Recap Of 6/2/2014 28 Board Imp Individual

Once more, the bidding created the majority of the swings, but defense was significant on one hand.  There were fewer large swing hands than most months, but I always enjoy looking at what decisions were made that resulted in the swings.  I am also going to mention a couple of push hands that were of interest.  Nick Wiebe joined our group for the first time today and was a winner.  Congrats Nick.

Board 3 was an amazing push

At my table (top auction), North could hardly believe their eyes when the 1♠ bid hit the table.  South was dismayed to hear the 4♥ splinter and signed off in 4♠.  However, North wasn’t done.  They made one more bid (5♥) to convey the diamond problem (and that hearts are covered).  The auction ended with 5♠ and a diamond was dutifully led.  After we cashed those 2 tricks, I just threw down my hand showing the automatic trump trick.  South was stunned because they thought they escaped disaster by bailing out in 5♠.  Surely they don’t have a trump loser?!  But today they did.  Push, since 5♠ was also reached at the other table with a dramatically different auction.  

Meanwhile, at the other table…First, with 5-5 in the majors, Dan chose to respond 1♥.  Then, with no control in diamonds (assuming the jump shift hand must have something there), tried RKCB.  They signed off in 5♠ but were one too high like the other table. 

My thoughts – I would always respond 1♠, but having responded 1♥, Dan had a chance.  After the slam invitational raise to 3♠, a bid of 4♠ should guarantee no void, no singleton, no ace, no king in the unbid suit (diamonds).  If you establish that agreement and stick to it, there is no need to reach the 5 level on any auction with 2 fast losers in both hands in a suit (that has been broadcast to the opponents).

Board 7

I don’t lead at the other table, but I think it was the same lead.  I certainly don’t know the right way to play this hand.  One loser in spades and trumps seems pretty likely and then hope to guess the clubs (which have no guess on this hand).  I thought there might be a chance, if I kept the ♥A and ♦K in dummy, that I could achieve a club discard on spades in time to avoid 2 club losers.  As the cards lie, 4♥ cannot be made…but, 4♥ was made at the other table.  

Anyway, I chose to lead the ♠J at trick 2, covered with the ♠K and the ♠A winning.  I next led the ♠10, continuing my theme of pitching a club eventually.  RHO ruffed the spade, led clubs and the contract was doomed.

At the other table, trick 2 was ♥Q, ♥3, ♥5, ♥K.  West returned a heart to the ♥A.  Next the ♣J, ♣4, ♣3, ♣Q,  In with the ♣Q, East has to decide what to do.  Many clues ‘obvious’ in the post mortem are not so obvious at the table.  Where is the ♣2?  Can I cash the ♣A and give partner a ruff?  Why didn’t they play a club higher than the ♣4 if they held 3 clubs (upside down count)?  Why didn’t declarer simply draw trump and lose 2 clubs if  they held ♣K32 (and 1=6=3=3 shape), making 2 club losers and the trump were all they had to lose?  Why did partner return trumps at trick 3 if they were seeking a ruff?  In any case, an attempt at providing partner with a club ruff saw the spade loser disappear and 4♥ came home.  Lose 12 IMPs.

Board 9

The familiar refrain from Peter, Paul and Mary…’when will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?’  ‘They’ would be ‘me’ on this next sorry hand.  When will I ever learn?

There are many maxims in bridge.  “Never” sacrifice at IMPs.  “Never” bid 5 over 5.  “They” violated the first rule (offering +800), I violated the second rule.  My excuse at the time was that partner didn’t double with secondary diamond values and maximum defensive values.  But, he has strong offense as well.  I feared a small plus on defense and thought that I had much more offense than defense.  All weak excuses.  I am going to swear off 5 over 5.  When Bill, trying to make 5, ended up making 3, I had a brief hope that my stupid bid would be saved by the lie of the cards.  But, when 10 tricks was the objective at the other table, declarer (Jack Scott) played carefully (starting with a small heart to the ♥J) and brought it home, lose 13 IMPs.

Board 20

This next hand was a modest loss, but it became the 3rd time in a week (the other 2 being during the Sacramento Regional) that I had been snookered by a 1♠ bid stealing the hand when 1♠ was not bid at the other table, .  

Once (in Sacramento) Kit Woolsey had my hand at the other table.  The hand was 1 shy of a ‘rule of 20’ opener (11 HCP with 5=3=3=2). But he opened 1♠ anyway.  His partner bid 1NT all pass with our teammates never entering the auction.  On this hand our teammates were cold for 4♥ and their hands were 5=4 and 3=5 in the majors.  

