Recap Of 12/19/2018 28 Board IMP Individual

Here we are again, 2 days later, playing with mostly a different set of players.  Eight double digit swings, essentially all based on bidding judgment.  Several hands that were not double digit swings as well as three of the 8 that will be reported were somewhat classical heart/spade duels where the winning answer, as is often the case, was ‘bid more.’  Obviously at some point you have to quit bidding – that is the beauty of bridge – figure it out!

Here is the first heart/spade duel.  My partner evaluated his hand as a weak jump overcall and I incorrectly sold out to 4♥ – I should have bid 4♠ – at least as the cards lie.  At the other table, our teammates dealt with a simple 1♠ overcall and the auction gradually crawled up to 3♠, allowing our opponents to play the hand there, making their contract at both tables.  So we were -420 to go with -140, lose 11 IMPs.

Reviewing the bidding at our table – if East had passed the 1♥ opening bid, South would undoubtedly have offered an invitational limit raise bid of 3♥ .  However, after East jumped to 2♠ South didn’t really have an invitational bid available.  They could bid 3♥ showing fewer values than they had, or force to game (via a 3♠ cue bid or simply bidding 4♥) showing more values than they had.  So, the 2♠ preempt had the effect of forcing our opponents into game.

Our teammates judged that neither side was making game, so they just passed it out in 3♠ hoping that they might be able to find 5 tricks to defeat the contract.  I felt that, with my sterile distribution, it made no sense to take a vulnerable save against a non-vulnerable game.  It would have been right this time, but since our teammates didn’t reach game in hearts, it wouldn’t have saved many IMPs.  You have probably heard “6-5 come alive” and “6-4 bid more.”  Hands with those shapes, especially when they find a fit, have a way of taking a lot of tricks.  To get better results on this deal, both tables (on my team) sold out too early and needed to ‘bid one more.’  But that is just one hand.  Given the same bidding with a different layout, going higher could clear by wrong.  Still, if we could start over, I would prefer a 1♠ overcall rather than the 2♠ that was chosen.  Perhaps we, too, could have bought the hand for 3♠?

Defensively, it might seem that we can score a spade, a diamond and 2 clubs.  However, we cannot knock out both the spade stopper and the club stopper on the opening lead.  Soon diamonds are established for the critical discard, so declarer always has 10 tricks.

I’m happy to jump raise my partner’s major suit response to my minor suit opening with 13 HCP and a singleton, so I have no problem with the 3♥ raise that happened at my table (14 HCP and a singleton).  The ♠KJx also increased in value after RHO made a 1♠ overcall.  West, having heard the jump raise, is looking at 16 HCP and a doubleton, so they proceeded to invite slam with 5♥, asking for a spade control.  With two aces and a trump to lose, they were already too high, so they were down 2 in the 6♥ slam. 

The heart fit was never mentioned at the other table.  With such a strong hand, West decided to simply respond 1♦ bidding their suits naturally, up the line, with 4-4 in the red suits.  After the 1♠ overcall, East rebid 1NT and it was easy for West to simply raise to the NT game rather than try to find a major suit fit.  At a regional lecture many years ago, Grant Baze suggested that when holding 29-31 points with 2 flat hands, just play NT.  Both the major and the NT contracts will usually score 11 tricks.  In matchpoints, when they both take the same number of tricks, that is a HUGE win to play in NT.  But, in IMPs, playing NT with 2 strong hands has the advantage of having a recourse to find other tricks if you run into a foul trump distribution.  Playing a suit contract, there is no such recourse.

