The Gargoyle Chronicles

Event 3 - Match 4 - Board 2

2012-01-29T21:41:00.000-05:00

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ 7 6♥ A K J 9 8♦ A K 2♣ Q J 8

Pass to me. I open one heart, and partner responds one spade. I bid two notrump (18-19 HCP). Partner raises to three, and LHO leads the club ace.

	NORTH Jack ♠ K Q 10 9 ♥ Q 10 ♦ Q 10 5 ♣ 10 6 4 3

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 7 6 ♥ A K J 9 8 ♦ A K 2 ♣ Q J 8

West	North	East	South
Harry	Jack	William	Phillip
		Pass	1 ♥
Pass	1 ♠	Pass	2 NT
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

East plays the five of clubs, and I follow with the eight. West continues with the club king, and East plays the seven. One usually leads low from ace-king fourth. So my guess is West led from ace-king third, trying to hit his partner's suit. But then why did he continue clubs after his partner played low?

I drop the club queen (the card I'm known to hold). West continues with the nine of clubs. West must have the deuce of clubs, so it appears I was wrong about the club split. He does have four. I win in my hand as East pitches the deuce of hearts.

I've made four. If I can sneak a spade through, I'll make five. I play the spade six--deuce--queen--eight. Aha! Making five.

	NORTH Jack ♠ K Q 10 9 ♥ Q 10 ♦ Q 10 5 ♣ 10 6 4 3
WEST Harry ♠ 5 4 3 2 ♥ 6 5 ♦ 8 6 3 ♣ A K 9 2		EAST William ♠ A J 8 ♥ 7 4 3 2 ♦ J 9 7 4 ♣ 7 5
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 7 6 ♥ A K J 9 8 ♦ A K 2 ♣ Q J 8

East had the spade ace and ducked? Interesting. My counterpart made only four, so we pick up an imp.

Which club should West lead? An honor could be necessary in a layout such as

	NORTH ♣ J
WEST ♣ A K 9 2		EAST ♣ 10 8 5 4
	SOUTH ♣ Q 7 6 3

But, on the auction, dummy can't sensibly have a singleton club. So presumably West led the ace to cater to declarer or dummy holding a doubleton queen.

A low club is better in two scenarios: (1) It avoids blocking the suit in a layout such as

	NORTH ♣ 8 6 4 3
WEST ♣ A K 9 2		EAST ♣ Q 5
	SOUTH ♣ J 10 7

And (2) it retains communication if you must concede a club to establish your long trick:

	NORTH ♣ 8 6 4 3
WEST ♣ A K 9 2		EAST ♣ 7 5
	SOUTH ♣ Q J 10

So either high or low could be right. Which is better? It's hard to say. But there is an additional consideration. We need five tricks to beat this. If we take that fact into account, you probably don't need to lead a club at all.

You may need to lead a club if partner has five of them. But, given dummy rates to have seven minor-suit cards, that seems unlikely. If we can take only four club tricks, partner needs a side entry, so running clubs can wait. In scenario (2), where we are after only three clubs tricks, partner needs two tricks on the side. He can use the first entry to lead a club, which you will duck, and the second entry to run the suit.

Since a club lead probably isn't necessary double dummy, why guess whether to lead a high club or a low club? If you guess wrong, you could be making the only lead that allows declarer to make his contract. So why not just lead a passive eight of diamonds?

One might raise a couple of objections to this line of reasoning. One objection is suggested by the use of the words "double dummy" in the previous paragraph. Partner might not find the club shift when he gets in. An initial club lead will certainly make things easier for him. A second objection is that the diamond lead may pickle our fifth trick. The right defense might be to cash four clubs, then wait for declarer to misguess diamonds.

As for the first objection, I'm hoping my failure to lead a club will clue partner in that I think the suit may be running off the top. Even if that message doesn't come across, it may be hard for him to construct a layout where we can take five tricks that doesn't involve running the club suit. As for the second objection, I suspect we will have a hard time beating this anyway if partner's only side trick is a slow trick in diamonds. I probably need him to have either an entry in one of the majors or the diamond ace to prevent declarer from having nine cashing tricks.

What about East's duck of the spade ace? Does that play make any sense? East knows I have all the missing high cards, including the heart jack. The only hand I can think of where I have a loser other than the spade ace is,

♠ x x♥ A K J x♦ A K x x♣ Q J x.

But what does ducking accomplish? It's not as if I'm going to come to my hand and play a second spade. Instead, I'll just run my tricks and hope for a spade-diamond squeeze, which East knows is going to work. In other words, rather than duck the spade ace, East should have simply pitched the ace on the third round of clubs. He would let me make five a lot faster that way.

I'd say neither opponent was thinking very clearly on this deal. That's the way I like it. Next board, please. Before they have a chance to grab a cup of coffee.

Table 1: +660
Table 2: -630

Result on Board 2: +1 imp
Total: -7 imps

Event 3 - Match 4 - Board 1

2012-01-22T17:12:00.000-05:00

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ 9 8 6 2♥ 9 5 4 2♦ K 9 7 6 2♣ --

Partner opens one spade, and RHO overcalls two clubs. I wish I could bid three spades, but partner insists on playing that as a limit raise rather than as pre-emptive. Four spades seems a bit much with eight losers. so I settle for two spades. LHO bids five clubs, and everyone passes.

If partner has the spade ace, the trick probably isn't going away. And cashing it now may simply set up discards in dummy. As I've said before, it can be dangerous to lead a nine-card fit when you are missing the middle honors. Diamonds looks like a better choice. If my king of diamonds is not working on defense, we probably aren't beating this, so why not hope it is working and act accordingly?

Since I have an entryless hand, I have to consider leading the king to try to retain the lead, but I don't have to consider it very long. It's hard to see why I need to be on lead at trick two. And if partner has the diamond queen rather than the ace, I surely want to lead low, since we don't want partner to have the sole guard in every suit. Accordingly, I lead the diamond deuce.

	NORTH Harry ♠ A 10 7 4 ♥ A Q J ♦ 4 ♣ Q 6 5 4 3
WEST Phillip ♠ 9 8 6 2 ♥ 9 5 4 2 ♦ K 9 7 6 2 ♣ --

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Harry	Jack	William
		1 ♠	2 ♣
2 ♠	5 ♣	(All pass)

I don't think we have much chance of beating this. Partner wins the diamond ace; declarer drops the three. Partner returns the diamond eight, and declarer plays the five. The eight cannot be partner's highest card, since declarer would have covered. The only holding consistent with the eight is ace-queen-ten-eight, giving declarer jack-five-three. So declarer's shape seems to be 0-4-3-6 or 0-3-3-7. None of our tricks can go away. Either partner has the heart king or he doesn't. Either he has a trump trick or he doesn't. I can go back to sleep now.

Declarer ruffs in dummy, draws two rounds of trumps, and claims. Making six.

	NORTH Harry ♠ A 10 7 4 ♥ A Q J ♦ 4 ♣ Q 6 5 4 3
WEST Phillip ♠ 9 8 6 2 ♥ 9 5 4 2 ♦ K 9 7 6 2 ♣ --		EAST Jack ♠ K Q J 5 3 ♥ 8 6 ♦ A Q 10 8 ♣ 8 2
	SOUTH William ♠ -- ♥ K 10 7 3 ♦ J 5 3 ♣ A K J 10 9 7

How about that? I made the right lead for a change. I stopped the second overtrick.

Since the opponents have a wasted ace - not to mention a wasted queen and two wasted jacks - it seems they should have come a little closer to reaching slam. Obviously three spades by North is a better start than five clubs. But would that work? South has two features to show: his second suit and his spade void. He must decide which is more important. If he bids four hearts, North will bid a slam. If he bids four spades, North probably won't. Or if he does, it's just a lucky decision. He would also be reaching slam opposite the same hand with the red suits reversed.

Our teammates did not reach slam either, though they apparently received more aggressive interference than we gave our opponents. They wound up defending five spades doubled and dropped a trick, beating it only one. We lose eight imps.

How did they drop a trick? I can't say for sure, but I can guess. Suppose the defense starts with a club, ruffed low in dummy. Dummy now leads the spade six. North, thinking declarer is psychic and is about to let the six ride, covers with the seven. Declarer wins with jack, discovering the bad break. He ruffs another club and leads dummy's last spade, the nine. North ducks, and declarer lets the nine hold. To get to his hand to continue trumps, declarer must play a diamond. Then, when he leads a trump to North's ace, North can recover his trump trick by taking a diamond ruff. He plays ace, queen of hearts, expecting South to overtake and give him his ruff. But will he? South must decide whether to overtake and play a diamond or to duck, playing declarer for

♠ K Q J x x x♥ J x x♦ A 10♣ x x

Or perhaps even to overtake and play a heart, playing declarer for

♠ K Q J x x♥ J x x♦ A Q 10♣ x x

It does seem there are clues enabling him to get this right. But apparently he didn't. Can North help him out? If South has managed to signal possession of he heart king, North might try the effect of leading jack, queen of hearts. Once South knows for sure declarer has a doubleton heart, he has no reason not to overtake and play a diamond.

