Recap Of 5/20/2019 28 Board IMP Individual

Today there were 6 double digit swings, 3 of them fell into declarer play problems (with leads and defense also playing a factor), with bidding judgment the source for the other 3 big swings.

Both tables used traditional Jacoby 2NT in support of spades, finding heart shortness.  At my table, North then bid 3♠ to indicate a hand that could be slam suitable (it is minimum in high card, but it does have 3 key cards).  The 3♠ bid initiated a series of cue bids (4♣-4♦-4♥) with North indicating they had nothing more to say when they next bid 4♠.  They have a nice fit, all suits controlled, now what?  South decided that there would be 12 tricks available and bid the slam.  After partner’s heart lead, declarer had chances.  All he needed was to find trumps 2-2, diamonds 3-3, ♦K onside and he would be there: 7+1+3+1.  He got the ♦K onside, but that was all.  So, eventually he lost a trick in every suit but hearts for down 2, +100 for our side.

Our teammates cue bid diamonds after hearing heart shortness.  When that was doubled, South looked at their minimum values and, based on the bidding, one sure diamond to lose, so they were not seeing a route to 12 tricks with their minimum HCP so they simply signed off in 4♠, ending the auction.  When that contract came home, they were +420 to go with our +100 for 11 IMPs.  When you are at the 3 level in a game forcing auction, it is good to have agreements about what subsequent bids imply.  Many play a ‘fast arrival’ approach that suggests limited/no controls in unbid suits and zero slam interest.  Partner may proceed at their own peril.  I think North is too strong to immediately sign off in 4♠ over 3♥.  But whether they bid 3♠ waiting (the bid chosen at our table), 3NT non-serious slam try, or 4♦ cue bid of their cheapest control (chosen by our teammates) is somewhat a matter of style, judgment and bidding agreements.  Always good to have bidding agreements.  Here, I guess South just fell in love with his hand.

Both tables had the same auction with the same lead.  Now to find 9 tricks.  When the ♦Q holds the first trick, you certainly have 4+1+2+unknown opportunities in clubs as well as potential for additional diamond and heart tricks.  This hand was about the play (and defense).

At my table, I followed with the ♦7 at trick 1, showing count and saving the ♦10 which may be useful.  Declarer played a heart to the ♥Q (noting the fall of ♥9) and cashed 4 spades.  On the last spade, I played the ♣9, declarer pitched a fateful diamond while partner played their ♦2 (confirming a 5 card suit – often when forced to discard from the suit of your original 4th best lead, you want to play your original 3rd best (if the spot doesn’t cost you), leaving declarer in the dark as to whether your initial suit was 4 long or 5 long).  Next declarer led a heart, thinking a bit about ducking, but eventually played the ♥A, dropping the ♥J.  Declarer had a plan.  He decided my ♣9, in theory, showing nothing in clubs had been a false card ploy to deceive (and that I actually held the ♣A), so all he had to do was strip the last diamond out of my hand (by cashing his ♦A) and lead hearts.  He had taken the first 8 tricks and needed 1 more.  I could cash two hearts (the ♥K7), but would be forced to lead away from my presumed ♣A, giving him his 9th trick in dummy with the ♣K.  This would have worked quite well as the cards lie if he had kept all of his diamonds.  Yes, my spades, hearts and diamonds would be gone, forcing me to lead clubs.  If I had the ♣A, his plan worked.  But if my partner had the ♣A, his plan also works…as long as he keeps all of his diamonds.  Partner would be forced to either cash the ♦K and lead a diamond to his ♦J for his 9th trick, or lead a club to the ♣K in dummy for his 9th trick.  As it was, we took the last 5 tricks, 2 hearts, 2 diamonds and a club.  So we were +100.

