Board 4
Both sides vulnerable
Both sides vulnerable
| ♠ Q J 8 7 2 ♥ Q J 8 7 ♦ 2 ♣ A 8 4 |
LHO opens one diamond, partner overcalls two clubs, and RHO bids two hearts. When you have your own suit and support for partner in a competitive auction, there is always some question as to which suit you should show. Most of the time, raising partner is better. But here, bidding spades makes more sense, since four spades is our likeliest game. I bid two spades. LHO and partner pass, and RHO bids three notrump.
How can they be making this? Partner might strain to overcall with a good suit. But that can't be the case here. He is missing the ace of clubs and, apparently either the king or the queen-jack. So he must have high cards on the side, which means the opponents are stretching. I have hearts stacked behind declarer and partner rates to have diamonds behind dummy. (Since partner apparently overcalled light, there is an inference he has four diamonds. Three-card length in opener's suit makes a light overcall unattractive, and it's unlikely he is short in diamonds.) On top of all that, we have a source of tricks of our own. Not only do they rate to go down, they rate to go down a lot.
I criticized partner on board one for doubling a voluntarily bid game on the assumption the opponents didn't know how to add up their high-card points. But in this case I have additional information. I know their suits aren't breaking, and they don't appear to have distributional values to compensate for their lack of high cards. If LHO had bid three diamonds over two spades, I would not double. They might easily take six diamonds and three tricks on the side. But she passed, so she is presumably balanced. The opponents have clearly stepped out of line. I double, and everyone passes.
Now what to lead? If LHO had bid rebid diamonds, I might have reason to steer clear of a club lead, since the club king might be their ninth trick. But, on this auction, I have no reason to think declarer has eight cashing tricks. Leading a club might give up a trick unnecessarily. But setting up partner's club suit seems like a good way to start the defense. Accordingly, I lead the four of clubs.
| NORTH
Kate ♠ 9 5 4 ♥ K 9 ♦ A K J 8 5 3 ♣ 6 3 |
||
| WEST
Phillip ♠ Q J 8 7 2 ♥ Q J 8 7 ♦ 2 ♣ A 8 4 |
| West | North | East | South |
| Phillip | Kate | Jack | Stella |
| 1 ♦ | 2 ♣ | 2 ♥ | |
| 2 ♠ | Pass | Pass | 3 NT |
| Double | (All pass) |
Can I change my mind now? Why is declarer lucky enough to catch dummy with six diamonds? Partner plays the nine of clubs, and declarer wins with the king. I can't construct a hand for declarer that doesn't include the queen of diamonds. The worst hand I can construct for her is:
| ♠ K x x ♥ A x x x x ♦ Q x x ♣ K x |
leaving partner with
| ♠ A x ♥ x x ♦ x x x ♣ Q J 10 9 x x |
That's not a hand I would have overcalled with, but to each his own. If this construction is correct, they're going to make this, and we had the first seven tricks if I had led a spade.
Declarer plays the four of diamonds--deuce--king--seven. Now the king of hearts--six--five. That's encouraging. If she isn't running diamonds, maybe she's missing the queen after all. I play the seven of hearts. (Always give false count with the jack, remember. Since partner should echo with jack third, declarer can't tell how hearts are splitting.) Declarer plays the nine of hearts--three--ace--eight, then the six of diamonds. I play the spade deuce (in case partner has any bright ideas about trying to run spades instead of clubs)--ace--nine. Declarer plays a diamond to partner's queen; I discard the spade seven.
Partner shifts to the queen of clubs. We should have the rest: five clubs and two hearts. That means partner has the spade ace, else declarer would have cashed it. So, in fact, we have one more trick than we can use. I overtake the queen of clubs with my ace, cash my hearts (letting partner pitch one of his winners), and lead the club eight, so partner can overtake and claim. But he doesn't overtake. He ducks my eight of clubs, letting me take one more trick. What a nice partner, redistributing the wealth like that. We get to take four tricks each.
| NORTH
Kate ♠ 9 5 4 ♥ K 9 ♦ A K J 8 5 3 ♣ 6 3 |
||
| WEST
Phillip ♠ Q J 8 7 2 ♥ Q J 8 7 ♦ 2 ♣ A 8 4 |
EAST
Jack ♠ A 3 ♥ 6 3 ♦ Q 9 7 ♣ Q J 10 9 7 2 | |
| SOUTH
Stella ♠ K 10 6 ♥ A 10 5 4 2 ♦ 10 6 4 ♣ K 5 |
Did I make a bad lead? The only reason we beat this after my club lead is that South had made a gross overbid. By all rights, she should have the diamond queen, in which case I needed to lead a spade. But that seems double-dummy to me. Dummy certainly didn't have to have six diamonds.
Partner's pushy overcall while holding queen third of opener's suit was, of course, ill-advised. Although he survived the main danger: that we would go minus on offense when we were entitled to go plus on defense. The moment I doubled three notrump, I imagine he was quite happy he had bid.
How should the opponents' auction have gone after two spades? While it's rare for opener to pass with six diamonds, I agree with the pass in this case - not because she has a minimum but because she has a good hand for defense. With three spades and top cards in diamonds, North is quite happy to defend if it looks right to South.
After two spades is passed around to South, some would reopen with an "action double." But I don't think South should double with diamond support. To my mind, double is essentially a "take-out double" of partner's suit. It shows at most two diamonds and "support" for both black suits. If South does double, I think North should pass, which would not work out well on this deal. With this South hand, I would bid two notrump (natural and non-forcing), which partner would correct to three diamonds.
Our teammates were down two in five diamonds. Why is everyone bidding so much? And, come to think of it, how did they manage to go down only two?
Table 1: +1100
Table 2: -200
Result on Board 4: +14 imps
Total: +16 imps
No comments:
Post a Comment