The next time I barely had a ‘rule of 20’ opener and opened 1♣ with 4=2=2=5 and 11 HCP.  Partner responded 1♥ and RHO doubled.  I failed to bid 1♠ (due to misfit, minimum, …) and with ♠KQ105 and ♣AQxxx, I was soon doubling 4♠.  No overtricks.  LHO bid 1♠ with ♠AJ3 and RHO bounced with six small.  I scored my ♣A and 2 spades, but that was all.  Our teammates did not venture into the a spade contract when my hand rebid spades at their table.  Now to Monday’s hand.

The auction was over rather quickly.  I think Mike has a negative double over 1♠, but I don’t know how the auction will proceed from there if he had doubled.  When he decided not to double and passed instead, we were soon defending 3NT.  I led the ♣4, not wanting to waste the power of the ♣J10 and hoping partner held ♣9x or even singleton ♣9.  That may be lame thinking, but in the end, it didn’t matter.  Down 4, +400.  But, with no 1♠ bid at the other table, East responded 1♥, and the opponents at the other table holding our cards arrived in a cold 4♥ contract.  Lose 6 IMPs.  It never ceases to amaze me what a monkey wrench is thrown into an auction with one little bid, resulting in wildly different contracts.  Should we have doubled 3NT and collected +1100?  I don’t see how, unless you just double every time they bid, assuming they don’t have full value for their bids.  There is a huge amount of poker going on at the highest levels of US and World Championships.  Call their bluff?

Board 21

Once more, an early bidding decision greatly altered the auction (and the lead).  Jack Beers considered West a “1-bid” hand and bypassed a pretty fine diamond suit to bid 1♠.  But, after seeing the jump raise, he liked slam potential, bid RKCB and hearing only 1 missing, bid the slam.

At my table (top auction), hearing that dummy would be 4=4=1=4, partner led the ♠A and a then another spade at trick 2.   After this start, the diamonds only set up with a finesse for the ♦K.  Since our declarer was only in 4♠, he didn’t much care.  Diamonds were set up, but he lost one to the ♦K, making 5.  When they were in 6♠, Mike, on lead, thought the ♠A was too valuable of a card to release at trick 1.  He led a club, hoping that he might later win the ♠A and give partner a club ruff.  But, looking at the hand double dummy against the club lead, 12 tricks can still only be made with the diamond finesse!  A club lead was perfectly fine.  In discussing the hand, we thought that the defense that started with 2 rounds of spades (which happened at the 4♠ table) was the only way to give declarer a problem (and even with that start, 12 tricks are still there with the diamond finesse).  Without BBO, I can’t see where the defense went astray, but on the cross ruff, 12 tricks were made and no first round diamond finesse was taken.  It seems (playing with the double dummy program) like the hand always goes down when declarer fails to take a first round diamond finesse.  In any case, win 11 IMPs due to teammates bidding and making the slam.

Board 22 – another spade slam

When 13 top tricks are there for 7NT with no finesse and no splits required, you would like to think there is a way to get to grand.  Here is an offer of a possible auction, but whenever I dream up an auction that shows THIS hand (in my mind), I always try to see if the same auction could show a similar hand, but, with slight changes, the similar hand (same auction) fails to produce the desired number of tricks.  You be the judge.

Perhaps this is a fantasy auction?  Certainly not one encumbered with a 2NT intervention.  Anyway, I like to look at slam hands and slam auctions and try to see what I can learn about ways to describe THIS hand that will lead to slam with assurance.  Many other factors are involved in an auction which include keeping the opponents in the dark.  Perhaps the slam will be much more successful if the opponents know much less about your hand?  Huge swings (good and bad) are produced by slam bidding resulting in many matches won/lost just based on the slam hands.  Bad slams that make produce as many IMPs as good slams that make, making slam bidding one of the most interesting, exciting and dangerous areas of bridge.  Of course with no ruff, there was nothing to the play.  Win 11 IMPs when only game was reached at the other table.

No double no trouble.  Our teammates went down 2 quietly for -100.  Meanwhile, back at my table, there are several ways to defeat 4♥.  The easiest is a club lead and later give partner a ruff.  But, many of us in the group have throughly studied the David Bird books, so ‘what would David lead?’ comes up again and again.  David hates trump leads.  But he also hates leads from Hxxx(x).  We are still left wondering what would David’s models show as the best lead against 4♥, since this auction type was not covered in the book.  The actual trump lead still leaves the club ruff in play, but pard must put up the unlikely ♥K on the first trick and return his stiff club to receive the ruff.  When he saved the ♥K for (a sure trick) later, the club ruff was gone and declarer only lost the ♦K and the 2 top trump, +420, win 8 IMPs.

Board 11 – one more push hand