Recap Of 11/4/2019 28 Board IMP Individual

Apologies in advance.  You are not going to see a lot of good bridge today, but I’m just reporting what happened.  Here is a preview of things to come.  Defense played a significant role in 3 swings (see if you would have done better?).  Twice a minor suit slam was bid vs. 3NT – once a very good one to win IMPs, once not a good slam to lose IMPs.  Once a (rare) excellent minor suit game was bid vs. a failing 3NT.  There was a lead ‘problem’ – see what you would have led.  Once there was a problem with doubles (penalty? take out?) that got way out of control.  And finally, there was an awkward hand where the auction started with a 3rd seat weak 2♦ at both tables and it was difficult to determine where to land – but friendly cards resulted in a win for the aggressive bidders.  If you are keeping track, that is a total of 9 double digit swings!

Here we go…

 

Playing that 3♣ over 1♠ shows an invitational hand, non-forcing, I felt that really described my hand well and chose that option at the risk of losing the heart suit.  When partner repeated spades (non-forcing), I feared that the tricks my hand offered (possible diamond ruff, force a club trick, plus a heart trick) might produce game, so I raised to 4♠.  It is certainly not partner’s fault for failure to offer hearts – my 3♣ bid showed interest only in clubs with no side suit.  Double dummy, only 8 tricks are possible playing in spades and when partner misguessed hearts, 6 tricks were lost for down 3.  Had partner left me in 3♣, only 7 tricks are possible.

The player with my hand at the other table simply bid a forcing NT and when partner offered hearts, they bounced to the heart game.  Here, double dummy, 9 tricks are possible, but the defense has to find their 4 tricks.  On the opening heart lead, East could see the singletons in dummy, the length in hearts (and clubs) and concluded that if declarer had the ♣A, there would be lots of tricks (i.e. no hope for the defense), but if partner (West) held the ♣A, declarer will fail by losing a trick in every suit.  So, they cashed both their ♠A and ♦A and the hand was over for the defense.  The spade suit, which initially had holes in it, became established.  The diamond loser could be ruffed in dummy, and there was communication to draw trump and enjoy all of the tricks.  Double dummy, after winning the ♥K, almost any continuation defeats the contract (only a trick 2 continuation of the the ♠A or ♠9 allow 10 tricks).  It is safe to cash the ♦A.  After that, it appears the safest lead is to try clubs, although any card at trick 3 but the ♠A or ♠9 will leave declarer a trick short.  Of course, had declarer held the ♣A, a club shift allows a needless overtrick, since the club suit will provide discards for everything in declarer’s hand.  I don’t know if I could have resisted the temptation to cash the ♠A, but it was necessary to not lead the ♠A in order to defeat 4♥.  So we were -150 and -420 to lose 11 IMPs.

Back to the bidding – I have heard numerous times, over the years, that 7 card suits dwarf 4 card suits, so don’t worry about the 4 card suit.  And I had a decent 7 card suit.  But, I now think bidding 1NT is the right bid, even if you are playing invitational jump shifts – it allows you to bring the heart suit into play.  If partner rebids 2♦, you can rebid 3♣ (which is a slight underbid – you do have invitational playing strength, but on a misfit, 11 tricks will be unlikely).  If partner rebids 2♠, you can chose to pass or convert to 3♣.  But if partner rebids 2♥, you can bounce to game and see if the opponents can figure out how to defeat your contract.  The forcing NT is the choice made at the other table and clearly the better choice on this deal.

 

 

When I make impossibly bad plays, I am constantly tempted to omit them from the blog, but here comes another one – a play so bad that it defiles the game of bridge.

At the other table, West chose to rebid their 6 card club suit rather than show spade support by raising to 2♠ with only 3 card support.  West’s 2♣ rebid ended the auction and on the spade lead, the defense got their 4 top major suit tricks, a spade ruff and the ♣K for down 1.