I think East-West were a little unlucky to find such poor fitting hands with lots of wasted values coupled with a lousy trump split, but the old adage of going slow with strong hands (bid up the line) worked wonders for our teammates.  Once East rebid 3♥ at my table, West is really stuck for a bid to describe their hand.  Their choice of 5♥ didn’t work.  They could have simply cue bid 4♣ (denying a spade control) and hear partner cue bid 4♦ promising a spade control.  But, one player, in the post mortem, suggested that 4♦ is not a diamond cue bid, but instead is ‘last train’ (but, it was noted, that a ‘last train’ 4♦ does promise a spade control, otherwise, just signoff in 4♥).  Last train is another long discussion I don’t want to get into:  did you and your partner discuss it, agree to play it, know when it applies, …  In any case, that is not the auction that happened.  East showed extras with the jump to 3♥ and you (West) have extras and need to find a way stop in 4♥ or you will be going minus.  The 5♥ slam try left 4♥ unattainable.  There aren’t many bidding tools available to allow you to arrive in 3NT once you have found a strong 4-4 heart fit.  Result: partner cashed their 2 aces against the slam and I still had a trump trick coming for down 2, +100 while our teammates took 11 tricks in 3NT for +460, win 11 IMPs.  (I’m not sure what the defense was, but they were never going to defeat 3NT.)

At my table, West judged to open 2♣, East responded 2♦ waiting, and West showed a spade suit.  East next showed positive values, choosing to show diamonds cheaply while leaving room for partner to offer hearts.  When West rebid spades, East felt that 2 trump, a singleton, and two 5 reasonable card suits offered play for slam and made a quantitative invitational 5♠ bid that typically asks about the quality of the trump suit.  In spite of outstanding trumps, West did not pursue the slam.  Partner made the only lead to challenge declarer – a trump.  12 tricks are possible, double dummy, with any non-trump lead, but 11 tricks are the maximum after a trump lead.  Declarer won trick 1 with the ♠A and led a heart…to the ♥J.  Once I won the ♥Q at trick 2, the hand can no longer be made.  At the table, I returned a heart.  Declarer discarded their diamond loser as partner won the ♥A to make another good lead – the ♦K, killing dummy’s late entry to the established hearts.  Declarer won the ♦A to start cashing hearts and was disappointed to see me ruff.  They overruffed and led a trump to the ♠9, hoping the remaining trumps split 1-1 and that they could discard club losers on the remaining good hearts.  The remaining trumps were not 1-1, so declarer knew I could ruff a heart lead.  Declarer didn’t bother leading hearts, but took a winning club finesse.  But, they still had 2 clubs to lose, down 2.

At the other table with a radically different auction that stopped in game, a trump was not led, declarer guessed well, and they managed to score the double dummy optimum 12 tricks that are available without that trump lead that my partner made.  Nice lead partner!  We were +200 and our teammates were +680 to win 13 IMPs.

Most 4♠ opening bids show a decent hand able to score around 7 tricks if partner has no help whatsoever, meanwhile hoping to make it difficult for the opponents to enter the bidding for the first time at the 5 level.  Often, the 4♠ bidder will have 7-8 trumps.  But, here, when partner opened 4♠ they only had 6 trumps with a nice 5 card suit on the side.  But, the high level opening bid had the desired effect of removing the opponents from the bidding.  Even with the bad trump split, 10 tricks were easy when the clubs behaved, just losing a trump and both red aces.

At the other table, the auction started lower with a simple 1♠ opening bid, the opponents entered the auction, and by the time the bidding got back to the opening bidder, the auction was at the 5 level!  Reasonable enough, North continued to 5♠ but declarer could only score the same 10 tricks, so we were +420 while our teammates were +50 to win 10 IMPs.  In fact, 5♠ was a necessary save!  Due to a singleton in each black suit for East-West, 11 tricks were going to come home in the 5♦ contract assuming declarer played to finesse South for the red honors during the play of the hand!

Even with both sides non-vulnerable, the 4♠ opening bid made it very difficult for either East or West to enter the auction.  It would have been right on this hand, but I cannot imagine it being winning bridge, long term, to come in with a 5♦ bid over the 4♠ opening bid.  What do you think?  I think preempts are tough…bridge is tough.   Here the opening 4♠ bid made it really tough on the opponents.

