Recap Of 1/14/2019 28 Board IMP Individual

Six hands provided double digit swings in play on Wednesday including slam swings on 4 of the 6.  Between the two tables of play, there were also 5 more slams bid that were essentially push boards and not reported below.  Quite a lot of action throughout the day.  Of course bidding differences were involved in many swings, but leads, defense and declarer play were consistently playing a significant role in the final result.

 

 

In the first hand for today, some bidding issues arose that are worth discussing with your partner.  At my table, the North hand simply did the math: if partner has 25-27 HCP and I have 8 HCP, then we have at least 33 HCP combined, the classic requirement for slam, so they raised 3NT to 6NT.  At the other table, North initiated an exploration to find a 4-4 fit in a major and bid 4♣ intended (and received) as Stayman.  The 4♥ response was not the major they hoped for, and it was unclear how to proceed.  Would 5NT now be ‘Grand Slam Force (GSF)’ advising partner to proceed to 7♥ if they hold 2 of the top 3 honors in hearts?  Looking at their hand (♥AKQJ), South should be able to see that that cannot be what partner intends by their 5NT call.  However, North doesn’t know what hearts South holds.  What North wants to do is force slam, with a choice of 6NT or 6♠ contracts.  5NT perhaps should be that.  It certainly could be that.  But since North was unclear what bid would make partner choose (between 6♠ and 6NT), they decided to end the auction with 6NT, the same contract that was reached at the other table.  Stayman at a lower level would have simplified the auction (Kokish anyone? – although that still may not solve the problem).  When the auction begins with 1NT, there are many standard tools dealing with a “choice of game” (do we want to play 3NT or 4 of a major?).  Everyone knows if partner asks for a major, hears one, then jumps to 3NT, they were ‘obviously’ interested in the other major.  So, when the NT bidder holds both, they remove 3NT to 4 of the other major.  Here, the bidding tools with unfamiliar partnerships were not sufficiently refined.  With spades and diamonds behaving, 13 tricks (via 2 diamond ruffs in the South hand) are easy in a spade contract.  Bottom line, be sure you and partner know/agree as to the meaning of 4♣ after an auction that starts out 2♣-2♦-3NT (Gerber or Stayman?).   Also, have an agreement about the meaning of 5NT (GSF or ‘pick a slam’).  Through the years, most experts have evolved to where 5NT is almost always ‘pick a slam’ – that meaning comes up much more frequently and provides much greater utility.  Still, if partner is not on the same page, 5NT can be a very dangerous bid!

Now, on to the play/defense – both declarers were trying to find 12 tricks in 6NT.  The opening lead is automatic – you have a nice safe diamond honor sequence to lead.  Declarer plays small, and I…well, I think I should have taken more time before playing to this trick.  I owe partner a count card.  Trying to not tank forever, I played the (upside down count card) ♦7.  In the moment, I thought, even if unlikely, the ♦9 might be useful, so I will save it.  The lead of the ♦Q is almost certainly ♦QJ10, otherwise it could be too dangerous.  If partner holds ♦QJ10, my ♦9 has no use, so I should play it to make my count clear to partner.  If, unlikely, partner found the ♦Q lead from ♦QJ5 and declarer held ♦K108, my play of the ♦9 would provide a finesse for declarer to bring in the whole diamond suit for 4 winners and no losers.  But, in that situation, playing the ♦7 would possibly have the same effect, since, if I win a trick, I will then lead the ♦9.  All of that is extremely unlikely, but I didn’t work that out at the time and played the  ♦7.  You will soon see why that was significant.

Where is declarer going to find 12 tricks?  This hand has 11 top cashing tricks: 4+4+2+1 with virtually no chance for a 12th trick except for the ♣K on side (in the West hand).  Lead small to the ♣Q and hope.  At trick 2, that is what declarer did, and I won my ♣K.  When I led the ♦9 to trick 3, partner doesn’t know if my trick one play of the ♦7 was from the ♦97 or ♦976!?!  Of course declarer won the ♦A and cashed their 8 major suit winners, ending in dummy with a small diamond and small club remaining in dummy.  When the last spade was cashed at trick 11, partner was holding ♦J and ♣J10 and had to make a discard.  Who holds the ♦6?  If declarer started with 4=4=3=2, partner had to save their diamond.  If declarer was 4=4=2=3, partner had to toss their diamond, knowing I could beat the lowly ♦4 remaining in dummy!  When partner selected a club discard, declarer had found their 12 tricks out of thin air.  We were -990 while our teammates were -50, lose 14 IMPs.

