Recap Of 9/24/2018 28 Board IMP Individual

The trend, lately, has been a mix of leads, defense, declarer play and bidding all involved in determining the large swings and today was no exception.  There were 5 double digit swings.

I thought this was a tough opening lead problem given the auction at my table.  I pictured declarer holding 1=5=3=4 with a possible singleton ♠K.  I pictured that with 2=5=2=4, declarer would be too weak in diamonds to offer NT as  a place to play.  So, down went the ♠A as my opening lead, presenting declarer with his impossible 8th trick.  This was a hand for passive leads – choose to lead any heart, any club or even a diamond that is not the ♦10 and you will beat 2NT.  There are only 7 tricks unless the defense gives declarer the 8th trick.  I did.  With clubs being bid on my right, the only other lead I considered was the small diamond.  Sometimes, to avoid blockage with a 3 card holding, I will lead the middle card from H10x or H9x (hard for partner to read, but necessary to avoid blockage) but here, due to the ♦9 in dummy, if I had chosen the ♦10 for an opening lead would have been just as unsuccessful as my actual ♠A, providing declarer with their 8th trick (0+5+2+1).

Meanwhile, on a different auction, our teammates arrived in 3NT.  Here, South had not heard a club bid, so they ended up making the best opening lead of a small club.  Declarer beat the ♣10 with the ♣A at trick 1, crossed to the ♥K, and then took the finesse against the ♥Q.  As declarer cashed their 5 heart tricks, South needed to find 2 discards, choosing a spade and a club(!?).  Declarer then led a club to the ♣J, ♣Q and ♣K and back came a diamond.  Declarer won the ♦A, cashed the ♣9 (the 8th trick for declarer), whereupon South discarded a diamond.  Now declarer exited with the ♠K, allowing South to cash their ♠AQ and ♦K, but at trick 13, they had the ♠10 left to lead to dummy’s ♠J, making 3NT.  So we were -120 while our teammates were +600, win 10 amazing IMPs.

Here is what “Lead Captain” has to say about the choice of opening lead.  I don’t present this for vindication, just for your information.  And, the description I used for dummy/declarer is based on the auction at my table (arriving in 2NT), not the auction at the other table which arrived in 3NT without bidding clubs:

I’m not surprised, from a double dummy standpoint, that the ♠A is the best lead because, double dummy, I would always get the shift right.  At the table, not so much.  Here, the 2 top leads (♠A and ♦10) are the two leads the present declarer with their 8th trick.  As readers of the blog know, I continue to believe that Lead Captain (for specific hands) and David Bird’s books (for general principles) provide the best available information for leads.  But, the chosen lead won’t always be the best on a given deal.  As noted previously, the ♦10 must be considered (vs. the ♦5) due to potential suit blockage.  The ♦10 barely beats out the ♦5 using Lead Captain analysis, but it does come out ahead of the ♦5 and the second best lead.

Notice the bidding at the two tables was sort of similar, but not really.  At both tables, N-S competed to 4♥ but the path to get there was quite different.  At my table, 1♠X was only raised to 2♠.  Personally, with this East hand, I would jump 3♠ as they did at the other table, showing the 4 trump and preemptive values.  The singleton club with 4 trump proved quite valuable.  Over 2♠ I decided partner wanted to hear me bid and I sure wasn’t broke, so with modest values I decide to enter the auction with a bid of 3♥.  West continued with 3♠ and partner raised me to 4♥.  With maximal doubles, the 3♠ bid should simply be competitive, not a game try, but… East decided to venture on to 4♠ and North decided to make a penalty double.  My sterile distribution kept me from considering bidding 5♣ but, as you can see, with the doubleton ♥K in the slot, 5♣ will deliver 11 tricks for the vulnerable game bonus for N-S.  Should partner have offered 4♣ over 3♠ or tried 5♣ over 4♠?  Beats me. I doubt that I would have if I held the North hand, since a 4♣ bid discourages hearts and likely promises a much better club suit.  But 4♣ rather than 4♥ would likely have worked here, getting us to 5♣.

