Recap Of 1/13/2016 28 Board IMP Individual

Wow, I don’t think it was our best day of bridge for the group as a whole (I’m talking about all the hands, not just the ones reported on here).  Many potential swings (that didn’t happen because of similar errors at both tables) and other swings (not reported because they failed to clear the hurdle of double digits) were not pretty bridge.  And, on the 3 swings that did reach double digits, I lost them all!  Enough whining.  Onto the bridge.

Board 8

There was nothing to the lead or the play here – all of the action was in the bidding.  Perhaps the eventual NT ranges being shown was the biggest factor in this swing, or else the East’s view of the slam potential of the hand.  East’s slam view should include the 6th trump and the singleton, but with no aces and no kings, opposite 24-25 HCPs, I have some sympathy for his decision to merely do a Texas Transfer.  The East/West pair that did not bid slam are my most frequent partners at regionals and nationals.  We discussed this some afterwards and concluded that, since a transfer to 3♥ followed by 4♥ is only a mild slam try, that sequence could/should have been chosen.  Another option is to add a point for the 5th diamond, bringing the opener to the 26-27 point range and leveling the playing field in terms of ‘points shown’ by the 2♣ bidding sequence.  In any case, -980 vs. +480 by teammates cost 11 IMPs.

Board 12

Another slam invite position (taken by me) – since this came on the heals of my loss on the prior round, I think that had significant influence on my choice here.  Once more, there was nothing to the lead or play, all the action was in the bidding.  Did I have my invite?  I guess not!  When the diamond was led against 4♠, 12 tricks were easily scored with one club loser discarded on the ♦A.  When the club was led against 6♠, the opponents cashed their ♣AK and the rest were mine.  -50 vs. -480, lose another 11 IMPs.

There are lots of ‘rules’ in bridge.  ‘Never play me for the perfect cards because I don’t have them’ would have worked well here.  In the bidding, I projected the ♦AQ with my LHO and the ♦K with partner.  I also projected shorter (than 4) spades and longer (than 3) clubs.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen a jump to 2NT with 4 card trump support.  But, with a totally balanced hand, I think that bid makes some sense.  When I checked back, partner admitted to holding enough spades to play spades, jumped to the spade game and I got excited.  Wrong!  In hindsight, I not only needed the perfect shape and perfect placement of points to score 12 tricks, I needed partner to know what those perfect holdings would be.  Bad choice.

I knew he would not have slam card in hearts (I had them).  I projected the ♠AK (for the jump) and the ♦K for the eventual acceptance of my slam try.  That left 8-9 more points elsewhere.  Oh well, that isn’t how it was.

Board 15

I think my (North) hand is a classic responding hand to a 1NT opening bid (when the opponents pass).  Most players have learned to pass when holding 8 HCP with 4-3-3-3 distribution opposite 15-17, or the more common ‘good 14-17’.  Only here, the opponents did not pass.  Now, what do I do?  I am not embarrassed by my bidding, but we could have doubled to save 3 IMPs (lose 8 instead of 11).  I have very soft defense, but more important, I didn’t have a penalty double available even if I had chosen that option.  A takeout double with 4-3 in the unbid red suits didn’t seem right, and it would not have ended well.  Since the opponents have a misfit (although I don’t really know that), nothing will play well for us.  And partner, in the balancing position, decided to go quietly.

At the other table, the bidding took a wildly different turn and the lead vs. 3NT did not attack spades.   The actual ♣K lead established 3 club tricks for the declarer, and when the lead of the ♥Q dropped the ♥J, 10 tricks were in the bank (1+3+3+3).

There have been many growing trends in the world of bridge for many years.  Disturbing the opponents NT opening bid has always been popular, but it has gotten much more so.  Look at the problem for the North hand after either a 2♣ or a 2♠ bid?  What do you do?  I chose pass and they played a quiet 2♠ down 2 tricks for +100.  My counterpart at the other table had an even tougher problem (over 2♠) and soon they were in the ‘hopeless’ 3NT.  When the opponents bid over 1NT, it greatly alters the available NT tools and train wrecks often happen.  But the ‘train wreck’ actually happened for the defenders when 3NT was not defeated.  That brings up another bridge bidding ‘rule’ from the beginning of time – ‘just keep bidding vulnerable games and let them try to beat you’.  Sure worked here.  +100 vs. -630, lose another 11 IMPs.