Sunday, January 30, 2011

Match 2 - Board 39

Board 39
Both sides vulnerable

♠ K 8 6 5 8 7 4 3 2 K ♣ A 6 2

I pass, LHO passes, and partner opens one notrump (12-14) in third seat. I bid two clubs, and partner bids two hearts. I was intending to pass two spades. But, with a ninth trump, my hand is worth a raise. I bid three hearts, and partner goes on to four. RHO leads the queen of clubs.


NORTH
♠ K 8 6 5
8 7 4 3 2
K
♣ A 6 2






SOUTH
♠ Q 2
A Q J 10 5
7 5 3
♣ K 7 4



West North East South
Pass Pass 1 NT
Pass 2 ♣ Pass 2
Pass 3 Pass 4
(All pass)


Not your classic weak notrump opening. But it worked out OK.

I have four potential losers. I need the heart king to be onside, or I need to be able to establish a second spade trick for a club discard. I may be able to do that if East has ace doubleton or tripleton of spades. I will need some luck for this to work, like the opponents' unaccountably not continuing clubs or perhaps five-two clubs with the diamond ace favorably located. But it doesn't hurt to try. I can always fall back on the heart finesse if necessary.

I win with the club ace. East plays the eight, and I play the four. The eight presumably shows the ten. I play the five of spades--four--queen--ace. So much for developing a second spade trick. I expect West to continue clubs, since East's signal has told him it is safe to do so. But he plays the jack of spades--king--seven--deuce. Jack tends to play up the line after his initial count signal. So it looks as if East has nine-seven-four of spades and West has ace--jack--ten--three.

I could take a heart finesse now. But I don't see any reason not to exit with the king of diamonds first. If I put the opponents on play, maybe they will do something stupid. Perhaps West will win with the ace and try to cash the ten of spades, crashing his partner's nine. Even if they don't do anything stupid, it's always a good idea to gather information if you can.

I play the king of diamonds--ace--five--ten. East plays the club ten--king--three--deuce. I ruff the three of diamonds to dummy, intending to take a trump finesse. To my surprise, West contributes the queen; East plays the deuce. Can West really have queen-ten doubleton of diamonds? It's possible, but I doubt it. That would mean East passed twice with ace-jack seventh. Even if he chose not to pre-empt in second seat, he could have overcalled with two diamonds on the next round. So I suspect what is going on is West has queen-jack-ten of diamonds. If so, he surely has only three. With longer diamonds, he would have preferred a diamond lead to a club lead from queen-jack-nine.

The fact that West has at most three diamonds means it is likely he has five clubs, which opens up an interesting possibility. If East is out of clubs, there is no need for me to take a heart finesse (unless hearts are three-zero). I can strip the hand and cash the heart ace. If the king drops, great. If it doesn't, I play another heart, endplaying East. Can I determine for sure whether East is out of clubs?

I know West has two or three diamonds. If he has two hearts, either I'm down or East has a singleton king and I have nothing to worry about. So I might as well assume he has a singleton or void in hearts. I also know he has no six-card suit, since East has already followed twice to each black suit. Thus there are only four relevant patterns West can hold: 4-1-3-5, 5-1-3-4,  5-0-3-5, or 5-1-2-5.

The latter two patterns, while possible, are unlikely, since West probably would have bid over one notrump with five-five in the black suits and an opening bid. 5-1-2-5 is particularly unlikely, as I said earlier, since it requires East to have passed twice with seven diamonds. So I'm going to focus on handling the first two patterns. If I can handle the latter two as well, fine. If not, I'm not going to worry about it. I should start by ruffing a spade to my hand to get a count in that suit.

(A) If East follows (as I expect him to, given his count signal), then I know West is 4-1-3-5 (or he has two hearts, in which case my play doesn't matter). I cash the heart ace. If the king doesn't drop, I ruff my last diamond and play a heart, hopefully endplaying East.

(B) If East shows out, he probably has another club. So there is no endplay, and I need the heart king to be onside. I ruff a diamond to dummy and play a heart to the queen. If West follows low, I'm home. If he shows out, I don't have an entry to repeat the finesse. But I don't need one. If East has three hearts, he is out of clubs. I cash the heart ace and play a third heart to endplay him.

What happens if West does have a doubleton diamond?  When I try to ruff the third round of diamonds to dummy, he may ruff in front of dummy with the nine or king. If so, I can pitch dummy's club loser. But if East is out of clubs, West can lead a club for an overruff. That means if West is 5-1-2-5 with a singleton king or nine or hearts, I'm going down.