I wish I had played my ♦9!  Meanwhile North-South wish they had found the auction to arrive in 6♠.

The same auction was used at both tables to arrive in 3NT.  Nearly all pairs would reach 3NT if this hand were played hundreds of times.  My partner chose to lead the unbid major (♠9) to attempt to locate our source of tricks.  My preference when leading from length without strength is second best (here, the ♠5).  I have two reasons for this preference.  First, it is possible, on a different layout, that the ♠9 could eventually be established as a power trick.  Second, partner knows, for certain, when a 9 is led, that partner’s suit will be 1, 2 or 3 long – never more.  It can help count the hand.  This is another understanding worth having with partner (but it made no difference on this hand).  After the spade lead, declarer simply needed to knock out 2 aces and claim their 11 tricks.  When I ducked trick 1, declarer won and led a heart.  When that won, they crossed to the ♣A and led another heart.  Partner’s doubleton ♥A won that and on the spade continuation, the defense was done.  Declarer had 3+4+2+2 for 11 tricks without a club finesse. 

At the other table, holding an entry and a 5 card suit, West made the opening lead of the ♦5, traditional 4th from longest and strongest.  This gave declarer a greater challenge. 

There are several ways to attack the hand, looking for 9 tricks.  Plan A: he could win the diamond in hand (preserving the crucial diamond entry if needed to reach the established hearts) and lead a heart towards the strength.  When that wins, cross to hand with the ♣A and lead another heart.  When West’s ♥A appears, it allows dummy to win 4 hearts to go with 2 each in clubs and diamonds.  Still when diamonds are continued after winning the ♥A, diamonds are established for the defense, so there is no time to go after spade tricks.  Declarer must take the club finesse.  When the ♣Q turns out to be on side, they have 10 tricks instead of the 11 won at my table.

Plan B: duck the opening diamond lead in both hands, winning trick 2 in dummy with the ♦A.  Ducking the first trick is rather standard technique when holding 5 cards including the A and K.  If the major suit aces are split, and if diamonds are 5-3, and if you guess which major suit ace is held by the long diamond hand, you can lock that hand out by ducking early.  After winning the ♦A, you could lead a club to the ♣A and a heart towards dummy.  If that wins, it seems best (Plan B1) to switch to a club finesse.  By ducking the diamond at trick 1 and the opponents ducking the heart, the heart suit is currently without an entry.  On this hand, if you do lead the ♣J at this point, you will both find the ♣Q and gain an entry back to hearts.  So, upon winning a club in hand, you can lead hearts again.  When the ♥A goes on air, the hearts are good and you only lose the diamond you ducked and 2 major suit aces, 10 tricks total.  What if the club finesse loses?  It is still possible to find 9 tricks, but only if both missing aces are with the short diamonds.  You will lose a trick in each suit, but score 2+2+2+3.  An alternative (Plan B2) would be to next try spades after winning the first heart lead in dummy.  Assuming they duck and your ♠K wins, lead another heart.  The doubleton ♥A must win the second lead of hearts, and they will stick you back in your hand with your ♦K.   You now have no real choice except to play clubs surrendering a trick to the ♣Q.  But, when that hand is out of diamonds, you only lose a trick in each suit and score 9 tricks for 3NT bid and made.  What about Plan B2: duck a diamond, win the ♦A, lead a spade?  This could work if diamonds are 5-3 and the ♠A had been with the long diamonds, but if they duck their ♠A, now what?  Lead a heart, winning in dummy, and lead another spade?  Now they might win that with the ♠A (again, assuming West had the long diamonds and the ♠A) and lead spades, getting the defense up to possibly 2 spade tricks and a possible trick in every other suit.  So, if allowed to win a spade and win a heart, it must be time to try the club finesse.  When that wins, a spade can force your 9th trick:  2+1+2+4.

