Recap Of 11/18/2015 28 Board IMP Individual

Wow, has it really been 4 months since we last played?  August involved a mostly miserable performance in Chicago, then I was busy, then I was gone two months, so we finally had a 2-table game Wednesday, 11/18.

During all of this time, since I last posted a blog 4 months ago, there have been horrible developments of cheating scandals that have rocked the bridge world.  I’m greatly saddened to learn how pervasive cheating has been for a very very long time.  Words escape me.

But, back to the blog.  For once, almost all of the big swings went my way.  There were six double digit swings.  I can’t say they were earned, but here they come…

Board 4

Two things going on here with my double of 5♥.  One – it may have been our hand, they may have seriously misjudged, and I am tired of collecting 100, 200, 300 when 200, 500, 800 is available (and, it seems like I do have 1 trick on defense that I might not have!).  Two – the double might have the effect of throwing declarer off the right track, whether it should accomplish that or not.  Here, # two came into play.  As you can see, if declarer gets the rounded suits right (both kings are in the slot, in front of the AQ), 12 tricks are there.  Our teammates only collected +500 vs. 4♠X, so if our opponents score 12 tricks without being doubled, -680/+500 we lose 5 IMPs.  But, since I doubled, if they score 12 tricks, it becomes -1150 vs. +500, lose 12 IMPs!  So, in theory, the seemingly bad double that I made will cost 7 IMPs extra.  But, in reality, both kings were misguessed and the resulting -1, +200 combined with our teammates +500 to win 12 IMPs vs. losing 4-5 IMPs had 5♥, undoubled, been made.  What happened?

Partner, of course, led their singleton ♦8.  Declarer, ducked in dummy, winning the ♦9 in hand.  Fearful of losing a heart finesse, followed by an underlead in spades that would then result in a ruff in diamonds, declarer simply banged down the ♥A, then a small heart to my ♥K.  I was in and led my ♠Q, thinking I would tap dummy with a second round of spades, not that that would do any good.  But partner (Mike Schneider), seeing what is going on, overtook my ♠Q with the ♠K and led the ♣2.  Declarer is now at the crossroads with a two way finesse for the ♣K – either insert the ♣Q now (to pitch one of the losing spades and then ruff the other), or take a ruffing finesse in clubs by leading the ♣Q after winning the ♣A, playing me for the ♣K.

But here, there is an easy clue.  Since I showed declarer the ♠Q, there are too few HCP left for partner if they do not hold the ♣K.  That is, if they did not hold the ♣K, it would mean they opened on 8 HCP and then bid again freely at the 4 level with the same 8 HCP and only a 5 card spade suit (I have to hold 4 spades for my jump raise).  Even if I don’t show the ♠Q, partner still has to have the ♣K to have his bids.  But, declarer, not thinking along these lines, decided that I had my bid (I did double 5♥), so he played the ruffing finesse, and lost 3 tricks.  A lucky down 1.

Board 8

Virtually all players that I play with/against play Smolen.  Smolen applies in a failed Stayman auction (you bid clubs, partner bids diamonds).  Playing Smolen, when you hold 5-4 in the majors and partner denies a 4 card major, you introduce your 4 card major at the 3 level, game forcing, implying 5 cards in the other major (with 6 in the other major, you transfer at the 4 level).  It allows you to have the effect of the transfer when that is what you want to do.  After the Smolen bid, the NT opening bidder gets to place the contract, either in NT, or choose a suitable major (even the 4-3 fit if that is what they judge to be best, but now the contract with the 4-3 fit would be wrong sided).  For some reason, Manfred chose to not answer Stayman with the normal 3♦, so Smolen was not available and they played a quiet (successful) 3NT.

Here, the singleton ♥7 vs. 3NT at my table gave away my ♥Q10 and brought declarer to 11 tricks (when South was endplayed out of the ♦K at trick 12), -460.  Our teammates arrived in the unfortunate spade slam when only game was available,  going down 2, -100, lose 11 IMPs.  What happened?  