Why jack, queen rather than queen, jack? In this deal, it doesn't matter. Partner should do the right thing however you card. But you should still play jack, queen just to reassure partner for the sake of future deals that you know how to signal.

As a general rule, playing your cards in a non-standard order is an alarm clock, waking partner up to the fact that something unusual is going on, frequently that you are ruffing something. If there were any ambiguity, your decision to employ or not to employ an alarm clock is how you would resolve that ambiguity.

For example, take this layout:

	NORTH ♥ x x x
WEST ♥ x x x		EAST ♥ A Q J x
	SOUTH ♥ K x x

You want to take three heart tricks, then lead a fourth round for a trump promotion. So you lead queen, jack, hoping declarer misplaces the ace and ducks twice, trying to block the suit. If you are wrong about the location of the king and partner has it, no harm done. At least no harm done unless partner decides you are trying to put him on play for a ruff and overtakes the jack. He knows not to do that, however, if he can be confident you would play jack, queen as an alarm clock if that is what you wanted.

Table 1: -420
Table 2: +100

Result on Board 1: -8 imps
Total: -8 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 8

2012-01-15T22:46:00.000-05:00

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ A 5♥ K J 9 4♦ 6 4♣ Q 8 7 5 2

LHO opens one club, alerted as showing "at least a doubleton." Of course, that doesn't mean it could be a doubleton, but I'll assume that's what RHO meant to say.

Partner overcalls one heart, and RHO bids one spade. I could cue-bid to show a limit raise or better. But why be so delicate? Are we really going to buy this in three hearts? The opponents have the master suit, and this is probably their hand. Sometimes when you hold the heart suit it's better to overbid slightly and force the opponents to guess what to do. This is particularly true if you can't tell from your own hand what you want them to do. If you don't know whether they should bid four spades or not, why should they know?

I bid four hearts (showing at least a doubleton). LHO bids four spades; partner bids five hearts. Not to be outdone, RHO bids five spades. Since I have more defense than I might have for my four heart bid, it's tempting to double to make sure partner doesn't bid again. But that isn't necessary opposite a disciplined partner. If partner were contemplating bidding again, he should have involved me by bidding five of a minor. We don't rate to beat this two tricks. So there is little reason to double except to stop partner from doing something he shouldn't do anyway. Accordingly, I pass. Five spades ends the auction.

I don't see any need for partner to be on play at trick two. On the other hand, it might easily be necesssary for me to switch to a diamond at trick two. So I lead the heart king.

	NORTH Nathaniel ♠ J 8 3 2 ♥ A ♦ A Q 7 ♣ J 10 6 4 3
WEST Phillip ♠ A 5 ♥ K J 9 4 ♦ 6 4 ♣ Q 8 7 5 2

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Nathaniel	Jack	Marcus
	1 ♣¹	1 ♥	1 ♠
4 ♥	4 ♠	5 ♥	5 ♠
(All pass)
¹At least a doubleton

Dummy wins with the ace, and partner plays the heart eight. As I play, a high heart suggests that the obvious shift (diamonds) is a bad idea. I know some would play this card as suit-preference, but that's a serious error in my book. Longtime readers of this blog might want to skip the next three paragraphs, since you've heard it all before. (Unless somehow I still haven't unconvinced you. In which case, please read on.)

Let's call my method of signaling Method A: Discouraging in hearts suggests the obvious shift (in this case, diamonds). Encouraging ostensibly suggests I want hearts continued. But partner must be alert to the fact I have no way to ask for the less obvious shift (in this case, clubs). So he is free to use his judgment and shift to clubs if that seems likelier to be productive than continuing hearts. The more common method of signaling is Method B: If a heart continuation is logical, my card is attitude. Encouraging suggests hearts; discouraging suggests the obvious shift. If a heart continuation is illogical, my card is suit preference.

Note that if a heart continuation is clearly logical or clearly illogical, it makes no difference which method I play. Either method will work. But if one of us thinks a heart shift is logical and the other thinks it isn't, (A) is clearly superior. Playing (A), if I want a diamond shift, I am going to get one, since a low card always suggests diamonds. Playing (B), if there is any confusion, I am guaranteed to get the wrong shift whichever shift I want.

There will always be some hands where it is unclear whether a heart continuation is logical or not, and I don't think you can devise sensible rules to eliminate these ambiguities. Even a rule like "a heart continuation is illogical if dummy has a singleton heart" (which many people play) is demonstrably wrong. Sometimes you want to continue hearts because you want to defend passively. Sometimes you want to continue hearts to tap dummy's trumps, promoting a trump trick for the defense. Yes, there is point somewhere along the continuum where a heart continuation becomes illogical. But how do you define where that point is? Or, more importantly, why bother to define where that point is? What do you gain by switching from attitude to suit preference? How can it possibly be right to play "high" for diamonds in some cases and "low" for diamonds in other cases based on some subjective criterion about which you and your partner might disagree? Sometimes one must make tradeoffs in choosing one method over another, and different people may evaluate the tradeoffs differently. But here I see no tradeoff. I don't see that (B) offers any advantage over (A).

Jack, of course, plays neither (A) nor (B). He plays (J). He is simply showing the heart queen with his signal. Thanks, Jack.

Declarer plays a low club from dummy, partner plays the king, and declarer ruffs with the four of spades. Why is declarer ruffing clubs to his hand? It looks as if he's missing king-jack of diamonds and is trying to strip the hand for an endplay. I play the club deuce.

Declarer ruffs the deuce of hearts in dummy. I play the four; partner, the six. I haven't seen the three yet. Partner should be giving count, but Jack tends to play up the line in these situations. So the three is probably in declarer's hand. That gives partner a 1-5-4-3 or 0-5-5-3 pattern. (I refuse to believe he bid five hearts with 2-5-3-3.)

Declarer ruffs a club with the six of spades. Partner plays the nine; I play the five. Declarer leads the elusive three of hearts--nine--spade three--heart seven. He then ruffs out partner's club ace with the spade seven.

We are down to this position:

	NORTH Jack ♠ J 8 ♥ -- ♦ A Q 7 ♣ J 10
WEST Phillip ♠ A 5 ♥ J ♦ 6 4 ♣ Q 8

We need to score two diamond tricks to beat this. If partner is 0-5-5-3 (making declarer 7-3-3-0), what are our prospects? Declarer will lead a trump. If I win and play a diamond, declarer can simply duck and partner is endplayed. To stop the endplay, I must win and play a trump. But then declarer doesn't need an endplay. He can concede a trick to my club queen, then pitch his last diamond on dummy's good club. I can't beat this if declarer is 7-3-3-0.

What if partner is 1-5-4-3 (making declarer 6-3-4-0)? Declarer leads a trump. Now if I win and play a trump, declarer is a trick short. Do I need to win it? Can I afford to duck in case partner has a stiff king of spades and no jack of diamonds? If I duck and partner follows low, declarer can abandon trumps and duck a diamond to partner. A diamond return into dummy's ace-queen is obviously fatal. If, instead, partner returns a heart, declarer pitches a diamond, ruffing in dummy. Declarer is now down to two trumps and two diamonds, and I am down to the spade ace, one diamond, and two clubs. Since I have two clubs, I can't stop declarer from scoring both his trumps. He ruffs a club, plays a diamond to the ace, and ruffs another club. I end up ruffing partner's diamond winner with my spade ace at trick thirteen. So I can't afford to cater to a stiff spade king in partner's hand. Not that I'm too worried about it given the auction.

Declarer leads the spade queen. I take the ace as planned, and partner follows with the ten. I play a trump. Declarer wins in dummy, and partner plays the diamond eight. Declarer now leads the ten of clubs. Partner pitches the heart ten, and declarer pitches the diamond deuce. I win with the queen and exit with a heart, which declarer ruffs. Declarer is left with three small diamonds in his hand. Dummy has ace-queen of diamonds and a good club. Declarer takes a losing diamond finesse and is down one.

