Recap Of 3/17/2014 28 Board Imp Individual

March 18th, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  No Comments 

Where to begin…we played 28 boards today and I lost IMPs on 16 of them!  Some were unlucky, some were teammates, some were me.  I don’t have the time to post them all (BIG difference when BBO is my data source, since it is so easy to have accurate cards, bidding and play available).

There were just 4 double digit swings.  Here is the first one.

Your basic slam missing the trump Q.  I wasn’t embarrassed about the auction.  I had 2nd round control of all suits and when partner showed 3 aces, we were there.  12 tricks are easy if I can find trump 2-2 or, with the weak 2♦ bid, perhaps finesse and find trumps 3-1 with the ♥Q in the slot.  With ♥Q10x offside (with the weak 2 bidder), the slam was quickly down 1.  The other table had an auction that included an invitational 5♥ bid, but there was confusion about what was being asked by that bid and, had they understood, they too would have bid the slam.  Since the max was 11 tricks on the hand, lose 11 IMPs.

This had interesting issues in the bidding and play.  I have reserved Michaels for 5-5 hands and didn’t consider bidding 2♦.   Over the 1♦ opening bid, I considered pass, a VERY light double and 1♥.  I settled on 1♥.  We missed our 4-4 spade fit, arriving in 3♥ and I lazily led a trump to the ♥Q, resulting in losing a 2nd trump trick and making only 9 tricks, +140.  If I bothered crossing to dummy to lead trumps up, the singleton ♥A would catch air and 10 tricks would have been there.  But, by not being in game, my laziness cost nothing.  Should I have carried on to game?  Should partner have insisted on game?  Beats me, but if I’m in game, I sure better play it better.

Dan decided this was a Michaels hand and partner (Ed) quickly arrived at the spade game.  After cashing the high diamond and seeing the singleton in dummy and the ♦2 from partner…Jack cashed the ♥A and then shifted to a club (thinking a heart ruff was coming after partner’s club entry).  Signaling (udca assumed) when dummy has a singleton is a very tough area of bridge.  Small can mean shift to a low suit, small can mean I have stuff here so shift to trump to cut down ruffs, small can mean I have stuff here so continue the initial suit led and tap dummy.  I have had the discussion with some partners that middle cards mean continue and small or big mean shift high or low.  That assumes an assortment of cards to choose from as well as the ability to read which card was chosen.  When the ♣J won trick 3, the defense was over.  Declarer has much more work to do on a passive defense, but as long as a small heart is first led towards the length and the ♥A catches air, most problems are solved.  Declarer might still has to find the ♠Q, but there is only 1 way to finesse (not counting the backwards finesse).  Also, both club losers can go on the hearts.  I think declarer didn’t bother with the spade finesse and made +620, lose 10 IMPs.

Most players consider a 5 card suit = to 1 point when counting points for NT.  So, 14 HCP plus a 5 card suit =15-17 1NT.  Mike Schneider opened 1NT and after the transfer, Ed invited with 2NT which ended the auction.  Lots of tricks available double dummy (singleton ♦K coming down for entries to hearts, entries for spade finesses, lots of tricks).  Mike didn’t know about the ♦K and only found 7 tricks after the club lead, down 1.  Dan (Teammate south at the other table) opened 1♦ and after the 2♣ overcall, eventually found himself in 3♦X, going -500 and losing 9 IMPs.

I hate to call this hand a ‘comedy’ of errors, because losing 12 IMPs wasn’t that funny.  First the bidding – 5♣ would have been a cheap save, but I HATE to take a phantom save at IMPs and I thought there were chances that we could set 4♠.  There are a couple of guesses available to bring home 10 tricks in 4♠ (♥A doubleton offside, duck twice; or finesse in spades to pick up the spade suit).  Jack (teammate and declarer at the other table) didn’t get those right and ended -1.  Ed didn’t get those  plays right either, and he made 10 tricks!  I tried to blame partner for giving wrong count in diamonds, but the fault is mine.  Play began with a club to ♣A, ♠A, ♠K, diamond to the ♦10, ♦A.  Partner  played high/low showing 3 diamonds, which would give Ed 4 diamonds, and partner showed 6 clubs, giving Ed 2.  Now Ed erred by playing a heart to the ♥K and ♥A.  If pard plays back a heart after winning the ♥A, life is good.  But, instead, a top club was led and ruffed in dummy.  Now declarer played a top diamond which I incredibly failed to ruff (and cash my 2 hearts for the setting tricks).  If Ed was indeed 5=2=4=2, he is cold, since we only have 1 heart to cash after I get my high trump, so it would make no difference what I do.  But, if Ed has the actual 5=3=3=2, I must ruff the ♦K now and cash 2 hearts.  Once I erred by not ruffing, Ed now pitched a heart on the last good diamond from dummy and only lost his 1 remaining heart for 10 tricks.

Like I said, partner’s count in the diamond suit was an illusion which didn’t matter on the hand.  When Ed gave me the chance to beat it, I failed to grab it.  With the 4th diamond in dummy, he  was thinking he didn’t want to run diamonds, ending up in dummy to lead hearts away from the ♥K, so prior to cashing all diamonds, he led a heart up to the ♥K himself, allowing us the chance to defeat the contract.  Had he just continued to play diamonds, when I ruff, he can still play me later for the ♥A, or better, just duck whatever heart I play.  If I lead the ♥Q he can duck and as long as I hold ♥AQJ or ♥QJ, the defense has no recourse due to the power of ♥10xx.  Our -620 paired with teammate’s -100 to lose 12 IMPs.

Finally, a hand where my side had a pickup.  I’m not exactly proud of my ‘weak jump overcall’ in 2nd seat, red vs. white.  But, it has the merit of being effective and got us to the 4♠ contract, vulnerable, which making and was not reached at the other table.  However, Mike (North) made the effective decision to save in 5♥.  Since our teammates were only in 4♥, if they could get the same 10 tricks that we allowed, we could score 11 IMPs.  Teammates did get 10 tricks, probably the same way we allowed 10 tricks at our table.  Opening lead ♠Q ducked all around.  I figured I would not be on lead many more times and I shifted to a club, ducked to partner’s ♣K.  Fearing a cashing spade would go away on the club suit after declarer drew trumps, partner tried the ♠A instead of knocking out the ♦A to score a 2nd undertrick.  When the ♠A was ruffed, declarer could draw trump and later pitch his losing diamond on the long club.  A diamond must be played at trick 3 to get a trick in each suit for the defense.  

Since our teammates made +420 in 4♥, our inability to collect 300 vs. 5♥X only cost 1 IMP.

Here, both tables arrived in 4♠, but we decided to defend and the other table took the save at 5♥ .  Since we had crammed the auction and since I had overcalled a 4 card suit, I had hopes that the heart suit was 5-4-2-2 around the table and pard would contribute a trick to beat 4♠.  Phantom saves are VERY costly at IMPs, and it looked to me like I had much more defense than offense.  But here it was quite profitable to save in hearts at the 5 level. Since 5♥X only paid out 300 points vs. 620 for the vulnerable game, my side lost 8 IMPs.

On the scoreboard a sad day of losses (and many more smaller losses that I didn’t bother to document!).  Bad luck?  Bad bridge?  Actually I think it was some of both.

Recap Of 3/10/2014 14 Board Imp Individual

March 12th, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  2 Comments 

We played last night on BBO, but to make it quick, we only played 14 boards.  We got done in an hour 15 minutes, so it went really fast.  There was only 1 double digit swing, so I will be looking at a few other hands with not as many IMPs at stake.

With identical bidding up to the 3NT call, Manfred, at the other table, opted to not take the push to game. My partner (Dmitri aka Darkbird) pushed on to the game. The defense was radically different against 2NT (an initial club lead got things going in the main suit for declarer and soon they had 9 tricks for +150). I got a heart lead.

How do I play to arrive at 9 (or 10) tricks? Double dummy, 10 tricks are easy. Single dummy, my objective was 9. I was looking for 2+2+2+3 with the ♣Q onside. It turned out West had all outstanding HCP BUT the ♣Q and, in the fullness of time I only found 8 tricks. Because West has both of the other missing queens, West can be squeezed or endplayed out of both of them as I play off the clubs. Play began with the ♥10, ♥J, ♥Q ducked. I won the ♥9 at trick 2 and needed to make a plan. I did consider just leading the ♣K at trick 3 (playing for a singleton ♣Q or else eventually gain a 3rd trick in either diamonds or spades. The simple line of play (hope ♣Q onside) failed as I used my dummy entries to lead up to clubs twice to take the finesse and lost my positions to squeeze/endplay West. I was heading for 10 tricks if I merely gave up on the onside ♣Q and played to give up the ♣Q to my LHO. But if my RHO holds both the ♣A and ♣Q, leading clubs out of my hand gives them the needed 2 entries to run 4 more heart tricks. Yuck! As the cards lie, the run of the clubs results in a progressive squeeze of RHO in all 3 suits. If they abandon hearts, my ♥5 is established (and another squeeze as I cash the heart). If they abandon spades, my ♠J is established (and another squeeze as I cash the spade). If they abandon diamonds, my whole suit is good. Should I have worked it out? I don’t know, but I didn’t!
Down 1, lose 6 IMPs. This is a 16 IMP swing, since making would have won 10 IMPs. Sorry teammates.

Next up a basic 1NT all pass auction/defense.  At my table, the ♠K was led and an upside down ♠7 was played.  For some reason spades were continued and declarer quickly cashed his 8 tricks.  At the other table shown here, a more effective heart lead started the defense.  And, when in with hearts for the last time, Dmitri made the critical shift to spades rather than endplaying partner with the last heart.  The result was 7 tricks for the defense (-1) vs. 8 for the offense (1 overtrick) at my table.  Win 6 IMPs.  Nice defense by Jerry and Dmitri.