This hand is (sort of) another opening lead problem, but better defense can overcome the unfortunate start.  Often, when people are dealt any AK in a suit, leading a high card becomes a semi-automatic lead to start the defense.  Here, in the post mortem after the hand was over,we were thinking that the only leads that allow 4 tricks for the defense would be to start with a small club (impossible to find that play!) or a neutral spade lead (in fact, a neutral spade lead allows us to defeat the contract 2 tricks if partner (North) later tries to give me a diamond ruff).  By starting with a spade, South can gain the lead when a club is played (declarer must play clubs early in order to ruff his club losers in dummy prior to drawing trump).  When South wins declarer’s club lead, they can push a heart through the ♥Kx, allowing the defense to score 0+2+1+1 for down 1.  As the cards lie, the only lead that allows 10 tricks against 4♠ is a heart lead.  North did not try that!  But, once they started with a high club, the only entry to my hand was lost.  Still, the diamond suit provides additional opportunities for both the defense and declarer.  There are some obscure double dummy plays to beat it, but the easiest way is a traditional holdup play.  That is, resist the temptation to place your ♦A on the ♦Q.  Instead, simply duck 2 diamonds, win the 3rd round of diamonds, and then lead a club.  Declarer is left with 2 heart losers in the end, since the 4th diamond in dummy can’t be reached to discard the losing heart.

The actual play was ♣A led (I played the ♣Q, promising the ♣J), then a small club ruffed (I played the ♣J, thinking I was showing partner that my remaining count was an odd number (3 remaining) and showing him that I held ♣J10x at that point.  Is it possible those plays confused partner?  I was trying to help!  Declarer played a spade to hand to ruff their last club, then another spade to hand and one more to finish drawing trump (on the spade leads North pitched a diamond(?) and a heart, keeping his clubs).  Declarer played the ♦Q and North won the ♦A (duck is necessary to defeat the game).  North continued with clubs as declarer ruffed.  Now the ♦10 was led and ducked all around, then a diamond to the ♦9 and then the ♦K to pitch one heart loser.  So, in the end, the defense scored their 3 aces and declarer took the rest.

The defense is a bit double dummy to achieve down 2.  An initial small diamond or trump lead is the necessary start.  When partner wins their club, they lead a heart through.  If North’s opening lead is a small diamond (impossible with this holding), they now simply provide partner a diamond ruff to score 1+2+1+1.  If the opening lead was a more likely trump and South, after they win a club, leads the heart through declarer’s ♥Kx, North must not cash the setting tricks, but pursue a diamond ruff to achieve down 2 by underleading the ♦A.  This defense is possible, but only if North determines partner’s shape as 3=4=2=4.  After the small diamond continuation, if declarer draws trump, they can’t get all of their clubs ruffed.  If they don’t draw trump, South gets to score a diamond ruff.  Either way, 5 tricks for the defense, +500.  Instead, -790.

At the other table, our teammates put maximum pressure on N-S with the jump to 3♠ and when that was passed around to North, they repeated their takeout double.  South, reasonably, didn’t consider 4/5♣ but instead bid their 4 card heart suit and bought the contract.  The doubleton ♥Kx in the slot is great in the heart contract too, but not good enough to score 10 tricks.  In fact, even scoring 9 tricks is quite a challenge after two rounds of spades.  It turns out the actual defense was a high spade followed by a club shift.  Declarer won in hand, finessed the J and then cashed the A and 9.  When they tried to enter their hand with a club to draw the last trump, East could ruff and cash 2 spades for down 1.  The losing diamond goes on the last winning club in dummy.

After a start of 2 high spades, the only way for declarer to reach 9 tricks is to allow the opponents to win the first 2 spades and ruff the 3rd spade (so that now you no longer have spades, severing the defensive communication).  Now cross to the ♣Q, heart to the ♥J, then the ♥A.  But, North has no more hearts, so you can’t draw trump (and you can’t get to your hand to draw trump).  When you play a club, East ruffs and leads diamonds.  You must win West’s ♦Q with dummy’s ♦A and continue with the ♦J so that West can’t gain an entry and provide yet another club ruff for East (which is why declarer can’t ruff the high spade at trick 2).  Bottom line, our teammates scored 4 tricks, +100 to go with our -790 to lose 12 IMPs.

This hand had identical auctions and identical leads at both tables.  And, it is all over at trick 1.  Certainly the opening lead could have been from ♦10xx2 rather than ♦Kxx2, but I didn’t want to be in my hand – I need to get going on clubs.  So, at trick 1 I played the ♦J and, the way the cards lie, I can not be defeated.  At the other table, when the ♦9 was covered by the ♦10 at trick 1, the contract can no longer be made.  I was looking for 4+1+2+2, but to do that, I had to lose 3 club tricks and I wanted to start losing them to West (where he cannot successfully lead diamonds).  If I’m losing 3 clubs, I cannot lose 2 diamonds.