	NORTH Nathaniel ♠ J 8 3 2 ♥ A ♦ A Q 7 ♣ J 10 6 4 3
WEST Phillip ♠ A 5 ♥ K J 9 4 ♦ 6 4 ♣ Q 8 7 5 2		EAST Jack ♠ 10 ♥ Q 10 8 7 6 ♦ K J 10 8 ♣ A K 9
	SOUTH Marcus ♠ K Q 9 7 6 4 ♥ 5 3 2 ♦ 9 5 3 2 ♣ --

Declarer was out of trumps. The only reason he could afford the diamond finesse was partner was out of hearts. Partner erred by pitching a heart on the ten of clubs. Had he pitched a diamond instead, we would beat this two if declarer tried to make it by finessing the diamond in the end position. Of course, it would be pretty foolish of declarer to do that. If I had the diamond king, I wouldn't be putting him in his hand. Upon winning the club queen, I would just return a club and lock him in dummy. But it can't hurt to give declarer a chance to be foolish.

I suppose I shouldn't complain about partner too much. He did bid five hearts, after all. I doubt very much I would have done that. I don't expect to make it, and declarer doesn't have a source of tricks in a minor, so it seems unlikely four spades is making. Accordingly, I would pass. That is such a poor decision in practice that I wonder if I'm missing something. Why is Jack's judgment better than mine? I presented this hand in a bridgewinners.com poll to see if anyone had any insights. Over 80% of the respondents chose to defend. So either Jack knows something we humans don't or he was just lucky.

This board is yet another push, the fourth one of this match. We win the match by two imps and pick up a mere 16 out of 30 victory points. I was certainly right not risk a double. The extra two imps would have picked up no victory points, so the risk-reward ratio was infinite. Fortunately, 16 victory points is enough to stay in the lead.

Table 1: +50
Table 2: -50

Result on Board 7: 0 imps

Result on Match 3: +2 imps (16 VP)
Current Total: 58 VP

For our next match, we play William and Harry, another Majeure cinquieme pair. I didn't even know William and Harry played bridge, although I know their mother was a big fan of the game.

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 7

2012-01-08T21:13:00.000-05:00

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ Q 9 6 3♥ J 8 6♦ 3♣ A K 10 8 3

I pass in first seat. Partner opens three diamonds in third seat and buys it. RHO leads the deuce of clubs. Their convention card says "low encouraging."

	NORTH Phillip ♠ Q 9 6 3 ♥ J 8 6 ♦ 3 ♣ A K 10 8 3

	SOUTH Jack ♠ J 8 ♥ Q 7 4 3 ♦ A K J 9 8 6 5 ♣ --

West	North	East	South
Marcus	Phillip	Nathanial	Jack
	Pass	Pass	3 ♦
(All pass)

Three diamonds? On a five-loser hand? I hope partner wouldn't have done this in first seat. And I'd just as soon he didn't do it in third seat either. He might make four hearts opposite a psyche.

I rise with the club ace. East plays the seven, and I discard a spade. I cash the club king and discard another spade. East plays the four; West, the five. If "encouraging" means West has an honor, then I suppose the club honors are split.

If I don't have a heart trick, I need to pick up the diamonds. If I do have a heart trick, I need to hold diamonds to one loser. But it doesn't really matter what my objective is. Low to the jack is my best play in either case. Sometimes one spurns a trump finesse to avoid a ruff. But in this case, I welcome a ruff. If the diamond finesse loses and they grab a heart ruff, that establishes the fourth round of hearts for me, and I've made my contract.

I lead the three of diamonds--seven--jack--deuce. I play the diamond king--four--club three--diamond ten. That makes nine tricks. I hope the opponents weren't planning on leading a club against three notrump. I cash the diamond ace, pitching another club from dummy. West pitches the club six. The missing clubs are the queen, jack, and nine. The honors are presumably split, but I don't know who has the nine. East might well have decided it was too important a card to signal with at trick one.

If I can take a heart trick, I'll make four. West probably would have led from ace-king of a major, so East must have at least one honor in each major. In fact, he must have exactly one honor in each major. Otherwise he would have an opening bid. So I know the heart honors are split. If they are three-three or if I can duck out a singleton or doubleton honor, I will make a heart trick.

I have two ways to duck out an honor: (A) I can play low to the jack, then lead low from my hand. Or (B) I can lead the queen from my hand. If West wins this, I lead toward the dummy and duck. (A) works if West has shortness, and (B) works if East does. Does either play offer any extra chances? Yes. (B) allows me to pick up honor-ten or honor-nine doubleton on my left. My queen forces West's honor. Then, when I lead toward dummy's jack and see the ten or nine appear, I can cover, eventually establishing my seven. So (B) is a standout, especially when you consider that East is more likely than West to have short hearts anyway.

I lead the queen of hearts--deuce---six--ace. I ruff the return and lead a heart to the jack. Making four.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ Q 9 6 3 ♥ J 8 6 ♦ 3 ♣ A K 10 8 3
WEST Marcus ♠ K 7 ♥ K 9 5 2 ♦ 4 2 ♣ Q 9 6 5 2		EAST Nathanial ♠ A 10 5 4 2 ♥ A 10 ♦ Q 10 7 ♣ J 7 4
	SOUTH Jack ♠ J 8 ♥ Q 7 4 3 ♦ A K J 9 8 6 5 ♣ --

I wonder why West ducked the heart queen. Couldn't I have been three-three in the majors?

I don't care for the opening lead. I would have led the spade king. Leading long, weak suits against pre-empts frequently seems to accomplish nothing other than to allow declarer to take quick discards. If you lead a short suit and catch dummy with values there, at least declarer rates to have some length in that suit, so he doesn't have any quick pitches. Make dummy's club ace the spade ace, for example, and the spade lead doesn't hurt. As the cards lie, a spade lead beats three diamonds a trick. That's not as good as a heart lead, which beats it two tricks. But it's better than letting them make it.

I commented above that East is more likely than West to have short hearts. Why is that? West is known to have four or five clubs and a doubleton diamond, and I will assume hearts are not three-three (else my decision is irrelevant). If West has five clubs, then he is either 4-2-2-5 or 2-4-2-5. But if has four clubs, he is almost surely 3-4-2-4. 5-2-2-4 is contraindicated both by his failure to pitch a spade on the third diamond and by his choice of opening leads. If he chose to lead a long suit, his five-card suit would be a more natural choice.

The other table played three diamonds making three, so we pick up an imp. They probably got a club lead as well but misplayed the hearts even worse than I did. I turns out (A) and (B) were both wrong. Assuming I'm right about the split honors, I had a 100% line available: play low from both hands, ruff the return, and play low from both hands again.

Now I have to ask myself why I didn't think of that. I suppose it's because my first thought was that I had to guess who had the doubleton. Once I found a play that improved on that, I was happy. Deciding when it's OK to stop thinking is one of the hardest problems in bridge. I"m sure if I were to encounter this as a problem in a book ("Find a sure trick line for an overtrick, assuming split honors."), I would solve it. But at the table, no one tells you there is a sure trick line. If you don't see one right away, how do you know whether to keep looking or not? I confess I have no idea of how to avoid errors like this.

Table 1: +130
Table 2: -110

Result on Board 7: 1 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 6

2012-01-01T23:35:00.000-05:00

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 8 7 6 5♥ 10 2♦ K Q J 6♣ A 8

One pass to me. I open one spade, partner raises to three spades, and I pass. LHO leads the king of hearts.

	NORTH Jack ♠ Q 10 9 2 ♥ A 9 8 4 ♦ 7 5 ♣ Q 7 6

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ J 8 7 6 5 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K Q J 6 ♣ A 8

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
		Pass	1 ♠
Pass	3 ♠	(All pass)

I wouldn't make a limit raise with this hand myself. But if partner wants to, I'll take that as a compliment.

I have five losers: a heart, a diamond, a club, and two trump tricks. The only loser I have any realistic chance to avoid is the club. I might be able to establish a heart to pitch my club loser on. (Among other possibilities: West might have king-queen doubleton.) Since I'm unable to draw trumps quickly, however, it may be difficult to manage that, even if a favorable heart position exists. A more likely prospect is to establish three diamond tricks, allowing me to pitch club losers from dummy. Say I lead a diamond to the queen and it holds. I now lead trumps, hoping the opponents fail to find a club shift. (Perhaps West has the jack, which would make a club shift unattractive.) Eventually, I reach dummy with the third round of trumps and lead another diamond. East must duck to avoid giving me three diamond tricks. I now need to guess the clubs (which should be easy once I know how the spade honors are split). If West has the king, I play ace and a club. If East has it, I ruff a diamond with dummy's last trump. If the ace doesn't drop, I ruff a heart to my hand and cash my last trump, squeezing East down to a three-card end position. I can then toss him in with the diamond ace.