On this board, there was very different bidding at the 2 tables. As you see, at my table, West, holding 19 (using the rule of 20, with 10 HCP and 9 cards in their 2 longest suits) decided they had a 1 bid opener anyway. I overcalled 2♦, and East decided they had a 2 level free bid (no, they were not playing negative free bids). This had the effect of convincing me that we should sacrifice. Nervous that they had to beat me, they took their spade trick too quickly and the result was down only 1, since I could pitch my losing club on the ♠K. 

At the other table, a slower auction ended in both sides getting too high, since 2♥ is the EW limit and 3♦ is the NS limit. But, they were not doubled in 4♦, so I lost 2 IMPs for my effort since my teammates took their 4 tricks to set 4♦ 1 trick.

At my table Dmitri decided he had a 2♣ overcall…vulnerable! I had to choose between showing my 4 hearts with a negative double and showing my club values with 2NT. I opted for 2NT and pard bid the heart game. I suppose I am worth one more bid, but I wasn’t clear how many extra values were shown by the 4♥ call (my club strength could be and was worthless – the main value in my hand, for slam, was leading spades to finesse and later ruffing a spade). On the diamond lead (won in dummy), declarer can lead any card at trick 2 and still score 12 tricks. But, it turns out the key to the hand (for 12 tricks) is, sooner or later, to take a first round spade finesse against the ♠J. You can draw trump first, and even play some diamonds first. The sequence of plays is not critical, but you need 2 dummy entries and a first round finesse in spades to make 12 tricks. You also better draw trump before a 2nd spade is played.  In 4♥, Pard as declarer led a spade to the ♠K and when the ♠Q was later ruffed, he ended with 10 tricks and his contract. Glad I didn’t push on to slam.

Double dummy, this slam is cold. In my opinion, this slam is unmakable, single dummy, as long as there is no E-W bidding. There are no inferences, and the only successful line (1st round spade finesse) hardly parlays all of the opponents holdings that you would want to bring into play in trying for 12 tricks. But, at both tables, West could not keep quiet. A 2♣ overcall at my table not only helped keep us out of slam, but did give some clues that might still land 12 tricks in a heart contract. 

When slam was bid, with spades opened on his right, Cris doubled the slam and led the ♠A at trick 1. Now, similar to our table, 6♥ is cold as long as a first round finesse is taken in spades (and trumps are drawn before a second spade is played) but 6♥ was also cold (assuming the first round spade finesse) even without the ♠A lead, but in hindsight it sure seems a lot easier with the ♠A lead. Without the ♠A lead, it is hard to take a first round finesse of the ♠J when you are in 6♥ missing the ♠A!  I think the better defense is to not double and not lead the ♠A. I think it would be close to impossible to take a first round finesse in spades as your parlay to make 12 tricks in hearts if there had been no double and no ♠A lead. But, considering declarer’s problem (how to make 6♥ after the ♠A lead?) – What would prompt a defender to lead the ♠A against a doubled slam if they held AJx(x)? Not likely, but when Jerry was playing the hand, he thought LHO was thinking of giving partner a ruff, and then  LHO (Cris) thought better of it after seeing the dummy and shifted to a trump. So the first time declarer plays spades, they must find the winning play of the ♠9. Whether the ♠A is led at trick 1 or not, the first time declarer plays spades, the finesse is the only route to 12 tricks. Jerry didn’t get his 12 tricks, so, with the double, my side picked up +200 to go with +620 for 13 IMPs. We lose 14 IMPs if the doubled slam came home. We gained an IMP on the double, but we don’t even gain that IMP if my partner had won 11 tricks in his 4♥ contract. This was a double with VERY little to gain and a whole lot to lose.

With a passed hand double holding 5-3 in the unbid suits, Dmitri allowed EW to uncover the spade fit (support double) and the invitational jump to 3♠ was followed by a raise to the cold 4♠ game.  The fit looked like a misfit at my table when the auction was a simple 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠ all pass.  Both East and West could have taken a more aggressive bid, but there was no invite and no game reached, win 6 IMPs for the non-vul game swing.

Here, Jerry was quite successful when he competed unilaterally at the 5 level and bought a rather sparse dummy.  Still the ♥J was incredibly useful to fully establish hearts and the 3rd trump was useful to ruff his good 13th heart in order to lead a diamond up to the ♦K.  So, he only lost the ♣K, ♥AK and ♦A for -2 and -300.  I didn’t like my wasted ♣K (and shortage duplication) opposite the splinter (but the ♣K turned out to be just as valuable as the ♥Q, since I could use the ♣K to pitch my losing heart and make 5 – or the diamonds establish to allow heart discards, so 11 tricks are easy in 5♠).  Anyway, I went with ‘the 5 level belongs to the opponents’, and doubled for +300.  When the save wasn’t found at the other table, my side lost 8 IMPs against 4♠, making 5.  Nice bid Jerry.

This was a reasonably routine auction to a cold 3NT.  I dealt.  1st seat red I like a suit with better texture than this to start with 2♦.  At the other table, Bob Pastor opened with 2♦ and the takeout double was understandably passed out.  But, the defense could only score +500 vs. their vulnerable game, so my side lost 4 IMPs.

The auction was quite different at both tables, resulting in different leads and different opportunities for declarer, but the same hopeless 3NT was reached at both tables.  At trick 6, Cris was looking at -2, in spite of getting 4 tricks out of the heart suit, but when he led a club, Jack inexplicably went up with the ♣A catching pard’s ♣Q and the defense was over.  Cris was now slated for 10 tricks.

At my table, declarer was headed for -1 from the beginning.  Jerry led spades and continued spades when he got in with the ♥Q.  That allowed for 2+1+1+1 for -1 which is all we were entitled to.  But when the game made at the other table, win 10 IMPs.

Recap of 2/24/2014 28 board IMP individual

February 25th, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  2 Comments 

There were a few declarer/defense items of note that caused swings, but by far the majority of swings were the result of bidding and/or the opening lead.  Again I will be referencing the books on opening leads by David Bird.  Let’s take a look at some of the hands of interest.

Board 3

On this first hand, both the bidding and the lead played key roles.  The auction was pretty much forced to be the same at both tables through 3♥.  Then, South who opened 1♥ with weak trump and minimum HCP, but holding 2 doubletons, had to decide to pass or bid the non-Vul game.  Ed went on to 4♥, Dan, at the other table, passed.  David Bird didn’t simulate this auction, but had he done so, I am certain he would have favored the diamond lead.  It pickles partner’s ♦Q, but declarer might find that anyway (Ed did), and it doesn’t give up anything.  Mike chose the ♠3, giving up the setting trick in spades. At the other table, a small club was led which gave up the club suit for a possible spade discard.  I think there, declarer did not find the ♦Q, so bid 3♥, made 9 tricks for +140.  Ed bid 4♥, and made 4♥ when he lost his 3 trump tricks, but avoided the spade loser on the lead and found the ♦Q for 10 tricks.  Win 7 IMPs.

Board 7

Here I lost a double part score swing.  At the first chance to bid, Drury precluded a natural 2♣ bid with the south hand, and in the balancing seat over 2♠, Mike decided to not compete.  There has been much discussion lately about how to open 4-4 in the minors.  I was in 3rd seat, and I ‘solved’ that problem by opening 1♥, and soon the auction was over with clubs never being introduced.  Bruce, holding my hand at the other table in 3rd seat opened 1♣ with a plan to rebid 1NT had his partner responded with 1♠.  As it was, his partner was never going to stop competing in clubs and they eventually played 4♣, making for +130.  Losing the part score at both tables cost 6 IMPs.

I attempt, from time to time, to point out the critical need to discuss follow up bids and ‘what if…?’ situations before any convention is just slapped onto the convention card.  I have had some discussion with some partners that a 2NT bid by a passed hand responding to 1M opening shows clubs, invitational.  A fit jump shift bid of 3♣ would show a good 5+ card club suit with 4 cards in opener’s major – a fit jump shift by passed hand.  The fit jump shift applies whether 4th seat bids or not.  Here, had I opened 1♠, South has a hand with minimum HCP, but great playing strength, and could show that by bidding 3♣ showing the spade fit and the club suit – a much more descriptive  bid than a 2♣ Drury bid responding to a 1♠ opening bid.  But, I didn’t open 1♠, I opened 1♥, so there is no Drury and no fit (and, in competition, the fit jump shift applies), so neither 2♣ nor 3♣ is available the first time around.  But, in the balancing seat, a 3♣ bid is simply competitive and natural and shows clubs.  I think this hand is worth showing the clubs sometime and the passout seat is the first and last opportunity.  In any case, be sure to discuss with your partners the many variations that can occur in Drury ‘like’ situations.  What if 4th seat passes, or doubles, or bids x?  What if I bid 2♣, 2NT, 3♣?  And, adding to the complexity, what if we play 2-way Drury?

Board 10

Both tables missed par (5♣X) here by a mile.  Mike felt that his shape and 6 trumps warranted a game bid (I think so too), bounced to the game and played it there, making 10 tricks, +620.  I didn’t like my flat shape, seemingly full of losers, and when the opponents persisted to 4♣, our side sold out.  To add insult to injury, I could not read the ♠6 lead (I thought we played 3rd and low) and I returned a spade at trick 2, allowing 11 tricks to make.  But the 13 IMPs were lost on the bidding.  We lose no more IMPs if we let them make all 13 tricks.  Should EW take the save against the speculative game?  In this case, the insurance would have paid off handsomely.