Here, Bruce was thinking the diamond bid was a punt, essentially a relay/transfer back to spades, allowing partner (strong hand) to finally become declarer in 4♠, since no one had bid spades yet.  If Bruce bids 4♠ as a signoff, he becomes declarer.  With Mark’s monster hand, he wanted to express slam interest for spades over the Smolen 3♥ bid by cue bidding 4♣.  When Mark heard the 4♦ bid, he took that as showing the ♦K and, had that been right, a slam would have been reached that likely had decent play.  But not today.  Clearly the 2♣ opening bid is blessed with 24 prime HCP including all 5 key cards, but with 3=3=4=3, there were not enough tricks with 2 club losers and 1 heart loser in a spade contract.

Board 12

 

Here, a significant variance in the auction resulted in my team playing a contract at both tables.  After the same first 3 bids at both tables, Bruce (my teammate at the other table) in 4th seat and holding 9 cards in the suits that had already been bid by the opponents decided he would introduce his beefy four card spade suit at the one level.  With this bid, he undoubtedly tied the course record for introducing a new suit after the opponents have already bid suits that accounted for 9 out of the 13 cards held in hand.  He soon found himself in the phantom sacrifice bid of 5♠, but when the dust had cleared, he was chalking up +650, win 12 IMPs, since I was down one in 5♦, -50.

We had a quiet uncontested auction to, I think, a normal 5♦.  Although the ♣K is in the slot, it is not possible to draw trump, get to dummy twice, finesse clubs twice, ruff a club, and then reenter declarer’s hand to cash clubs.  So, a spade, a diamond and a club must be lost in 5♦, -1.

What happened in 5♠?  The singleton ♥Q lead trivially defeats 5♠, assuming the defense wins the ♥A, provides the heart ruff, and then scores a club trick at some point.  However, the opening lead was the ♦A which was ruffed.  After cashing the ♠AK, declarer led a club.  Upon winning the club, it would seem that the ♦Q could hardly be wrong.  But West tried the ♥Q (the ♥Q had been destined to score the setting trick later in the hand).  Declarer, who was going to finesse against the ♥Q (by leading the ♥J and letting it ride), now had the whole heart suit solid only losing the ♥A (and the club trick) to score 11 tricks and make 5♠!

Board 17

Technically not a double digit swing, but it felt like one to me.  Diamonds were played at both tables, 11 tricks at both tables when a trump was not led (since there are two black aces and 9 cross ruff trump tricks with all 9 trumps scoring separately).  But at my table, the contract was 5♦X and at the other table, they stopped in 3♦.  5♦ was bid over 4♠ which was going down.  We have 4 top tricks to cash (2 diamonds to go with our 2 black aces) and at least one more in the wash, since declarer can’t handle the 4-1 trumps along with uneven club/heart splits.  So, yet another phantom sacrifice turned into a making game!  What about the bidding?

I certainly prefer a 6 card suit to come into a live auction at the 2 level, but since LHO might hold only 2 clubs, I felt my offense potential (5-5) warranted a 2♦ call.  With the ♦J now likely useless, North’s opening bid has been reduced to an aceless 11 HCP.  Even though reversing values may become slightly less in a pinch in a competitive auction, it seems to me that the principles of a reverse are still in force in this situation.  Nevertheless, North rebid 2♠ and South, seemingly also expecting a substantial hand opposite, bounced to the hopeless spade game.  But, my partner was there for them, balancing with 5♦.  South, presumably still expecting a substantial North hand, decided it was time to double.  But, as noted above, on the spade lead, 11 tricks were there for the taking when South was unable to overruff as dummy ruffed clubs.  Since 11 tricks requires scoring all trumps separately, a trump lead beats 5♦, but the contract also goes down after 3 rounds of hearts which brings the ‘worthless’ ♦J into play.  The ♦J will either be an overruff trick at trick 3, or, if declarer ruffs high, North discards a spade and will later score a spade overruff with the ♦J.

So, +550 for making 5♦X, vs. -150 for 11 tricks in the part score resulted in winning 9 IMPs.

Board 21

I don’t know if my partner’s double affected the auction or not (causing our opponents to stay low at our table).  With both of the pointed kings in the slot, 12 tricks become easy in 6NT with a spade lead, even with the bad club split – 2+0+7+3.  A heart lead also makes 12 notrump tricks easy (with the diamond finesse on).  But, this is not really a great slam, offering no play if the diamond finesse loses.  Still, bidding a slam on a finesse isn’t crazy.  But, with the spade lead vs. NT, you need 2 finesses (spade and diamond, which both happen to work on this hand).  And with a heart lead vs. a diamond slam, you need the diamond finesse plus you need the hand with the ♥A to not hold 5 clubs.  Here, there were 5 clubs with the ♥A, but the club ruff was not found and the diamond slam came home.  