I might as well start by ducking the heart. As usual, it is better to let West use his entry now before he knows much about the hand. I play the four of hearts from dummy, East plays the three, and I play the deuce.

East didn't encourage. If he has the jack, it must be jack doubleton. West continues with the five of hearts. It's possible he has king-queen-jack. On the given layout, he could afford to lead the queen from that holding. But if I had two slow losers (say, ace third of clubs), leading the queen might enable me to take my ace and concede a heart, establishing my nine for a pitch. He might decide it's better to lead a low heart, hoping his partner has the ten or hoping I have something better to play for than to duck this to my ten at trick two. If that's what's happened, he got what he hoped for. I'm not desperate enough to duck this trick. I rise with the heart ace. East plays the jack.

I play the five of diamonds--deuce--queen--ace. Not good. West shifts to the ten of clubs. I play the queen, East covers with the king, and I win with the ace. This isn't going the way I planned. I've reached this position. I can afford to lose only two more tricks:

	NORTH Jack ♠ Q 10 9 2 ♥ 9 8 ♦ 7 ♣ 7 6

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ J 8 7 6 5 ♥ -- ♦ K J 6 ♣ 8

Do I have any chances left? The only chance I see is to crash trump honors. Perhaps I can get East to ruff a heart with ace doubleton of trumps, then get West to hop with king doubleton when I lead a trump toward dummy. I doubt very much this will work. But it's better than just giving up.

I cash the diamond king and ruff a diamond with the spade nine. West plays eight, ten; East plays three, four. I lead the eight of hearts. East pitches the three of clubs. I didn't think he was going to ruff. Maybe if I have a heart winner in dummy, he'll ruff that. I pitch my club, allowing West to win with his heart queen, establishing dummy's nine.

West exits with the nine of clubs--six--four. I ruff with the five of spades and lead the diamond jack. West pitches the six of hearts, and I ruff in dummy with the deuce. East knows I have no loser left to pitch on the nine of hearts. so I can't imagine he'll ruff. But what else can I do? I lead the nine of hearts. East ruffs with the three of spades! Yay! One opponent down. One to go.

I overruff with the five and lead the spade six. West plays low. Oh, well. They score their two spade tricks for down one.

	NORTH Jack ♠ Q 10 9 2 ♥ A 9 8 4 ♦ 7 5 ♣ Q 7 6
WEST Nathanial ♠ K 4 ♥ K Q 7 6 5 ♦ A 10 8 ♣ 10 9 2		EAST Marcus ♠ A 3 ♥ J 3 ♦ 9 4 3 2 ♣ K J 5 4 3
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ J 8 7 6 5 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K Q J 6 ♣ A 8

West knows he needs two trump tricks to beat this. So hopping would make no sense. But then, East's ruff made no sense, and that didn't stop him. It's too bad this didn't work. It would be fun watching the opponents argue about who made the worse play.

Howard Chandross was the master at getting the opponents to ruff when they knew--or should have known--he was trump tight. He even had a name for the play: the Idiot's Delight. I saw him execute it many times when he was short of entries for a trump coup. This is the first time I've seen an Idiot's Delight and an Idiot's Coup in combination.

If they raise only to two spades at the other table, they may buy it. So I'm a little a nervous before we compare. But, once again, the board turns out to be a push.

Table 1: -50
Table 2: +50

Result on Board 6: 0 imps
Total: +1 imp

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 5

2011-12-25T21:38:00.000-05:00

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ K Q♥ K 10 8 5 2♦ J 7♣ A 10 9 4

Two passes to me. I open one heart, LHO bids one spade, and partner doubles. Some claim this double promises at least four-four in the minors. I don't think that's quite true. First of all, you might have a three-card limit raise in hearts. In addition, there are some awkward hands with a three-card minor where a negative double is the only call that makes sense. Take

♠ x x x x♥ Q x♦ A x x x♣ K x x

for example. You could pass with this pattern if your hand were weaker. But this hand is too good to pass. What else can you do but double? If partner bids two clubs, you can continue with two hearts. Since you would bid three hearts with a three-card limit raise, this bid should show precisely a doubleton heart. I would consider this hand is a minimum for the sequence. You might have as much a two notrump rebid without a spade stopper.

RHO redoubles, showing the ace or king of spades. I bid two clubs. LHO and partner pass. RHO balances with two spades. I pass, LHO passes, and partner competes with three clubs. Everyone passes. LHO leads the jack of spades.

	NORTH Jack ♠ 9 7 6 5 ♥ 4 ♦ A 5 4 3 ♣ K J 7 5

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ K Q ♥ K 10 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 10 9 4

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
	Pass	Pass	1 ♥
1 ♠	Double¹	Redouble²	2 ♣
Pass	Pass	2 ♠	Pass
Pass	3 ♣	(All pass)
¹Negative double
²Spade ace or spade king

Partner's three club bid makes no sense. We don't necessarily need nine trumps to compete at three level when the opponents are at the two level. But, with four spades and a singleton in my primary suit, partner's hand is better for defense and worse for offense than is his typical hand on this auction.

RHO plays the ace, and I drop the queen, the card I'm known to hold. He continues with the four of spades to my king; West plays the deuce.

If I can score seven trump tricks on a crossruff, I'll make this. I need to start by ducking a heart. Clearly I would rather lose the heart trick on my left, so that the presumed trump shift rides around to my hand. I can then ruff a heart, ruff a spade, ruff a heart, ruff a spade, and ruff a heart with the club king. That's seven tricks. I need two more, and I still have the diamond ace and a high trump in my hand.

I may be able to increase my chance of ducking the heart to West if I play a diamond to the ace and a heart toward my hand. But releasing the diamond ace is a bad idea. I establish a winner for the opponents, I give the opponents communication, and I expose myself to a possible overruff. If I took the time, I'm sure I could find a specific layout where playing a diamond to the ace costs the contract, but I'm not going to bother. I'm rejecting it because it's bad strategy (sort of like putting your knight on the edge of the board).

West surely has the heart ace on the auction. Should I exit with the heart king? If I were sure West would play a trump, that would make sense. But what if he doesn't? Often the most effective way to scuttle a crossruff is to avoid leading trumps in order to retain the defense's middle cards. That may be the case here. If West wins the heart ace and plays a diamond, I have no clear route to seven trump tricks. Accordingly, I'd just as soon preserve the option of ruffing out ace third of hearts on my left. Besides, leading the heart ten may suffice to keep East off play. It may be hard for West to duck with ace-queen or even ace-jack.

I lead the heart ten. West plays the three, and East wins with the jack. Probably East has the queen also. I do wish I had the benefit of some table action. In real life, even one as table-presence-challenged as I am would have some clue as to whether that was the case or not. East shifts to the deuce of clubs. I play the ten. If this holds, I can crossruff as described above. If West covers, I will be in dummy, where I don't really want to be. But at least I will have flushed out the club queen, which may make things easier.

West does cover with the queen, and I win with dummy's king. This is the position I've reached, with the lead in dummy:

	NORTH Jack ♠ 9 7 ♥ -- ♦ A 5 4 3 ♣ J 7 5

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ K 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 9 4

Can I still crossruff? If I ruff a spade, ruff heart, ruff a spade, and ruff a heart, I'm stuck in dummy with no way to get to my hand to ruff the third heart. Perhaps if West began with ace third of hearts, I can establish hearts instead. Say I play a trump to my hand, ruff a heart, ruff a spade to my hand, and ruff another heart, dropping the ace. My hearts are now good, and I have one trump left with which to draw the remaining defensive trump. If I were in my hand, I could claim my contract. But, again, I'm stuck in dummy.

I don't usually present Gargoyle Chronicles hands as quizzes. But this is a good problem. If I didn't offer you a chance to test yourself, you would be annoyed with me. Under the assumption that West began with ace third of hearts, how do you play to take seven more tricks?
------

I don't know if this problem is actually difficult or if I just had a blind spot. But it took me longer than I care to admit to find the answer. Finally, it dawned on me that I didn't need to ruff two hearts in dummy. I can afford to lose two more tricks. So now that I've found the trump queen, I can afford to lose a heart trick. Why waste one of dummy's trumps ruffing with it when I desperately need it as an entry to my hand? The solution is to ruff a spade to my hand, then lead a low heart pitching dummy's last spade. If the defense plays another trump, I win in my hand, ruff a heart, hopefully dropping West's ace and establishing my suit. I can then return to my hand with dummy's carefully preserved trump. A red-suit switch by the defense does no better. And a spade switch allows me to ruff in dummy and pitch my diamond loser. See? I knew there was a reason not to release the diamond ace.

