Bob Munson

Recap Of 2/8/2017 28 Board IMP Individual

I’ve been gone awhile, so I’m just now having another game to report.  We played yesterday, 2/8, and only had 2 hands which cleared the hurdle of ‘double digit swings’ (my usual criteria for reporting a hand).  There were a number of other interesting hands, not being reported, but I am so behind on a variety of work at home, I’m just reporting these 2 hands.  Of the 2, I won one, and lost one, but my actions had no bearing on the actual swings.  You can decide what you would have done.

 
4
Both
West
N
Dan
AQ
10962
AK8
K1054
 
W
Ed
6
Q543
J10764
J96
J
E
Bob
J10972
AK
Q953
Q2
 
S
Lew
K8543
J87
2
A873
 
W
Ed
N
Dan
E
Bob
S
Lew
Pass
1NT
Pass
2
Pass
2
All Pass
 
W
Bill
N
Mark
E
JoAnna
S
Manfred
Pass
1NT
Pass
2
Pass
2
Pass
2NT
Pass
3NT
All Pass
 

The first swing came on the first round and was not all that interesting.  A careless discard, all of a sudden, turned a hopeless 3NT into 9 tricks.

At my table, South decided to simply transfer to spades and stop in 2.  Because I held the 7, I was always assured of 2 spade tricks and felt the J was the safest start for our side against 2.  In the end, we scored 2+2+0+1 to hold declarer to 8 tricks, -110.  Meanwhile, our teammates, with the same start to the auction ventured onward, arriving in 3NT.  It seems to me like a close call with the South hand (whether to give up on game, or try one more bid after the transfer is accepted, but not super-accepted).  If partner holds 3 card spade support and a maximum, the singleton diamond might prove useful.  Kaplan and Reubens (http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=k8543+j87+2+a873) evaluated the hand at 9.40!  I was surprised it could come in that high.  If you count a point for the 5th spade, you can get to 9 points, but the 5 card suit is decidedly weak, the J is only 3 long, and there is a lot to be said for passing, which is what Lew chose.

As you can see from the auction, our teammates felt the lure of the red game and bid it.  Not only is the decision close whether to pass 2 or continue to 2NT, the decision to go on (to 3NT over 2NT) is also very close.  16 HCP is right in the middle between 15 and 17.  Evaluating the AQ is good news and bad news – it will fit partner’s 5 card suit, but having only 2 can leave the suit blocked and awkward to score extra tricks.  Neither passing 2NT nor bidding 3NT can be called an error (in my opinion).  There are a lot of IMPs at stake when red games get bid and made, so continuing to 3NT was the final decision.

On the diamond lead (the J would have been safe, but extremely passive, knowing dummy will also hold 5 spades), declarer has no real play for 9 tricks unless spades break 3-3, so they won the K and cashed the AQ, seeing the bad spade break.  They can give up a club and get to 8 tricks (3+0+2+3), but they decided to first cross to dummy’s A and cash the K.  On the K, West elected keep all of their hearts and diamonds and let go of a club and that provided 4 tricks in clubs and 9 tricks total, +600, win 10 IMPs.

 
26
Both
East
N
Bill
QJ6
QJ632
109543
 
W
JoAnna
K532
987
Q
KQ1095
4
E
Ed
A984
A10
K6
A7632
 
S
Bob
107
K54
AJ872
J84
 
W
JoAnna
N
Bill
E
Ed
S
Bob
1NT
Pass
2
Pass
2
Pass
4
All Pass
 
 
W
Lew
N
Dan
E
Mark
S
Manfred
1
1
1
4
Pass
Pass
5
All Pass
 
 

It has become extremely fashionable to open 1NT, not only on balanced hands, but most semi-balanced hands in range for your 1NT opening bid.  Here East has an easy 1 opening bid with an easy 1 rebid.  This hand would always be opened 1 by traditionalists.  But, as you can see from the result, the 1NT opening bid proved far more effective (I approve!).  Even though the opponents have found it very effective to disrupt the 1NT auctions as much as possible (more and more people are interfering over 1NT all the time), 1NT still preempts the auction (the opponents have to start bidding at the 2 level and may not have a suitable bid) and it conveys critical information to partner (partner knows within 1 point the number of high card points held).  And, usually, you have at least 2 cards in any/every suit (the ACBL recently approved a new rule that allows 1NT opening bids with a singleton as long as it is the A, K or Q – experts have been doing this for quite some time).

So, a simple auction at my table (Stayman followed by bidding the game in spades) left me on lead vs. 4.  Lead Captain (http://www.bridgecaptain.com/LeadCaptain.html) and David Bird’s books on opening leads  have resulted in me very rarely leading trump or any suit that is Axx(xx) or Kxx(xx).  So, on this hand, with all of those leads ruled out, that left me with a rather lucky lead of the 4.  Partner ruffed and now must find me with a red ace (or the trump A).  It is pretty much a coin toss, with the tie broken by the extra undertricks we will gain if declarer happens to hold the K and I hold the A.  Partner can not only get a second ruff, they have a heart to cash for down 2.  Sadly, a diamond lead at trick 2 would have achieved down 1, but on the actual Q lead at trick 2, declarer could win the A, draw trump and just lose the opening ruff plus 1 diamond and 1 heart, 10 tricks, -620.

Moving on to my teammates table, the 1 opening bid allowed a cheap 1 overcall.  Responder was able to bid 1, so opener knew there was at least a 4-4 fit in spades, but when North bounced to 4, opener was reluctant to compete with 4 (I think I would have – if RHO had passed you would certainly have bid 3♠ so what is one more?), so when 4 came around to West, they competed with 5.  In clubs, declarer must lose a trick in every suit (except trump) for down 1.  Nothing the defense can do to allow the contract to make, nothing declarer can do to find 11 tricks.  Down 1, -100 combined with our -620 resulting in losing 12 IMPs.

Interesting – a side benefit (on this hand) of having opened 1 right-sided the spade contract.  That is, we could have beaten 4 by East, but 4 by West cannot be beaten because there is no ruff on the opening lead.  North has a natural trump trick, but one ruff just scores that single natural trump trick allowing 10 tricks for declarer (West) in 4.

One hand does not prove a rule, and bridge biases creep into selective memory.  But, I have found much greater success opening all hands that come close to looking like a 1NT opener with 1NT and then let the chips fall where they may.  There are lots of tools available for responder to sort out where the hand should be played after the 1NT opening bid.  I think gives an extra edge to starting with 1NT when possible.  Double dummy, on this hand, opening 1NT was the losing action and opening 1 was the winning action.  But, the actual results proved otherwise.

 

 

Leave a comment

Your comment