What about Plan C:  at the other table, my  teammate/declarer won the opening diamond lead in hand with the ♦K (preserving the ♦A in dummy as an entry to hearts, but leaving the opponents with communication when diamonds were divided 5-3).  At trick 2, they led a heart to dummy, but when dummy won the high heart, declarer continued with a second high heart from dummy, hoping for hearts to be 3-3 or the ♥10 doubleton.  But, if that were the case, that would still be the case if they had bothered to first lead a club to the ♣A and then another heart up.  That sequence of plays would add the chance of the doubleton ♥A onside to their chances for tricks.  As it was, diamonds were continued upon winning the ♥A, establishing diamonds for the defense prior to establishing hearts for declarer.  Now declarer had no route to 9 tricks.  If he attacked spades, the opponents would win and cash diamonds.  If he took a winning the club finesse, he can only reach 8 tricks (0+2+2+4).  So, we were -660 while our teammates were -100, lose 13 IMPs.  Plan C was not a success.

 

 

Playing 20-21 HCP for a 2NT opening bid, one player looked at their balanced hand, counted 21 HCP and opened 2NT.  Responder counted their points.  Even with a point added for their 5 card suit, they only saw a combined maximum of 32 points, so they tried Stayman, found the 4-4 fit, and then signed off in 4♥.  At my table, the same South hand upgraded their balanced 21 HCP to reach 22 points, so the bidding started off 2♣-2♦-2NT.  North evaluated to 11 points, did the math, and tried for the 33 point slam in NT.  With weak hearts, a 4-4 heart fit might fail on a bad split when 12 tricks are there in NT, so I like the bounce to the NT slam (forgoing Stayman) assuming partner has their 22 points.  As it was, it was an excellent slam in either hearts or NT (although I prefer NT to avoid the potential of a defensive ruff).  NT is a clear 75% slam (win one of 2 50-50 finesses).  This is a slam you would always want to be in if you could examine both the North and South hands.  However, if you could also examine the East-West hands, you would decline the slam, since both kings were offside!  Very lucky for our side, unlucky for our opponents.  Our teammates were +650 in their heart contract, we were +100 defeating 6NT, win 13 IMPs.

Was South’s hand worth an upgrade?  The honors are clustered, touching and helping each other.  Offsetting that is a worthless doubleton in diamonds.  Still they arrived in a great slam.

 

 

Several years back, I became rather well known for the belief that 3rd hand should ‘never’ allow 4th seat to see 3 green pass cards.  That is, open ‘anything’ in 3rd seat.  As West, I would never open this hand in first or second seat (yes, many strong club players are opening all 11 point hands and nearly all 10 point hands, but that is a whole different structure).  I have mellowed some over the years (some hands simply aren’t worth opening – the downside exceeds the upside).  Still, an opening bid in 3rd seat can often prove disruptive to the opponents bidding (sometimes with undesired and unexpected consequences!).

Here, both West players concluded they should open the bidding in third seat.  I started with 1♠ and North tried Michaels (2♠) to show the other major and a minor.  My partner bounced to 4♠ giving North-South a serious problem.  How much defense do they have against 4♠ and how much offense do they have to try for 11 tricks in hearts?  At my table, South tried for the two way 5♥ bid – maybe it makes, maybe it is a save against a making 4♠ contract?  I doubled to make sure partner didn’t try to save – my flat hand suggested (to me) limited offense and better defense.  Clearly, I had no reason to think we could score 3 tricks against 5♥ but if they made it, I thought the loss would be less than if we went on to 5♠.

At the other table, the West hand chose 1♣ for their ‘opening bid.’  Then, after a simple 1♥ overcall, their partner (East) bid 1♠.  When South showed an invitational heart raise (via their 2♣ cue bid), West was sufficiently embarrassed about their initial light opening, that they did not raise spades!?!  North bid the heart game and ended the auction.

Even with the club honors in poor position for declarer, the 3-3 club split allowed a ruff to establish the suit so that the only losers in the heart contract were the 2 clubs and the trump ♥A.  That meant 10 easy tricks, but not 11.  We were +100 to go with +420, win 11 IMPs.