At the other table, when East saw 3 passes, they were able to open a reasonably standard 2NT.  Partner’s signal (singleton) to the opening ♣Q lead looked encouraging, so clubs were continued at trick 2 and soon declarer had 9 tricks.  So, our teammates were -150.

At my table, once North opened 1♠ the bidding took a very different turn.  I had too much to overcall 1NT, so my first bid was double.  I thought my next double was also takeout, but I wish I had bid 2NT.  If partner took 2NT as natural, we quickly go down 1 (after a heart lead), but that would save over half of the IMPs that we lost.  If partner took 2NT as ‘takeout, pick a minor’ we could have gotten to a makeable  3♦ contract.  That would have held the losses to 1 IMP.  Of course, if my second double was interpreted as takeout, we also would have gotten to 3♦ and just lost 1 IMP if partner brings it home.  Sadly, partner decided, since my first double ‘showed hearts’ my second double was taken as a penalty double of hearts, so they passed,  We had 5 easy tricks against 2♥X but we needed 6.  So, we were -670 to lose 13 IMPs.  Darn.

Although this is a very different situation than my last blog which talked about 1 partner thinking the double is takeout and the other thinking it is penalty, it is the same principle.  If you are not certain you and partner are on the same page, making a penalty double that may be taken out or a takeout double that may be left in for penalty will result in very poor results.  If there can be any doubt, don’t make a disastrous low level takeout double that may be taken as penalty, turning the opponents partscore into game.

With practiced partnerships, I use the ‘Larry Cohen list’ – a short list of what low level doubles are penalty.  If it is not on the list, it doesn’t exist.  It is takeout.  Still, to avoid the disaster, I should have tried 2NT.  https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/berk-co-exceptions-to-low-level-doubles

Had we been in 3♦ partner needs to play carefully.  If the opponents haven’t helped with a spade opening lead (perhaps they led a singleton club?), draw trump, play a high club the first time clubs are led and a low club on the second club lead (key play), forcing your club loser to happen on the second round, but retaining a club that can lead to the last high club so that you can ruff the 4th round (or possibly lose the 4th round of clubs), but establishing the 13th club for a trick.  Depending on how the defense goes, you might lose a heart, a spade and 2 clubs or various other combinations, but if you establish the 13th club you will win 0+1+5+3 for 9 tricks, +110.  Of course you also must guess which major suit ace is onside, but the opponents play might help.

I really hate to offer 3 passes to the 4th bidder, so I will often strain to ‘open’ with almost anything.  For me, this hand easily clears the hurdle, but at the other table, our teammate sitting North looked at the vulnerability and opted to not make the light opening bid.

Considering East didn’t hold 4 card spade support, they had a rather light takeout double of 1♥ but I still think it is the right bid – and both tables did double the 1♥ opening bid.  South made an attempt to jam the auction with a jump to 4♥ but I had an easy 4♠ bid.  When North and East passed over 4♠ South decided to offer a penalty double – rare after a preemptive action.  North, with 2 aces, thought 11 tricks might be a stretch in hearts, so they decided see if they can find 4 tricks vs. the spade contract.  Sometimes partner (South) will hold 5 good spades after preempting in hearts when the takeout double hand only had 3 spades – that happened Monday this week (prior blog) and the defense scored +800.

Anyway, I was playing 4♠X after the ♥A lead won trick 1 with South playing the ♥2, North was hoping that South held ♣Kx and could obtain a club ruff.  So, North continued with the ♣2 at trick 2.  It is unusual to underlead aces, but in this situation, the ♣2 MUST promise a high club (or else show a singleton).  South feared that I held the ♣A, so they did not rise with the ♣K and my ♣Q in dummy won trick 2.  I drew trump and just lost the 2 red aces, 11 tricks, +690. 

To achieve 4 defensive tricks North must lead a diamond to the singleton ♦A while they still have an entry.  South can win the ♦A, return to the remaining entry, and then ruff a diamond.  That defense was tough to find.

