Recap Of 8/27/2018 28 Board IMP Individual

Today there were only 4 boards that created double digit swings – the first one didn’t happen until board 19 and then they came in a flurry.  Leads, defense, declarer play and bidding all came into play.

 

 

This auction here at both tables, while not identical, established the same ‘known’ conditions.  That is, declarer held a strong notrump, dummy had game values, opening leader held both spades and clubs, and the partner of the opening leader didn’t have clubs.

At my table where I had supported spades, partner led his fourth best spade and declarer won the ♠K and led a diamond, hoping to bring in that suit.  When East showed out of diamonds, declarer knew that losing a diamond would result in the defense cashing 4 spades to defeat the contract.  Declarer hoped for some miracle to happen after cashing 1+2+2+2, but the rest of the tricks went to the defense, down 2, +100 for our side.

Our teammate, declaring at the other table, received the opening lead of a heart (partner ‘bid’ hearts and had no chance to support spades).  Opening leader was trying to make sure that declarer could not enjoy their spade stopper by retaining all of their spades over declarer.  Double dummy, any heart or any spade opening lead will defeat 3NT, but that is not what happened.  Declarer won the ♥A, and lost the ♦Q.  West then led the ♠Q, covered by the ♠K and ♠A and East continued with hearts.  Declarer won the ♥K and, on the run of the diamonds, the East defender held onto his ♠J8 over declarer’s ♠9, but successful defense required throwing all of the low spades and holding onto the last heart (not the ♥J!).  In the 5 card ending, East needed to hold ♠J♥5♣QT7, not ♠J8♣QT7.  By holding onto all black cards, East was subjected to a black  suit end play.  From the bidding, declarer knew East held spades and clubs.  Declarer could lead 3 rounds of clubs forcing East to surrender trick 13 to the ♠9, or declarer could lead spades, forcing the defender to give a trick to the ♣J at the end.  So declarer could score 1+2+4+2 or 0+2+4+3 to reach 9 tricks.  By retaining a heart, East has an exit card to lead to partner’s heart winners, scoring 2+2+1+0 for the defense.  With the end play, declarer was able to reach 9 tricks, making 3NT for +400 to go with our +100, win 11 IMPs.

 

 

Bidding judgment determined the final contract.  Looking only at the East-West hands, 4♥ would appear to be far preferred (vs. 3NT), with 10 tricks easy as long as spades were 5-2 and hearts 3-2.  Our teammates were defending 4♥ and led their singleton spade, got their ruff when North continued with the suit preference ♠3, so South ruffed, returned a club to partner’s ♣A and received a second spade ruff to take the first 4 tricks.  Declarer had the rest, but that was down 1, +50.  In spite of having a potential natural trump trick (via ♥Qxx), the old rule ‘if you have a singleton, lead it’ worked well here.

I liked the texture of my heart suit enough to jump to 3♥ over partner’s balancing double.  But, perhaps unwisely, decided to just sit when partner bid 3NT.  The defense can defeat 3NT leading any card (but the ♥2), but that isn’t what happened.  The opening spade lead was won by the ♠K and declarer decided to try the ♣K which was won by North with the ♣A.  North then cashed the ♠A (error) and the contract could no longer be defeated assuming best play by declarer.  After cashing the ♠A, North shifted (too late) to ♦5.  Declarer ducked that and ducked the diamond return to the ♦J, rectifying the count (now the defense has 4 tricks).  At this point, declarer only has 7 top tricks (2+2+1+2).  But there is no continuation by North that is effective.  South is caught in a 3 suit progressive squeeze that produces 2 additional tricks!  At the table, North continued with the ♥J.  On the ♠A, South was able to throw an idle diamond.  But, after that, South’s 3rd heart, 4th diamond and 4th club are all critical to protecting those suits.  West won the ♥K in hand and played the ♠9 to the ♠J in dummy.  South’s discard (they threw a diamond) allowed that suit to be established.  And after running clubs and diamonds, in the 2 card ending, dummy has ♥A10 and declarer has ♥4♣8.  If South keeps both of their hearts, declarer’s ♣8 is good.  If South keeps the ♣10, dummy’s hearts are good.