Meanwhile, our teammates (also playing 3NT by South) won the ♦Q at trick 1 while my hand followed with the ♦10 (upside down attitude).  Declarer continued with a heart at trick 2, ducked around to West’s ♥9 (a better way to come closer to assuring 2 heart tricks – but complicating getting those 2 tricks), and West exited with a safe spade.  Declarer cashed four spades (keeping all his diamonds, and so did West, both players pitching a club).  Next declarer led a heart to the ♥A, dropping the ♥J and continued with a heart to the ♥10 to force out the ♥K, establishing the ♥Q for the second heart trick.  On this trick West pitched the ♣Q, still keeping all his diamonds, thinking that the ♦10 played by East at trick 1 promised 3 diamonds and that declarer started with ♦AJ6.  My hand (East) won the ♥K and continued with their remaining diamond (♦7) which was covered with the ♦J and ♦K.  Nine tricks have been played (4 spades, 3 hearts, 2 diamonds) with dummy (North) following suit to all 9 tricks, leaving dummy with the 4 clubs they started with.  During those 9 tricks, declarer won 6 and lost 3, and he needs 3 more out of the last 4.  Declarer has a high diamond and high heart in their hand, but no way to get to them without help from the defense.  But with hearts and spades gone, West was down to leading diamonds (into declarer’s ♦A8) or their now singleton ♣A.  If East had started with 3 diamonds, a diamond lead at this point leaves declarer with only 2 more tricks (high red cards) – the defense will score the last 2 (high minor suit cards) for down 1.  Had West discarded 1 diamond and 1 club, the defense can abandon diamonds and score (at least) 2 club tricks for down 1.  West led diamonds after winning the ♦K, allowing South to score their ♦A8 as well as the ♥Q.  That brought declarer’s total to 9 tricks for +600 to go with our +100 to win 12 IMPs. 

At trick 9, if West had kept the ♣AQ (pitching 1 diamond and 1 club), declarer must not finesse in diamonds but use this opportunity to gain access to his red winners.  If declarer goes up with the ♦A, and cashes the ♥Q, West has no effective answer.  On the heart lead, they can throw their ♣Q, but then must surrender a trick to the ♦J at trick 13.  If they throw a diamond on the ♥Q, they must surrender a trick to the ♣K at trick 13.  Declarer must end up relying upon the ♣A being onside.

So, which diamond spot to play at trick 1 turned out to be critical (and, at our table, which diamond spot to discard was also critical – when West played their original 5th best diamond, declarer could be 100% certain that diamonds were 5-2).  I have always heard ‘if you can’t beat the J at trick 1, your attitude is already clear, give count.’  Here dummy didn’t play the ♦J, but the ♦Q.  So do I give attitude with the ♦10 or count with the ♦7?  It isn’t so much what I mean by the card I play, but rather how partner interprets what I play.  I thought that the ♦10 might be important/useful in the diamond suit, so I saved it.  But rules (known by and followed by both players) can be really useful.  Partner needs to be able to read your cards in order to have the most effective defense.  Of course declarer can read your cards too, and draw their own conclusions.

With most regular partners, I lead (Rusinow) ♥K from ♥AK.  This was not my regular partner, but somehow I still led the ♥K.  When I saw dummy, I shifted to diamonds.  Declarer won, drew trump and led the ♣10.  I made a reflexive cover play of the ♣Q (seeing dummy, that is impossibly bad –  playing the ♣Q can never be right!), partner won his ♣A, I got my ♥A and declarer had their 10 tricks, -620.  Due to my weird ♥K (accidental) lead, declarer wasn’t sure where the ♥A was, so he had no assurance that he could obtain a club discard on the ♥Q, so he was looking for the ♣Q to be onside.  It was.

At the other table, the defense cashed both hearts prior to shifting to a diamond.  Declarer drew trump and, with the ♥Q available in dummy for a club discard, they led a club to the…♣K!  The defense cashed their 2 club tricks to go with their 2 heart tricks for down 1.  North had doubled at his second bid, indicating values (and red cards), but North did pass the first time over 1♠ (as did I).  North holds a strong heart suit, but I think, with both vulnerable, the hand and suit are not strong enough to come in the first time.  Some thought West should get the club guess right based on North not acting the first time. Holding ♠xx ♥AKJxx ♦Jxxx ♣Ax – after the forcing NT by East and 2♣ rebid by West, this is a routine double (the hand may belong to us).  Is this enough to make an offshape double over 1♠?  A 2♥ overcall of 1♠?  You be the judge.  If the hand shown had to bid the first time (if they were that strong including the ♣A), then they cannot hold the ♣A.  If someone holding that hand might pass over 1♠, then the club play is a total guess.

Bottom line, I gave declarer no guess, and our teammate got the club guess wrong.  We were -620 and teammates -100, lose 12 IMPs.