Board 13

Not much to the play, lots to the bidding.

First, the opening bid.  Regardless of the wisdom of treating the north hand as an opening bid (I did) or a preemptive bid (Ed did), the momentum of the preempt had the effect of propelling the opponents into an unbeatable game.  I personally don’t think either choice can be greatly faulted and the result seems somewhat random.  You can choose a somewhat off beat preempt or a sub-minimum opening one bid (but it did meet the rule of 20 which I often apply on borderline hands).  Much more interesting is the auction at my table.  I don’t know how clearly the rebid actions have been specified by the takeout doubler in the direct seat (raise a simple response to 2-3-4 vs. cue bid, then raise)?  But, even if those actions are crisply defined, it becomes much more gray with a balancing double.  How much strength is reasonable for West to assume that East holds, given that South passed and North took no further action?  And, can East know what West is assuming?  Does East (in this case) hold extras (with their 5 HCP including an ace)?  Is the assumption ‘allow for zero HCP’ a starting point, and anything over that is bonus?  That is pretty much the standard  assumption when dealing with a direct seat double, where the non-jump response is usually 0-8 HCP.  Here, in the reopening/balancing double scenario, the non-jump response is still probably 0-8 HCP, but how likely is it to be zero when South passed 1♣ and North passed the double?

In any case, West (who doubled) attempted to show an invitational moose by cue bidding then raising to the 3 level.  East (responder to the double) decided they didn’t have enough extra and passed.  Furthermore, and more importantly, East felt that the cue followed by the raise showed possibly a very strong hand (even stronger than the actual hand?), but with only 3 trump.  East’s trumps are not going to play well opposite many 3 card raises.  Replace the ♠Q with the ♦K (with the shape 3=4=4=2)and it seems quite likely declarer will lose at least 2 spades a heart and a club and possibly 2 hearts.  With only 3 trump in dummy, 4♠ may fail even if they find 3-3 trumps.  A difficult auction to get right – I have sympathy for Mike/Bill who failed to get to game and for Ed (and his partner) who pushed their opponents to game.

Bottom line, it is good to have some discussion and general understanding about the values shown by various alternative sequences, but it is very costly to miss the red game and here, E-W paid out the usual 10 IMPs for failing to bid the game.

Board 14

With this hand we take a little comedy break.  Are you kidding?  Few IMPs (I lost 2 IMPs on the hand) were involved, but there could have been quite a few at stake.  Sometimes the pass card is a reasonable option to throw on the table.  Mercifully, neither final contract was doubled.  The two initial passes could hardly be questioned (as long as your stodgy weak 2 bids must be 6 cards in 1st and 2nd seat, which is what most of us play).  And the 3rd seat 1♦ opener is automatic.  What should North do in 4th seat?  I really like full support (even in the minors) for my takeout doubles, so 1NT seemed to me to be the least of evils.  Perhaps I could hear Stayman and we would find a suitable landing spot (but, I could double to find a major also?).  Ed doubled.  Both Easts now bid their heart suit (Bruce at the 1 level, Mike at the 2 level over my 1NT overcall).  South introduced spades at the minimum required level and then the wheels came off.  Bill (West at my table) ‘raised’ hearts to 3♥ on the singleton ♥Q, hoping to push us to 3♠.  We sold out and beat it 2.  Dan (West at the other table) sensibly bid 2♣ and heard 2♠ on his left, 3♦ by partner and 3♠ on his right.  The operation was a success.  We have pushed the opponents to the 3 level.  But, Dan continued with 4♦ and bought the contract there, down 3.  2 IMPs for the ones who only went down 2.

Board 15 

Interesting problem for opening bids.  I tend to fall in the camp of ‘anything that looks like 1NT is 1NT’ – Dan opened 1NT as would I.  At my table, Bill opened 1 and was soon dummy in 3NT.  So, the different flavor of the auction had the effect of a different side playing it, which often results in a different lead and totally different timing and play of the hand.  This hand was no exception.  

At my table, with South on lead, Jack chose the very aggressive and very successful heart.  Declarer won the 3rd round and was looking at a very challenging 9 tricks.  Even though there are two balanced hands, stoppers in every suit with 26 HCP, 9 tricks are elusive.  I believe there is little chance to score 9 tricks except to play for spades 3-3 with the ♠A onside (around 18%) or play for diamonds 3-3 with the ♦K onside (around 18%).  Pretty much a coin toss.  And there is no way to parlay both possibilities that I can see.  Mike opted for spades.  When they broke 3-3 with the ♠A onside, he pitched all of dummy’s diamonds (except the ♦A) on the run of hearts and clubs and ended up with 3+1+1+4 for his 9 tricks.

At the other table (Dan) West was declarer, with North on lead.  They chose the ‘obvious’ ♣10 and declarer was in hand after trick 1, winning the ♣K and needing to decide a path for 9 tricks.  Certainly crossing to dummy to pursue 3 potential spade tricks did not appeal.  He had limited transportation and his coin flip resulted in ‘try diamonds’.  You may as well lose the first diamond trick as long as you are playing for 3-3 with the ♦K onside, so he led a small diamond at trick 2.  The result was -2 when the diamond finesse, taken later, lost to the ♦K.  Seems like a random 11 IMPs lost on a coin flip.  Darn.

More thoughts on the coin flip…Mike, at my table, on lead after winning the 3rd round of hearts, has already lost 2 tricks.  Missing the ♦KJ97, it will take a very lucky specific lie of the cards and guess how to play them to keep LHO off lead.  To establish diamonds, you must lose a diamond.  If LHO wins a diamond, they have a heart to cash and someone has the ♠A to cash (down at least 1), so going after diamonds can’t possibly be as good as spades (which, at 18%, spades aren’t very good either).

Dan, on the other hand, truly had a choice of 3-3 spades (♠A onside) or 3-3 diamonds (♦K onside).  If he decided spades, he can (and must) continue clubs at trick 2 and 3 to make the hand.  He appears to be squeezing himself (but, as Mike saw, the 4 diamonds that are not the ♦A are easy discards on the play of hearts and clubs).  The run of the clubs also squeezes South.  Dan can continue with the 4th round of clubs, or, after cashing 3 clubs, lead a spade up.  He is threatening to take 4 clubs, 3 spades and 2 red aces while the defense has no threat to take their required 5 tricks.  Or, if South throws away diamonds while clubs are being cashed, Dan can revert to taking several diamond tricks.  South has great pressure on the 3rd and 4th round of clubs.  Whatever he throws, declarer is in control.

Now, back at my table, more double dummy…as noted above, declarer (East or West) has serious challenges making 3NT on this hand, not the least of which is transportation.  After 2 rounds of hearts, Mike (as the East declarer) has lost natural access to his ♥A, unless I continue hearts.  I did lead hearts at trick 3, which left him cold on the lie of the cards.  He decided to attack spades (his only real chance) and 9 tricks were there.  Had I switched to a neutral club after winning 2 heart tricks, we abandon the opportunity of setting up the 13th heart, but instead we start to attack declarer’s communication.  My heart lead gave him the critical entry to begin attacking spades.  If I get out a club, he can still win in hand and lead spades up, but when the ♠K holds, how does he get back to lead spades up again?  He cannot.  If he overtakes the ♣K, he squanders one of his few precious tricks and can no longer reach a total of 9.  Is that double dummy for me to switch to clubs at trick 3 (with such modest prospects in clubs)?  I sure didn’t see it until I looked more deeply into the hand.  The issue is not really going after my clubs as it is going after declarer’s few entries.  Had I led a club, declarer is down – no way to arrive at 9 tricks.  Double dummy, the heart opening lead has it set as long as I don’t continue hearts at trick 3 (a diamond lead at trick 1 also does sets it, as long as I find a difficult heart shift at trick 2).  

This just shows how tough double dummy is, and how tough bridge is.  Mike was down on the heart lead that he got, but he made it.  To defeat it, I have to abandon hearts at trick 2 – our strength and source of tricks.  Dan was cold on a club lead that he got.   But to make it, Dan has to run clubs (the suit the defenders  led and ultimately a source of a trick when the 13th club is established).  Tough game.

Board 17

One can hardly fault East for the non-vulnerable 2♣ overcall.  Many (Larry Cohen in particular) strain to not reopen with a double when void – due to no chance to lead even one round of trump through declarer.  I think there is likely a lot to that, but, on the other hand, I had substantial extra defensive values, so if partner wants to defend 2♣X, then I thought I did too.

At the other table, 3NT made with no problems, scoring 10 tricks.  At my table, I found the analysis of the play quite interesting..  It was quite peculiar that my partner, on lead with 13 cards to chose from to make his lead, including the impossibly ridiculous ♣K, can pick any one of them.  All 13 possible leads result in -3, +500 with best play after that.  Sometimes opening leads are over rated!  Anyway, the ‘obvious’ ♥J was led and covered by the ♥Q and ♥K.   At trick 2, all 12 of my remaining cards can be led (including a small heart to dummy’s ♥10!!?!?!), again resulting in -3, +500.  I chose a small spade which declarer won with the ♠K.  At trick 3, declarer has some choices and they are not all equal.  Any red card (he has 3 of them remaining) will arrive at -3, any black card will arrive at -4 with best defense.  Declarer chose the ♣A and we are now looking at a possible +800.  When tricks count +300 each, a huge number of IMPs are at stake with each play.  After winning the ♣A, Declarer continued with a small diamond to the ♦9 and I won the ♦Q.  Declarer could not get to dummy, but I still hated to cash the ♥A (one of my winning plays).  Also, if declarer held the ♦A, a diamond continuation could be fatal (although, if declarer could duck and win the ♦J, partner would have a doubleton diamond and be able to ruff out the ♦A).  Anyway, I played the ♠A and another spade.  Declarer was now back to -3 and the rest of the play was pretty straightforward.  Win 2 IMPs.  But, I win 9 IMPs if, after winning the ♦Q, I found a red continuation (that is ♥A or any diamond – a silly small heart at this point, allowing dummy to win the ♥10, doesn’t have the success that it would have had at trick2).