At the other table, North heard an ‘invitational or better Jordan 2NT’ over East’s double.  North competed to 5♥ over 4♠ and correctly, concluding that North-South were scheduled to make 11 tricks in their vulnerable game, West took the cheap save in 5♠X.  Our teammates, on defense, took their 3 aces for +100 to go with our +690, win 13 IMPs.  Our North-South teammates also could have found 4 defensive tricks via 3 aces and a diamond ruff, but they were most interested in ensuring that the contract went down.

Again, as it happened on board 3, the losing side in this competitive heart/spade auction quit bidding too soon.  That is not to suggest that these are simple problems and that you should always just keep bidding.  But, it certainly is a recurring theme where it is often right to bid more in case you can make your contract or they can make theirs.  Bidding more is right in either case (you make or they make), and only wrong when both contracts are going down.

I understand South’s jump to 4♥ (sometimes you can buy the hand and keep the opponents out of the bidding), but I like the choice of Jordan 2NT better.  Had East not doubled, but passed instead, I would want to treat this hand as a limit raise.  Not a simple raise to 2♥ or a preemptive raise to 4♥.  I would make a routine limit raise of 3♥ showing an invitational hand.  So, after the double, 2NT describes the South hand rather well.  At the other table, North judged well to bid 5♥ over 4♠ and West judged well to bid 5♠ over 5♥.

Our ‘bridge club standard’ 1NT opening bid is “15-17” but we will open 1NT with a ‘good 14.’  Personally, I count a point for the 5th card in a suit and there aren’t many other 14 point hands that I upgrade.  If a hand has great spot cards and is rich in aces/kings with a lack of queens, that could be a cause to upgrade.  Here, North is dealing and they are looking at a balanced 14 HCP with the ratio of aces to queens 1:1.  Both jacks are bolstered with higher honors nearby (one AJ, one KJ) which could make the jacks more valuable than the 1 point assigned.  But the ♣Q is all alone and hardly worth the full 2 HCP that normally is accredited to that holding.  As mentioned on board 25, this is a regular partnership which has 14+ to 17 on the card.  Subsequent discussion with Cris indicated that he didn’t ‘upgrade’ but just chose to make a tactical bid of 1NT.

The ‘gold standard’ of hand evaluation is the Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator (knr):

http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=aj76+kt+kj2+q974

This is a computer evaluation that is extremely complex (and provides a number evaluating the hand to 2 decimal places).  It evaluates a “7” as being barely more valuable than a “6”!  It is not possible to utilize this tool at the table.  Still it can useful to get another opinion to try to hone your hand evaluation skills.  The number for knr evaluation of this hand is 12.95.  This is quite a bit shy of the 15-17 range associated with a 1NT opening bid.  Still, when North opened 1NT, they created an extremely easy auction for South.  South checked on a 4-4 heart fit and simply bid the NT slam.  There are 11 easy tricks (2+3+5+1) with 2 chances for the 12th trick (but you cannot try both – pick 1).  With a certain loser of the ♥A, you cannot afford a spade or club loser.  Either finesse the ♣K (it was onside) or find the ♠Q (2-way finesse, so the slam is ‘cold’ if you could only see who has the ♠Q!).  Best line, I think, if the opponents don’t give you the spade guess for free at trick 1, is to cash red tricks and see who has the most red cards (West does).  That leaves more room for East to hold the key black cards that you need to find to score your contract.  But, transportation isn’t that easy.  Running the red cards leaves you knowing that odds are in favor of East holding the card you want to find, but you are in dummy after you learn that.  So, if you took that line of play, it is best to cash the ♠K, then ♠A.  If the ♠Q doesn’t fall, take the club finesse.  With East holding both critical black cards, they are squeezed on this hand when the red cards are cashed.  If you cash the top spades after running red winners you won’t go wrong.

