Recap Of 5/18/2016 28 Board IMP Individual

Well, at least the Warriors won in basketball last night…I have had a hard time getting started on this blog from our game yesterday because it didn’t seem that many of my choices (bids, play, defense) were out of line and, for the most part I did the same as my counterpart at the other table.  Yet, after 3 boards to start the day, I was already 74 IMPs behind and the losses kept piling up!  How do you lose 74 IMPs in 3 boards?  -12, -14, -11 = -37, and the 4 players on the opposing team are +37 – all of them will later be teammates sometimes (in the remaining 6 rounds, half of the time they will be opponents, half of the time they will teammates/partner).  When they are on my team, they will be winning or losing whatever IMPs I win/lose (which means no catching up in those rounds).  It seems more and more of my blogs start out whining about my results.  Sorry.  On with the bridge.

Board 1

Here, all action depended upon North’s second  call.  The first four calls at both tables were identical.  After West bids 5♦, it was time for North to pass or double – one passed, the other doubled.  If North doubles, does South sit or bid?  If North passes, should South reopen with a double, or bid their second suit (5♠)?  As you can see, at the table, South chose to pass when North doubled, and South reopened with a double when North passed.   After South reopens with a double, the attention is back on North.  North at my table tried 6♣ and reached a slam that could not be beaten.  One heart to lose, ruff all the spades.

With friendly hearts, there are really only 3 aces to lose in 5♦ X, -100.  The actual result was -300, but the extra 200 points lost only cost 1 IMP because the slam brought in 920, lose 12 IMPs.

Is 6♣ the right bid after partner reopens?  I don’t think I would have made that bid, but it sure worked on this hand.

Board 2

The literature is full of recommendations to not double low level contracts when you have a fit with partner, but I always thought that that meant suit contracts, since the opponents will be short and can ruff.  If the opponents want to play NT and you have a fit, your long suit can be a source of tricks that contribute towards defeating 1NT.  I don’t have the wherewithal to run a simulation to determine the best bid here, but clearly over 1NT, West must choose to raise spades, or double.  I chose double and after declarer cashed the first 8 tricks, he surrendered the balance to us, -380.  The player at the other table, holding my hand, raised spades.  When it was all over, they arrived in 4♠X with no uptricks.  -590, lose 14 IMPs.  Was my double that bad?  It was on this hand.  But I cannot imagine we were getting to game if I made a simple raise to 2♠ and partner (with a dead minimum) never bid again.

There are several points of bidding here worth discussing with your regular partner.  With most of my partners, I’m playing modified Hamilton in all positions, including after 1NT overcalls, but some play only when 1NT is overcalling a minor suit opening.  With Modified Hamilton:

• Double is penalty.
• 2♣ shows diamonds, or if you pull it, a major and a minor
• 2♦ shows majors
• 2♥ shows hearts
• 2♠ shows spades

So, with that structure, should West bother showing hearts with spades, simply raise spades, or penalty double?  Should East sit for the double?  With the great heart/spade fit, there are a lot of tricks on offense for E-W without many on defense.  The end result was a very sad result for our side.

Board 3

As you can see, at my table, as dealer, South passed and later checked on a heart stopper.  When North delivered the needed stopper in hearts, N-S arrived in 3NT.  With the ♣A onside (as it figured to be on the bidding), declarer flew the ♣K at trick 1, cashed 2 spades and 6 diamonds and the rest were ours, -400.  Our teammates arrived in 5♦.  After a heart lead (partner would be able to read the ♥6 as showing exactly 3 when leading 3rd best (not true if leading 4th best)), they could win the ♥Q, cash two aces, down 1.  But, the actual lead was a spade vs. 5♦.

As noted above, any heart lead will set the contract.  It turns out that any non-heart lead allows the contract to make with careful card reading and play.  On the actual spade lead, win the ♠A, cross to dummy in trump, lead a club up forcing the ♣A to win, ruff out clubs, run diamonds, coming down to ♠KJ and ♥K.  East has no answer if declarer is able to read the cards.  Either the spades cash, or the lead of the heart forces a spade lead away from the ♠Q into the ♠KJ.  Wow, that would have been some play!  Thanks to Bruce Tuttle for pointing this out.

