Recap Of 3/4/2019 28 Board IMP Individual

There were 5 double digit swings in the game on Monday with a number of other hands that might have been a large swing if the right opportunities had been found.

Most players have a “Western cue bid” available to ask partner for a stopper.  It applies when 3NT is a possible contract and the opponents have bid only 1 suit.  A cue bid in that suit is typically a request for partner to bid 3NT if they possess a stopper.  However, the structure is different when the opponents have bid or shown 2 suits.  When that is the situation, and you are able to probe for a 3NT contract, the suit you bid is SHOWING a stopper, and implicitly asking for a stopper in the other suit that has been shown by the opponents.  While this treatment is standard, it is not necessarily what your partner plays, so be sure to be in sync with whatever understanding your partner has.  My teammates at the other table passed throughout and therefore didn’t present the same bidding situation that we faced.  The players with our cards easily arrived in 3NT (which, by the way, is not such a great contract).  I was trying to head to 3NT with our cards when I showed my heart stopper, but partner persisted in clubs and we ended up needing to find 11 tricks in 5♣.  “All” we need (for 11 tricks in clubs) is 3-3 clubs, spade finesse on, 3-3 diamonds, and the ♦KJx with South.  Almost all of those conditions were met, but when the ♦J was with North, 10 tricks was the limit in clubs and the same 10 tricks were available in NT, so we were -50 while our teammates were -430, lose 10 IMPs.

Many of the conditions necessary to make 11 tricks in clubs were also required in order to achieve 9 tricks in 3NT, and even one more – the long hearts must be with South.   Declarer starts with 6 top tricks.  They can get 1 more with 3-3 clubs and one more with the spade finesse, but a losing diamond finesse would go into the hand with long hearts.

What about the bidding where the N-S opponents passed?  After an inverted minor (1m-2m shows invitational or better values with support) many players use a structure that starts by showing major suit stoppers after the raise.  Of course 1♦-2♣ is not the same thing.  Partner has not shown support and partner has created a game force, not an invitational bid.  In any case, with no opposing bidding at the other table, East heard the 2♣ bid and proceeded to start showing major suit stoppers by bidding 2♠.  Some would play this shows a real suit (4 long) and some would play this also shows extra values (not a full reverse, but not a dead minimum opening bid).  I’m not suggesting there is a ‘right’ way to play it, but I will suggest that you and your partner have some understandings of what subsequent bids show after an auction begins 1♦-2♣.

What about the bidding where the N-S opponents bid?  Both North and South have extremely modest values.  Still, had they passed throughout, we would likely have arrived in the 3NT contract that was bid at the other table.  Bidding has risks – you may steer the opponents away from a contract which would have failed if left to their own devices.  You may be doubled.  You may tell them how to play the hand.  Still, those risks come with rewards.  You may buy the contract, direct the  lead or you may throw a monkey wrench into the opponent’s auction and send it off the rails into a hopeless contract.  That is what happened at our table.

This auction got pretty far off the rails, even though the first 6 calls were the same at both tables.  As you can see from the comments, the ever present ‘bidding agreements’ (in this situation, what does this bid mean?) entered into the final contract.  This proves the bridge maxim that merely agreeing to play a convention doesn’t come close to being ready to play it.  What if one/both partners are passed hands?  What if the opponents interfere?  What if the opponents double/redouble?  What if the opponents preempt?  There are lots of situations that are often not covered simply by saying ‘let’s play Meckwell.’

I knew it was possible that North and East both had 5 spades, giving West 2 to go with my 1.  Still, I thought it was more likely that partner had a single minor, so I wanted to compete in that minor – if it turned out held had both majors rather than a single minor, I was OK playing 3♥ since I could ruff some spades.  As noted in the comments, I thought 2NT merely said “show which of the possible Meckwell hands you held”, while partner thought I was forcing him to pick a minor.  Thinking we were on the same page, I decided to push for offense in our presumed long diamond fit rather than defend 3NT.  Obviously we didn’t have a long diamond fit, and it would have been far wiser to try to get 5 tricks on defense rather than 10 tricks on offense, even if we did have a long diamond fit and even if declarer held ♦AQ and a double diamond stopper (with partner on lead).  I thought this hand was about competing for a partscore – I did not expect the 3NT call.  When I heard 3NT, I needed to change tactics and simply pass – not keep competing.