Let’s revisit the bidding.  If you agree that North does not warrant an upgrade to 1NT, how should the hand be bid?  I think South, with 17 HCP and a good 5 card suit should offer a raise of 1NT to 4NT, invitational.  If partner has the minimum 12 HCP, 6NT is unlikely to succeed.  But, if they have a max, there should be some play (of course, the hands fit incredibly well – you could construct plenty of maximum 14 HCP hands which offer poor play or no play for 12 tricks in NT).  Still, I think it is worth an invite and let partner decide.  When South simply raised to 3NT over 1NT, the slam auction was over.  I led a spade vs. 3NT at my table and declarer claimed their 12 tricks.  Clearly a spade is not what you want to lead vs. 6NT – it makes life easy for declarer.  Here the question is ‘passive or aggressive?’ – lead a black suit where you have Hxxx or a red suit where you have nothing.  Often against a slam, you want to avoid presenting declarer with his 12th trick, but aggressive leads can payoff too.  The actual lead against the slam was a small club.  This made the play end very quickly.  There is no option to rise with the ♣A and later worry about finding who has the ♠Q.  You MUST play hearts, the defense will win the ♥A, and if they have a club to cash, you are down. So, there is only one play at trick 1 – hold your breath and finesse the ♣J.  Either the ♣K is onside or it is not, but there is no decision/choice about what to play or how to play it.

Both tables took 12 tricks in NT.  We were -490, our teammates +990, win 11 IMPs.

The last hand of the day was a different flavor of heart/spade battles.  The auction was somewhat similar, but at our table, North waited to double after the signoff in 2♠ was passed around to him.  At the other table they doubled the Drury bid of 2♣.  It seems that there is an endless stream of “you better discuss this bid (and agree) with partner” and here is another one.  Typically, if a player doubles a Jacoby transfer bid, it merely shows a request to lead (or, depending on the hand partner holds, possibly bid) the suit that is doubled.  It is not normally treated as a general takeout of the suit being transferred to.  That is: (1NT)-P-(2♦)-X shows diamonds, not a takeout of hearts.  Here, North doubled the Drury 2♣ bid.  Some might play that the double merely asks partner to lead clubs, or possibly bid clubs if their hand warrants.  Another option (I’m not sure which is the most standard) is to play that the double of Drury is a takeout bid of the major that is being shown.  Here North-South are a regular partnership and they had the specific agreement that double of Drury here is a takeout of spades.  Yes, you and partner are both passed hands.  Still, you can see the result.  Voids are magical when you have a fit.  With trumps splitting 2-2 and without a diamond lead, there are 12 tricks in hearts.  0+7+1+4 – easy peasy.  There is nothing to the play or defense.  So, with no diamond lead at either table, we were -230 at our table defending 3♥ while our teammates in 4♥ were +680, win 10 IMPs.

Which is better – double of Drury shows clubs or shows a major suit takeout?  I think to avoid the opponents stealing the hand, the takeout is superior, but what matters is that you and partner are on firm footing with a common understanding.

Epilog: talking later with Bruce, the South player that bid the 4♥ game:  “Since Cris and I play a double of Drury as a takeout double of the major, it made things somewhat simple. I did not leap to 4♥  fearing the opponents would go for the non-vulnerable save, so I was “walking the dog” by bidding 3♥  over 2♠ and then 4♥ in the passout seat. It looks like 4♠ is only down 1 (possibly 2), losing 0+2+1+1/2 – a cheap save, but the opponents did not save (mission accomplished).”

Best defense vs. 4♠ looks like it would involve leading the doubleton diamond (possibly after cashing 2 hearts) and ducking the ♦A.  Now, with a diamond ruff threatened, declarer must draw all trumps, leaving themselves with only 1.  Now when they knock out the ♦A, the defense can go back to hearts, removing declarer’s last trump and prevent declarer from scoring a trick with the ♣K.  In practice, this might be a tough defense to find.  Anyway, no one played spades, this hand was played in hearts.