays away from drawing any more than one round of trump (after eventually winning the ♣A), he can get out for -200.  But, playing hearts and more hearts after dummy gained the lead resulted in -300.  This didn’t IMP well against our teammates who ventured a 3NT by North, -1 (-100), winning 1+1+3+3.  Lose 9 IMPs.  My fault, too aggressive.  Mercifully we were not doubled.  Still, if I don’t bid 3♥, we were losing 7 IMPs (if pard goes -200 in only 2♥) against 3NT -1, so, while it is embarrassing to lose -300 on a voluntarily bid contract, it didn’t cost that many extra IMPs.

Board 11

I don’t know the auction at the other table, but they stopped short of game and played safely to make it, for -140 for our teammates.  I felt I had too much playing strength to pass and this isn’t my idea of a weak 2 bid, so I opened 1♠.  Using the rule of 20, I have 21, but 3 of those HCPs are in a pair of singletons.  I don’t think that is what the rule of 20 had in mind when it was invented, but nevertheless, I began with 1♠.  After the limit or better cue bid by partner, I was easily going to game.  The only question became could they gather in their 3 aces, since the cards were so friendly for me as declarer.  After I won the spade lead at trick 1 in hand, I led the ♦J, won by the ♦A.  When spades were continued, I could win the ♠A in dummy, pitch my ♣Q on the ♦K, take the heart finesse and, when the ♥J was covered by the ♥Q, I made 5, win 7 IMPs.  If the heart isn’t covered, I only make 4♠, but at that point I was always making the hand.  Cool hand proving the adage, 6-5 come alive.

Board 12

The hazards of an individual movement…

There was an extensive email discussion in the bay area this week about the merits of opening 1♣/1♦ when 4=4 in the minors.  The arguments to ‘always’ open 1♣ seemed persuasive, so I was suckered in.  In the past I would likely have opened the stronger minor – in this case 1♦.  My 1♣ opener allowed the unusual NT to come into play and the preference to hearts resulted in the cold game being bid (against me at my table).  Meanwhile, our teammates had to deal with a 1♦ opener, so an unusual NT was not an option.  The auction didn’t go well.  South chose to pass at their first opportunity, and then try to make up ground by cue bidding spades at their second opportunity (after hearing partners powerful 2♥ call).  Later Jack Scott (whose partner bid 2♠) was asking me how I would take 2♠ in the context of their auction.  At first it sounded natural, but upon further thought, I now think South should have doubled 1♠ for penalty if they now want to play 2♠.  The pass over 1♠ seems pretty cautious.  But I now think, with that pass, 2♠ cannot be natural.  At their next turn to bid, South thought they would make up for lost time by making the 2♠ cue bid.  A 3♦ cue bid, it turns out, would have been safer (from misinterpretation), but all actions seem to suffer ambiguity when a simple raise to 3♥ or 4♥ would clarify to partner that you like hearts and have some modest supporting values that may prove useful.  In any case, 2♠ was taken as natural and passed out.

Play at my table went quickly.  Spurning the club finesse, declarer won the ♠A, cashed 3 rounds of hearts and started diamonds from the top, losing 2 diamonds and the ♣K for +620.  A fine result.  Due to the strength of dummy, our teammates were able to score +140 in 2♠, but that was still a loss of 10 IMPs.

Board 13

Wow!

At the other table, West did not act over 1NT and North was quickly and quietly in 4♠ undoubled, down 1 for -100 (1♠-1NT-4♠).  At my table, I thought they couldn’t make 3♦, so I doubled.  Chris thought I had a more useful hand and he not only bid the game, but redoubled for -400 and the loss of 7 IMPs.  It was an exciting hand.  I don’t get to see too many redoubled contracts!

One could hardly expect the North hand to sit for 3♦X.  Double dummy 3♦ always goes down, but the  successful defense includes getting rid of all of my clubs on the ♣A and ♠AK so that I can score a second round club ruff.  Any other defense leads to 9 tricks.  Assuming I get rid of my clubs, declarer basically embarks upon a cross ruff and cannot be prevented from getting 8 tricks. The play/defense to 4♠X was easy enough, with East scoring their ♥J at trick 1, 2 high trumps and the ♣K.

At this point in the day I was -62 IMPs after 4 rounds (our event is 7 rounds, 4 boards per round, everyone is your partner once – except when we play on BBO where they have a very poor system for 2-table individual games with many repeat partners and missing partners that you never see).  Not a good start to the day, but didn’t think I had done much too awful.  My team was able to win the last 3 matches by modest amounts, so it wasn’t a hopeless day, but I still ended negative large IMPs on the day.