Board 22 

Everything is pretty automatic in the first round of bidding.  The second round is tough.  South has a great diamond suit and Bill expressed it by bidding 4♦.  Now, with VERY weak spots in hearts, North (Jack) was unwiling to risk a 4♥ bid and, with substantial values, raised to the (hopeless) diamond game.  Bruce, facing the same situation, rebid only 3♦.  Now, I have a problem.  I have the same weak suit and briefly considered passing 3♦!?!?  But, I simply have too much and even a singleton ♥10 could offer some play for 4♥, so I rebid 3♥ and was raised to game.

The ♣K lead at my table (and the fall of the ♥Q and 3-3 clubs) made the play quite easy for 10 tricks in hearts.  Interestingly, Jack is seriously endplayed at trick 1.  The ♣K or ♣Q are the only possible leads to hold me to 10 tricks (double dummy), all other 11 cards on lead allow me to score an overtrick!  Because the ♣K made the play so easy, we were thinking that some neutral lead (♥Q?) would make things more difficult to declare.  And perhaps they would have.  But against best play, 11 tricks are there in 4♥ after any lead but a high club.  We win 11 IMPs for bidding/making the heart game vs. down 1 doubled in the diamond game (a club lead achieves -2, but all other leads are targeted for 10 tricks in diamonds).  The 4♦ rebid made it difficult to get to hearts.

Board 23

I have mentioned on prior occasions that many players in this individual game are not regular partnerships.  We allow wide latitude to discuss methods real time.  So, at the other table, they played the ‘system’ preferred by one of the players (described and implemented at the table) and, with 2♠ forcing, South took the least of evils route to game.   That is, they already announced a double negative.  A bid of 3♠ would be slam going.  The bad break doomed the game and the result was -2, -200.  After ruffing a diamond, it seems like the precious single dummy entry might be used for a heart finesse (you won’t be getting back to dummy any time soon) rather than leading trumps.  That could have saved a trick, but it was never making.

At my table, Bruce and I are a regular partnership.  We have ‘Kokish’ on our card, but it is really ‘Tuttle’.  The ‘Kokish’ that everyone else plays is that 2NT in this sequence is a game force showing 25 and up, unlimited.  Bruce and I play a different structure (and all NT treatments that we play over 2NT still apply, whatever level we get to).  

2NT = 20-21

2♣-2♦-2NT = 22-23

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT = 24-25

2♣-2♦-3NT = 26-27

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-3NT = 28-29

2♣-2♦-4NT = 30-31

and so on…

Here, knowing I was precisely 24-25, some with Bruce’s hand might try 3NT.  Some might transfer to 3♥ or 4♥ and then pass.  Some might transfer to 3♥  and then try 3NT.  Bruce judged to pass it out in 2NT (a big position with a red game looming) but he was right, as 8 tricks was the limit of the hand.

Recap of 2/10/2014 28 board IMP individual

February 11th, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  1 Comment 

I have spent an insane amount of time (getting ready for local GNT events) over the past 2 weeks reading and rereading the amazing books (one on suit contracts and one on NT) on opening leads by David Bird.  For those who have not read these books, there is lots to learn.  Today I proved I was a slow learner, where the right lead, by the book, would have been far better than my feeble attempt at an opening lead.

The lead challenges begin on the very first board.  David Bird has many strong recommendations and they include items that have largely been heresy in prior books on recommended opening leads.  Doubletons are far down the list of recommended leads and suits that contain jacks – either length or shortness are also on the list of ‘don’t try this at home’.  Here, I am certain Bird’s extensive modeling would have determined that the best opening lead is the ♦J.

Board 1

At the other table, East actually got in a heart bid and, rather than lead partner’s suit, West (Bob Pastor) led the ♦J.  As you can see, the ♦J was quite effective.

At my table, hearts were not bid, so my heart length, headed only by ♥QJT suggests that by the time I get a trick set up, they will be ruffing hearts, so look elsewhere (read diamonds).  The book doesn’t begin to suggest that their leads always work, just that a given lead on 5000 hands is effective more often than another lead.  No one gets to hold the same hand 5000 times in a lifetime, so having a computer to run the numbers and a book to recap the results has been great.  Now if I could just remember the principles when I am on lead!

Actually, the diamond lead wasn’t necessary to defeat the contract.  Upon winning the ♥A at trick 1 and noting the fall of the ♥K, you can see zero future in hearts.  A club return, shortening declarer’s clubs, coupled with a club after winning the second round of spades will leave declarer a trick short.  He is unable to enjoy all the clubs and will lose 4 tricks total on that defense.  The diamond lead only achieved -1 at the other table, so we could have pushed the board in spite of my inferior heart lead, but we didn’t.  The club return at trick 2 into dummy’s strong clubs proved too difficult for partner to find.  4♠ making 5, vs. 4♠ down 1, lose 11 IMPs.  The point is, on this hand, a diamond lead made the defense very easy after trick 1.  Declarer is never making the hand after a diamond lead.

Board 4

I felt my playing strength warranted carrying on to game, since partner felt he could bid freely at the 3 level.  Double dummy, any non-spade lead with subsequent best defense/declarer play will defeat 4♥.  Somehow the other table played 4♦ and made 5, +150.  So, if our 4♥ comes home we are winning 10 IMPs.  After the ♠A lead, the contract is cold.  But declarer has to play carefully.  Trick 2 saw a club go to the ♣K and ♣A.  The ♥J at trick 3 was won by the ♥A and a diamond shift was won in hand.  Now pard must play a small heart and life is good.  Actually, 8 of the remaining 9 cards in the hand can be led at this point and bring home 10 tricks with best play.  But pard placed the ♥10 on the table and when LHO showed out, he ducked.  After winning the ♥Q, the ♠K tapped dummy and the ♥7 was promoted into the setting trick.  This result was actually a 16 IMP swing, since we lost 6 (-100, -150) instead of winning 10 IMPs.

Board 7 

The same bidding at the other table, except that the Stayman 2♣ bid was doubled for the lead.

I was dummy and Mike Schneider was in charge of bringing this home at my table.  My double dummy program says no lead can beat the hand  It sure looks like 2 spade losers and 2 diamond losers in spite of the friendly lie of the clubs and the ♥K in the slot.  

In any case, a club was led (as requested via the double of Stayman) at the other table, with declarer now knowing he has a strong ♣10 in his hand.  Upon winning trick 1, a high spade (or the ♦J or ♦10) must be led at trick 2 in order to make the hand against best defense.  Declarer did lead the ♠J, covered by the ♠K and the ♠A won as South followed with the ♠2.  Double dummy, the only lead (from dummy at trick 3) that can now bring in 10 tricks is a heart to finesse the ♥K.  Instead declarer led a spade at trick 3 to the ♠9, losing to the ♠10.  Another club followed, declarer winning the ♣10.  Now ♣K, ruffed by North (second trick) and a diamond ducked to the ♦Q (third trick for the defense).  Now a club lead by South promotes partner’s lone remaining spade (♠8) into the setting trick.  When a club wasn’t led at this point, 10 tricks came home, since declarer could now draw trump and had the ♦J/10 to finesse against the ♦K with North and another finesse against the ♥K with South, both working and a trump left in dummy to ruff a heart (or pitch the heart on the 13th diamond).  So, there were missed opportunities to make the hand followed by missed opportunities to defeat the hand which left my team -620.

Moving back to my table against the opening lead of the ♥10 which was covered all around.  The ♠J was led at trick 2 and held.  Now, amazingly, a high diamond, a high club (giving up the winning club 10!?!?) or a high heart can be led at trick 3 and make the hand against best defense.  In fact, the ♠Q was led at trick 3 (hoping for the doubleton ♠10 offside), but when the ♠Q was covered and RHO showed out, the hand could no longer be made.  The end result was that declarer lost 2 spades and 2 diamonds.

Basically, successful declarer play may be double dummy.  I haven’t really been able to sort out what card combinations are covered by the successful declarer line of play.  That is, could a more likely card holding for the opponents torpedo what would be the only winning line of play on this particular layout?  Or, is the winning line of play on this hand a ‘best’ line of play?  I don’t know.

To make the hand against best defense, you have to strip hearts from dummy/declarer and strip clubs from the north hand (you don’t need the seemingly valuable ♣10!).  Then throw North in on the 3rd round of diamonds with the ♦K (while establishing the 13th diamond in dummy).  North would have only a long heart and spades left and whatever they get out with after winning the ♦K, declarer has an answer.  Instead, we lose 12 IMPs against the game making at the other table and down 1 at mine.

Board 10

Oops

I envisioned a more useful hand such as ♠xx ♥xxxx ♦xxxx ♣Kxx that would never jump to 3♥ but might be able to make 3♥.  And, if pard is a little better than that, could reasonably have a shot at a red game (you know, never bring back a red 170 to your teammates).  So, I bumped pard’s 2♥ response to 3♥ and bought the contract.  Pard had to play it.  Trick 1 South led the ♣2 (a spade lead can ensure -3).  If declarer ducks the club and stays away from drawing any more than one round of trump (after eventually winning the ♣A), he can get out for -200.  But, playing hearts and more hearts after dummy gained the lead resulted in -300.  This didn’t IMP well against our teammates who ventured a 3NT by North, -1 (-100), winning 1+1+3+3.  Lose 9 IMPs.  My fault, too aggressive.  Mercifully we were not doubled.  Still, if I don’t bid 3♥, we were losing 7 IMPs (if pard goes -200 in only 2♥) against 3NT -1, so, while it is embarrassing to lose -300 on a voluntarily bid contract, it didn’t cost that many extra IMPs.