How does the 4♠ contract fare?  There are a variety of ways the defense can get 4 tricks including the unlikely start of two top diamonds and a diamond ruff to go with the trump ♠A.  However, there are ways that the play can go that would allow a club discard on a diamond, so that declarer would only lose 2 diamonds and the ♠A.  Barring the early ruff, the defense needs to lead clubs early and often (not obvious for South to lead into ♣AQ3).  It is clearly unlikely that declarer will find 10 tricks in spades, but bidding 4♠ over 4♥ seems like a worthwhile insurance bid – little potential of a big loss, and possibly a big save.  I especially don’t understand the failure to support spades early and let partner decide if they want to defend or save when 4♥ was reached.  Somebody needed to bid 4♠.

 

 

There were a number of different bidding decisions here.  As dealer, South gets to open a red suit.  One chose the longer diamonds and when the bidding came back around, they bid, opposite a passing partner, 3♥!  (yes, they are 6-5, but 9 working HCP seems a bit much when partner could not muster a negative double)  At that point, my partner hoped that I held some useful card(s) and bid the slam.  Unless all of my values were in the red suits (that South had been bidding), there figured to be some chance for 12 tricks (either long clubs to make them all good, or short clubs and ruff them good).  So, the slam was a bit unilateral, but had the benefit of being cold.

The other table opened the 5 card major, judging that the hand wasn’t sufficiently strong to reverse.  The black hand decided to show a 2-suited Michael’s bid, and when they heard a spade response, they kept cue bidding hearts, trying to get partner to show some life and encourage them to bid the slam.  In the end, they subsided in 5♠.

There was little to the play – after entering dummy with the ♣Q, lead spades.  When the ♠K shows up, play another round in case it was a false card.  When there is still a trump outstanding, declarer needs to review the situation.  If clubs split, 12 tricks are there for the taking.  But, what if clubs don’t split?  Whenever you are in this situation, you are faced with a 100% right play.  Play clubs and find out  if clubs split before drawing the last trump!  If clubs split favorably, draw trump and claim.  If clubs don’t split, and the opponent ruffs, you were not making the hand anyway.  If clubs don’t split, and the opponent with the long club has the long trump, you can ruff the clubs good with the  last trump in dummy, THEN draw trump, run your clubs, score your slam.

That is how the play went at the table that was in 5♠, scoring 12 tricks.  Sadly, after bidding the slam, partner drew trump and proceeded to lose a club to the ♣J, down 1.  We were -200 and our teammates were -680, lose 13 IMPs.

Note “100%” didn’t mean the slam is assured.  It just means that if it can be made you will make it, and if it could never be made, you are no worse off.  Heads you win, tails you tie.  Very important.

 

 

One more slam to end the day.  At our table, different bidding judgment drove our opponents into a 3NT contract.  There were lots of bids at both tables where both strain (♣,♥ or NT) and level (game or slam) was in serious question.  The only reasonable slam was in clubs, and our teammates reached the 6♣ slam which could be made with careful (double dummy?) play.  How do you score 12 tricks in clubs?  There are some layouts where you can score 12 tricks even with hearts 4-1 and clubs 3-1.  I think you have to assume that clubs are 2-2 or 3-1 and assume the ♣Q is with West.  You also might need to assume the ♠K is onside so that you can win 2 spade tricks.  The question is ‘how many arrows are in your quiver?’  What is the worst layout you can handle and still score 12 tricks?  How do you get 12 tricks?  And, if the actual layout is not as bad as the assumed worst layout, will you go down when the cards were normal, but you are playing the line of play required to make it with the worst layout?