Board 20

Another wow

In our game, it is often asked ‘what do we play over their strong NT?’  With this partner, our system over NT was Meckwell, which I rarely use (I prefer Woolsey).  At the recently completed Phoenix Nationals, I was kibitzing the Senior KO final.  Board 32, the final board of the afternoon session, Rodwell had to deal with a very strong playing hand with hearts after RHO (Carolyn Lynch) opened 1NT.  Typically, a Meckwell double of a strong NT is announced as showing 1 minor, both majors or strong spades.  But, it appeared (to me) that Eric Rodwell had added another dimension to the ‘system’ (I don’t know where or if it is documented?) – the double of a strong NT can also be a strong single suited heart hand, in which case you rebid 3♥ over partner’s 2♣ (semi-forced response to the double).  The reason I think that must be part of the system is that Jeff Meckstroth, with a heart void and reasonable values elsewhere, diagnosed what Eric held (strong hand, hearts) and passed the double of 1NT with quite successful results.  Jeff and Eric scored +500 while a 4♥ overcall of 1NT at the other table went down 2.

Back to my hand.  I could have bid 2♥ (thought it was too strong for that), or 3♥ (thought it sounded too preemptive), so I came up with a double thinking that that is part of the ‘new Meckwell’.  Partner alerted and bid the required 2♣.  When I bid 3♥ next, he determined that I had a strong hand with both majors and bounced to the spade game.  My hand proved to be sufficiently suitable to play in spades that he was able to make 10 tricks in a spade contract!  Not what I had in mind, but any port in a storm.  East has a difficult lead, with all 13 cards quite unattractive.  He eventually settled on the ♣A, but, as it turns out, double dummy, he could lead any of the 13 cards and all result in 11 tricks for declarer.  Declarer was shooting for a sure 10 tricks and didn’t bother taking the heart finesse, so he only scored 10 tricks.  The other table played 3♥ and made their 9 tricks for a 10 IMP pickup for our team.  Again, double dummy, South is able to score 11 tricks in hearts (on any lead of any of the 13 cards from West!).  I don’t know the auction or play at the other table, but not being in game, the objective becomes ‘make your contract’ and they did.

Opening leads are sometimes fruitless (as noted above, where, double dummy, all 13 cards end with the same result, whether East is on lead against spades or West is on lead against hearts).  But, more often than not, opening leads are critical and a worthwhile topic of study.  At least that is what I believe.

Another point on this hand that is critical for all bridge partnerships – it is not enough to simply say ‘Meckwell’ or any other convention without discussing many many followup possibilities.  What if…?  What if…?  Here we landed on our feet, quite luckily.

The auction at the other table took a decidedly different turn when East felt (as I do) that 17 HCP  (mostly prime) plus the 5 card suit is too much for a 15-17 1NT.  When they opened only 1♣, the auction proceeded as follows:

North didn’t have much and, in response to the double, dutifully showed his spade suit, such as it was.  When partner showed a very strong hand with the 2♥ bid,  Of course 2♥ isn’t forcing, but in the context of the auction, North has some decent values (♥JTx is some pretty fine support).  The ♣K proved to be worthless and still 11 tricks are there to be had.

Board 22

South has a modest hand (12 HCP) with no aces.  Yet, it is a quite powerful 2 suited hand opposite an appropriate dummy.  North, with a hand quite suitable for play in clubs (all primes), decided that his strong diamond suit suggested that 3NT was the place to play and quickly ended the auction.

On lead again (against 3NT), I started thinking about David Bird.  How hard a lead is this?  Place the ♠Q on the table and receive an unblock or attitude card from partner and go from there.  However, without considering the power that the ♠9 brought to that lead of the ♠Q (sorry, I cannot explain my blind spot), I only thought about the spade bid on my right and the futility of pursuing spades.  Wrong!  I feel sure that David Bird’s simulation would dictate a club lead on this  auction without the ♠9.  But, the ♠Q is clearly the right lead with this holding, because the whole suit is so strong.  Had  I led the ♠Q, continuing spades will force declarer to finesse diamonds rather than attack hearts if they want to get their 9 tricks in NT.  Anyway, I led the ♣8, and when I won the ♥A, I belatedly shifted to the ♠Q.  Eventually declarer only scored 10 tricks in NT.  But 12 tricks in clubs proved quite easy to our teammates, so I still won 10 IMPs despite my miserable lead, due to their successful slam.  Thanks guys!  You got to a great slam.