I don't mind going down if he has a singleton king. My alternative line of taking an immediate trump finesse would not have worked either. But if he ruffs in with a singleton nine, I've gone down on a hand where the more straightforward line would have worked. As I said, I'm not going to worry about that. I think West is very unlikely to be 5-1-2-5.

So my discovery play of the king of diamonds paid off. I'm now going to make this on some layouts where West has a singleton king of hearts. Obviously, I didn't envision this when I chose to exit with the king of diamonds. When you embark on a journey of discovery, you never know where it might lead you.

I play a spade from dummy. It turns out, East did give false count in spades. He shows out, but, instead of pitching, he ruffs with the six of hearts. That makes it easy. I overruff and cash the heart ace, dropping West's king. Making four.


NORTH
♠ K 8 6 5
8 7 4 3 2
K
♣ A 6 2


WEST
♠ A J 10 9 3
K
Q 10
♣ Q J 9 5 3


EAST
♠ 7 4
9 6
A J 9 8 6 4 2
♣ 10 8


SOUTH
♠ Q 2
A Q J 10 5
7 5 3
♣ K 7 4


So East did pass twice with ace-jack seventh of diamonds! And West passed over one notrump with five-five in the black suits and an opening bid! What got into Jack? Not only that, East handed me the contract by ruffing the spade. I was expecting to go down on this particular layout. Giving East an opportunity to misdefend was a bonus for my line that I hadn't even considered. If I ever use this problem in an article, I'll switch the eight and nine of hearts, so I needn't rely on misdefense.

Every table played four hearts. Half the declarers made it; half did not. Strangely, everyone who went down failed by two tricks. Where does the extra loser come from? Somehow East must manage to ruff a winner. It took me awhile to figure it out, but I think I have it. Club queen to the ace. Spade to the queen and ace. At my table, West played the spade jack, perhaps hoping his partner had a singleton spade. What happens if, instead of a spade, West plays another club? I win and play a diamond to the king and ace. East then plays a heart. If I finesse, West wins, cashes his club, allowing East to pitch a spade, then gives East a spade ruff. Down two.

Should I finesse the heart in that position? I don't think I would. I would probably assume from East's failure to play a club that he doesn't have one. In which case, I would rise with the heart ace and, if the king doesn't drop, go for the strip and throw-in. It would take quite an imaginative East indeed, holding another club and the king of hearts, to envision that refusing to cash the club presents declarer with an attractive losing option.

Score on Board 39: +620 (9 MP)
Total: 315 MP (67.3 %)

Current rank: 1st

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Match 2 - Board 38

Board 38
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 6 2 A 8 7 Q 8 2 ♣ J 10 7 6

RHO opens one notrump (15-17) and buys it.

After one notrump--three notrump, it would be normal to lead a major, hoping to hit a five-card suit in partner's hand. Against one notrump--pass, however, the situation is different. For one thing, since partner didn't balance, he is more likely to have a long minor than a long major, particularly when playing Astro. For another, when you are looking for seven tricks rather then five, there is less urgency in finding partner's long suit right away. You rate to have more entries defending one notrump than defending three, so you may have an opportunity to correct your course later on, and there is less reason to speculate at trick one.

This is a long-winded way of saying I'm leading fourth from my longest and strongest: the six of clubs.


NORTH
♠ A K 10 5
10 5 4
10 6 4
♣ 9 8 3


WEST
♠ J 6 2
A 8 7
Q 8 2
♣ J 10 7 6




West North East South
1 NT
(All pass)


Declarer plays the eight from dummy, partner plays the queen, and declarer wins with the ace. Partner has eight to ten high-card points, and I've just seen two of them. So he has six to eight unaccounted for.

Declarer would usually duck the first trick with only the ace. So it is a fair inference that either (A) declarer has the club king as well or (B) there is a shift declarer is afraid of. If (A), as we've seen before, declarer would have done better to win with the king. Then neither partner nor I could draw this inference.

Declarer leads the heart queen. If partner has the king, I'd rather he win this trick so I can retain my entry to the long clubs. If declarer has the king, there is probably no hurry. This doesn't look like the kind of deal where he wants to sneak one trick through, then switch to a different suit. I play the seven--four--deuce. If the deuce is honest count, then declarer has king-queen-jack fourth or king-queen-nine fourth. If the latter, he is not taking his best play in hearts, so there is an inference he has some communication problems. With, say, queen fourth of spades, he might have used dummy's spade entries to lead up to his hearts twice.

Declarer plays the spade three. I play the six (routinely giving false count with the jack)--king--seven. As I said, I don't think partner has two small spades. I suspect partner has either queen-seven, queen-third, or nine-eight-seven. If declarer has the queen, then, when he cashes it and sees my deuce, he will know that either I gave false count with jack third or partner gave false count with jack fourth. If he thinks the latter, then perhaps he has some sort of endplay available against partner, in which case we will have given him a losing option.