I’m not sure why a simple raise to 2♠ suggested to East that a game try was in order, but try they did and game was quickly reached.  Now to find 9 tricks.  On the diamond lead, declarer could see 6 tricks (which is all they had), but things got better.  On the run of the diamonds, using upside down carding, my partner discarded the ♠5 and ♠9 of spades, in that order, guaranteeing that they held the ♠AQ.  They also pitched the ♣7.  Declarer also pitched a spade and 2 clubs.  Then, on the club lead, declarer thought a bit before finessing – it turns out they were thinking should I risk going down 4 or hope to win the finesse and only be down 2.  I felt they held ♣AQ10 and were trying to decide which finesse to take.  Anyway, they played the ♣Q so I won the ♣K and I made my first horrible play – shifting to a heart rather than simply lead a spade to score our 2 spade tricks and find out what else we can get after that.  Partner, of course, won my heart lead with the ♥A and continued with the ♥J.  Declarer played the ♥9 under the ♥A and covered the ♥J with the ♥Q.  I placed declarer with originally holding ♥Q109, and, horror of horrors, I ducked to maintain communication with partner to score my 13th heart.  If the hand was dealt as I was thinking, I don’t need to score my 13th heart because partner, after winning the ♠AQ, can lead a heart and it will end play declarer into losing to the ♣J at trick 13.  MUCH more significantly, I forgot I had already won the ♣K, so the 2 known spade tricks plus the ♥AK ensures down 1 – that is 5 tricks.  Down more is good, but at least beat the hand.  When I ducked, that was declarer’s 6th trick and they cashed 3 clubs for 9 tricks, making 3NT!?!?!?

In a different context, when a suit is 4-3-3-3 around the table, it is often right to duck the second round to maintain communication with partner, so that 2 more tricks can be scored in the suit.  This was NOT that situation.  Terrible terrible terrible.  Earlier I asked to see if you can do better on defense – board 3, I’m not sure how many players would have defeated 4♥ but here, everyone that can count to 5 defeats the hopeless 3NT…except me.  We were -600 and teammates were -100, lose 12 IMPs instead of winning 5 IMPs.

 

 

Competitive bidding (vs. passing throughout) always alters the auction, sometimes in unpredictable ways.  At my table, with a hand rich in controls and tricks, North elected to force game with a jump shift rebid of 3♣.  At the other table, West stuck in a 2♦ bid which prevented a jump shift, so North underbid slightly with 3♠.  With strong diamonds and a solid hand, South chose to rebid 3NT and that ended the auction.  Back to my table, with a maximum 1NT hand (but shortage of aces), South chose to take the jump shift seriously and bounced to the club slam.  Perhaps 3NT or 4♣ or even 3♠ would have been preferable to the precipitous jump to 6♣.  See if partner wants to make a further move towards slam and proceed more cautiously.  It turns out the leap to slam was too unilateral, too high.  Hands that are 5-3-3-2 are only one card away from the dreaded 4-3-3-3, hands which always have trouble producing tricks.  However, without a diamond lead, there is hope (for declarer).  Draw 2 rounds of trump, and if the spades are 4-1 and the long trump is with the long spades, all diamonds can be discarded before the opponent can ruff in, and the losing heart can go on the final spade.  However, the 5-0 spade split doomed the slam.  An opening spade lead would lead to down 2, an opening diamond lead would at least produce down 1.  My choice of a heart lead left a bit of suspense to the hand, but in the end, 11 tricks was the limit.  So we were +50 while our teammates had 9 easy tricks in NT (possibly could have scored more depending on the play and defense), so they were +400, win 10 IMPs.

