Recap Of 11/10/2014 28 Board IMP Individual

Lots of interesting hands, but only 2 double digit swings.  Due to time crunch, I’m not going to recap as many hands as usual, so it will be a shorter blog than normal.

Bidding, play and defense came into play on the swing hands this time, so IMP swings weren’t simply a ‘bidding judgment’ issue, as they often are.  The first double digit swing came on Board 2.

The bidding started the same at both tables, but South’s rebid over partner’s balancing 1♥ call made all the difference.  At my table, the auction ended with 1♠, while at the other table, the 1NT call by South was raised to 2NT, reraised to 3NT and 9 tricks were there for +600 for teammates vs. -110 for us.  Win 10 IMPs.

Here, as East, I failed to appreciate my Jacks, and 4-3-3-3 is always a disappointment.  However, partner’s 6=3=3=1 shape proved exceptionally useful and with the lead of the ♦K, 12 tricks were quickly there.  At the other table, North opened 1♦, and the opponents holding my cards soon got to the spade game, but when they scored less than 12 tricks, we ‘only’ lost 9 IMPs.  I’m not usually a timid bidder, but clearly the blame is all on me for this one.

 

The contract (and, I think, bidding) was the same at both tables and the initial play started out the same – lead singleton ♦10 (♦Q, ♦A, ruff, club to ♣A with ♣Q falling from declarer’s hand, looking like a singleton).  At this point, double dummy, the hand can no longer be made.  At my table, declarer ruffed a club, ‘finessed’ hearts, ruffed another club and eventually lost control, allowing partner to ruff a spade for the setting trick.  Communication between the hands is challenging.  Our teammate (Chris),  playing 4♥ at the other table cashed the ♥A at trick 5.  When the ♥K fell under the ♥A, he had hope.  He drew trump and led the ♠Q.  When that was covered, he was home because he can reenter his hand with the ♠J and then ruff out the ♠10 while he still has a trump to ruff a club back to his hand and cash winners.  If the ♠K is not covered, the transportation isn’t there to run 10 tricks.  Based on the fall of the ♣Q and partner’s encouraging club card when clubs were led at trick 4, it looks like declarer might be 4=4=4=1.  If so, even if the ♠Q is a Chinese finesse (lacking the ♠J), it is not necessary to cover and it proved to be fatal to cover the ♠Q.

But, if declarer is 3=4=5=1 holding ♠Qxx and ♦Jxxxx, failure to cover the ♠Q is the only way to allow the hopeless game to make!  Bridge can be a tough game.  The size of the diamond that partner led at trick 3 for the ruff is not a count card, it is the lowest diamond saying ‘lead clubs’ after you ruff this diamond trick, so there is no way I know of for South to signal count in diamonds.  Win 12 lucky IMPs.

Here, I got to the ‘obvious’ contract which happened to be cold against any defense.  Except I am playing it doubled.  The bidding was the same at the other table except for the final double.  I managed -500 when Manfred mistakenly played the wrong card at trick 1 and allowed my ♥10 to win.  All I need to do is lead a club to the ♣9 and I am home with 8 tricks, +380.  And, had Manfred correctly won the ♥J at trick 1, shifting to spades at trick 2, I am still good for 7 tricks if I get the clubs right.  I think I should have gotten clubs right, based on the double, but I can blame some confusion on the ‘impossible’ ♥10 winning trick 1 and not knowing what is going on.  That is a lame excuse.  Manfred has to hold the ♣K for his double of 1NT.  If he has the ♣J too (so that my ♣9 loses to the ♣J), I can still get to dummy later with the ♦A to lead the now singleton ♣Q to finesse the ♣K, so that I am still making 7 tricks if he started with ♣KJx.  Our teammates were disappointed, when they picked up +300 and lost 5 IMPs!  Their declarer didn’t have the early warning from the penalty double, so they played clubs normally and ended up with only their top 4 tricks.  But, having been warned by the double, I should have made it.  Lose 5 IMPs instead of win 12.

I guess I have time for one more hand.

This one was a push.  Also a comedy.  But 12 easy IMPs were available for the side that managed to defeat the hopeless spade game.  Both defenses let the contract through for +620 at both tables and a push, no IMPs for either team.  The defense collects the first 4 tricks after a heart lead, diamond to the ♦A and then another heart lead for 2 more hearts.

How does partner know to chose hearts over clubs?  Beats me.  But read on.

Leads are important.  I have mentioned the Lead Captain program for many months.  However, for this lead, I didn’t bother running the program because the principle was spelled out in David Bird’s book.  That is, amazingly often, you do not want to lead the A from Axx(x) in a suit partner bid.  Sometimes declarer holds the key missing high cards and your high card can be better used later.  On this hand against 4♠, the ♦A was led at the other table and the lucky lie of the cards meant the contract can no longer go down, since the fall of the club suit allows a heart discard.

There has been a lot written about what to lead from xxx.  Some lead high to show lack of interest, some low to show lack of a doubleton and some lead middle to try to blend those 2 messages together (referred to as MUD leads).  I pretty much always lead low unless I supported the suit and want to tell partner I have nothing in a suit that I bid.  This time Jerry chose the ♥7.  Partner, believing that it was a doubleton, won, cashed the ♥A and led the 3rd round for the ruff…that never came.  So, with only 2 heart losers and 1 diamond loser, 10 tricks were there.

At my table, partner and I were pretty aggressive in the bidding.  There is much more in the literature about direct takeout doubles (followup bids after the initial double), but little mention of the strength required to raise, double raise or triple raise a response to a balancing double of a 1 bid.  Dan’s decision to triple raise, holding the East cards, is from some book I haven’t yet read.  Sorry Dan.

With my partner making ‘only’ a double raise of my 1♠ bid, it left room for South (Bob Pastor) to stick in a lead director bid of 4♥!  I should have passed, because they have no where to go and partner would hopefully have doubled them, whether they attempted 4♥ on their 3-3 fit, or went on to 5♦.  Either way, they were doomed for a large penalty once the 4♥ bid was made.  But I took them off the hook by bidding the spade game holding very modest values.  So, lots of strange bidding and problematic leads resulted in a vulnerable game coming home at both tables.