Board 11

I don’t know the auction at the other table, but they stopped short of game and played safely to make it, for -140 for our teammates.  I felt I had too much playing strength to pass and this isn’t my idea of a weak 2 bid, so I opened 1♠.  Using the rule of 20, I have 21, but 3 of those HCPs are in a pair of singletons.  I don’t think that is what the rule of 20 had in mind when it was invented, but nevertheless, I began with 1♠.  After the limit or better cue bid by partner, I was easily going to game.  The only question became could they gather in their 3 aces, since the cards were so friendly for me as declarer.  After I won the spade lead at trick 1 in hand, I led the ♦J, won by the ♦A.  When spades were continued, I could win the ♠A in dummy, pitch my ♣Q on the ♦K, take the heart finesse and, when the ♥J was covered by the ♥Q, I made 5, win 7 IMPs.  If the heart isn’t covered, I only make 4♠, but at that point I was always making the hand.  Cool hand proving the adage, 6-5 come alive.

Board 12

The hazards of an individual movement…

There was an extensive email discussion in the bay area this week about the merits of opening 1♣/1♦ when 4=4 in the minors.  The arguments to ‘always’ open 1♣ seemed persuasive, so I was suckered in.  In the past I would likely have opened the stronger minor – in this case 1♦.  My 1♣ opener allowed the unusual NT to come into play and the preference to hearts resulted in the cold game being bid (against me at my table).  Meanwhile, our teammates had to deal with a 1♦ opener, so an unusual NT was not an option.  The auction didn’t go well.  South chose to pass at their first opportunity, and then try to make up ground by cue bidding spades at their second opportunity (after hearing partners powerful 2♥ call).  Later Jack Scott (whose partner bid 2♠) was asking me how I would take 2♠ in the context of their auction.  At first it sounded natural, but upon further thought, I now think South should have doubled 1♠ for penalty if they now want to play 2♠.  The pass over 1♠ seems pretty cautious.  But I now think, with that pass, 2♠ cannot be natural.  At their next turn to bid, South thought they would make up for lost time by making the 2♠ cue bid.  A 3♦ cue bid, it turns out, would have been safer (from misinterpretation), but all actions seem to suffer ambiguity when a simple raise to 3♥ or 4♥ would clarify to partner that you like hearts and have some modest supporting values that may prove useful.  In any case, 2♠ was taken as natural and passed out.

Play at my table went quickly.  Spurning the club finesse, declarer won the ♠A, cashed 3 rounds of hearts and started diamonds from the top, losing 2 diamonds and the ♣K for +620.  A fine result.  Due to the strength of dummy, our teammates were able to score +140 in 2♠, but that was still a loss of 10 IMPs.

Board 13

Wow!

At the other table, West did not act over 1NT and North was quickly and quietly in 4♠ undoubled, down 1 for -100 (1♠-1NT-4♠).  At my table, I thought they couldn’t make 3♦, so I doubled.  Chris thought I had a more useful hand and he not only bid the game, but redoubled for -400 and the loss of 7 IMPs.  It was an exciting hand.  I don’t get to see too many redoubled contracts!

One could hardly expect the North hand to sit for 3♦X.  Double dummy 3♦ always goes down, but the  successful defense includes getting rid of all of my clubs on the ♣A and ♠AK so that I can score a second round club ruff.  Any other defense leads to 9 tricks.  Assuming I get rid of my clubs, declarer basically embarks upon a cross ruff and cannot be prevented from getting 8 tricks. The play/defense to 4♠X was easy enough, with East scoring their ♥J at trick 1, 2 high trumps and the ♣K.

At this point in the day I was -62 IMPs after 4 rounds (our event is 7 rounds, 4 boards per round, everyone is your partner once – except when we play on BBO where they have a very poor system for 2-table individual games with many repeat partners and missing partners that you never see).  Not a good start to the day, but didn’t think I had done much too awful.  My team was able to win the last 3 matches by modest amounts, so it wasn’t a hopeless day, but I still ended negative large IMPs on the day.

Board 20

Another wow

In our game, it is often asked ‘what do we play over their strong NT?’  With this partner, our system over NT was Meckwell, which I rarely use (I prefer Woolsey).  At the recently completed Phoenix Nationals, I was kibitzing the Senior KO final.  Board 32, the final board of the afternoon session, Rodwell had to deal with a very strong playing hand with hearts after RHO (Carolyn Lynch) opened 1NT.  Typically, a Meckwell double of a strong NT is announced as showing 1 minor, both majors or strong spades.  But, it appeared (to me) that Eric Rodwell had added another dimension to the ‘system’ (I don’t know where or if it is documented?) – the double of a strong NT can also be a strong single suited heart hand, in which case you rebid 3♥ over partner’s 2♣ (semi-forced response to the double).  The reason I think that must be part of the system is that Jeff Meckstroth, with a heart void and reasonable values elsewhere, diagnosed what Eric held (strong hand, hearts) and passed the double of 1NT with quite successful results.  Jeff and Eric scored +500 while a 4♥ overcall of 1NT at the other table went down 2.

Back to my hand.  I could have bid 2♥ (thought it was too strong for that), or 3♥ (thought it sounded too preemptive), so I came up with a double thinking that that is part of the ‘new Meckwell’.  Partner alerted and bid the required 2♣.  When I bid 3♥ next, he determined that I had a strong hand with both majors and bounced to the spade game.  My hand proved to be sufficiently suitable to play in spades that he was able to make 10 tricks in a spade contract!  Not what I had in mind, but any port in a storm.  East has a difficult lead, with all 13 cards quite unattractive.  He eventually settled on the ♣A, but, as it turns out, double dummy, he could lead any of the 13 cards and all result in 11 tricks for declarer.  Declarer was shooting for a sure 10 tricks and didn’t bother taking the heart finesse, so he only scored 10 tricks.  The other table played 3♥ and made their 9 tricks for a 10 IMP pickup for our team.  Again, double dummy, South is able to score 11 tricks in hearts (on any lead of any of the 13 cards from West!).  I don’t know the auction or play at the other table, but not being in game, the objective becomes ‘make your contract’ and they did.

Opening leads are sometimes fruitless (as noted above, where, double dummy, all 13 cards end with the same result, whether East is on lead against spades or West is on lead against hearts).  But, more often than not, opening leads are critical and a worthwhile topic of study.  At least that is what I believe.

Another point on this hand that is critical for all bridge partnerships – it is not enough to simply say ‘Meckwell’ or any other convention without discussing many many followup possibilities.  What if…?  What if…?  Here we landed on our feet, quite luckily.

The auction at the other table took a decidedly different turn when East felt (as I do) that 17 HCP  (mostly prime) plus the 5 card suit is too much for a 15-17 1NT.  When they opened only 1♣, the auction proceeded as follows:

North didn’t have much and, in response to the double, dutifully showed his spade suit, such as it was.  When partner showed a very strong hand with the 2♥ bid,  Of course 2♥ isn’t forcing, but in the context of the auction, North has some decent values (♥JTx is some pretty fine support).  The ♣K proved to be worthless and still 11 tricks are there to be had.

Board 22

South has a modest hand (12 HCP) with no aces.  Yet, it is a quite powerful 2 suited hand opposite an appropriate dummy.  North, with a hand quite suitable for play in clubs (all primes), decided that his strong diamond suit suggested that 3NT was the place to play and quickly ended the auction.

On lead again (against 3NT), I started thinking about David Bird.  How hard a lead is this?  Place the ♠Q on the table and receive an unblock or attitude card from partner and go from there.  However, without considering the power that the ♠9 brought to that lead of the ♠Q (sorry, I cannot explain my blind spot), I only thought about the spade bid on my right and the futility of pursuing spades.  Wrong!  I feel sure that David Bird’s simulation would dictate a club lead on this  auction without the ♠9.  But, the ♠Q is clearly the right lead with this holding, because the whole suit is so strong.  Had  I led the ♠Q, continuing spades will force declarer to finesse diamonds rather than attack hearts if they want to get their 9 tricks in NT.  Anyway, I led the ♣8, and when I won the ♥A, I belatedly shifted to the ♠Q.  Eventually declarer only scored 10 tricks in NT.  But 12 tricks in clubs proved quite easy to our teammates, so I still won 10 IMPs despite my miserable lead, due to their successful slam.  Thanks guys!  You got to a great slam.

Recap of 1/20/2014 21 board IMP individual on BBO

January 21st, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  4 Comments 

After a rough start trying to get all 8 signed into BBO and registered for the game, we finally were able to play 21 hands in around 2 hours.  There were 5 double digit swings and bidding was the source of all of them, although careful play could have reduced the impact (one less doubled undertrick) on 2 of them.

Board 2

Responder at the other table didn’t bother mentioning 1♦ and simply responded 1NT, raised to 2NT and reraised to 3NT.  Great auction, 9-10 tricks.  I was East and decided to make a passed hand double of 1♦.  I don’t know if my double got Bill worried, or if Mike intended 3♣ as forcing.  In any case, Bill passed 3♣ and they languished in a part score when a red game in clubs and NT were both available.  10 IMPs for our side.

