Recap of 11/4/2013 28 board IMP individual

Often I begin my post whining about the many swings that went against me that I had nothing to do with the cause of the adverse swing (although often there is something I could have done to alter the end result).  Yesterday I was on the receiving end of many such swings, but not enough to win – Ed Nagy was the winner.  Such is bridge.

Lots of big (8 or more IMPs) swings yesterday.  Start with Board 1

 

 

The first 4 bids were the same at both tables.  Then, at one table after West’s double, North, with KQx in the implied suits of RHO’s double, decided to try 1NT.  At my table, North passed the double and East (Dan) faced a problem.  He could pass and possibly face -180 or -280.  Double dummy play is able to bring home 1♥, but I’m sure I would have failed, losing the finesse of the ♥K.  He could try 2♦, his longest suit of the two suits offered.  He decided to try 1NT, although that traditionally shows more like 7-10 HCP.  He does have an eventual stopper in both of our suits.  I (South) doubled and everyone sat.  Double dummy defense produces 8 tricks for our side, and with the West hand exposed, that defense proved rather easy to achieve.  At the other table, the offense (by North in 2NT) is much less obvious.  Without the exposed hand, the suits are tangled, entries are complicated, the heart finesse loses and although the same 8 tricks are there double dummy for North as declarer, in the fullness of time declarer only arrived at 7 tricks in a 2NT contract.  +300 vs. +50 for our side, win 8 IMPs.

In the defense of 1NTX, my opening lead of the ♣9 produced the ♣A from dummy and the ♣7 from partner.  From that, I knew clubs were not our source of tricks.  Trick 2 declarer led the ♦2, partner winning the ♦Q.  Trick 3 was a small heart ducked all around.  Trick 4 continued with the ♥K.  I won the ♥A and led the ♠10, keeping transportation.  When declarer covered with the ♠J, we were able to cash out our 8 tricks (4+3+1+0).  But, if declarer lets my ♠10 hold, I shift to a diamond and we score 3+3+2+0 for the same 8 tricks.

Dan observed they should not be playing 1NTX and was wondering who should have pulled.  I guess East or West either one could have run to 2♦, and likely they would have played it there for a likely -50.  Or, perhaps we start bidding over 2♦ and go minus?

Board 6

I don’t know the auction at the other table, but both tables arrived in 4♥.  With the diamond ruffs available in dummy, it turns out the only lead to beat 4♥ is the ♥6.  Trump leads killing diamond ruffs leave declarer a trick short.  However, both tables led partner’s suit (♦10) and after winning trick 1, East  (me) has to find a shift.  Double dummy there is now no lead that can beat it.  When dummy has a long side suit threatening (clubs), a shift to the suit of the side entry (here spades), is often effective.  The spade was led at trick 2 at the other table and declarer began ruffing diamonds and brought home 10 tricks (I don’t know the full line of play – this is where BBO is incredibly helpful for someone trying to compare lines of play/defense/bidding).   I decided to lead a high trump at trick 2 and declarer won the ♥A and ruffed a diamond.  Now, to bring 4♥ home, declarer must cross to his ♠K to lead the ♣J and let it ride.  Had he made that play at this point, against subsequent best defense and best declarer play, he gets 10 tricks.  But no other play (after ruffing a diamond at trick 3) can arrive at 10 tricks.  Instead of leading to the ♠K and floating the ♣J, Jack tried cashing the ♣AK.  When I ruffed, he could over ruff and ruff another diamond, but that still left another diamond to lose as well as 2 trump tricks on power.  Jack (South, declarer at my table) was lamenting not floating the ♣J.  At the time we thought ♥4 would still fail even if he found the play of floating the ♣J but, in fact with the right sequence of plays, he can arrive at 10 tricks (except against an initial trump lead which neither table got).  In the fullness of time I scored 2 trump tricks and 2 diamond tricks for -1.  In the end game, I gave declarer an undeserved diamond trick so we could have actually had -2, but with 4♥ making by our teammates we still picked up 10 IMPs (+420 +50) on the hand.

I think the heart suit is very interesting.  The power of the ♥KQ98 is neutralized (after floating the ♣J) by leading the ♣AK off dummy.  East can ruff low, but the ♥J10 can over ruff, leaving only the high trump for East to score a trick.  And, if East discards, south discards, eventually endplaying East with the remaining diamond so all they get is the high trump and 2 diamond tricks.  But, this only works if there are TWO high clubs to lead from dummy, thus the need to float the ♣J.  I think that is pretty double dummy (as is the opening lead of the singleton trump).  Nevertheless, I thought it was an interesting hand.