Declarer plays the heart ten--jack--king--ace. If declarer had king-queen-nine fourth, he would have led low from dummy in case partner had jack doubleton. So it appears declarer has five hearts.

I also know that partner has at least one high diamond honor. This conclusion comes from the inference I drew earlier: either (A) declarer has the club king (in which case both diamond honors would give him 19 high-card points) or (B) there is some shift declarer is afraid of, which could only be diamonds.

If declarer has the spade queen, we are in a cashout situation. Declarer has at least nine cashing tricks (four spades, four hearts, and the club ace) and might easily have a tenth (the club king or diamond ace). So we should try to cash as many tricks as we can before giving up the lead. Partner can still have as many as seven high-card points that I haven't seen yet. So there is room in partner's hand for the club king or for the ace and king of diamonds. Either minor could be running:

(A) ♠ Q x x K Q 9 x x A x (x) ♣ A x (x)

If we cash out our clubs, we hold declarer to nine tricks. If we don't, he makes ten.

(B) ♠ Q x x K Q 9 x x J x (x) ♣ A K (x)

If we cash our diamonds, we hold declarer to seven or eight tricks (depending upon whether partner has four or five diamonds). Again, declarer takes ten tricks if I don't find the right shift.

Rather than win this trick and guess which suit to shift to, I could duck again, so that partner can signal when I win the heart ace. Can I afford to do that? How many tricks might declarer take if he abandons hearts? At most, he has two hearts, four spades, the club ace, and one more minor-suit trick, bringing his total to eight tricks. The only time we can hold him to fewer than eight tricks is if partner has ace-king fifth of diamonds, so ducking, while not always best, at least works out better on balance than a blind switch.

Accordingly, I duck. Declarer continues with the six of hearts--ace--ten--three. So declarer had only four hearts after all! Maybe I was hasty in assuming declarer would lead low from dummy with king-queen-nine fourth. Can leading the ten ever be right?  I suppose it would be right if partner had jack-eight fourth. But few defenders would duck with an offside doubleton ace. If I were declarer, I would rate that layout unlikely.

Partner wasn't able to signal on the heart ace, but I did find out declarer has one trick fewer than I thought he did. That makes a club shift less attractive. If declarer has only nine tricks to cash, there is no hurry to cash our three club tricks.

Could it be right to lead a club for some reason other than to cash out, perhaps because breaking diamonds gives away a diamond trick? How about this layout:

♠ Q x x K Q 9 x A J ♣ A x x x

The diamond shift establishes a diamond trick for declarer. That wouldn't matter if the minors were three-three. But with this pattern it costs a trick because the clubs are blocked. Still, the fact that I had to work to construct this layout suggests that a diamond shift is the percentage choice.

The question now is which diamond? A low one gives partner an impossible problem if he has the very hand I am hoping for: ace-king fourth or fifth of diamonds. How is partner supposed to know whether I am leading from the jack or the queen? If I lead low, partner might reasonably play ace, king, and another, playing declarer for queen doubleton. Leading the queen would make things much easier for partner.

Of course, the queen could be a spectacular failure. Imagine, for example, that declarer has

♠ x x x K Q 9 x K J x x ♣ A K

But I'm not so sure I should worry about that. The queen is wrong only when leading diamonds is the wrong idea altogether. If I'm going to lead the wrong suit, how much worse is it to lead the wrong card as well? Better to make sure I maximize my advantage if I happen to have made the right decision.

I shift to the diamond queen. Partner takes his ace, and declarer drops the five. Partner returns the five of clubs, declarer wins with the king, and I play the seven. The five is the highest outstanding club, so declarer began with three or four clubs. His hand is probably some variation on:

♠ Q x x K Q 9 x K x x ♣ A K x

That's 17 high-card points, so there isn't room for the diamond jack. But he might have the diamond jack if he's missing the spade queen. Let's hope not.

Declarer cashes the nine of hearts. I pitch a diamond; dummy and partner pitch clubs. If I'm right about declarer's hand, he's down to


NORTH
♠ A 10 5
--
10 6
♣ ---






SOUTH
♠ Q x
--
K x
♣ x



His spades are good, so he has four of the last five tricks. But he doesn't know that. If he thinks I have the diamond jack, his best play now is a spade to ace, then back to the queen, strip squeezing me. This gives him four tricks any time I have the diamond jack, regardless of the lie of the spade suit. As the cards lie, he will be disappointed to take only three tricks. My queen of diamonds may have been a serendipitous choice.