 

 

At the other table, North looked at their hand and found a negative double at the 2 level with 2 HCP!?  East looked at their hand and bid (4♥) what they thought they could make.  South found the amazing bid of double which has the virtue of being right, in that the defense will painlessly score 5 tricks on any lead but trump.  That is, leading any of the 10 cards that are not hearts (most of those cards are impossible to lead, such as a small diamond or a small club) will prevent declarer from scoring more than 8 tricks.  Assuming reasonable defense after any non-trump opening lead, the defense will fall into a spade ruff, 2 club ruffs, and 2 aces.  Declarer can’t get to their hand to draw trump.  A trump lead produces 11 tricks for declarer because then he is in charge – he loses 2 aces and wins the rest of the tricks.  The inability to draw trump due to the 6-0 fit creates a 3 trick swing.

Clearly South intended the double as penalty – spades is the only unbid suit and they hold a singleton.  I suspect it was the negative double at the 2 level that made South feel that 10 tricks would not be possible in hearts.  They have no reason to believe that their hand will produce 4 tricks.  But, North, who had already advertised spades, heard the double and thought partner wanted THEM to bid spades (plus, their undervalued negative double made them fear there was no chance of defeating 4♥).  I think South could have bid 4♠ themselves if that is the contract they were pursuing.  So, it seems more prudent, if North has to pull the double, to revert to partner’s suit, diamonds.  There are 9 tricks available in diamonds.  In any case, North decided to try for 10 tricks in spades.  West thought that was unlikely and doubled.  Instead of now pulling back to diamonds, North sat for the double and was able to manage 5 tricks, down 5, -1400.  Double dummy, 1700 is possible, but who’s counting.

Meanwhile, at my table, there was no negative double.  East didn’t bounce to 4♥ but bid a simple 2♥ as their first bid.  I then bid 2♠ to show my second suit and East bid only 3♥.  Now I could bid 3♠ to show my 5=6 shape and partner took a preference back to clubs rather than repeating his solid heart suit.  I wasn’t sure what tricks I would find, but I felt my hand was too good to not bid the 5♣ game.  South could see 3 almost certain tricks in their hand, maybe more, so they doubled.  South won the ♦A at trick 1 and returned a diamond to the ♦K.  There are a lot of tricks around, but I can’t get at them.  I started by attempting to cash the two top spades but South ruffed the second one.  No matter what I did, South was destined to score 3 trump tricks along with their ♦A for down 2.  In fact, I am down 3 if, after ruffing the spade, South ensures that dummy is never reached for heart discards by continuing clubs – the easy way is to play the ♣A and then the ♣J).  Declarer has spade losers and dummy is down to 1 trump and if declarer attempts a spade ruff, South will over ruff and lead diamonds.  Instead, declarer can play his high trump to draw South’s last trump, but it also takes dummy’s last trump and declarer is left with 2 spade losers to go with the 3 tricks they have already lost.  By leading clubs, South trades 1 club trick for 2 spade tricks.  But, when South ruffed the spade, they led a diamond allowing a spade discard as dummy ruffed, plus 2 more spade discards on high hearts.  But South still had 2 power trump tricks for down 2. Our -300 and our teammates -1400 lost 17 IMPs.

What about the bidding?  It is hard to call a 6-3 fit a misfit, and even the spade 5-2 fit can play for 9 tricks for East-West.  Even though there are 26 HCP and stoppers in every suit, 3NT is hopeless on a diamond lead, since 6 tricks must be lost.  Bottom line, if our team declares at both tables on this deal (at a high level), we are destined to lose a lot of IMPs wherever we land, especially if we are doubled.  The secret to this hand is to let the other side play it.  My partner and I felt we had too much power (if clubs are 2-2 there are 11 easy tricks, just losing 2 aces).  So we bid too much (as the cards lay on this deal).  And our teammates also bid too much.  So there you have it.

 

 

Here, both auctions started exactly the same.  For their second bid, East had to make a choice.  At my table, they signed off in 3NT and West passed, ending the auction.  Our teammates saw strong diamond support with an outside ace and king opposite the powerful 2♣ opening bid, so they decided they had to push for slam (I agree).  One curiosity of this particular deal, the ‘2♦ waiting response’ had the (rare) effect of right siding the diamond contract.  Had West been declarer, the natural ♣J lead would have forced declarer to either win the ♣A on the first round, or duck and (assuming South wins the ♣K and continues clubs) win the ♣A on the second round and take an immediate finesse for the ♦Q.  Since declarer is more likely to play for 2-1 trump than take a first round finesse, that would have led to the defeat of the diamond slam, since once the ♣A is gone, there is no reentry to the East hand to take a diamond finesse (after you learn about the 3-0 split).