Our bidding certainly got us to an excellent contract that had some chances even if my diamonds were not so strong (if we find 3-3 spades or 2-1 diamonds, that would have helped a lot, not to mention if my ♣KJ were the ♣A).  As it was, my high diamonds meant the opponents did not have them, so they could be squandered with ruffs and allow declarer to get back to their hand (ruffing high) and still be able to draw trump.  I like the first 5 bids by our side, up through 5♦, and I like partner’s raise to 6♦, but I think that bid may be less clear cut/automatic.  Bottom line, partner has a powerful playing hand with controls in all 4 suits and made a reasonable assumption that my hand would provide some useful fillers.  At the other table, the 3♥ got the auction higher faster, but actually it produced an auction quite similar to the one at my table.  As it was, South could have advanced  to 4♦ over 3NT and seen what partner did, just as my partner did.  If partner bids 4NT, give up, but if North raises diamonds, South’s playing hand definitely offers opportunities for slam.  Against 3NT, after a 9♥ lead, declarer cashed their 9 tricks making their contract.  The 9♥ was also led against 6♦, but all declarer had to do was draw 1 round of trump, noting that trump are 3-0, and get 2 spade ruffs to establish spades, and then draw trump losing a club at the end.  So we were +920 vs. -400, win 11 IMPs.

I’m not especially proud of the 1NT opening bid that I chose.  It could certainly backfire, but here the result was spectacular.  Yes, if partner responded 1♥ to my 1♣ opening bid, 1NT is a reasonable rebid.  Still I give myself a point for the 5th card in a suit (many only do that with a quality suit – this certainly fails that hurdle, since the opponents took 4 club tricks in their heart contract!).  1NT can act as a preemptive bid making the opponents auction awkward.  Many varied tools have been developed to try to get in and compete when the opponents open 1NT, since it seems the bad guys are doing it more and more.  Here North, using Meckwell, opted to show clubs and a major, East transferred to diamonds, and South thought their majors were good enough to compete to 3♥ (as pass or correct to spades, if the major isn’t hearts).  North had to guess whether to try for the vulnerable game and ultimately decided to pass.  At the other table, after my hand opened 1♣ and North overcalled 1♥, South bounced to the heart game.  With both rounded kings onside, 11 tricks were easily scored at both tables.  We were -200 while our teammates were +650, win 10 IMPs.

In the bidding, knowing partner has 6 diamonds, my 4 strong diamonds suggest we have a good non-vulnerable save against their vulnerable game.  We do, since we just lose 1 trick in each suit (-300 vs. -650).  But, no sense in prodding them into game if they are willing to play a partscore.

Similar auctions (but certainly not the same) resulted in the same contract by the same declarer at both tables.  At the other table, the J♦ was led, handing declarer their 9th trick.  In the end, North kept both the ♣Q and ♣10, so when a diamond was led, declarer also scored the ♣J at trick 13 for 10 tricks, -630 for our teammates.  After a club lead, I struggled (more on that later).  I have probably played this hand more than 80 times since Monday afternoon, using DDS – Double Dummy Solver, available for free (donations encouraged – I did) at http://www.bridgecaptain.com/downloadDD.html.  This program shows you, at each hand’s turn to play, the cards that will result in making the contract or which cards will lead to down 1, 2, … or which cards will lead to +1, 2, … overtricks if everyone plays double dummy from that point forward.  Some think using double dummy programs are cheating, but for me, it is a great learning tool.  Variations in the play (what might have happened if the defense did this or declarer did that) are fascinating and eyeopening.

What about the bidding?  All players in the group play a 2NT lebensohl relay after a double of a weak 2 opening bid.  If a bid is freely made at the 3 level, values are shown (typically 8+ HCP).  I judged that I did not have those values – a doubtful ♦Q, so even though I had a 6 card suit, I bid 2NT as a relay to clubs.  The player holding my cards at the other table thought they were too good for 2NT, so they bid a ‘value showing’ 3♣ in response to the double.  Their partner checked for a diamond stopper besides the one (♦A) they held and holding ♦Q93, West was happy to oblige by bidding 3NT.  My partner, dealing with my lebensohl 2NT but holding 7 solid tricks decided taking the relay to 3♣ was too wimpy, so they bid the NT game – I could hold the ♥J and ♠Q – definitely weak values, but those cards would create 9 tricks in NT.  3NT is a pretty good contract (“cold” on any lead – double dummy).  Where there are 8 tricks, there must be 9.