I play a spade from dummy. East pitches the nine of hearts. Oops. Time to reassess. That looks like queen-jack-nine of hearts, which gives West ace fourth. Actually that makes more sense than ace third on the auction. Holding four hearts would make West's light overcall more attractive. He probably would have led a singleton diamond (or East might have bid diamonds with six of them). So West is probably 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-3-1. The latter pattern I think I can safely ignore. I doubt I can make this against a bad trump break.

The ace isn't going to ruff out. But that's OK. I just need to make a slight adjustment to my plan. Instead of leading a low heart at this point, I need to lead the king, smothering East's queen and establishing my eight. If East did start with four hearts and has falsecarded with the nine, hearts are now two-two. So leading the king doesn't hurt anything.

I ruff the spade and lead the heart king. West plays the ace, I pitch dummy's last spade as planned, and East plays the heart queen. We have now reached this position, slightly different from the one I was envisioning, with West on play. (I'm just guessing about the diamond honors. They don't really matter.)

	NORTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ A 5 4 3 ♣ J 7 5
WEST Nathanial ♠ 10 x ♥ 7 6 ♦ K x ♣ x		EAST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ Q x x x x ♣ x x
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 9

West plays the eight of clubs. I win in my hand with the nine, ruff a heart with jack, and play a club to my ace. Making three.

	NORTH Jack ♠ 9 7 6 5 ♥ 4 ♦ A 5 4 3 ♣ K J 7 5
WEST Nathanial ♠ J 10 8 3 2 ♥ A 7 6 3 ♦ K 8 ♣ Q 8		EAST Marcus ♠ A 4 ♥ Q J 9 ♦ Q 10 9 6 2 ♣ 6 3 2
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ K Q ♥ K 10 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 10 9 4

In the analysis above, I glossed over what would happen if West played a spade, offering me a ruff-sluff. Would that accomplish anything for the defense? I ruff with dummy's five. If East overuffs, I have no problem. I overruff with the nine, ruff a heart with the jack, and play a trump back to my hand. If East refuses to overruff, I can pitch my diamond loser. I've lost control, so I can no longer establish and run hearts. But I don't need to. I need only five more tricks, so I can revert to a crossruff.

The crossruff works only because West has the club eight. If East had it, refusing to overruff dummy's club five would beat me. What an unusual position! You must refuse to overruff the five, allowing declarer his ruff-sluff, so that you can overruff the seven later. Thanks for overbidding, partner. I had much more fun playing this hand than I would have had collecting an easy down two against two spades.

East did make a serious error in pitching the nine of hearts. It cost nothing double dummy, since I could always make the hand by leading the heart king. But I wasn't intending to do that until he clued me in about the lie of the heart suit.

I don't know how the play went at the other table, but somehow my counterpart managed an overtrick in the same contract, cutting our lead in half.

Table 1: +110
Table 2: -130

Result on Board 5: -1 imp
Total: +1 imp

Post script:

Rainer Herrmann points out, "The plan in the quiz scenario should certainly be to ruff only one heart. But what do you actually accomplish by the artistry of ruffing a spade and ducking a heart first? Simply come to the club nine, ruff a heart and play dummy's last club to the trump ace. Now decide which heart honor is more likely to drop, having seen the heart nine from West, which could be a false card to give declarer a losing option."

He is correct. Not only does his solution allow you to delay your decision about the lie of the heart suit, it avoids the crossruff variation, which fails on best defense if East has the club eight. So why didn't I see that? I suppose it took me so long to think of not ruffing two hearts that I wore myself out, and I gave insufficient thought to the best way to reach my hand. My instinct said to ruff a spade to force East to discard, and I didn't stop to question my instinct.

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 4

2011-12-18T20:38:00.000-05:00

Board 4
Both sides vulnerable

♠ A 6 4♥ 4 3♦ 8 6 4♣ A K Q 10 3

RHO opens one heart in third seat. I can double or I can overcall two clubs. Two clubs can make it a little harder to find a spade fit, but double leaves the main feature of my hand on the shelf. Two clubs also makes it easier for me to reenter the auction if the bidding dies at a low level. Suppose, for example, I double and the auction continues two hearts--pass--pass back to me. Now what? I'm not comfortable selling out. But three clubs would show a considerably better hand than I have. If I bid clubs first, however, I can compete with a re-opening double.

I bid two clubs. LHO bids two hearts, and partner bids three clubs. RHO bids three hearts. I pass, and LHO goes on to four hearts. I guess three hearts was invitational. Not many pairs play that way.

In some partnerships, I could lead the club queen to request count at trick one. Jack doesn't play that convention, however, so I lead the club ace.

	NORTH Nathanial ♠ K J 10 9 ♥ Q 9 8 2 ♦ 7 5 ♣ J 6 2
WEST Phillip ♠ A 6 4 ♥ 4 3 ♦ 8 6 4 ♣ A K Q 10 3

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Nathanial	Jack	Marcus
	Pass	Pass	1 ♥
2 ♣	2 ♥	3 ♣	3 ♥
Pass	4 ♥	(All pass)

Partner plays the four; declarer, the nine. If a second club is cashing, I need one trick from partner. If he has a trump trick, the diamond ace, or the queen of spades (doubleton or third), there is nothing I need to do. But if he has king-queen of diamonds, I may need to switch to a diamond before my spade ace is knocked out.

If the second club isn't cashing, I need two tricks from partner. In that case, I may need to go after a spade ruff. If partner has a doubleton spade and the trump ace, I need to switch to a spade at trick two.

I was right that what I needed was a count signal. If declarer has two clubs, my best defense is (A) to cash the second club and play a diamond. If he has a singleton club, my best defense is (B) to play a low spade. Note that an obvious-shift attitude signal would not help. Partner, not knowing he needs two diamond honors for a shift to be productive, would discourage any time he has the king or queen. This would work just fine if I had a diamond honor too. Then I could adopt (A) if partner discourages and (B) if he doesn't. But, with the hand I hold, an attitude signal does not tell me what I need to know.

Jack's I-don't-have-a-club-honor signal, as usual, is no help at all. So I must simply choose the defense that works most often. For (A) to be right, I need declarer to have a doubleton club. Less obviously, I need him to have six hearts, If he has only five, he doesn't have enough pitches to get rid of all his diamonds, and there is no need for a diamond switch. That means declarer must be x-6-y-2. For (B) to be right, I need declarer to have a singleton club,and I need partner to have a doubleton spade and a doubleton ace of hearts. That gives declarer specifically 4-5-3-1.

Since (B) requires declarer to have a specific pattern and (A) requires a range of patterns, (A) is more likely to be right. It may appear that the high-card constraints counterbalanace that. (B) requires partner to have one high card (the heart ace) while (A) requires partner to have two (the king and queen of diamonds). But that's an illusion. Partner has more diamonds than hearts, so he is more likely to hold diamond honors than to hold heart honors. I won't bore you with the calculations. But it turns out partner is actually more likely to hold the king-queen of diamonds than to hold the heart ace. So (A) is a standout, at least on an a priori basis.

Of course, I've completely ignored the fact that South chose to bid three hearts over three clubs. Does the three heart bid itself suggest a singleton club? If I adopt (A), I'm playing declarer for something like

♠ Q x ♥ A K J x x x ♦ A x x ♣ x x

Three hearts would make more sense if it were competitive rather than invitational. But I don't see any reason that hand is any less likely than, say,

♠ Q x x x ♥ K J x x x ♦ A K x ♣ x,

which is a pretty thin three-heart bid whatever it means. So I'm sticking with (A).

Now that I've decided to shift to a diamond, does it matter whether I cash the club king first or not? It can't hurt to try to cash it. If the club gets ruffed, a diamond shift wasn't doing any good anyway. And not cashing it might give me a problem, since I won't be sure how many tricks I need elsewhere.

I play the club king. Partner follows with the five, and declarer ruffs with the five of hearts. Declarer plays the six of hearts--three--queen--ten. Then the deuce of hearts--jack--ace--four. How about that? Jack played the suit correctly. He guarded against the one four-zero break he could handle.

He plays the deuce of spades--four--nine--three. It appears declarer is 3-5-4-1. Unless partner has the ace-king of diamonds, we're not beating this. Declarer plays the five of diamonds--three--king. Making four.