Anyway, that is not what happened.  I was on lead and led a spade against 3NT and declarer could win, find out about the diamond split, unblock the ♥A, come to hand with the ♣A, cash the ♥K pitching a club from dummy and then finesse in diamonds, 12 easy tricks, -490.  Since East is playing the diamond slam, no lead by South is effective, there are always 12 tricks, just as there were in NT.  So our teammates scored +920 vs. our -490 to win 10 IMPs.

 

 

Some wildly different bidding created a swing on this hand.  Start with the dealer, East – is this an opening hand?  Of course.  I will occasionally pass 12 HCP that is 4-3-3-3, but this hand has 13 HCP and 2.5 quick tricks, excellent spades, but an awkward initial call in first seat.  At my table, East opened 1♠ (which normally shows a 5 card suit) and when I doubled (which normally shows 4 cards in hearts, the unbid major), West raised to 3♠ which was passed around to me.   I felt that if I doubled again, I would be promising 4 hearts, so I merely competed to 4♣.  Partner, still thinking I held 4 hearts converted to the game in hearts, which West decided to double.  With the ♥KJ6 over the ♥AQ4 (and with the 3 card trump suit clearly visible in dummy), the defense was able to work out a path to 4 tricks.  The defense began with two high spades with the second one ruffed in dummy.  Declarer played 3 high clubs, with the third one ruffed by West with the ♥J as the last spade is discarded by North.  West exited with a diamond ducked to the ♦K and ♦A.  Then a diamond to the ♦Q allowed a heart finesse that lost to the ♥K.  West exited with a spade, ruffed by North who then led a diamond to dummy to score the ♦10.  But, at this point, the defense already has 3 tricks and East retains the ♥107 while only a singleton ♥A remains in dummy.  No line of play can prevent East from scoring their ♥10 for the setting trick.  So, we scored 9 tricks for -100.

At the other table, East miscounted their points and did not open.  Without the spade opening bid, North-South had the auction to themselves with no opposing bidding.  South judged that their hand was worth a 2♣ opening bid (what do you think?).  After the 2♦ response, South showed their suit with 3♣ and heard North rebid 3♦ (table talk decided that this was either diamonds or a double negative, but unclear which – turns out it was both!).  Now South is trying to find a place to land, hoping that by showing hearts, partner, with spades stopped, can rebid 3NT.  North, with no spade stopper, raised hearts so that North-South reached the same heart game that we did at our table, but played by the South hand.

The play started the same: two high spades with the second one ruffed by South followed by 3 high clubs.  However, West did not ruff the third club with the ♥J – they just discarded as dummy got rid of their last spade.  Declarer then played ♥A, then ♥Q, won by the ♥K.  Unable to see that South had bid a 3 card suit naturally at the 3 level, West continued with the ♥J, dropping partner’s ♥10.  A spade continuation after cashing the ♥J took dummy’s last trump, but South was now down to the ♦A and good clubs to score 10 tricks.  They didn’t even need the diamond finesse which was working.  We were -100 while our teammates were -420, lose 11 IMPs.