At trick 2 I ran the ♣7 losing to the ♣J (fearful that they might allow the ♣7 to win, I almost overtook the ♣7 with the ♣8 which would have left me with only 1 club trick!).  But, with the friendly singleton ♥Q coming down, I still could have managed 9 tricks if I timed it just right (4+2+2+1) even if I had overtaken the ♣7.  When West won the ♣J, no exit is effective.  They tried a spade which I won and continued clubs.  West won the ♣K and continued spades.  I won the spade in hand and forced out the ♣A.  When a diamond came through, I could win the ♦A and cash my 9 tricks.  Double dummy, no lead beats it, but it is necessary to win the ♦J at trick 1.  When the dust settled, our teammates achieved down 2, +100 to go with our +400, win 11 IMPs.

This hand was bid poorly at both tables (if I say so myself), but more poorly by me!  As I’ve said before, we allow table talk with unfamiliar partners, so I should have inquired about preempter’s key card (4♣ bid over any opening preempt with responses: 0, 1, 1+Q, 2, 2+Q).  I can still construct weak 2♦ bids that offer no play for slam, even if trump divide evenly and partner has “1+Q”.  But, I think, had I asked and found one ace plus the Q, I can pretty much count 11 top tricks.  Partner could have another Q or clubs are very likely to ruff good or possibly a spade ruff could bring the total to 12.  I have no problem with my partner’s weak 2♦, but I failed to see what bids I could make that would learn what I needed to know, so I just jumped to the terrible bid of 5♦.  My bad.  But at least neither table arrived in the challenging 3NT, but does manage to score 9 tricks on this lie of the cards.

The auction at the other table, annotated above, got to the right spot even if they were not exactly on the same wavelength.  I don’t know the details of the play, but I was told “played it safe for 6” since they were in slam.  Assuming a spade lead won and cross to the ♦A, as long as clubs aren’t 7-0, it seems pretty safe to ruff one low.  Then cross to the ♦K and ruff a club high.  Draw trump and claim, 13 tricks.  That is what my partner did for +440.  Our teammates were -920, so we ‘only’ lost 10 IMPs.

Actually, if clubs had been 7-0 or 6-1, the only way to 12 tricks was a spade ruff which risks going down when trump are 4-1.  So it seems that hoping for clubs no worse than 5-2 is the safest play to make 12 tricks and when clubs turn out to be 4-3, all 13 tricks are there.

I like to have a 6 card suit, or else a MUCH stronger 5 card suit to overcall vulnerable at the 2 level, so double seemed, to me, to be automatic at my first turn.  North decided to show their diamond suit (non-forcing after the double) and partner doubled.  I took that as ‘good diamonds, they cannot make 8 tricks in diamonds’ (he was right).  South, walking the dog, bid a gentle 2♠ and I couldn’t find a bid, so I passed.  Partner balanced with a double and there we were.  I agonized a long time before passing, but I pictured partner with weak clubs and hearts, strong spades and diamonds, possibly QJTxx Qx KQxx xx or the like.  If so, they cannot make their contract, and we have no suit to play at the 3 level.  So, I passed!  However, if this is precisely what partner held, 2NT should make.  Being wrong about 2♠ going down can be really costly, and it was.  Partner just thought he was showing convertible values with nothing to bid – suggesting that I bid or pass depending on my defense and he would be happy either way.  If dummy is short in spades, and partner is short in spades, declarer may have a lot of spades (he did). 

Basically partner made a DSI double, I have values, you have values, do something intelligent but it wasn’t very intelligent when I passed!.  Clearly I thought he had better defensive values against 2♠.  When we failed to goad South into bouncing to 4♠, we were destined to lose a lot on this hand in any case, since no 3 level contract makes.  But, I might have gotten a 3♠ bid out of South if I had bid something.  Anything!  If I chose 2NT, I’m looking at down 3 vulnerable on a likely spade lead, so that won’t gain many IMPs.  But, if I bid anything, it might prompt North to bid again.  Who bids ‘only’ 2♠ with an 8 card suit?  Nice bid Steve!

There was a different auction at the other table.  My West hand did overcall 2♥ rather than double.  When East took the overcall seriously and showed heart support with invitational values with the 2♠ cue bid, E-W had already gotten too high.  However, South saw his 8 card spade suit and bounced to the ill-fated game which was doubled.  There were the same 8 tricks in the spade contract at both tables, which meant our teammates were -300 and we were -470, lose 13 IMPs.