Board 10

 Different judgment on the opening bid resulted in different contracts.  At the other table (my teammates) opened 2♠ and soon were in 6♠.  As you can see, 6♠ is cold, but only if you drop the doubleton ♦Q offside.  At my table, East dealt and passed (1st seat VUL) and they got to 4♠.  After the lead of the ♥A and a club shift, declarer won the ♣A, drew trump, finessed in diamonds and lost the club, making 10 tricks at both tables, -620, -200, lose 13 IMPs (or win, depending on which side you were on).

Board 11

 

Here I was issued a speeding ticket.  I’m rather infamous within our group for wanting to “never show 4th seat 3 green (pass) cards”.  Never is a long time.  Sometimes 3rd seat just doesn’t have a bid.  Here I made one up and Ed Nagy issued me a speeding ticket.  If teammate Bruce had pulled off 4♥ at the other table (he decided to discard a club rather than ruff the last diamond and the hand collapsed), the speeding ticket would have only cost 2 IMPs.  As it was, -500 and -50 cost 11 IMPs.  A swing of 22 IMPs vs. Ed, who beat me by 8 IMPs on the day.  Darn.  As Bruce said ‘another data point’ – implying correctly that the good results of a light 3rd seat ‘opener’ which was successful in obstructing the opponents bidding have to be offset by results like these.  Not a good result!

Ed wanted a spade lead to collect +800, but double dummy shows that -3 is the best defensive result that can be achieved against 2♠X.

Board 14

 

Another slam swing, this time in my favor.  The other table played in 3NT, -460.  My partner (Ed) decided to try 1NT on his 4=4=4=1 hand and we were quickly in 6NT.  Clubs 3-3 make it easy, but that never happens.  The heart finesse possibility was eliminated at trick 1 via a ♥8 lead, ♥J, ♥Q, ♥K.  Of course Ed cashed the ♣Q, crossed to the ♦K and played clubs from the top.  Round 4 of clubs put Bruce on lead and he wanted to take away the (successful) diamond finesse option immediately, so he led a diamond and Ed didn’t want to go down yet, so he flew the ♦A.  Now Ed crossed to the ♥A and played the last 2 clubs.  With the favorable spade position, he was always destined to succeed, but on the last club Bruce pitched the ♥10, hoping Dan had led an initial 2nd best and that Dan held the ♥9.  So, Ed pitched his spade, took the spade finesse and had his 12th trick (2+3+2+5) via the ♥9.  +990, win 11 IMPs.

Board 16

 

Unfortunately, I don’t know the bidding at the other table, but they arrived in 3♥, making +140.  At my table, Ed found a slightly aggressive 3♥ rebid and I raised to the game.  Ed won the ♦A at trick 1 and led a trump up, Bruce ducking.  Then he crossed to a spade and led another trump, Bruce taking the ♥A.  Here a club shift would have put Ed to the test, but he might have gotten it right, figuring Bruce would have a 1NT opener if he also held the ♣A.  Instead Bruce tried 2 high diamonds, Ed ruffed, drew trump and claimed when the ♠J came down, making +650, win 11 IMPs.  I suspect the club play is how they arrived at 9 tricks at the other table. 

I really like 3rd best leads, regardless of attitude (unless you have raised partner’s suit on 3 small).  Dan also plays 3rd best, but on this hand decided to try an ‘attitude’ ♦9.  Bruce might have tried the club  after winning the ♥A if he didn’t think 2 more diamonds were cashing (assuming the ♦9 was a doubleton)?  On this hand, another byproduct of leading the ♦2 instead of the ♦9 is less info for declarer.  Bruce and Dan know Dan does not have a diamond honor, but on the lead of the 2, Ed doesn’t know.  The ♦9 placed the ♦KQJT in Bruce’s hand along with the ♥A that Bruce has won.  The ♣A would get Bruce to 14 HCP and a stray ♠J would turn the hand into a 1NT opener (or perhaps an upgrade on the solid diamonds would make it a “14+” 1NT opener if Bruce had the ♣A).  Perhaps that inference (after the ♦9 lead) is enough to get the club play right.  But, we will never know because Bruce played diamonds.

I have since learned that at the other table North actually did upgrade their 13 HCP to a 14-16 strong NT opener.  So, the small club shift makes it VERY hard to find the winning play on that auction.  In fact, impossible.  So, 9 tricks was the limit, losing 2 clubs along with a diamond and the trump A.