There were an unusual number of bidding judgment decisions on this hand.  East must open, but what?  If it were me, I would just follow my rule: opening hand, no 5 card major, 3=3 in minors, open 1♣.  But opening 1♠ (as East did at one table) has a lot of merit – far superior lead director (vs. 1♣) and a better preempt than 1♣ so the only downside is fooling partner about your length in spades.  Perhaps I will adjust my rules about what to open!  If East opens 1♣ it would certainly have changed the flow of the auction a lot, but who knows where it would end, since no one did open 1♣.  South certainly has a problem after East opens 1.  They would probably double and then bid 2NT if the opponents have not bid spades.  If East passes, South has the chance to open – does South open 2♣ (or 1♣ as I would)?  Since the cards are sufficiently unfriendly for (vulnerable) East-West, a penalty double of 3♠ would allow a winning score of +500 if North-South took all their tricks. The problem is that had I made a double of 3♠ it is still takeout!  Should North pull 4♣ to 4♥?  Does West have a penalty double of 4♥?

What about the defense?  When I have 3 trump, I often play high-low to show count (let partner know that I am 3 long), so that they can then work out how many trump declarer has.  Many others use ‘trump suit preference’ to tell partner where their values are, since the small spots played while declarer draws trump can be meaningless cards unless you assign a meaning.  On this particular deal, no suit preference signal is going to help the defense, but if East provides the count in trump, West could work out that a 3 card suit had been bid and that tapping dummy with a spade (after winning the ♥K) would leave declarer helpless.  That isn’t what happened, so the game came home.

 

 

The first round of bidding (and West’s rebid) were pretty automatic and the same at both tables.  Then East has to decide if they should try 9 tricks in NT or pursue game/slam in a minor.  With diamonds doubly stopped, one player decided that they should go for 9 tricks in NT.  But, when the club finesse lost, the defense had 0+1+3+1 for 5 tricks, down 1.  At the other table, Dan was sitting East and he saw a shortage of helpful honors in partner’s suits (and void in the suit partner opened), with no great source of tricks in his own suits, so rather than offer 3NT as a game contract, they raised partner’s clubs to 4♣ and partner bid the club game.  In spite of the ♣K being offside, there are actually (double dummy) 12 tricks available (after the ‘obvious’ ♦K lead – an unlikely opening spade lead will hold declarer to 11 tricks due to altering the timing necessary to get all of the diamond ruffs). Declarer simply pursues a cross ruff (and 1 ruffing finesse in hearts) to score all 8 trumps, one at a time, plus 2 top spades, a heart and the ♦A.  I don’t know the actual line chosen, but declarer made 11 tricks, so our teammates were +600 and we were +100 to win 12 IMPs.

What do you think of the 3NT bid?  It certainly seems reasonable and 9 tricks are there if ♣Kx(x) is onside.  If the opponents don’t set up declarer’s spades or diamonds for extra tricks, declarer can force a heart trick to reach 9 tricks.  But, I like the 4♣ bid.  Yes, you only have 3 trump, but they should be useful with the heart void, while the heart void is problematic in NT.  Plus, your 3 fast tricks in the pointed suits figure to cover partner’s losers there.  And, as partner ruffs diamonds, you know the diamond length on your right will prevent any threatening over ruff.  So, would you pursue the minor suit game or assume you will find 9 tricks in NT?  Playing matchpoints, one has to worry about whether there would be 10 tricks available in NT, but playing IMPs you just need to pursue the safest game contract.  I like the 4♣ bid and it had the virtue of being the winning bid on this deal.

 

 

Here, both tables started with two passes and South opened a rather routine weak 2♦.  From there, both tables floundered around a bit with no obvious place to land.  North-South have 7 card ‘fits’ in both minors with 6 card ‘fits’ in both majors.  East-West are just the opposite (7 card major fits, 6 card minor fits).  The target of every auction is ‘how high and where?’  The answer to both questions is far from obvious.  Often 25 HCP plus a stopper in every suit (without an 8 card major fit) means 3NT should be the target…only 8 tricks are there with best defense – but that ‘best defense’ includes a double dummy opening lead of a small diamond so as not to squash the critical ♦109 of diamonds that partner holds.  Double dummy, the deal produces 11 tricks in spades and 10 in hearts, but as you will soon see, double dummy is not the likely scenario for offense or defense.