I don't know if declarer doesn't see this line or if he is simply unconvinced that I have the diamond jack. For whatever reason, he banks on spades coming home. He cashes the spade queen, then plays a spade to the ace. My jack drops, so dummy's spade is good. It looks as though we are going to score partner's jack of diamonds at trick thirteen. That is, unless declarer has the nine of diamonds and finesses. That's a scary thought. Wouldn't partner have ducked my queen if he didn't have the nine of diamonds? Who knows? Maybe he was afraid I had king-ten fourth of clubs. If declarer does have the nine, let's hope he thinks I've come down to a singleton jack of diamonds and a winning club for my last two cards.

No worries. Partner has the nine of diamonds. Making four.


NORTH
♠ A K 10 5
10 5 4
10 6 4
♣ 9 8 3


WEST
♠ J 6 2
A 8 7
Q 8 2
♣ J 10 7 6


EAST
♠ 9 8 7
J 3 2
A J 9 3
♣ Q 5 2


SOUTH
♠ Q 4 3
K Q 9 6
K 7 5
♣ A K 4


Four pairs held one notrump to nine tricks. It looks to me as if it takes an initial diamond lead to do that. I shouldn't think that would have been such a popular choice.

One pair reached three notrump, so we wind up with three matchpoints.

Score on Board 38: -180 (3 MP)
Total: 306 MP (67.1 %)

Current rank: 1st

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Match 2 - Board 37

Board 37
Our side vulnerable

♠ Q 9 2 A 7 3 K 9 7 ♣ 9 7 6 2

Two passes to me. I pass. LHO passes. Oh, well.


NORTH
♠ K 8 7 3
K J 9
5 2
♣ Q J 10 5


WEST
♠ 6
Q 10 4 2
Q 10 6 4
♣ A K 8 4


EAST
♠ A J 10 5 4
8 6 5
A J 8 3
♣ 3


SOUTH
♠ Q 9 2
A 7 3
K 9 7
♣ 9 7 6 2



West North East South
Pass Pass Pass
Pass


The opponents can make three diamonds, but it's hard to get there. If RHO opens, as he would have done in the old days (he does have two and a half-plus honor tricks after all), he would probably wind up in two notrump going down. Every other table passes it out as well, so we wind up with six matchpoints.

Now that we have some time on our hands, let's go back to last week's deal. I glossed over the play of this suit, and it bears some further discussion:


NORTH
K Q 9 8 3


SOUTH
7 2


In the post, I said simply that I led the deuce of hearts from my hand. What I didn't say was it would have been an error to lead the seven. To see why, note what happened. West took the ace, and East, holding ten-four and not wishing to waste his honor, played the four. West was now unable to read the lie of the heart suit. East might have ten-four or he might have ten-seven-four. Had I led the seven, West would have known the count. He might not know whether his partner held ten-four or four-deuce. But he would know his partner held at most two hearts. There is no three-card holding East would play the four from. This was no accident; I led the deuce precisely for this reason.

In this particular case, concealing the heart count from West made no difference. But it might matter on a different deal, so it's worth discussing how one knows that the deuce will be less revealing than the seven. One possibility is to tabulate all of East's possible holdings and figure out which play makes East's card unreadable in the greatest number of cases. Of course, this method is laborious and time-consuming. An easier way (and one less apt to generate late-play penalties) is to follow a few simple rules:

Rules for Scrambling the Opponents' Count Signals

In the ensuing discussion, I will use the name 'Fred' to refer to the defender from whom you wish to conceal information. I will use the name 'Ethel' to refer to his partner, that is, the defender whose holding you are trying to obscure. Sometimes you know ahead of time which defender is which; sometimes you don't. Sometimes Fred may be, for example, whichever defender holds the ace.

Rule 1 - If you wish to represent a particular holding for Ethel, signal as if you held that holding.

Most players know this rule when it comes to attitude signals. Declarer should play high to encourage and low to discourage (or the opposite if the opponents signal upside down). Many players do not know, however, that the rule works with count signals also.


NORTH
♣ Q J 10 9


SOUTH
♣ 7 6 2


Fred leads the king of clubs against a heart contract; Ethel plays the four. If Ethel has four-three doubleton, you want Fred to think that it is possible she has three clubs. So you signal as if you had three clubs (which, by sheer coincidence, you do). Since the opponents play standard count, you play low. ("Low" means any card lower than the card Ethel played. If you have choices, you should choose among them at random.)