So, at my table, we defended 3NT on a spade lead.  Declarer finessed spades, finessed diamonds, then claimed 13 tricks unless clubs didn’t split, so only 12 total tricks.  We were -490.  Our teammates, avoided the club ruff after a trump lead (?) against the slam, so they scored +920 for their diamond slam, winning 10 IMPs.

Board 27

This is an awkward hand to bid, play and defend.  Both tables arrived in 4♥ by South.  I scored 10 tricks for +420 and our teammates scored 5 tricks for +100, win 11 IMPs.

I have a rather minimum responding hand, and the value goes down with my ♦Q being doubtful.  However, partner has clearly made a forcing bid of 3♠ and I have to choose.  3NT or 4♥?  Both contracts, double dummy, are due 10 tricks, but if I bid 3NT (not knowing partner’s diamond strength), I thought I could lose the first 5-6 tricks before I got started.  So, I placed the contract in 4♥.  The diamond lead seemed natural given that the suit was bid and raised, but it made my handling of the diamond suit much easier.  No lead is especially effective or attractive.  No lead does better.  A diamond was led at both tables with the ♦Q winning trick 1 and a heart finesse at trick 2, losing to the ♥A, then a diamond return to the ♦A.  Both tables were the same through trick 3.

At this point, I crossed to the ♠A, finessed again in hearts getting the bad news about the 4-1 split.  Now I cashed the ♠K, ruffed a spade (when the ♠Q fell, I had a parking place for my last diamond on the ♠J).  Now I decided to try the ♣J to ‘finesse’ but when LHO showed out, there was no finesse.  I had to rise with the ♣A and lead the ♠J to throw my diamond while LHO ruffs.  They led a diamond, but I could ruff, draw the last trump and give up a club, but RHO only had a club to lead back to me at trick 13.  So, I won 2+4+2+2, losing 2 trump and the ♣K.  It might seem as though the defense can gain by ruffing when I lead the club.  But, they are ruffing air.  Then they can lead the ♦K to force me to ruff with dummy’s ♥K, setting up their ♥Q.  But that ruff takes care of my diamond loser, and now I can throw my one remaining losing club on the ♠J, leaving the defense with 3 trump tricks, but no other tricks.

What if a diamond isn’t led at trick 1?  Because of the trump length held by opening leader, a diamond appeals because diamonds were raised (!?) and perhaps it will be possible to tap out declarer and gain control of the hand.  No lead can beat best declarer play.  But, as opening leader, you sure hate to underlead a K at trick one only to see declarer win their Q while dummy remains with just the ace.  If you do not a diamond, then probably a spade is the next choice – how could a heart be right on this holding?!  Amazingly, leading any of the 13 cards result in 10 tricks for declarer.  You can even lead the impossible ♠Q or even ♥Q and still score 3 tricks for the defense, no overtricks for declarer!  Very strange hand.  But, I have played with Double Dummy Solver with many varied lines of defense and declarer play and nothing special needs to be done (such as you don’t need to finesse the ♠J in order to make the hand).

At the other table, in dummy at trick 3, declarer tried the effect of the ♥K at trick 4.  Not good.  I think they were thinking if trump are 3-2, lose 0+2+0+1 and arrive at 10 tricks after ruffing the last diamond with dummy’s last trump.  And maybe the club finesse will work.  When trumps were 4-1,  with the ♣K offside, things collapsed.  +420 vs. -100 resulted in win 11 IMPs.

 

I write this blog to learn, to review the causes of the largest IMP swings in the matches.  What can be learned from these?  

• 1 swing happened when the same contract with the same lead at both tables, but different declarer play.
• 1 was a decent slam (needed a finesse which worked, unlikely to go down, but could have been defeated as the cards lay) winning IMPs vs. 3NT.  
• 1 was a terrible slam, losing IMPs vs. 3NT
• 2 were phantom saves that were allowed to make
• 1 was a declarer play that went astray after my strange double

So, bidding judgment again played  a major role, but I think the actual swings were based more  on declarer play and defense.  That is what really drove the large swings for this session.  The bidding created the opportunity for the defense to win big, but often declarer won out.  All-in-all, pretty uneven play for the day.  And lucky results for me.