What do you lead against 3NT?  I have found that when your side bids, and the opponents, hearing your bid, go ahead and try 3NT, they are (more often than not) prepared for a lead in your suit and a ‘sneak attack’ lead is indicated.  The sneak attack is any lead other than your suit – here I thought the ♣10 was unlikely to be from ♣Q109 and that North was trying to hit their partner’s suit.  So, I went up with the ♣A at trick 1 and continued clubs with South showing out.  Darn!  Now what?  Plan the play. 

I made a (too) hasty plan that assumed North was 6=4 in the minors and had only 3 major suit cards.  If he, did, all I needed to do was extract those major suit cards and then lead a diamond.  Due to my ♦9, I had a 100% endplay against North after stripping him of his major suit cards (cover whatever South plays).  I was home!  So, I started to eliminate those ‘3’ major suit cards and crossed to the ♥A and then played the ♥ K – at this point, double dummy, it is no longer possible to achieve 9 tricks.

There are a number of ways to make the hand with this precise layout of the cards, but the ‘obvious’ one (duck a spade to ensure I can extract all of North’s major suit cards) becomes more double dummy than you might imagine.  Let’s say after winning the ♣A and ♣K, I lead the ♠2 and duck it.  Seems reasonable, and that is the play that I felt like I needed to have done at the table after the hand was over.  South wins the spade and leads his partner’s diamond suit through my ♦Q and, to make the hand, I must:

1. Win the ♦A (no other card allows 9 tricks)
2. Cash the ♠AK (no other card allows 9 tricks)
3. Lead the ♥3 to Norths singleton ♥J (no other card allows 9 tricks!)
4. North now must allow my ♣J or ♦Q to score a trick and that will be my 9th trick

But, there are other ways to make the hand.  At the table, I led the heart at trick 3 and saw the ♥J.  I could (must) revert to spades, playing 3 rounds (losing control of spades, but extracting all of North’s spades).  If, after winning the ♥A, I duck a spade prior to cashing the ♠AK, I can no longer make the hand.  This is what I was talking about when I said I could learn things from DDS.

My plan (100% certain to make the contract) was the right thinking – but I needed to include in the plan the potential that North was 3=1=5=4 and then find the right timing.  

There are so many variations on the play and defense (more than you can imagine), but they mostly come down to getting North down to all minor suit cards.  I didn’t bother discussing South’s discard at trick 2.  What does South play at trick 2 when they cannot follow to the club lead from dummy?  The actual play was the ♠4, but a heart discard will give declarer much greater problems.  If South discards a heart at trick 2, the only way to now bring in 9 tricks is:

1. Win the ♣K (no other card allows 9 tricks)
2. Lead the ♠2 (no other lead allows 9 tricks)
3. Duck the first or second spade (if you play ♠AK and another spade it does not work)
4. Win the ♦A after South plays a diamond through (no other card allows 9 tricks)
5. Cash the remaining high spade(s) ♠AK (no other card allows 9 tricks)
6. Lead the ♥3 to Norths singleton ♥J (no other card allows 9 tricks!)
7. North now must allow my ♣J or ♦Q to score a trick and that will be my 9th trick

The line of play to make the hand that is closest to ‘not double dummy’ is to win the ♣A and ♣K (noting the discard of a spade), and then lead a heart and notice the ♥J (assume it is a singleton) and then lead ♠A, ♠K and another spade.  That works on this lie of the cards, but this line fails if North had been 2=2=5=4 or 2=1=6=4.  Since I (incorrectly) ‘knew’ they were 2=1=6=4, I never thought about 3=1=5=4.  If South discards a heart on the club at trick 2, only double dummy play can bring it home with this lie of the cards.

You may be getting tired of all of these double dummy plays, but I have just a few more observations, for what they are worth.  To make the hand (double dummy), I did not have to play the ♣A (as table talk/post mortem suspected at the time).  In addition, after choosing to win trick 1 with the ♣A, 12 cards remain in dummy and, with double dummy play, I can lead any one of 11 of them and still score 9 tricks – the only fatal lead at trick 2 is cashing the ♦A (a crazy bad play).  After leading the ♦A, I will be unable to score 9 tricks, double dummy.  Any other card gives me a chance.  Given how complex this layout is, I feel much less embarrassed about failing to bring home my 9 tricks in 3NT.  I congratulate Bob on his sneak attack club lead.

One last epilogue – had North been 2=2=5=4, my play (cashing AK in both majors) works, but ducking a spade at trick 3 does not.  Bridge is a tough game.