Suppose, however, you want Fred to continue clubs. Perhaps you know--for whatever reason--that Ethel has three clubs (presumably eight-five-four), and you want Fred to waste a tempo cashing his club ace. You want to represent a doubleton in Ethel's hand, so you signal as if you had a doubleton. Since the opponents play standard count, you play high. Any card higher than Ethel's will do. By concealing the deuce, you leave open the possiblity that Ethel has four-deuce.

Rule 1 is fine if you have a specific objective in mind. But what if you don't? What if you just want to play the card that has the greatest chance of scrambling the opponents' signals? In that case, you need Rules 2 and 3.

Rule 2 - With three or more cards, play your lowest or second lowest card, choosing whichever is closest to middle in rank. If the opponents signal upside down, choose similarly between your highest or second highest spot card. 

For example,


NORTH
♣ K Q J 10


SOUTH
♣ 8 5 2


Which card should you lead toward dummy to scramble Ethel's count signal? Assuming standard signals, your choice is between the deuce and the five. The five, being a middle-ranking card, will work more often. Playing the deuce is right only if Ethel has four-three doubleton, since it leaves open the possibility that she has eight-five-four. Playing the five is right anytime Ethel has three clubs, since it leaves open the possibility she has a doubleton.

Note that if dummy had the nine of clubs instead of the ten, the five would work in even more cases. It would work against against any three-card holding and against any even holding that includes the ten (provided Ethel is unwilling to signal with the ten), since it leaves open the possibility she has ten-eight third.


NORTH
♣ K Q J 10


SOUTH
♣ 9 8 4


Now the choice is between the four and the eight. Again, the middle-ranking card, the four, is the percentage play. The eight will create an ambiguity only if Ethel has seven-six-five. The four will create an ambiguity any time Ethel has an even number.

Rule 3 - With a doubleton, give correct count with one exception: If Ethel is apt to have a card she doesn't want to part with, give false count. 

Why should you usually signal an even number with a doubleton? Because, in general, it is easier to scramble Ethel's odd signal than it is to scramble her even signal. To scramble her odd signal, all you need to do is to conceal one card lower than the card she plays (or higher if they signal upside down). To scramble her even signal, you must conceal two cards higher than the card she plays (or lower if they signal upside down).



NORTH
♣ K Q J 10


SOUTH
♣ 9 2


Signal as the opponents would. Play the nine if the opponents play standard signals; play the deuce if they play upside down. You hope that Ethel has an odd number of clubs, in which case playing the proper card will make it possible that she has a doubleton. It is impossible to create an ambiguity when Ethel has an even number of clubs.


NORTH
K Q 9 8 3


SOUTH
7 2


In this layout, there are two cards outstanding that Ethel might well choose not to signal with: the jack and the ten. Ethel is apt to have one or the other of them, so the exception applies, and you should give false count.

Why does this situation create an exception? Because there are now many three-card holdings from which Ethel's play is automatically ambiguous:

J 6 5
J 6 4
10 6 5
10 6 4

Ethel will play low from any of these holdings, but she will also play low from:

J 5
J 4
10 5
10 4

(Actually, it doesn't matter whether she will play low from these doubletons or not. All that matters is that, from Fred's point of view, she might play low.)

Normally, against standard carders, you want to retain the deuce when you hold a doubleton. That way, if Ethel plays low from three, it will be possible she holds a doubleton. But if Ethel holds the jack or ten, you don't need to do that. It is already possible that she holds a doubleton. Her signal from three cards is already ambiguous without your having to do anything.

Therefore, you need to shift your attention to scrambling her signal when she holds an even number. And, as we have seen, the way to do that is signal an odd number. If Ethel plays her highest spot card from:

J 6
J 5
J 4
10 6
10 5
10 4
 J 6 5 4
 10 6 5 4

then retaining the seven leaves open the possibility that she has three. (If they signal upside down and she plays the lowest spot card, then retaining the deuce leaves open that possibility.)

One addendum: Declarer's choice of equals rarely matters. So, whatever card the above rules instruct you to play, you are free to play any other card of equal rank. Randomizing among equals will help to keep Fred from  exploiting these rules to divine your holding.

Am I being too cautious in saying "rarely" instead of "never"? No. I can't think of a case where declarer's choice among equals matters for an even-odd ambiguity. But it can certainly matter for a two-or-four ambiguity:




NORTH
♣ K Q J 3


SOUTH
♣ 9 8 2



You lead the king from dummy, and East plays the seven, presumably from seven doubleton. By Rule 1, if you want to represent three cards in East's hand, you should play low; if you want to represent four cards (so that you might have a singleton), you should play high. But, if you play high, you must play the eight. The nine will not work, since East would play the eight from eight-seven fourth. This falls under the heading of "playing the card you're known to hold."