The comments in the bidding pretty much cover how the final contract was reached.  Double dummy, the defense can score 8 tricks for down 5, +1100.  When the defense started with 3 rounds of diamonds against the 4♦X contract, they were still headed for down 4, +800 if East wins the spade lead and puts the ♣Q on the table (smothering the ♣J and scoring 4 club tricks).  However, after winning the ♥A followed by ♥JQK, declarer led a spade (he had to get to dummy to finesse the ♥8).  The spade was covered by East and won cheaply by West with the ♠10.  West  can’t play clubs effectively (so down 2 is now the best possible).  However, seeing the setting trick, they now cashed the ♣A for down 1 and declarer had the rest via a proven heart finesse.  To achieve most of the tricks to which they were entitled, East had to rise with a high spade to gain the lead when declarer led a spade.  Then put the ♣Q on the table.  From the fall of the diamond suit, East can be fairly certain that North’s hand is 5=5=2=1.  If it is, no matter declarer’s singleton club is, the lead of the ♣Q is certain to gain 4 tricks, but only if East gains the lead.

Playing 3NT, our teammate was looking at the (favorable) opening lead of the ♣J.  That immediately solved all problems with 3 top spades and 2 top diamonds to go with 4 club tricks.  Double dummy there is no lead to beat 3NT, but the only route to 9 tricks (without ♣J the lead) is by scoring 3 spades (establishing 2 spade winners for the defense) followed by leading the ♣Q.  (well, technically, since the ♣J will be coming down, you don’t have to cash the third spade yet, since you can reenter dummy later with a club – or, if they don’t cover the ♣Q, cash the spade when you are in dummy for the last time.)  With only spade entries to dummy in an awkward spade suit, that line of play is unlikely to have been how declarer would have played the hand.  All the more reason for me to simply pass 3NT.  Why offer a huge minus when we are likely to go plus (assuming no ♣J lead).  All I can say is that I made a terrible bid and came out great.

Here, the choice of opening bid was clearly a factor in how the bidding progressed.  With more than half of his values in the club suit that was opened, South did not venture a 1♠ overcall at my table.  I will almost always open 1♣  when 4=4 in the minors in order to allow partner to have more room at the 1 level as well as find a club fit when that fit might not be found if I open 1♦.  This hand doesn’t prove anything about the merits of opening 1♣ vs. 1♦, but it worked well here. 

Anyway, with the opponents jamming the auction (in hearts at our table), partner (West) wisely chose the 9 trick contract and bid 3NT (he held a heart stopper and a source of tricks).  Meanwhile, at the other table, the opponents were jamming the auction in spades, and West needed to make a decision without having any clue that partner had a spade stopper.  West ran out of room to explore 3NT and, not unreasonably, bid the 11 trick diamond game.  East, holding a spade stopper, could have tried 3NT with their second bid, but partner did not have to have a hand nearly as strong as the one they held.  The 3NT contract could be pretty silly if partner (only) had a routine limit raise in diamonds.  Ten tricks were there for those playing NT and for those playing diamonds, which means we were +430 while our teammates were +50, win 10 IMPs.  This hand, like the first hand of the day, shows how bidding (rather than passing) can make things extremely difficult for the opponents.

On this hand, both tables had the same auction, same lead, and same diamond continuation at trick 2.  I got it wrong, our opponent got it right.  At trick 2 I inserted the ♦J, losing to the ♦Q.  When a diamond was returned at trick 3, a defensive diamond ruff was threatened.  East won the ♦A and continued with a spade to the ♠A, followed by another diamond.  Since the defense already had 3 tricks, I needed East to hold ♥J10x, so I ruffed with the ♥A, finessed the ♥8 which lost to the ♥J and East still had the ♥10 to beat my ♥9 to get their diamond ruff for down 2.

When Gary led a diamond at trick 2, he played the ♦K.  He still wasn’t home – he needed to find the ♠A onside or ruff a diamond for the 10th trick, but since both were possible (without a diamond overruff), he did score 10 tricks.