After winning the ♣A at trick 2, only a diamond continuation by North can defeat the contract.  After, say, 3 rounds of diamonds by the defense, West will win the ♦A on the third round and will likely continue with ♠Q which North must duck!  Ducking the spade establishes the spade suit and prevents declarer from rectifying the count.  It was the third round of spades that crushed South in the progressive squeeze.  But, if North ducks their ♠A, declarer cannot play 3 rounds of spades.

Tough hand.  So, my partner was able to bring in 9 tricks in 3NT for +400 to go with our teammates +50, win 10 IMPs.

 

 

At the other table, the combination of fast arrival plus partner bidding the suit of their void prompted West to give up on slam and simply play game.  The same 12 tricks produced -680 with our -200 (we were doubled), lose 13 IMPs.

Since a club will almost certainly be led against a heart slam, West has to worry about the defense establishing a club trick before it can be discarded.  Partner did bid 2/1 game force.  They could hold ♦AK to take care of both club losers.  Or the ♣K.  Or the ♦AQJ and a ruffing finesse.  Still, it wasn’t clear from the bidding that the small slam would be cold.  Small slam still seems sufficiently promising to give it a try.

 

 

Here, playing weak two bids, the dealer (West) has an automatic 2♦ bid.  North must formulate a plan.  One player offered a double (without perfect shape/support for all suits) and another just bid their longest suit.  East, at both tables, bounced preemptively to 4♦ and South had to figure out what to do.  With excellent support (but modest values) for both unbid suits (after the spade bid), South might try a responsive double (showing hearts and clubs)?  But, the responsive double after partner doubled won’t work – that implies some spade tolerance.  Should South focus on his major (hearts) or his long suit (clubs)?

At the table where North doubled, South tried bidding their longest suit.  The 11 tricks required for 5♣ came up short when two aces and a trump trick had to be lost.  At my table, South passed 4♦ around to North who reopened with 4♥.  South was VERY happy with that, and that ended the bidding.

After my ♦A won trick 1, I had to find a continuation at trick 2.  This is a basic defensive position that occurs extremely frequently.  That is, dummy has a long threatening suit (clubs), so it is time to attack potential late entries (diamond ruffs)…NOW!  Clearly, the best continuation at trick 2 was a diamond.  Instead, I lamely tried a club (after which 11 tricks are cold).  Declarer won the ♣A, led the ♥J which was ducked (making life even easier for declarer), then a small heart which I won with the ♥A.  Declarer ruffed the (belated) diamond return, cashed the ♣K, ruffed the clubs good with the ♥K, then a heart to the ♥Q to draw trump and run clubs.  In the end, they took the spade finesse (risking the contract!) to make 11 tricks.

There are always 10 tricks in hearts, even with the diamond continuation at trick 2, but it is much more difficult.  Declarer must ruff clubs good, as they did at my table.  They can even ‘guess wrong’ and ruff with the ♥9, allowing an overruff with the ♥10, but they must not ruff with the ♥6 (if they did, my hand can discard a diamond and declarer quickly loses control of the hand).  But, interesting (to me), if they do ruff with the ♥9 and my hand does not overruff, there is only one continuation to make the contract – that is to lead their ♥6 and finesse dummy’s ♥7, playing me for the ♥10 that I did not overruff with!  Any other line of play leads to defeat with best defense.

Essentially all successful lines of play (after the best defense of a diamond continuation at trick 2) rely upon my hand (East) holding the ♥10 and partner (West) holding the ♠K.  We did hold those cards, so the game can always make.  But, the job of the defense is to make declarer’s life tough, and I failed miserably on this hand when I did not lead diamonds at trick 2.

So, with 5♣ down 1, our teammates were -50 to go with our -450, lose 11 IMPs.

The big hands of the day involved lots of defensive issues with some bidding, leads and declarer play thrown into the mix.