Board 3

But I gave it all back on the next hand.  The bidding all makes sense up through 3♦ and competing to 3♠ also seems reasonable.  However, I couldn’t resist pushing onward to game even though partner had declined my invite earlier with the 2♠ bid.  Mike was there with the double.  Down 1 still loses 8 of the 12 IMPs (the other table was in 3♠, making), but the play at our table ended up down 2 and I lost 12 IMPs for the team.

Double dummy declarer always has 9 tricks.  Art was still on course for 9 tricks through trick 6, but he has to come off dummy with a trump after he wins the ♥Q.  Instead, he ruffed a heart to lead trump from hand and ended up losing 5 tricks, -500.

Looking at the other table…The auction and play were different.  Chris offered his ‘invite’ via a redouble and a jump to 3♠.  The invite was declined and they bought the contract for 3♠.  Double dummy, the only route to 9 tricks is to start hearts at trick 2 (which Art did).  At this table, after winning the ♦K at trick 1, 3 rounds of clubs were played  (ruffing in dummy and sticking declarer uncomfortably in dummy to begin hearts away from ♥QJxx).  With that start declarer was heading for 8 tricks and -1.  Almost any line of play/defense gets 5 tricks for the defense (-1 in 3♠), but when declarer failed to ruff high at trick 11 (to prevent an over ruff), an over ruff achieves -2 for the defense.  But, the defender didn’t overruff at trick 11 with the ♠J (and then draw trump, scoring the ♣J at trick 13), they underruffed via a misclick on the ♠5 and declarer could now ruff their club for trick 12 and score  the ♠K at trick 13 for their 9th trick and their contract. 

Note to players – I do allow ‘undo’ when playing on BBO.  We are just trying to play bridge and if you misclick a play, undo can allow you to play the intended card (or bid).  The undo icon is below the table window to the right of the claim button.

Interesting hand.  Tough to play/make 3♠.  Better to defend 3♦X where best defense can achieve +500.  In any case, my 4♠ bid was unwarranted and I paid appropriately for it, taking my teammates down with me.  Nice double Mike.

The next big swing was on Board 9

The East hand met the player’s criteria at both tables for a hand strong enough to double and then bid his own suit.  The diamond spots are a little disappointing, but the richness in aces and kings certainly helps.  The redouble will normally send some warning flags up – South (my hand) has an extremely strong defensive hand against a red suit contract.  At my table, West offered the suit that they were best prepared to play (clubs) and when North made a penalty double of clubs, East showed their true colors with 2♦.  South (me) doubled that for penalty, and partner, who didn’t have the greatest defensive hand retreated to 2♠.  But East persisted with 3♦ and when that was doubled, it ended the auction.  Best play can achieve -2, but in the fullness of time, the defense got -3, +800, win 12 IMPs.  The spade start is normal, and cashing the ♣A at trick 2 cost nothing (and stripped South of his last black card, not that a club lead would ever help the defense), but declarer needs to lead hearts at trick 3 or they are down 3.  Later on, they also need to use the power of the ♦10 in dummy via an initial small diamond towards the ♦10.  Later South will be endplayed, forced to offer a ruff/sluff or give up some of the diamond strength costing a trick.  Declarer led clubs at trick 3 and ended -3.

In the auction at the other table with their weak black 5-5, North started with 1♣, pulled the XX (West didn’t bid) to 1♠ and pulled 2♦X to 2♠.  East competed no further (2♠ can be beaten) and South tried 2NT.  This can go down on the unlikely start of the ♣Q.  However, looking at double dummy, the play to score 8 tricks in NT is still quite difficult.  After best defense, amazingly, 2NT can no longer be made if the ♥A wins trick 1.  Declarer did win the ♥A, played another heart to hand, and played a spade to the ♠Q and ♠K.  When East shifted to diamonds, declarer won the ♦J and ran hearts (7 tricks).  On the run of the hearts, forcing many painful discards by both East and West, East pitched all diamonds but the ♦A, but had to surrender the 8th trick to dummy’s ♣K.  To beat 2NT, East needs to use the power of the ♣QJT (but doesn’t know his partner has such strong clubs) and attack clubs after winning the ♠K.  The diamond shift, allowed declarer to score a cheap diamond trick, and the defense had no recovery after that.

Next came a slam, grand or small depending upon…

The auction at our table was over (too) quickly.  1♦ – 6NT all pass.  At the other table, Art decided to take it a little slower, bidding only 2♣ over 1♦ to save bidding space and explore for the best contract.  Many play that the 2♥ rebid by East shows something extra – perhaps not a full reverse, but more than a balanced 12 HCP.  In any case, East had to bid something.  Without a 5th diamond, without a spade stopper for 2NT, and without a 3rd club, 2♥ seems pretty reasonable!  Art raised to 3♥ and soon RCKB got them to 7♥.  The 6♣ reply to the ♥Q ask seems strange – normally you show the trump Q by bidding the cheapest K, which would have been 6♦.   In any case, they got to the excellent grand slam and scored 12 IMPs for their trouble.

The next ‘slam’ came on Board 17

The auction obviously began the same with the opener’s rebid deciding the final contract.  The other table felt that the soft points, soft shape, only warranted a rebid of 3♠.  At my table, East rebid the 4♠ game.  Looking at 3 aces after hearing 4♠, West couldn’t resist bidding 6♠.  Easy to make 6♠ by dropping the doubleton ♣Q offside, but the ♣ finesse produced only 11 tricks and 11 IMPs for my side.

This certainly is not a horrible slam, since a club finesse brings it home, but depending on how declarer manages the trump suit, there are a number of positions that can result in the loss of 2 trump tricks and then a successful club finesse merely holds your losses to -1.  So, not a terrible contract, but one that did not fetch and cost 11 IMPs this time.

As always, there were other interesting hands but those were the ones that caused the big swings.  Being on the wrong side of these, possibly through no fault of your own, makes the final score tough.

Recap of 1/13/2014 28 board IMP individual

January 16th, 2014  ~  bobmunson  ~  4 Comments 

Most players in our group prefer playing bridge face-to-face vs. BBO.  I do too, but blogging favors BBO because I always know what happened (everything) at the other table, it is impossible to make typos while entering the hand records, and it is much faster to capture the hands/bidding.  So, here’s hoping I’ve avoided the typos for Monday’s game.  It has seemed to me, not only in our game, but in most IMP competitions that I play, the majority of large swings come from bidding decisions: open (or not), preempt (or not), invite (or force or pass), overcall/compete (or not).  Monday, there were many swings all due to bidding (as just noted), but there were 3 interesting lead/play/defense differences that created large swings (boards 1, 8, 15).  Start at the beginning… (footnote to those who attended – don’t worry, I omitted the infamous grand slam hand to protect the guilty).

Board 1

The trusty 4th from longest and strongest (the lead I received as North as declarer at table 1) created the biggest problem.  As declarer, I considered winning the club and returning a club, forcing my LHO to  break a suit (since continuing clubs would set up my ♣9).  I considered spades, but so many missing cards made that a suit that was better played by the opponents.  I finally decided to hope for 1 trick out of diamonds (hoping either the ♦J or ♦8 would produce a trick) and one out of spades (the ♠K or the ♠9).  At trick 2 I led a diamond the the ♦9, ♦J and ♦Q.  The ♣8 was returned to the ♣K, resulting in the second trick for the defense.  At this point, a spade shift left me with no recourse.  If I ducked, 2 spades plus 2 clubs plus the ♦Q insured -1.  My only hope at that point was that the ♠A was onside (getting me to 8 tricks) and that somehow I could score a 9th trick with the ♦8.  The opponents took their 3 spades and another club to leave me with the same 7 tricks I started with, -2, -100.

Mike Schneider led the ♦10 at table 2, covered by the ♦J, ♦Q and ♦A.  Apparently this gave declarer (Dan) hope that the ♦8 would, in the fullness of time, become a trick (bringing him to 8 tricks), so that 1 spade trick would bring him to 9 total tricks and fulfill his contract.  In any case, he led a spade at trick 2 to the ♠K and ♠A.  The ♦3 return went to the ♦K and the ♠6 was then ducked around to the ♠Q.  Next the ♦7 was pushed through, and Dan guessed to duck with the ♦5, allowing the ♦9 to win the trick and establishing the ♦8 for 1 of 2 needed tricks to add to the 7 he started with, trying to reach the needed total of 9.  Clubs had never been played, but a club at this point clearly establishes the setting trick.  However, apparently losing track of the spade suit, a small spade was led away from the ♠J, allowing declarer to score the ♠10 for his 9th and game fulfilling trick.  Cashing the ♠J would have been no better because then the ♠9 in dummy would provide the 9th trick.  Clubs had to be played sometime and they never were.  3NT making vs. down 2, lose 11 IMPs.

Deep finesse has an easy time at declarer play.  The contract is cold.  Simply lead a spade at trick 2 and duck it.  Win the return and duck another spade.  Now the ♠J can be finessed and the 2 required tricks (to reach 9) are provided by the lucky lie of the spade suit.  I think my play always makes when the ♦Q and ♠A are both onside (25%) with a (few) extra chances.  Not very good.  When faced with computations (as to the best percentage line of play), I am often guessing at the table.  But, once I get back home, I can often use http://www.automaton.gr/tt/en/OddsTbl.htm as an effective tool to compute the odds.  Attacking spades (at trick 2) by floating the ♠6 (the play deep finesse will make) will be successful whenever ♠ quack 8 (x) (x) are with LHO.  But that only gets up to 13.5%.   If both ♠QJ are onside, there are some more combinations that can bring home 2 spade tricks for declarer, depending on how LHO and how declarer both play to subsequent tricks.  Still, that seems to come up at less than 20% – even worse than the line I chose.  I gave up trying to compute the odds and reverted to http://www.rpbridge.net/ where expert Richard Pavlicek is available to offer input on the best line of play.  I thought it was an interesting play problem and defensive problem where some did better than others.  Here is Richard’s reply:

Hi Bob,

Interesting layout. It seems routine to lead the ♠10 at Trick 2,
reserving options in spades whether covered or not; East would
duck, losing to queen. On a club back, East must win and shift, say
♦10-J-Q-A. Then if declarer guesses spades: ♠7-8-9 (ducking would
be double-dummy) to the ace, then a diamond won by the king.
Running hearts now triple-squeezes East, who must abandon
spades to stop 10 tricks.