	NORTH Nathanial ♠ K J 10 9 ♥ Q 9 8 2 ♦ 7 5 ♣ J 6 2
WEST Phillip ♠ A 6 4 ♥ 4 3 ♦ 8 6 4 ♣ A K Q 10 3		EAST Jack ♠ 8 7 3 ♥ J 10 ♦ A Q 10 3 ♣ 8 7 5 4
	SOUTH Marcus ♠ Q 5 2 ♥ A K 7 6 5 ♦ K J 9 2 ♣ 9

Declarer was on a diamond guess. He apparently played partner for the diamond ace because he assumed I had the spade ace. But couldn't partner have ducked the spade ace? Declarer should have led the five of spades (Rule 2 for scrambling count signals ) to the king. It would be much harder for partner to duck now. From partner's perspective, declarer might have two small spades and might have just misguessed. In fact, to make this maneuver more convincing, declarer might do that at trick three, trusting us to have found a spade ruff already if one was available. It's true that if hearts were four-zero, he might regret wasting that dummy entry. But a four-zero trump break seems unlikely on the auction. I think the danger of misguessing diamonds is more pressing. As it is, the diamonds were misguess-proof.

South made a rather aggressive three heart call, apparently spurred on by his singleton club. The opponents probably would not have reached game had I passed or doubled instead of overcalling two clubs. Sometimes it seems that the worst time to bid is when your hand is pure. If all your cards are working, then all the opponents' cards are working also, and bidding just pushes them into a making game or slam that they would not have bid on their own. Perhaps two clubs is wrong. We probably can't outbid the opponents in clubs, so finding a club fit may help them more than it helps us. Maybe double, trying to find a fit where we can actually outbid them, is a better idea.

I'm not yet prepared to reach that conclusion. But I will certainly be on the look-out for additional deals involving this principle. I may change my strategy in the future. One of the things that makes bridge a difficult game to learn is that the feedback is imperfect. If you get a bad result, you can't be sure whether you did something wrong or were just unlucky. So it's easy to keep making the same mistakes over and over. To improve, you need to be continually evaluating your actions, and you need a long memory. I'm pretty good on the evaluating part. Sadly, my memory isn't what it used to be. The truth is, in a couple of weeks I'll probably have forgotten about this deal. If I do this again with a similar bad result, could you please remind me?

Luckily, our teammates reach game as well. The board is a push.

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 4: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 3

2011-12-11T22:54:00.000-05:00

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ Q J 9♥ J 10 7♦ A 4 3♣ A 8 7 4

I open one notrump (12-14). Partner bids two hearts (a transfer to spades), and I bid two spades. Partner bids three hearts, a game force showing at least five-five in the majors. Even though I have a minimum in high cards, this is a terrific hand, especially given that I am limited by my failure to pre-accept. I have fillers in both of partner's suits and aces opposite his short suits. Even the distribution is a plus. While "4333" is often a poor distribution, it is actually a good distribution opposite a two-suiter. Despite what various point-count systems may tell you, when partner has two five-card or longer suits, it is usually better to be three-three in those suits than to be three-two (and much better than to be three-one). So I bid four spades to show extras.

Even if you generally play fast arrival (which I don't), fast-arrival should not apply when showing a preference. A simple preference can't promise support and a good hand, because it must frequently be made with a doubleton as a mark-time bid. Still, you need some way to show extras below game. Since the simple preference is not available for that purpose, it makes sense to assign that role to the jump preference. It is true that, in this particular auction (because opener is known to be balanced and because the three heart bid promises five), these considerations don't apply. Opener has no reason to bid three spades with a doubleton, so you could play fast arrival if you chose to. But ad hoc exceptions make me nervous. Since a jump preference should show extras in most auctions, you are less apt to have an accident if you make that a general rule.

Partner passes four spades, and LHO leads the jack of diamonds.

	NORTH Jack ♠ A K 5 3 2 ♥ K 9 8 5 3 ♦ Q 8 ♣ 3

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ Q J 9 ♥ J 10 7 ♦ A 4 3 ♣ A 8 7 4

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
			1 NT
Pass	2 ♥¹	Pass	2 ♠
Pass	3 ♥²	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)
¹Jacoby transfer
²Forcing to game with at least five-five in the majors

I play the diamond queen and East covers with the king. It appears I must lose a diamond trick and potentially two hearts tricks. As long as trumps are three-two, I'm cold. If they aren't, I probably need to find the heart queen onside, so I can establish hearts by losing the lead only once. Otherwise, I will be tapped out.

Ducking the diamond to deprive the opponents of communication seems like a good idea, although it's not entirely safe. If East shifts to a heart, and West takes the ace and continues hearts, I will duck, assuming the shift was from a singleton. If East has queen third, he can win and give his partner a ruff, and I will go down in a cold contract. But if East is clever enough to find that shift, he deserves to beat me. These communication-killing ducks are frequently necessary for reasons you can't foresee at trick one. So it's a good idea to deploy them as a matter of routine unless you see a serious danger.

I play the diamond three. East continues with the five of diamonds--ace--six--eight. The deuce is missing. Probably East began with king-five-deuce.

I cash the spade queen. (Not the jack. As a general rule, declarer should conceal his jacks when possible. If I lead the queen, neither opponent knows where the jack is. If I lead the jack and it holds, at least one and possibly both opponents will know I have the queen.) West plays the ten; East, the four.

The ten looks suspiciously like a singleton. If so, is there anything to gain by abandoning trumps and playing on hearts right away? Maybe. Suppose I play a heart to the king and it holds. Now I'm home. I concede a heart. They tap dummy. I concede a second heart. If they don't tap dummy again, I can claim. If they do, I have a high cross ruff.

That's fine if West ducks when I lead a heart. But what if he hops and plays another heart? If I finesse, I go down when the spade ten was a falsecard and East has queen third of hearts. If I go up, I go down when East has a singleton heart. There is no way I can guarantee success whenever the ace is onside. So this line is worse than 50%, and it's better to stick with my original plan of playing West for the heart queen.

I might as well draw one more round of trumps, just in case the ten was a falsecard. I cash the jack of spades, and West pitches the deuce of clubs. I can't afford to draw the third round of trumps. I might need the spade nine as a hand entry. For example, suppose West has ace-queen fourth of hearts. I lead a heart honor, West hops, and plays another diamond. I can ruff high, play a spade to my nine, and float the other honor. East ruffs with his last trump, and I have a reentry with the club ace to repeat the heart finesse. Note, by the way, that I would be unable to cater to ace-queen fourth of hearts onside if I had not ducked the first diamond. If I draw the third round of trumps, I'm short an entry to my hand. If I don't, West can hop with the heart ace, give his partner a ruff, then gain the lead with the diamond ten for a second ruff. I don't claim credit for seeing this at trick one, but I didn't have to. It's enough to know that depriving the opponents of communication is a good idea on principle.

Which heart honor should I lead from my hand? Again, declarer should conceal his jacks when possible. (Just think of all the times you, as defender, told yourself, "If I only knew who had the jack of hippogriffs, I would know exactly what to do.") In this suit, for example, if it were necessary for West to hop with the ace, leading the ten would make it harder for him to do so. If West has the queen, hopping may cost a trick by force (if his partner holds a singleton jack). And, if he doesn't have the queen, hopping may take a guess away. (I may hold queen-ten and be fishing for the jack.) In this particular layout, I don't have any specific objective in mind in concealing the jack. I'm just following best practices.

I lead the ten. West plays the ace, and East follows with the four. I have just explained how leading the ten makes it harder for West to play the ace. So the ace is an unexpected play. What can he possibly have to making hopping look like the right move? I can think of only one hand that makes sense:

♠ 10♥ A x♦ J 10 6♣ K J 10 x x x x

Now, if he allows his partner to gain the lead before he does, he will be unable to continue the tap when he gets in with the heart ace. Somehow, though, I don't think this is what West has. He must have some other reason for hopping that hasn't occurred to me.

West plays the six of hearts. I can stop worrying about what West has now. If I play low on this trick, I can't go down. I play low, East wins with the queen, and I claim.

	NORTH Jack ♠ A K 5 3 2 ♥ K 9 8 5 3 ♦ Q 8 ♣ 3
WEST Nathanial ♠ 10 ♥ A 6 2 ♦ J 10 9 6 ♣ Q J 10 5 2		EAST Marcus ♠ 8 7 6 4 ♥ Q 4 ♦ K 7 5 2 ♣ K 9 6
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ Q J 9 ♥ J 10 7 ♦ A 4 3 ♣ A 8 7 4

This was not a spectacular defense. West can beat me by force by ducking the heart. Even after hopping with the ace, he will probably beat me if he continues diamonds. I can make it if I drop the heart queen. But unless I can figure out a reason for West to hop with ace third of hearts, I don't see why I would do that. Even looking at his hand, I can't figure out why he hopped.