In practice, declarer tried the ♠J at trick 1 and eventually led hearts to finish down 1, -100 and lose 11 IMPs.  

That was my start to the day.  Played 3 boards, -37 IMPs.  

Board 4

Finally, some IMPs coming our way.  I was getting ready to reverse with a bid of 2♥ (dead minimum for a reverse, but that still seemed like the right bid to make) when my RHO bid 2♥ in front of me!  I had to pass (double would show 3 card spade support), but partner was there for me.  He doubled in the reopening seat and I had an easy pass.  If I work out early that partner has the ♥A (not expecting the Vul overcall to be missing that card), we get an easy +800.  Even with the defense I chose (when in with the high diamond at trick 2, I cashed the ♣A and got out a club, playing partner for the ♣K), +800 was still available if, when in with the second high diamond, I exit with a seemingly valuable ♥8 (to avoid an endplay) – then declarer is stuck with spade losers if I play 4 rounds of hearts.

In reality, that defense (exit with the ♥8 instead of the ♥3) is only necessary if declarer is clever enough to dump his ♥Q109 under the ♥AKJ.  That isn’t happening.  So, we should have gotten +800 by me simply realizing, when partner did not have the ♣K, he had to hold the ♥A for the reopening double.  In any case, I was happy to finally post a plus score on the card with down 2, +500.  At the other table, our N-S teammates defended diamonds, -130, win 9 IMPs.

Technically, this was not a double digit swing, but could have been if I defended to get down 3 for +800.  Anyway, close enough, and with that we cut the first round deficit to -28.

Board 5

Here we have another hand that was not a double digit swing, but it really was, since I had an easy bid to win 10 IMPs instead of losing 8 IMPs, so it was really an 18 IMP swing opportunity.  Partner obviously bid aggressively with the jump to 3♣, and I think my values dictate a game bid (either 3♠ trying for 3NT from partner’s side, or a direct 3NT).  3NT will play immeasurably better from partner’s side if he happens to hold ♠Kx.  But what if my LHO doesn’t double 3♠ allowing partner to pass?  Now, 3NT may still be the best contract, but partner can’t bid it and we will have missed 3NT, since partner will have to bid 4♣ if they have no spade stopper.  But, here the double of 3♠ saved me.  It gave me another chance to bid 3NT on my own.  But, I failed to stop and consider the full implications of the double of 3♠.  

That double normally shows the ♠A or ♠K, so, at the table, I felt my ♠Q was in danger of not holding up as a stopper, so I abandoned 3NT.  Wrong!  Since my LHO had not raised spades, it is highly unlikely that he holds ♠Kxx or ♠Axx unless he has nothing else in his hand.  If short spades are on my left, my ♠Q will hold up as a stopper and I have the values (opposite the jump to 3♣) to bid 3NT.  Instead, I chickened out and bid 4♣.  Partner, hearing a game forcing auction, raised to the hopeless 5♣.  Trick 1 was the ♠J to the ♠K, then a diamond to the ♦A, ♠A and spade ruff.  Down 2 before we got started.  The rest of the tricks were ours, but when our teammates defended a club partscore (different defense) for -150 to go with our -200, we had a loss of 8 IMPs.  We win 10 IMPs if I merely bid 3NT, either immediately, or when partner passed the double of my 3♠ bid.  Yes, I might need the heart finesse, but the opponents have to lead something and I have opportunities for tricks in all suits besides the 6 cashing tricks in clubs, and my RHO did bid, helping to place some cards.  I like my partner’s aggressive 3♣ call – it gave us the opportunity for a red game and I blew it.  I should have bid 3NT instead of 3♠, and I should have bid 3NT instead of 4♣.  I had 2 chances for a red game and missed them both.

Board 6

On this hand, I’m back to being out of the loop (in terms of causing the loss of IMPs).  I still lost IMPs, but  there was defense and declarer play that was out of my control.  The same straightforward auction happened at both tables, with the same (good) lead at both tables.  