The ♠9 finesse, however, is dubious, as East should cover the ♠10
with J8x, so against capable defenders it seems better to put up
the ♠K (imagine East with ♠A8x). Down as usual. 🙂

So you’re right in theory.

I think all of that means that I was never going to make the hand, although he would have started spades, not the small diamond to the Q that I did.

Board 2

I think I correctly captured the bidding, but let me know if I got it wrong.  I lost a double part score swing here.  In our group, almost all players adhere to 6 card suits when opening 1st and 2nd seat weak 2 bids.  Mike Schneider is an exception.  Here he opened 2♠ and preempted their side out of the “cold game” in clubs.  Of course, to make 11 tricks, you must draw trump and rely on the ♠A onside, or else assume hearts are not 6-1 and embark on a cross ruff.  The latter line of play gets you to only 10 tricks.  But, since Mark was only in 4♣, his 10 tricks scored +130.  10 tricks were also allowed against 3♦, +130, so my team was -260, lose 6 IMPs.  So, this hand was an example of my original observation, choosing to open/preempt creates swings, sometimes favorable and sometimes unfavorable (and seems to be the most frequent cause of IMPs won/lost).

Board 3 was another bidding choice problem that created an early difference in the bidding resulting in wildly different results at the 2 tables.  I play a Walsh style, bypassing 4-5 card diamond suits when I have less than invitational values.  The difference in the 2 auctions was staggering.  When the bidding showed a strong heart hand with LHO, I thought it was quite possible that we could scramble 8 tricks in NT.  Bruce (South) played 2NT scoring 2 hearts, 5 diamonds and a spade for +120.  However, we lost 9 more IMPs (our team is now down 26  IMPs after 3 boards!) when 4♠X went -500.  My early spade bid took the spade suit off the table at our table.  An interesting side aspect of scoring in a 28 board individual IMP game: after 3 hands of play – 4 players are now 52 IMPs ahead of the other 4 players!  It is a deep hole to climb out of.

Board 8

West does not have a great opening bid, but I suspect I would have also opened 1♦.  The rebid is a problem.  Mike admitted to the spade stopper via 2NT and soon was declaring 3NT (at least that is how I believe the auction went at our table).

Here either side can play NT (both hands hold a spade stopper, the suit the opponents bid).  I was North and North managed to get in a spade bid at both tables, but at my table, West declared and I was on lead.  I didn’t want to lead a spade into the ♠AQ, so I chose to start with the ♥9.  Declarer won the ♥A in dummy and led a small club.  Partner erred by not flying the ♣K (far easier to do when looking at the exposed singleton ♣Q that was visible in dummy at the other table), and declarer won the singleton ♣Q.  Declarer then erred by accessing dummy in hearts to continue clubs, planning to get to dummy later in spades.  When declarer won trick 3 with the ♥K, he cashed ♣A and led another  club, watching the ♣KJ fall and the clubs become established.  However, upon winning the ♣K, partner played diamonds.  I (North) won my ♦K and continued with the ♦9.  Partner must play the ♦10 on the ♦9.  If declarer ducks the ♦10, partner can cash the good heart and lead spades so that we score 1+1+2+1 and if declarer does not duck, I still have a diamond left to lead to partner after I win my ♠K, so that we still score 1+1+2+1.  However, partner did not cover my ♦9, so declarer could duck that and isolate our winners such that we could no longer defeat 3NT.

Revisiting declarer’s choice of lead at trick 3 to get to dummy:  had declarer crossed to dummy in spades (not hearts) after winning the singleton ♣Q, the ♥Q would not be established for the defense.  However, as North, I could have still defeated the contract by rising with the ♠K and continuing with the ♦K.  That exposes declarer to losing 1+0+3+1 so the defense gets 5 before declarer gets 9.  I don’t know if I could have found that pretty defense.  I should though, because I can see declarer’s 9 tricks (2+2+0+5) if I duck or if I rise with the K.  So, the duck of the ♣K at trick 2 was not fatal as long as we defend correctly after that – we just get down 1 instead of down 2.

Had I started with 4th best spade instead of the ♥9, partner is more likely to have risen with the ♣K in order to continue spades.  Now we can get 3+0+0+2 to easily defeat the contract.  Of course rising with the ♣K is very wrong if declarer holds ♣Jx instead of singleton ♣Q.  According to my double dummy program, an initial spade lead can only achieve -1 against best defense/best declarer play.  On the other hand, my opening lead of the ♥9 can achieve -2, but only by rising with the ♣K to make a diamond shift (not spades).  The continued attack on spades will only lead to -1.

At the other table, East declared and the doubleton spade was led and North (Bill) ducked the first trick rather than playing 3rd hand high.  Interesting play!  He can see, with only 1 likely entry, he needs an early entry from partner to continue spades again in order to get them established.  By rising with the ♠K at trick 1, he could have achieved -2 double dummy, but I like his play of the small spade at trick 1 to maintain communication with partner who is able to push another spade through early in the defense (as long as he still has one, which Bill accomplished by ducking trick 1).  Bottom line, whether East or West declares, best defense results in -2 and normal defense results in -1, but at our table 3NT came home when the ♣K was ducked and the ♦9 was not overtaken, lose 10 IMPs.

Board 10

Again I was North.  My table got to a quiet 2♦, making 10 tricks easily after the ♥A was led (his partner bid the suit and his LHO bid NT, so he figured the ♥K was in dummy or with partner).  I don’t know the auction at the other table, but they managed to arrive in 4♠ by South.  The singleton diamond was led.  Declarer flew the ♦A to begin drawing trump.  When West won the ♠A, they had to find a shift.  A heart at this point trivially beats 4♠ a couple of tricks but partner had opened 1♣ and when a club was led after winning the trump A and trump broke 3-3, declarer had 10 tricks (3+0+5+2).  +130 vs. -620 lose 10 IMPs.  If you have been keeping track, my day has not been going well so far.

Board 15

You can see the auction here.  Again I am North.  My 3♥ bid was merely competitive since a maximal double would be a game try.  I was probably worth a game try, but I didn’t do it (weak trumps).  Partner came through and bid 4♥ anyway (recalling that I have often said ‘never bring back a red +170 in an IMP match’).  I received a trump lead and played on cross ruff lines: ♥A, ♣A, ♣ ruff, ♦ ruff, club.  East ruffed the club (in front of dummy, as I discarded a diamond) and led trump, ending the cross ruff.  I now had full control of the hand and needed to bring in spades to pitch my losing club.  I was hoping LHO was 2=3=6=2 with the ♠A.  As partner pointed out, all I need to do is lay down the ♠Q,  If LHO has ♠Ax, I’m good (by ducking the second spade).  If LHO has ♠Axx, they must duck the ♠Q (or I have the same established spade suit by the play of ducking the second spade), but when they duck the ♠Q, a spade continuation allows me to score the ♠K and ♠Q and 10 tricks (2+6+0+2).  However, I made the (far inferior) play of small to the ♠K and small back, hoping for ♠Ax.  It wasn’t ♠Ax, but it was ♠JT doubleton, so I still had my 10 tricks!  Bottom line, leading the ♠Q caters to both ♠Ax and ♠Axx with LHO.  My play catered only to ♠Ax and ♠JT doubleton opposite ♠Axx.  Lucky.  

The other table received a diamond lead, tapping declarer at trick 1.  Double dummy defense and declarer play results in 1 overtrick on any lead (due to the unlikely finesse of the ♣Q).  Well, full double dummy analysis includes the impossible small spade from ♠Axx (the small spade lead will eventually achieve a spade ruff, allowing no overtricks).  I would go after a cross ruff line after the diamond lead and that seems to arrive at 10 tricks, but I don’t have the details of play at the other table.  I only know they went -1, so +620 and +100, win 12 IMPs.

Board 16

I used to ‘never’ open 1NT with a 5 card major and now I ‘always’ open 1NT with a 5 card major when in range (adding a point for the 5 card suit).  However, this hand has some pretty special spades and seems to warrant reconsideration of that philosophy and a 1♠ opening bid seems in order.  You see the simple auction at our table.  I led a 4th best heart and then won the ♦A.  It seemed as though declarer had the ♥A.  If so, time to shift or beating 3NT is hopeless.  Partner could hardly have spades good enough to beat 3NT (if he did, he likely would have doubled 3NT), but he could have clubs.  When I shifted to the ♣2, we quickly took our 5 clubs to go with the ♦A for down 2, +200.  Our teammates avoided the NT trap, but played 4♦ instead of 4♠, so we were +130 at the other table to win 8 IMPs.  I don’t know their auction, but the play for 10 tricks is the same in spades or diamonds (except in spades, a 3-1 diamond split risks a ruff).

Sometimes after play during the day, I take the boards to have some practice play with Ed Nagy and our wives in the evening.  Of course Ed and I know the hands, but we still attempt to bid and play normally and give them practice with some of the more difficult hands.  Here, I was going to see if they could match my defense against 3NT, so Ed and I sat E-W against the wives.  Here is the auction we produced Monday night playing against our wives.  