Clearly if the shape had been the same (2 diamonds with East, 4 with West) but the ♦A and ♦Q switched between the 2 hands, the defense can easily prevail the way they did at my table – that is, win the ♦K with the ♦A, lead to partner’s doubleton ♦Q, and win the ♠A.  Then West leads the third round of diamonds and declarer will be down 1 or 2 depending on how he handles the threatened diamond ruff.  Is it a guess which diamond to play at trick 2?  Beats me.  Is there a better line of play – deferring diamonds until later?

After the club lead, assuming hearts split 3-2, you have 5 heart tricks to go with 3-4 black tricks.  You will need at least 1 diamond trick and possibly a diamond ruff.  Perhaps finding out early if the ♠A is onside is better?  Win the ♣Q, lead a heart to the ♥K, then lead a spade.  If the ♠A is with West, they must win it or lose it (they know declarer’s clubs and that declarer can discard the last spade on ♣A).  So, reflexively, they will probably go up with the ♠A.  However, letting declarer win their spade and then discard dummy’s last spade may not be all that bad for the defense.  Declarer may get rid of a loser, but that doesn’t create a winner.  That still only brings them to 8 tricks (5 trump and 3 black winners).  They still have to win a diamond and ruff a diamond to reach 10.  And there is a risk of an overruff in diamonds.  Anyway, assume West does hold the ♠A and wins it when you play a spade at trick 3, and continues spades.  You are up to 9 tricks (assuming hearts are 3-2), but you aren’t home.  You draw trump ending in hand (you still retain a spade and club winner) and you lead a diamond.  If you guess diamonds wrong, they might win and lead a black suit.  You can cash both black winners pitching 2 diamond losers, then lead your last diamond towards dummy’s remaining diamonds (honor and small diamond).  As long as one diamond honor was onside, you will prevail even if you guessed wrong the first time.  But what if they win the diamond and return a diamond?  That gives you your diamond trick, but your black winners are stranded in your hand, unreachable!  If diamonds are 4-2, your spots are such that you will lose 3 diamond tricks to go with the ♠A for down 1.  And if you cash your black winners first before touching diamonds, the opponents have black winners to make dummy ruff and force you to lead diamonds from dummy – not good.

But, if the ♠A had been with East (so that, when you led the heart to dummy at trick 2 and then led the spade up towards the ♠KQ at trick 3, East wins with the ♠A), you have some more problems.  You are going to have to win a diamond as well as ruff a diamond to reach 10 tricks.  And that is likely to be accomplished more easily if you lead diamonds early.

Bottom line, I don’t have the tools or skills to determine the ‘best’ line of play.  Depending on how suits split and where certain cards are, as well as how the defense defends, there are lots of possibilities out there.  Does anyone else know the ‘best’ line of play (without seeing all of the cards)? Suffice it to say that my diamond ‘guess’ failed and Gary’s guess worked.

I underbid my hand and paid dearly.  I caught partner with a moose, but they couldn’t envision my powerful hand, so they made no move towards slam.  I was a victim of point counting – looking at/counting my 11 HCP.  Knowing partner will often open hands with only 10-11 HCP themselves, I didn’t want to force game.  Still, I had 2 aces and the ♣109 really boosts the value of my hand from ‘invitational’ to ‘game force.’   Using the K&R hand evaluator (A85 AT5 2 QJT942), the hand evaluates to 13.50.  Clearly this is not a 2NT invitational bid, but a 2/1 game force 2♣ response to partner’s 1♦ opening.  Not to say game is assured, just that I have to bid my values and work at arriving in the best spot.  There are plenty of 1♦ opening bids that will not produce 11 tricks in a minor nor 9 tricks in NT with this hand, but I’m convinced that a game forcing 2♣ is the right call.  Gary bid 2♣ and had a reasonable power auction to the club slam.  With my 2NT response to partner’s 1♦, they had no choice but to raise to 3NT. 

With the heart lead vs. 3NT, I did not rise with the ♥Q, so I lost a club and a heart for 11 tricks, +660.  The club slam had a convenient spade ruff in dummy (with the ♣A), so then declarer could lead clubs losing only to the ♣K (discarding losing hearts on diamonds).  So this hand was all about bidding with little to the play.  We were +660 while our teammates were -1370, lose 12 IMPs.

All-in-all, a pretty sad day for me at the bridge table with lots of poor choices.