So there you have it. A simple set of guidelines for scrambling the opponents' count signals. What's particularly nice about these rules is that the opportunity to apply them typically comes up several times per session. So, if you didn't know these rules already, your expected per session score has just gone up perhaps a couple of matchpoints.

Score on Board 37: 0 (6 MP)
Total: 303 MP (68.2 %)

Current rank: 1st

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Match 2 - Board 36

Board 36
Both sides vulnerable

♠ J 10 9 3 K Q 9 8 3 7 3 ♣ 9 7

Partner opens one spade, and RHO overcalls with two diamonds. I'd like to bid a pre-emptive three spades, but our convention card says that's a limit raise, so I have to settle for two spades. I suppose it's just as well I was prohibited from bidding three, because two spades ends the auction. West leads the ace of diamonds.


NORTH
♠ J 10 9 3
K Q 9 8 3
7 3
♣ 9 7






SOUTH
♠ A K 8 5
7 2
6 4 2
♣ A K Q 2



West North East South
Pass 1 ♠
2 2 ♠ (All pass)


East plays the nine of diamonds, and I play the deuce. West continues with the king of diamonds, East dropping the ten, then the queen of diamonds. I doubt West sold out to two spades with six solid diamonds. But if I ruffed low and he did, I'd feel pretty silly. It looks as if I can afford to ruff with the jack, so I do. East follows with the diamond jack.

If East was unwilling to offer a single raise with jack third of diamonds, he can't have much. Surely he doesn't have the heart ace. (Although only a few deals ago I made an assumption like that that proved to be wrong). It's also suspicious that West sold out. It's seldom a good idea to let the opponents play at the two level when you know they have a fit. West would surely have balanced with spade shortness, so I have a strong suspicion he has three spades. (Against five-card majorites, three small spades would be a plus for balancing, since you can infer shortness in partner's hand. But when the opponents might be in a four-three fit, as is the case here, balancing with three trumps is more dangerous. This is one of the advantages of playing four-card majors: It makes the opponents' life more difficult in low-level competitive auctions.)

I have to play a heart sooner or later. It's hard to see the harm in getting the play out of the way early. I have to confess to being a little bit lazy here. I'm relying more on instinct than on analysis. I haven't actually constructed a deal where an immediate spade finesse presents any danger. It just looks more convenient to play a heart first.

I play a club--four--king (the most ambiguous of my three choices)--three. Someone gave false count, probably because he has a doubleton honor. My guess is East has five and West has the doubleton. If it were the other way around, West would have balanced. So it looks as if West is 3-3-5-2. I play the deuce of hearts--ace--three--four. East's four is consistent with my picture. It appears he has three hearts (unless he also has a doubleton honor).

West plays the ten of clubs--nine--five--ace. The obvious play now is to ruff my deuce of clubs and float the ten of spades. Is there anything wrong with this plan? East can't really have four spades. But West can. What if he's 4-2-5-2? (This requires East to have given false count in hearts, but that's hardly impossible.) If I lead a low club, West will pitch his heart. Now, when I lose the spade finesse to him, he can play another diamond. If I ruff in the dummy, I can't get to my hand to cash the club queen. If I ruff in my hand, I'm tapped out and can't score my heart trick.

Can I cash the heart before ruffing a club? If I do, then how do I get off dummy? A spade to the ace? To the eight? The club shift, killing the entry to my hand, was a nice play on West's part. A heart continuation would have made the hand easy for me. Cashing the heart might work, but it's complicated. I'll come back to this line later if necessary. First, let me see what happens if I lead the club queen instead of a low one. If that works, I may save myself a headache.

If I lead the club queen and West pitches a heart, I'm OK. I can continue with the club deuce, ruffing in dummy, and take a spade finesse. Now if West wins and leads a diamond, I can ruff in dummy and pitch my heart, leaving me with high trumps in my hand.

The danger in leading the club queen is that West ruffs it. Can I handle that? I overruff and cash the king of hearts, reaching this position:


NORTH
♠ 9 3
Q 9 8
--
♣ --






SOUTH
♠ A K 8 5
--
--
♣ 2



Now I lead the heart queen and pitch my club if East follows. If West began with queen fourth of spades, he ruffs with his natural trump trick, and I have the rest. If West follows as well, then he was 3-3-5-2. The remaining spades are two-two. So, again, I have the rest. If East ruffs the queen of hearts, then West was 2-4-5-2. I can overruff, ruff the club in dummy, and claim. This line loses a trick unnecessarily only if East began with a singleton queen of spades and West began with four small. I doubt I can find a line that does any better.