A spade lead doesn’t give declarer an immediate 9 tricks, but they are well on their way to 9 tricks on this hand after a spade lead.  Dummy’s entries have not been attacked, so whether declarer pursues clubs or diamonds for their 9th trick, they will succeed.  David Bird and Lead Captain definitely prefer a heart lead over a spade lead, quite contrary to the good old ‘fourth from longest and strongest’ maxim that pre-dates bridge (from the days of Whist, way before bridge).  Why am I saying to lead hearts instead of spades?  Because it increases the probability of hitting partner’s 5 card (or longer) suit (the more you have, the less they will have, on average).  Because the solid heart sequence is safer than the broken spade sequence (as demonstrated on this hand). After the 1NT-3NT auctions, you almost always want to lead a major unless you hold AKQJx of some minor.  If the opponents didn’t pursue a long major suit fit, you likely have one – find it and lead it.  After 1NT-3NT, with a 3 card major and a 4 card major, consider the 3 card major.  One hand doesn’t prove a case, and leading the 3 card suit won’t work on every deal, but I think a heart is the percentage lead on this hand.

So, a heart was led at both tables.  At our table (I was on lead), partner won and returned the ♥2 – definitely indicating a strong interest in hearts (lead low, you like it and want it returned, lead high says I probably started with  a suit only 3 (or 2) long and the rest is up to you (the opening leader).  Normally you return original 4th best after winning trick 1.  I’m not sure if partner was trying to be deceptive or just wanted to send a clear message that “I like hearts”.  Declarer won trick 2 with the high heart in dummy and then cashed the ♣AK.  Both my partner and I signaled high/low, upside down count, showing we were 3 long.  Should we have signaled?  Beats me.  Knowing the count helps the defense a lot, but it helps declarer a lot too.  Here just because clubs are 3-3 (not very likely a priori), declarer still needs an entry to establish clubs and then an entry to cash the clubs.  With the ♦A onside, the ♦Q became an entry.  Clubs were established and 9 tricks were there.  2+2+1+4.  It seems strange with 12 HCP opposite 15 HCP, double stoppers for any suit led, a 5 card suit to work with, to have so much difficulty finding 9 tricks.  What was the parlay that this declarer required?  It seems like 3-3 clubs (36%) plus the ♦A onside to allow the ♦Q to be an entry (50%).  Requiring both of these is 18%.  What other opportunities were there?  Well, had the ♦Q lost to the ♦A, the club suit is now dead and hearts are going to be established by the defense.  But, 3-3 diamonds with the ♦J onside or 3-3 spades with the ♠Q onside (pick one – you only have one entry to dummy after the hearts are dislodged at trick 1 and 2) can still see you to 9 tricks.  If you successfully pursue diamonds, that gives you 2+2+3+2.  If you successfully pursue spades, that gives you 4+2+1+2.  But, you cannot try both diamonds and spades.  Bottom line, if the clubs had not come home for 4 tricks, there were other chances that probably amount to another 18%, or a total of 36%.  But that’s not all.  A doubleton ♣Q would have also provided 4 club tricks, but again, the ♦Q must be an entry be able to enjoy the 13th club.  If not, you have the other options already mentioned in spades and diamonds to try to arrive at 9 tricks.

Let’s move over to the other table where a heart was also led.  Here North ducked their ♥A, so declarer is in dummy after winning trick 1 instead of after winning trick 2.  They are still faced with a pretty similar dilemma – where can they find 9 tricks?  They can try clubs like the successful declarer did against me, or try some combination of spades and diamonds.  You could try a diamond to the ♦10 at trick 2, or a spade to the ♠J at trick 2.  The other declarer never tried clubs, but tried to find 5 tricks in spades/diamonds to go with 4 tricks in hearts/clubs to reach 9.  With both spades and diamonds behaving quite poorly for this declarer (my teammate), he only found 7 tricks, -200 to go with my -600, lose 13 IMPs.

I think the chance of a doubleton ♣ Q makes the winning line (on this hand) the better line (attack clubs first with various fallback options – well done JoAnna!), but confirming that is the best percentage line of play is a complex analysis that I don’t feel up to right now.

I’ve been writing this blog for three and a half years.  This is the first time I have reported on boards 1 -2-3-4-5-6, capturing all six boards to start the day.  I’m going to stop with those.  Even though there were other interesting hands, I lost IMPs on most of those that were not pushes, but none were double digit and I’m weary from wading through these 6 hands.  Comments/suggestions/upgrades are welcome.