I’m not sure what to say about the bidding at either table.  West has an enormous problem after the 2♦ opening bid.  NT makes no sense with no diamond stopper.  Double makes no sense with a doubleton heart.  And bidding spades…well, partner decided to make a 4 card suit overcall (2♠) at the 2 level (well they did have 15 HCP).  I raised to 3♠ and that ended the auction when partner didn’t feel his hand warranted a game bid.

At the other table, West, who held 15 HCP, noticed that they had nothing to bid and passed over 2♦.  East (who could not open the bidding in second seat) then reopened with a double.  West came to life with a cue bid, so East bid 3♥ showing the only ‘suit’ they had.  Partner now bid 3♠, the only suit that they had.  Since East’s hearts were 5 long, they decided they must be rebiddable and so they now bid 4♥ ending the auction.  Neither hand could bid at their first opportunity, but still game was reached.  Now to find 10 tricks.  The ‘obvious’ way is to win the diamond (ducking could be quite poor if South opened a 6 card suit), and then finesse the ♥Q.  But, double dummy, the only card to lead at trick 3 (after winning the ♥Q) is…a diamond.  This is to sever communication early so that the ♦10 can never be a late entry or exit card for the North hand.  The actual play continued with the ♥A (a normal, but potentially fatal continuation).  Now a club finesse to enter hand to drive out the (hoped for) 3-3 hearts with one more lead of trump.  When South wins the ♥K, they must play a club (through dummy’s ♣Q6) to declarer’s ♣A – this would establish the ♣K while North still retains a diamond.  In practice, South first cashed a diamond (stripping North of their exit card) and then led a club.  This establishes the ♣K just like it would have if they led a club a trick earlier, but North can now be strip squeezed in the black suits.  After winning the ♣A, declarer plays 2 more hearts and North has no answer in the 4 card ending.  If they ever pitch a spade, the spades are all good, and if they hang onto all 3 spades, declarer can (and did) play a club to North’s ♣K forcing a spade lead away from the ♠Q, making 10 tricks – 3+4+1+2.  Very nicely done.  The cards were very friendly for East-West, but since declarer didn’t play a second round of diamonds very early (trick 3), the defense could have prevailed by not cashing their diamond and leading clubs, preserving North’s exit card.  Other similar ways to score 10 tricks is to duck the opening diamond lead (already noted as dangerous) or lead a diamond at trick 2 after winning the ♦A.  But if you continue with a heart finesse at trick 2, you must play a diamond at trick 3 or the defense can prevail.

It is amazing (to me) there there are 11 tricks available, double dummy, in the 4-3 fit with spades trump.  The cards were really friendly for East West.  We were only in 3♠ and when it was all over, partner scored 10 tricks for +170, but our teammates were -620 to lose 10 IMPs.

The nearly automatic 3rd seat weak 2♦ bid reeked havoc on the East-West bidding.  But, even without that opening bid, the choice of bids and choice of contracts for East-West remain extremely problematic.  All of bidding is structured around finding 8 card major suit fits.  There were none.  3NT suffers from a lack of a source of tricks.  But, on this deal, nearly anything was possible, double dummy.  I was shocked our counterparts (opponents holding our cards at the other table) arrived in the 4♥ game, and even more shocked that it made – I hadn’t tried to analyze it at the table, it just didn’t seem likely to score 10 tricks.  This deal took a distribution and key card location so precise and so specific that I think the game in either hearts or spades might be less than a 10% probability of success (but I don’t have the patience to compute what the probability really is – perhaps a reader will?).  All I can say is congratulations and move on to the next hand…

 

The exact same (normal) auction was produced at both tables, so it came down to the opening lead.  At our table, the heart lead produced 7 tricks for the defense, down 3, -300.  Our teammate found a diamond lead producing 9 tricks for declarer, -600 to lose 14 IMPs.

David Bird says to lead a major suit on these auctions and on this deal, either major can work to find the 7 defensive tricks.  A diamond didn’t work.