I lead the queen of clubs, and West pitches the five of diamonds. I continue with the deuce of clubs, and he ruffs with the four of spades. Now he ruffs? OK. Be that way. I overruff and finesse East for the spade queen. Making four.


NORTH
♠ J 10 9 3
K Q 9 8 3
7 3
♣ 9 7


WEST
♠ 4 2
A J 6 5
A K Q 8 5
♣ 10 3


EAST
♠ Q 7 6
10 4
J 10 9
♣ J 8 6 5 4


SOUTH
♠ A K 8 5
7 2
6 4 2
♣ A K Q 2


West was wrong to sell out. He should double two spades. If his partner bids clubs, he can correct to diamonds, showing a secondary heart suit. In practice, I would bid three spades directly over the double, which would end the auction.

Is the field going to reach game? I doubt it. One notrump--two clubs--two spades--pass looks like the normal auction. But, when I check the scores, it appears I'm wrong. Four pairs did reach four spades. Fortunately, one declarer found a way to go down. I can't imagine how he did that. The other two pairs played a heart partscore, making two. They transfered to hearts rather than bid Stayman? Perhaps they were playing Puppet Stayman. Anyway, plus 170 is dead average.

Which brings up an interesting point. Game is roughly 50%. Normally you would think you should bid such a game or at least that it would be a toss-up whether to bid it or not. But I got six matchpoints when the game made, and I would have gotten twelve if it had gone down. So my expectation in avoiding game was nine matchpoints. Had I bid game, I would either share a top or share a bottom with the other pairs who reached game, so my expectation would be six matchpoints. Clearly the percentage action is to avoid game. But why?

The reason is that not everyone found the spade fit, which means simply playing spades at all gets you ahead of the field. I'm not sure how you could predict that on this particular deal, but it's a point worth remembering.

Score on Board 36: +170 (6 MP)
Total: 297 MP (68.8%)

Current rank: 1st

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Match 2 - Board 35

Board 35
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 8 2 8 6 4 A K J 8 7 4 ♣ 9

This is an awkward hand when you aren't playing weak two-bids. It's dangerous to pass with a suit like this, and the hand is too good to open with a non-vulnerable three diamonds. So one diamond wins by default. It's only a tad light for a one-bid. If the spade jack were the queen, I would open one diamond even if a weak two diamonds were available.

I bid one diamond, LHO doubles, partner bids one spade, and RHO passes. I raise to two spades. I believe a two-diamond rebid should flatly deny three-card spade support. While I do have concrete reasons for believing this, it would be hard to do the argument justice in a few sentences. Perhaps I'll devote an entire post to it at some point.

LHO doubles again, and partner bids four spades. RHO, who wasn't willing to bid at the two level, now chimes in with five clubs.

Is a pass by me forcing? I don't think so. Nothing about this auction indicates it's our hand. But, more importantly, I don't care. As is almost always the case, I would make the same call either way. I know many people would double if they thought pass was forcing, because they have a "bad" hand. But that doesn't make sense to me. In a high-level competitive auction, "pass" should mean I have better offense than defense, and "double" should mean the opposite. And this should be true whether pass is forcing or not. With a singleton in the opponents' suit and all my high cards in my own suit, I have much better offense than defense. So I can't even consider doubling in front of partner. I pass, and partner doubles.

What should I lead? Our agreement is to lead ace from ace-king. Even when I have that agreement, I generally have a further agreement that, at the five level or higher, we lead king from ace-king and that partner is supposed to give count routinely. Jack doesn't play this way, however, so I lead the diamond ace.


NORTH
♠ K 6
K Q J 10 7
10 2
♣ A Q J 4


WEST
♠ J 8 2
8 6 4
A K J 8 7 4
♣ 9




West North East South
1 Double 1 ♠ Pass
2 ♠ Double 4 ♠ 5 ♣
Pass Pass Double (All pass)


What was the double of one diamond all about? One heart seems pretty normal. Would North really worried one heart was going to be passed out and that he would have missed something if it were?

What kind of hand does South have to bid five clubs when he wasn't willing to bid two clubs on the previous round? I doubt I would bid his hand this way whatever he has. But clearly he doesn't have much in the way of high cards. In fact, if he has enough shape to bid at the five level, I doubt he has either ace or the club king. Any one of those cards would give him an easy two club bid on round one.

Partner plays the nine of diamonds and declarer plays the six. If partner were carding sensibly, I would know to try to cash another diamond. Partner would not have queen-nine fourth of diamonds and the ace-queen of spades and encourage at trick one. But Jack's carding isn't so context-sensitive. His diamond card here simply shows or denies the diamond queen. So all I know is that either he has the diamond queen or the nine is a singleton.