Speaking of not being able to figure out the opponents' actions, why did East lead the five of diamonds at trick two? Was that systemic or was he just randomizing his spot cards? If I had needed a count on this deal, I probably would have gotten it wrong. For the remainder of the match, I need to keep in mind that the opponents might not card as I would expect them to.

The board is a push. I suspect our opponents played four spades from the North hand. And they probably got a diamond lead, killing any chance the defense might have. We were lucky Nathanial lived up to his name. This board should have been a loss for our system.

Table 1: +420
Table 2: -420

Result on Board 3: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 2

2011-12-04T11:53:00.000-05:00

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ 5 4 2♥ Q 9♦ A K 9 8 6♣ Q 8 5

RHO passes. Two and a half honor tricks with a good five card suit is an opening bid as far as I'm concerned. I open one notrump (12-14). Partner bids two hearts, a transfer to spades. I bid two spades, and partner splinters with four diamonds. I sign off in four spades, and partner bids four notrump, Roman Keycard Blackwood. I bid five diamonds, showing one keycard, and partner bids seven spades. Despite being shy one high-card point, this hand can't be a disappointment to partner. The king of diamonds is duplication, but at least it's a cashing trick. And both my queens are working. In addition, I have a third spade. Given my signoff over the splinter, this is a huge hand.

West leads the three of diamonds. Their convention card says "low encouraging" versus suits. The three looks pretty low, so I guess I should be encouraged.

	NORTH Jack ♠ A K Q 9 6 3 ♥ A K 8 7 6 ♦ -- ♣ A J

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 5 4 2 ♥ Q 9 ♦ A K 9 8 6 ♣ Q 8 5

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
		Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♥¹	Pass	2 ♠
Pass	4 ♦²	Pass	4 ♠
Pass	4 NT³	Pass	5 ♦⁴
Pass	7 ♠	(All pass)
¹Jacoby-transfer
²Splinter
³Ace asking for spades
⁴1 or 4 aces

Assuming trumps come home, I have twelve top tricks. If trumps are two-two, I can ruff a heart for the thirteenth trick. If not, I have three-three hearts or squeeze chances to fall back on. My squeeze chances will improve if I can isolate the diamond stopper. Ruffing one diamond will do that unless the suit splits four-four. In addition, letting this lead ride to my hand will isolate the stopper in the unlikely event that West has led from two honors fourth.

I pitch a heart from dummy. East plays the jack (presumably from queen-jack), and I win with the ace, the card I'm known to hold.

West's failure to lead a trump is suspicious. The diamond lead risked giving me a trick. What if I had held the diamond jack instead of East, for example? True, after Blackwood, West wasn't expecting a diamond void in dummy. But even if dummy had a singleton, the diamond lead might take a finesse for me that I wouldn't be inclined to take myself. A diamond lead makes some sense if he wants me to use my hand entries early, and a bad trump break is one reason he might want to do that.

I can handle a four-zero trump break by taking a double finesse at trick two. But I'm hesitant to place that much stock in this inference. Do I have any chance if I cash a high spade first? After cashing the spade, I can lead a heart to the queen for one finesse, but then I'm out of hand entries except for a heart ruff. And if I ruff a heart, I have no trumps left with which to take a finesse. This is exactly why the diamond lead makes sense with four trumps. If dummy did have a diamond, a diamond might well be the only lead to beat me.

It appears the only way I can pick up jack-ten fourth of trumps is to take a finesse now, but I'm not willing to do that. I just don't have that much respect for Jack's opening leads. So I proceed with the plan of trying to isolate the diamond stopper. I lead the nine of diamonds. West plays the ten. I ruff with the six of spades (retaining a spade lower than my five on principle, though I can't imagine how it will ever make a difference). East follows with the diamond deuce.

Now I'm worried. Why would West cover with the ten unless he held the queen as well? If he did lead a diamond from such a dangerous holding, the odds of a four-zero trump break have gone way up. (Although he should have led the queen rather than low. The queen might trap a stiff jack in dummy, or it might prevent a squeeze by allowing East to retain his jack.)

I cash the spade ace--seven--deuce--eight. Whew! On the spade king, East pitches the deuce of clubs. So I could have afforded a spade finesse at trick two after all, even though I was wrong about four-zero trumps. I'm sure the table would have found that amusing.

I don't have the communication for a minor-suit squeeze. So my only choice is a simple-played-as-double, with hearts as the double threat. Since dummy has two winners in the double-threat suit (what Clyde E. Love called a Type B₂ squeeze), the squeeze plays itself. I cash the club ace, run trumps, play a heart to the queen, and cash the ace-king of diamonds. There is no squeeze, because hearts were three-three all along. Making seven.

	NORTH Jack ♠ A K Q 9 6 3 ♥ A K 8 7 6 ♦ -- ♣ A J
WEST Nathanial ♠ J 10 8 ♥ J 3 2 ♦ Q 10 5 3 ♣ 10 6 3		EAST Marcus ♠ 7 ♥ 10 5 4 ♦ J 7 4 2 ♣ K 9 7 4 2
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 5 4 2 ♥ Q 9 ♦ A K 9 8 6 ♣ Q 8 5

Partner's auction was pointless. The information gained both from the spinter and from Blackwood was of no use to him. How should he have bid his hand? One possibility is just to bid seven spades over one notrump. But I think I can do a little better than that. I suspect that I'm quite willing to play a grand (1) any time partner has the heart queen or (2) any time partner has four spades. (If he has four spades, I'll take my chances that he doesn't have three small hearts.) In all other cases, I'd just as soon avoid a grand. I might still make one if partner has enough winners to allow me to pitch all my hearts, but that will be hard to diagnose.

With that in mind, I'd start with two clubs, intending to raise two spades to seven. On the given hand, partner will bid two diamonds. I now need to set hearts as trump, so I can bid keycard Blackwood and find out about the queen of hearts. I can do that by bidding three spades (Smolen), ostensibly showing four spades and longer hearts. If partner bids four hearts, I can bid Blackwood immediately. If he bids three notrump (as he would on this hand), I can transfer to hearts via four diamonds and bid Blackwood. Now I can bid seven spades if he shows the "trump" queen and six spades if he doesn't.

How's that for a plan? Of course, if I wind up signing off in six spades, I'm counting on partner to realize that I was just kidding about having only four spades. Will he work that out? Or will he think hearts is agreed, so six spades must be forcing - some kind of last-train grand try with six notrump as the resting spot? To find out, I tried another bridgewinners.com poll. Everyone appeared to interpret six spades as an attempt to play there, although almost no one was willing to abandon the idea that partner has more hearts than spades. I'm not sure why. Once you conclude that partner took this auction to find out about the heart queen, it seems to me that any descriptive content of his auction becomes suspect. All you really know about partner's hand is that he is willing to play six spades if you don't have the heart queen and has something else in mind if you do.

In the poll, I did not use the actual South hand. For one thing, I needed to remove the heart queen, so partner would attempt to sign off in six spades. Also, to add a little more interest, I gave South jack-ten third of spades and two small hearts. I was curious to see how many would raise six spades to seven, concluding that the ability to ruff two hearts high had to be just as good as holding the heart queen. A little over 20% reached that conclusion.

Our opponents stopped in six spades at the other table, so we pick up 13 imps and surge into the lead.

Table 1: +2210
Table 2: -1460

Result on Board 2: +13 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 1

2011-11-27T12:20:00.000-05:00

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ K 9♥ Q 8 4 3♦ K 4 2♣ J 9 8 5

Partner opens one diamond, I bid one heart, and partner bids one notrump (15-17). I'm worth only two notrump. But with such weak hearts, inviting is dangerous. If I bid two and partner accepts, LHO, knowing we don't have extras, can double any time he has a heart stack. If I raise to three, he must be more cautious about doubling. It's not the increased penalty I'm worried about so much as giving LHO a chance to direct the lead. I might go down doubled after a slow auction when I would have made three notrump had I just bid it.