Here is a line of play (Call it Plan A1: it handles 4-1 hearts and 3-1 clubs, ♣Q onside, ♠K onside): At trick one, play the  ♥A and (find out if hearts are breaking 3-2 or 4-1 right away) play another heart, losing to ♥J as you follow and West shows out.  After two rounds of hearts, it will take 2 more being ruffed before the last two are established, so you may need the spade finesse as well.  For now, assume that East continues with a diamond: Win the ♦A pitching a spade, finesse the ♣10, ruff a heart with the ♣A, finesse the ♣J (were they 3-1?), cash the ♣K (remember I’m assuming West held ♣Qxx in my worst case hand) and ruff a heart with your last trump.  Now you can ruff a diamond in dummy, cash the two good hearts and dummy is left with the ♠QJ to take the spade finesse and score 12 tricks: 2+3+1+6. 

That sounds good, and ends up working on the actual layout, except then, (assuming East returned a diamond after winning the heart lead at trick 2), you don’t even need the spade finesse (Call it Plan A2)!  That is because, on the actual layout, with trump 2-2, you have the luxury of an extra trump remaining in each hand (that extra trump was not needed for the 3rd round of drawing trump) and you are able to score 1+3+1+7.

What if East returns a spade?  I think this is a pure guess.   By leading a heart at trick 2, you have learned the bad news early that hearts are indeed 4-1.  But, as you can see from the scenarios above, if trump are 2-2, you don’t need the spade finesse.  If trump are 3-1, you do need the spade finesse.  Pick one – either you take the finesse or you don’t.

Is there a better line of play, a better parlay?  Let’s call this Plan B.  What about win the ♥A at trick 1 and draw trump, assuming a 2-2 split, and now you play a heart, learning that they were 4-1 as feared (this was the actual line of play chosen at the table)?  After this start, with best defense, there is no parlay, no line of play, no continuation that allows you to score 12 tricks on the actual lie of the cards.  The (correct) defense after winning the ♥J is to continue with a diamond which allows you to ruff in dummy and start setting up hearts, but when the hearts are finally established, there is no entry to use them.  After drawing trump there are two dummy entries (needed to establish hearts) but a third dummy entry is required to cash the hearts.  Even with the spade finesse and 2-2 trump, declarer can only score 2+1+1+7, but there is no 12th trick possible without establishing the hearts.  And no long heart can be enjoyed without entries. However, note, if East returns a spade after winning the ♥J, on the actual layout, that is the only way to allow you to make the hand using Plan B (getting helpful defense) – it gives you a crucial extra entry (you let the spade lead ride around to the ♠Q.

How does Plan B fair if hearts were 3-2 and trump 2-2?  Great!  Only 1 ruff is required to set up hearts, and one entry to cash them, and those entries are there after drawing trump (two trump remaining for diamond ruffs).  You score 1+4+0+7 – you don’t even need the spade finesse or the ♦A for a trick!  But Plan B failed on the actual deal.  

How does plan A fair if the hearts were 3-2 and trump 2-2?  OK.  You require the ♣Q to be with West, but you do not require 2-2 trump and, as with Plan B, you do not require the spade finesse when trump are 2-2.  The established hearts as well as scoring the trumps separately will be your source of tricks.

What about Plan C?  I can’t really find a line of play that allows for more chances – can you see a better way to play this?

As the cards were distributed, after the ♥A wins the first trick, declarer has to make a decision.  If hearts are 3-2, this shouldn’t be too hard, especially if clubs are 2-2.  But, would East double for a heart lead with only ♥KQ7?  East knows that it won’t take too many ruffs to establish hearts.  I think the double almost has to be based on KQJ7, and if the lead of the ♥6 is to be believed, it is guaranteed to be a singleton.  So, looking at the lead and the bidding, it would appear hearts must be 4-1.  If so, Plan B has no chance and Plan A has reasonable chances.  Well, that is how I’m seeing it.  I’m certainly interested if someone sees a better parlay that brings more alternative distributions into a successful line of play for 12 tricks based on this auction and lead.

What about the play in 3NT?  Partner led a diamond, but when declarer played clubs for 5 tricks and finessed in spades, 9 tricks were there.  So we were -600 defending 3NT and our teammates were -200, down 1 in 6♣X, lose 13 IMPs.