When does my play matter? (A) If declarer has a singleton diamond and partner has the ace-queen of spades, I must shift to a spade. (B) If partner has a singleton diamond, I must cash the diamond now. Otherwise I will lose it, since I have no entry. In all other cases, I don't think it matters which suit I play next.

Let's try to construct scenario (A). Declarer will have something like

♠ x x x x x x ♣ x x x x x x x

and partner will have

♠ A Q x x x x A x Q 9 x x ♣ K

It's hard to believe partner wouldn't have made a slam try with that. Given all the high cards partner must have, perhaps there is an inference he does have a singleton diamond and that the misfit persuaded him to bid conservatively. So let's try (B).  Declarer will have something like

♠ Q x x Q x x x ♣ x x x x x x

and partner will have

♠ A x x x x x x A x x 9 ♣ K x

Note that I had to give declarer the singleton queen of spades.  If partner had the spade queen, he would have a slam try despite his singleton diamond. (In fact, it's not so clear he wouldn't have made one even with this hand.)

While it is true that (B) is more consistent with partner's bidding, it's also true that an error on my part would be less costly on (B) than on (A). If I mistakenly shift to a spade on (B), I convert 800 to 500. If I mistakenly play a diamond on (A), I convert 500 to 200. Since we are non-vul, 500 is the number to aim for. Can I adjust (B) so that the wrong shift would net a mere 200?

Let's give declarer

♠ Q x Q x x x ♣ x x x x x x x

and partner

♠ A x x x x x x A x x x 9 ♣ K

We're really reaching now. We have to deal out two singleton honors to make this scenario plausible.

(A) is looking like the more likely scenario, provided we can construct some layout where partner doesn't have such a clear slam try. Let's try taking away a spade from partner's hand. That gives us

♠ x x x x x x ♣ x x x x x x x

and

♠ A Q x x x A x x Q 9 x x ♣ K

Holding three spades does make declarer's save less attractive. But this is still the most believable construction I've come up with so far.

All right. I've convinced myself. I shift to the deuce of spades. (By the way, in this situation, it is critical that partner has count in spades right away. So I would never lead a hard-to-read third best from four. I would lead my highest spot from four and my lowest spot from three.)

Declarer plays the six from dummy, partner plays the ace, and declarer plays the nine. Oh, well. Let's hope partner doesn't have a singleton diamond. No, he doesn't. He returns the diamond deuce. Declarer ruffs, plays a club to the ace, dropping partner's king, and loses a trick to the heart ace for down one. It didn't matter what I did at trick two. But, given how hard I had to work to construct a  hand where it did matter, I guess that's no surprise.


NORTH
♠ K 6
K Q J 10 7
10 2
♣ A Q J 4


WEST
♠ J 8 2
8 6 4
A K J 8 7 4
♣ 9


EAST
♠ A 7 5 4 3
A 9 5
Q 9 5 3
♣ K


SOUTH
♠ Q 10 9
3 2
6
♣ 10 8 7 6 5 3 2


We collected only 200, but the save was a phantom. Four spades is down two on a heart lead and down one (after imaginative play by declarer) on a club lead. As expected, I don't care for declarer's bidding. I would have bid two clubs on the first round. And, even if I hadn't, I would not have bid five clubs on the second round holding queen third of spades.

The results are a little surprising. One pair bid a spade game and made an overtrick. Two other pairs played a spade partscore, making five and tieing our result. Everyone else went down in a variety of diamond contracts our way, probably the result of an ill-advised three-diamond opening.

It's hard to see why every declarer who played spades made eleven tricks. I guess the queen of spades lead lets declarer make eleven tricks. But that seems unlikely. How about a rather silly singleton diamond lead? Declarer wins and plays ace and a spade. Instead of shifting to a heart, North gives his partner a ruff with his natural trump trick (or perhaps with a non-natural trump trick if South hopped with the spade queen on the second trump). South then returns a heart. This is how the play went at three tables? I'd almost rather believe they all led the queen of spades.

One other point worth thinking about. I should have followed Lowenthal's Second Law of Opening Leads: "The lead of a low card promises an honor sequence somewhere in the hand - either in the suit led or in some other suit." If I'd led a spade at trick one, I wouldn't have had any problems on defense. Partner would have cashed whatever spades were cashing and would have shifted to a diamond. I must admit a spade lead never occurred to me. But perhaps it should have. How hard is it to envision my trick two problem?

Score on Board 35: +200 (9 MP)
Total: 291 (69.3 %)

Current rank: 1st