I like our auction and don’t feel like it was the result of double dummy awareness of the hands.  It didn’t give them a chance to defeat 3NT, but gave us a chance to practice some bidding!  So, Monday night playing against the wives, we arrived at a solid 4♠ contract with 10 tricks easily there when diamonds were 2-2.  In the actual afternoon game neither table sniffed at 4♠. 

Board 24

As North, I think the hand is slightly strong for a 3♣ preempt, but what else can you do?  Both tables opened 3♣.  At the other table, South ended it with 3NT and took the obvious 10 tricks and somehow managed to score even 11.  He does have 2 5-card suits for a potential source of tricks, and you can’t argue with success and 3NT is a reasonable call.  I suspect that, if I ran a simulation, few 3♣ opening bids by North will offer significant play for 3NT by South since, without the ♣A, dummy will need 2 unlikely entries to enjoy more than 1 club trick.  And with the ♣A, dummy will need the solid clubs that they actually hold, or again, most of the 9 tricks required will come from the strong hand.  After a spade lead, I don’t like the chances and down 3-4 seems quite possible.  But, if not 3NT, what can you bid?  5♣?  That would work well on this hand, but likely requires the same strong clubs that makes 3NT a success.  My partner, Bill, decided to try 3♥ and I raised to 4♥.  After the spade lead, 2 clubs were played to pitch the remaining spade, 2 diamonds were cashed (pitching a club), and the cross ruff began.  Oops – on the first attempt at a diamond ruff, Jack ruffed in front of dummy with the ♥10.  Now, a simple ♥A and another heart leaves declarer with 2 losing diamonds, down 1.  But, Jack, seeing that he would lose his ♥J if he did that, tried to cash a spade.  Bill ruffed the spade and led another diamond, Jack pitched the ♠9 rather than:  ruff with the ♥J, cash the ♥A and lead another heart.  This defense kills all diamond ruffs in dummy achieving down 1.  Once Jack pitched the ♠9 rather than ruffing the 4th round of diamonds, Bill should be home.  He knows Jack still holds the ♠J (he led the ♠Q at trick 1), so a spade ruff to hand is safe, followed by his last diamond.  Now there is no defense.  All diamonds have been taken care of and 10 tricks are coming home.  Instead Bill led a good club to pitch his last diamond, but Jack ruffed with a low trump, allowing him to score his 4th trump trick for down 1.  Darn!

Had Bill ruffed a spade to return to hand in order to lead his last diamond, here is the ending for the last 4 cards.

As you can see, he has only lost 1 trick so far (Jack’s diamond ruff with the ♥10) and he will always get 2 of the last 4 tricks to make the contract.

The only opening lead to defeat 4♥ 2 tricks is the A♥.  But any of the other 12 cards led at trick 1 can achieve -1.  The key to the defense is killing diamond ruffs, the key to declarer play is getting diamond ruffs.  Since the diamond ruffs were never killed (via trump leads at some point), Bill was on his way home, but didn’t see 4 card ending.

I don’t think the bridge on Monday (across all 28 boards) was up to the high quality that I feel we usually see in this game, but that is how bridge goes sometimes.

Recap of 12/16/2013 28 board IMP individual

December 18th, 2013  ~  bobmunson  ~  3 Comments 

Normally, I enter the hands in numerical (which is chronological) order.  Today, I have to start with Board 26 – an incredible board that allowed me to jerk defeat from the jaws of victory.  I had a 24 IMP lead over two other players (who were tied for 2nd) going into the last round.  In the 4 board last round, there were two pushes, win 1 IMP on the 3rd board, and then there was board 26.

With everyone VUL, it can get pretty expensive to fool around.  But, my out of tune table presence told me that the opponents were fooling around.  Sure, they bid 3NT with no hint of a spade stopper after spades were doubled, but they did have 10 tricks in NT without a spade lead and only down 1 in 3NT with a spade lead.  Plus, they happened to hold 26 HCP, 19 HCP by responder and a decent club suit by opener!!!  So, they were not fooling around that much. 

The first time around (2nd seat after the 3♣ preempt), I didn’t want to try 4♣ to show both majors (felt the hand was too weak), and I didn’t want to pick 1 major to bid for fear of losing the other, so I passed.  Second time around, smelling something very fishy, I doubled, intending the double to show spades.  Third time around, I was having nothing to do with defending 3NT when we likely had a red game in a major suit. Thinking that Bruce had no heart suit, I bid 4♥ intended as pass or correct.  When Jack passed 4♥X, I was down 1400 (4♠ is cold on any lead as long as you ruff a heart with the ♠J if you haven’t been able to draw trump yet).  With our teammates down 200 playing in 5♦, we lost 17 IMPs on the hand.  I could have held it to 16 IMPs if I hadn’t decided to take the backwards spade finesse, thinking Ed showed the ♠Q with his 3♠ bid.  He explained he was just trying to not bypass 3NT in case partner had a spade stopper and partner wanted to bid 3NT.  Ed would have bid 3NT himself with a spade stopper.  Quite a hand, with the texture of my heart suit allowing hearts to be ruffed good and scoring 10 tricks on 11 working HCP, 14 HCP in all.

Clearly Bruce has a great hand opposite a preempt and he needs to figure out where to go with his 19 HCP.  I thought he was just screwing around with 12-13 clubs between their 2 hands and was just waiting for the double of 3NT before running to clubs.  I thought our better chance was in offense rather than defending 3NT and that 3♥ was a psych so…there you go.

Besides this hand, there were quite a few other interesting hands during the day.

Board 1

The (double dummy) play, to make 4♥, after the defenders win ♠A, then win ♣A, then tap dummy with a spade (rather than continue clubs, as they did at the table) is pretty spectacular.  Declarer must lead a small diamond to the ♦7, finessing the ♦8 on a suit that holds the top 6 cards in it!  Then ruff a spade, then diamond to the ♦9 and cash the ♥K.  A club entry remains in dummy and declarer’s last spade goes on the winning diamond as the opponent with the long trump scores their ruff.  But at that point, declarer would be down to all trump with the opponents having none.  I am thinking I might not have found that declarer play at the table.

Board 8

What do you open with an 8 card suit?  Jacked decided ♦5 and when my double ended the auction, he was soon down 500, losing the 5 obvious tricks.  I don’t know if or what our teammates opened, but they allowed their E-W opponents to declare and go set 100 and my team scored 12 IMPs.

Board 9

This hand was about reading the opponents, reading the vulnerability and getting the opponents to do what you want them to.  This swindle was accomplished by Dan/Bruce, my E-W teammates at the other table.  At my table, there was no opposing bidding.  We recently started playing ‘Simpson’ (Gene) over inverted minors.  We got to a peaceful 3♣ with 9 easy tricks, +110.  The swindle was at the other table.  Dan overcalled 1♥ on his 4 card suit.  Noticing that their white opponents were bidding clubs, Bruce at some point bounced to 4♥, offering 500 points to the opponents, but they did as hoped and ‘took the save’ at 5♣, -2 scoring the same 9 tricks that we did for +300 to go with our +110 for 9 IMPs.  Saving at IMPs is mighty risky business.  I recommend against it.

Board 20

Vastly different treatments of the North hand resulted in a 13 IMP swing.  Jack (my teammate, North at the other table), liking his tens, felt that he had a clear cut ‘rule of 20’ opening 1♦ bid with a little in reserve and soon they were in 3NT.  After a heart lead set up 5 heart tricks, they scored +660.  Our opponents languished in 3♥, -1, +100 for 13 IMPs.  Dan could have made 9 tricks if he didn’t take the offered heart finesse and simply won the ♥A and gotten the needed spade ruff in dummy.  He would have lost a trick in each suit, but it would still be a big adverse swing when 3NT came home at the other table.  It seems to me that 2NT makes more sense than 3♣,  but having failed to open 1♦, the fatal diamond lead (killing the entry to 4 club tricks) seems much more likely should they eventually arrive in 3NT.

Board 21

The last hand I’m reporting was not a big swing, but a big opportunity that slipped by.  I was doubled  down 1, -100 and our teammates were  down 1, -100, lose 5 IMPs.  But making 5♠X wins 11 IMPs, a 16 IMP differential.

The play went rather quickly for awhile.  I lost the ♣A, then the ♦A, then won the ♦K and led the ♠J, covered with the ♠K and ♠A.  A club ruff back to hand for a finesse of the ♠10 and I was now down to finding the ♥Q to make the hand.  Then the play slowed down a bit.  I felt, if Jack held ♥Qxx, he probably would have tried 3NT instead of 3♠.  And, if Mark held ♥Qxx, he probably would have tried 3NT instead of 4♣.  So, I correctly deduced that someone likely held ♥Qx.  Is Mark 0=2=5=6 or is Jack 3=2=4=4?   Who cares?  If I am right about either holding ♥Qx, then all I have to do is bang down the AK and the ♥Q will fall, making 5♠ doubled. Mark did a lot of bidding, so I foolishly went with Mark holding the ♥Q by cashing the ♥K and letting the ♥J ride.  Wrong!  Jack held ♥Qx.  My play is only right if Mark held ♥Qxx and the bidding indicated he did not.  Lose 5 IMPs.   But it was a fun hand to bid and play.  Bidding spades for the first time at the 4 level and then again(!) at the 5 level shocked everyone.  Getting the heart suit wrong was a painful lesson.

Recap of 11/4/2013 28 board IMP individual

November 5th, 2013  ~  bobmunson  ~  No Comments 

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