Enough on the play, what about the bidding on board 20.  Clearly the auction starts 1♥-2♣.  Opener has a 6th heart (is it a priority to show that?) as well as strong clubs with a side void.  If you raise clubs and partner immediately supports hearts, you know you have a 6-3 heart fit (they would surely find some probing bid for NT if they only held 2 hearts).   If you raise clubs and partner does not support hearts, there will be at most 2 hearts in his hand and a club slam starts to look reasonable.   I think it is right to raise clubs immediately, but others may have different opinions.  Anyway, you can see from the auction, the table that repeated hearts for their rebid roamed around awhile and ended in 3NT.  The table that raised clubs also roamed around awhile and eventually bid the slam.  Slam is excellent (cold) if clubs are 2-2 and hearts 3-2.  So, it certainly isn’t a terrible slam.  I think the double gives a pretty clear indication how to play the hand – lacking the double, Plan B will likely be chosen and the slam will fail.  With the double, declarer might have found Plan A and scored their doubled slam.  It is always nice to help partner on opening lead, but make sure you aren’t helping declarer, nor sending them from a failing contract into a making contract (as they run to something else).  Here there is no alternative contract to run to (but the double does provide information to assist declarer in playing the hand).

Full disclosure: Dan played the hand.  We rode together.  It was on the way home that, together, that we figured out how to make it.  Is it too much double dummy?  It is not, unless someone can find a better line that handles a more likely distribution. 

Epilogue:  I think the theme of this hand is a combination of counting tricks and shape.  If you know hearts are 4-1 (I think the bidding and lead confirm this), then Plan B cannot establish hearts, and you cannot possibly reach 12 tricks without establishing hearts, so Plan B fails. Even with the spade finesse, 2+1+1+7 is your maximum total and you are 1 trick shy.  You have to set up hearts.  And, the only way to do that is to start early…and ruff with the ♣A, hoping the ♣Q is onside for a later finesse.  One more variation of the play is possible: what if, using plan A, East leads a heart at trick 3 after winning the ♥J?  Since you know, and East knows that you know, you are not making the hand without establishing hearts, East shouldn’t be leading hearts to help you.  If they do, you ruff with the ♣A as you had planned before.  However, the heart lead (instead of a diamond) lost the crucial entry to hand (which was the ♦A, had they led a diamond).  So now, after ruffing that heart lead with the ♣A, you lead clubs to the ♣J (finessing the ♣Q), and you have a choice.  If believe clubs are 2-2, you can simply cash the ♣K, ruff out the last heart, and take your 12 tricks without bothering with the spade finesse.  Or, if you believe clubs are 3-1, you can (and you must) take the spade finesse to enter hand and take a repeat club finesse.  This variation is a flavor of the spade lead at trick 3: that is, do you finesse in spades or play the ♠A?  Count your tricks.  Guess the shape.  If clubs are 2-2, you have enough tricks without the spade finesse.  If clubs are 3-1, you require the spade finesse.  There is no right answer that will guarantee the contract.  Counting your tricks: when hearts are 4-1 and clubs 2-2, you have 7 club tricks and do not need 2 spade tricks.  When hearts are 4-1 and clubs 3-1, you only have 6 club tricks so you need 2 spade tricks.

Finally, there is one more critical variation on Plan B.  Plan B simply said ‘play 2 rounds of trump and then lead a heart’ – but, it didn’t say HOW you play 2 rounds of trump.  The ‘natural’ way is ♣A and small to ♣K.  That is wrong.  Since you can easily lead hearts from either hand to start the establishment, the right way to draw trump is to start with the ♣K.  Why?  If the ♣Q falls singleton, you need to lead hearts immediately (draw at most one more trump, but you cannot completely draw trump) and retain the ♣A in hand for the heart ruff  – only 1 heart ruff is required, but…you must retain at least the ♣10x in dummy for dummy entries to finish drawing trump and ruff a diamond while establishing hearts.  It is not possible to draw 3 rounds of trump and then set up hearts, even when hearts are 3-2 because you still have the need for 2 entries, one to ruff them good and 1 to use them.  If you first play the ♣A and the ♣Q falls singleton, 12 tricks can no longer be made, even if hearts had been 3-2!  The endless variations and complexities of bridge in general (and this hand in particular) provide fascination for a lifetime.  Plays you routinely make on one hand may not be right for this hand!  Play carefully!