 

Board 18

 A recurring theme in this blog has been “don’t save at IMPs” and this board shows why.  At our table 4♠ could only get 9 tricks while the ‘save’ in 5♦ went for 500.  The bidding started similarly, but I made a support double of ♠1 (showing 3 diamonds), while the other table raised to 2♦.  A simple raise to 2♠ was followed by 3♦, then an invite via 3♥, and an accept to 4♠ with nice fitting hearts.   We sat for 4♠, while the other table tried 5♦.  Of course the game makes trivially double dummy – you can see the ♥Q!  In practice, declarer had to find it.  Based on the play, hearts were 3-3.  Based on the bidding, the ♥Q could be either way.  Flip a coin.  Wrong.   A lucky win 12 IMPs (+100 and +500). 

Email input suggests an inference was available regarding the ♥Q location.  You be the judge.  In the play of the hand, I showed ♦KJx and Bruce ♦Qxxxxx.  Also, I showed ♠Ax and Bruce showed ♠Kx.  In clubs, Bruce showed out on the 3rd round as declarer cashed his ♣A and pitched a heart.  Therefore, I have Ax ?xx KJx KJxxx.  If I had the ♥Q, that gives me 14 HCP plus a 5 card club suit.  I always give myself a point for the 5 card suit and that gets me to 15.  But I didn’t open 1NT, so with more complete analysis, it must not be a coin flip after all.  Sorry Jack.  Makes Ed’s 5♦ save a winner if Jack brings it home.

Board 20

 

Not so lucky.  At the other table a simple raise to 2♥ resulted in North next bidding 3♣, ending the auction (should South push further?).  At my table, Bruce decided to bounce to 3♥, putting pressure on North.  4♣ did not have much appeal, and Jack found the winning call of 3NT.  We had no defense and lost -600 when clubs split 2-2.   We have a few hearts to cash if clubs don’t run, but clubs did run and 9 tricks became easy.  Lose 10 IMPs.  Even though 12 tricks were won in the club contract (ruff diamonds good, guess spades), the part score doesn’t score as well.

This points out the double edged nature of preempts.  You can jam the auction such that the opponents are seriously guessing (which could describe what happened here – a slightly different dummy gives no play for 3NT even with 2-2 clubs).  But you may jam them into a contract that they would never bid on their own steam, but forced to guess at the 3 level, they guess and it works.  Looking at both hands, you would want to be in 5♣.  If clubs don’t split, you still have a chance and if you do go down, you are likely down only 1.  3NT requires the club split or down a lot.

Another interesting sidelight of this hand is the ‘sometimes’ poker nature of bridge.  Bruce considered doubling 3NT, expecting them to run.  If they do run to (only) 4♣, we pick up 10 IMPs out of then air, since the other table was in a club part score.  If they get to 5♣, nothing happened, we still lose the same 10 IMPs.  If they sit for 3NTX, our loses increase by 1 IMP to 11 IMPs.  So, in hindsight, it was nearly a free double with a huge potential up side, with minimal downside.  Of course, judging what is happening at the other table, and who is bluffing whom and sorting it all out is what makes bridge such a great game.  But he didn’t double…

Board 23 

 

With no interference, our auction rolled along to 3NT, making +630.  At the other table I don’t know what North/South were bidding, but a support double (showing 3 card heart support) followed by 2NT was passed out.  When they dropped the singleton diamond K offside, they had 12 tricks, but once more the part score at that table left us winning 9 IMPs.

Board 28

 

Another slam swing.  At the other table, 3NT made 6 (an early diamond finesse, losing, resulted in a club/heart squeeze against South, as diamonds were run, for 12 tricks).  At my table, a better auction got to an excellent 6NT.  33 HCP.  Stoppers everywhere.  Seems good.  A spade was led at both tables.  In order to parlay both the diamond finesse and 3-3 hearts, the declarer (Mike) in 6NT first ducked a heart.  Of course hearts did not break.  At the end, when the diamond finesse lost, a spade was cashed for -2.  All agreed that the line of play chosen for 6NT was best for the required 12 tricks (just not the winning line on this lie of the cards).  Sometimes bridge isn’t fair.  Win 11 IMPs.

There were a few other hands of interest, but we need to play on BBO to get more complete reporting.  It is really tedious (and hugely error prone) manually entering in the bidding/hand records for each hand.  So, this is all you get.