I bid three notrump, and everyone passes. RHO leads the deuce of spades, fourth best.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ K 9 ♥ Q 8 4 3 ♦ K 4 2 ♣ J 9 8 5

	SOUTH Jack ♠ A 10 5 ♥ A 2 ♦ A 10 9 6 5 ♣ K 6 3

West	North	East	South
Marcus	Phillip	Nathanial	Jack
			1 ♦
Pass	1 ♥	Pass	1 NT
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

Partner has a minimum in high cards. But with ace-ten-nine fifth of diamonds, I assume he would have accepted an invitation, so we were always getting to game. Still, this isn't much of a contract. With a normal break in diamonds, I have only seven tricks. Each suit offers some potential for an extra trick. West might have led from queen-jack fourth of spades, diamonds might come home for five tricks, or the club ace might be onside. The heart king may be onside also, but that will probably be of no use. If I have three spades losers in addition to the club ace, I can't afford to give up a trick to the king of hearts. I may, however, be able to take a second heart trick via an endplay.

I will probably need a spade entry to dummy later, either to take a second diamond finesse if I find West with a singleton diamond honor or to lead a club toward my king. So I might as well play low to this trick and see if I got lucky in the spade suit before I delve too much further into this deal. I play the nine, and East plays the jack. So much for a third spade trick.

Where am I going to find two more tricks? If I can't bring home the diamonds for five tricks, I will need the club ace onside and an endplay in hearts, which means I need some kind of defensive entanglement in the club suit. Does queen doubleton of clubs in the West hand do it? Say I take the spade ace and play three rounds of diamonds. The opponents continue spades. I win in dummy and play a club. East must duck, else I get two club tricks. I win with the king and play a second club to West's queen. If he has the heart king and no entry to his partner in the spade suit, he will be endplayed. He can get off the endplay by unblocking the club queen under my king. But maybe he has queen-ten doubleton. Or maybe even a singleton queen, in which case I can toss him in with the ten of spades (though I will have to guess which holding to play for). This isn't likely to work, but I don't see anything better.

I take the spade ace and play the five of diamonds to dummy's king. West plays the three; East, the seven. I play the deuce of diamonds from dummy, and East plays the queen. I win with the diamond ace, and West follows. I play the diamond ten. West wins with the jack, and East pitches the three of spades. That's good. Assuming West has the spade queen, the opponents have no communication in spades.

West plays the four of spades to dummy's king--six---five. Does it matter which club I lead from dummy? If I lead the nine, East may think I have king-ten third, in which case, with ace-queen, he might hop with the ace to keep me from retaining the lead in dummy to repeat the finesse. If he does, then West, with his putative king of hearts and ten of clubs, has two suits he can't afford to lead. It's not entirely clear I can exploit that fact. But at least it will give West a problem.

I lead the nine of clubs. East plays the ten. That's not good. There's no way East would play the ten from ace-ten fourth or fifth. So the layout I was hoping for isn't there. My plan isn't going to work. Is there anything else to try?

What if West doesn't have four spades? What if he led from queen third (prefering the unbid major to his own long suit) and spades are now blocked? Is that possible? Could East have pitched a spade winner? Let's give East something like

♠ J 8 7 6 3♥ J x x x♦ Q 7♣ ? 10

He certainly might pitch a spade on the third diamond with that. If that's what he has, do I have a chance? Suppose his '?' is the ace. I play the club king, then play another club. He wins. If he plays a spade to his partner's queen, West will be endplayed. It shouldn't be hard for him to see that, however. It should be pretty easy to find a heart shift.

Suppose his '?' is the queen. Now I can duck this trick, allowing me to smother his queen later, establishing two club tricks in dummy. Again, if East plays a spade, I'll make it; and if he plays a heart, I'll go down. He might find a heart switch in this layout also, but it's a little bit harder. In general, the earlier you put someone to the test, the more likely he is to go wrong. Since it's fifty-fifty whether he has the ace or the queen, ducking seems like my best shot. I play the six of clubs; East plays the deuce. East plays the seven of spades to his partner's queen, and I pitch dummy's three of hearts. I don't think this is going to work. East would have played the eight of spades with eight-seven left, so West probably has the eight.

And indeed he does. He cashes it. I pitch the four of hearts from dummy; East plays the five of hearts. If East began with only four spades, he can't have a doubleton club. He is probably 4-4-2-3 or 4-3-2-4. He put up the ten of clubs from queen-ten because he thought I was psychic and might duck the nine to his partner's ace. If he is 4-3-2-4 and West has the heart king, we are down to this position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x x ♦ -- ♣ A		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x ♦ -- ♣ Q x x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

I can hold this to down one by pitching a club. West can cash his his club ace, but he will be endplayed. If East is 4-4-2-3,

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x ♦ -- ♣ A x		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x x ♦ -- ♣ Q x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

my only chance is to stiff the heart ace and hope West doesn't work it out. I must hope he thinks I began with three hearts and two clubs and decides to cash the club ace rather than exit with a heart. I can't imagine he would get the position wrong. (Why would I have ducked the club ten with king doubleton of clubs?) So I'll go for the legitimate line. I pitch the three of clubs. West cashes the club ace--eight--seven--king, then leads the four of clubs to his partner's queen. Down two.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ K 9 ♥ Q 8 4 3 ♦ K 4 2 ♣ J 9 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ Q 8 4 2 ♥ K 10 6 ♦ J 8 3 ♣ A 4 2		EAST Nathanial ♠ J 7 6 3 ♥ J 9 7 5 ♦ Q 7 ♣ Q 10 7
	SOUTH Jack ♠ A 10 5 ♥ A 2 ♦ A 10 9 6 5 ♣ K 6 3

My counterpart at the other table made four notrump. That's some pretty impressive declarer play! Somehow he must have induced a diamond lead. Maybe he opened one notrump, then bid two spades over Stayman.

While I doubt Jack actually did that, I do think bidding two spades over Stayman is a reasonable and underutilized swing action at matchpoints. With top tricks and a potential ruffing value, you could easily wind up taking one more trick in a four-three spade fit than in notrump, especially if the opponents don't know you're in a four-three fit. The bid has less constructive potential at IMPs, since you need to take two more tricks in spades than in notrump for it to gain (and, specifically, ten tricks rather than eight). Of course, either at IMPs or at matchpoints, the bid has considerable potential for gain if partner doesn't raise it, either by inducing a favorable lead or by getting the opponents to miscount your hand.

Table 1: -100
Table 2: -430

Result on Board 1: -11 imps
Total: -11 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 8

2011-11-20T14:27:00.000-05:00

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ A J 10 8♥ J 6♦ 7 5 2♣ Q J 7 4

RHO opens one spade in third seat. LHO bids two hearts, and RHO bids two spades, which is alerted as forcing. LHO bids two notrump--pass--pass back to me. At matchpoints this would be a clear double. I have spades behind dummy and partner has hearts behind declarer. I would not double three notrump, because they could have extras. The bad breaks may mean they're making only three when they would normally expect to make four or five. But when they stop in two notrump, I know they don't have any extras. There is very little downside to this double. If they make this despite the bad breaks, then they have underbid, in which case I have a terrible board anyway. Most of the field will be in game going down.

At IMPs, the risk of doubling is greater and the reward is smaller. It is still true that if they make this, they have underbid and our teammates will probably be in game. But doubling will still be costly. It will turn a five-imp loss into an 11-imp loss. And we must beat them at least two for the double to show any substantial gain. So I pass. Partner leads the deuce of clubs.

	NORTH Stella ♠ K 9 7 3 2 ♥ 10 9 ♦ A J 9 3 ♣ K 9
		EAST Phillip ♠ A J 10 8 ♥ J 6 ♦ 7 5 2 ♣ Q J 7 4

West	North	East	South
Jack	Stella	Phillip	Kate
			Pass
Pass	1 ♠	Pass	2 ♥
Pass	2 ♠¹	Pass	2 NT
(All pass)
¹Forcing

I don't understand two spades. There isn't much chance of a game opposite a passed hand, and two hearts seems as good a spot as any. So why not pass?

Partner probably has four clubs. But, since he rates to have four hearts, I must be alert to the possiblity that he is leading a three-card suit. Declarer rises with dummy's king. If I could afford the queen, I would play it. But if partner has ace third (or, more embarassingly, four small), the queen would not work out well. So I encourage with the seven; declarer plays the three.

I expect declarer to play a heart at trick two. When dummy has touching honors, it's usually right to cover the last honor if dummy has small cards and the penultimate honor if it doesn't. So my first instinct is to play the jack on the first round of hearts. Does that make sense here? Suppose declarer has ace-king-eight fifth (without the seven) and exactly one side entry. If I play low on the first heart, declarer can duck. Whether partner wins this trick or not, declarer can take four heart tricks. But if I play the jack, declarer can't afford to duck. She must win the trick and play a low heart to dummy's remaining honor. If partner ducks this trick, declarer doesn't have the entries both to establish and to run the suit, so she is held to three heart tricks. I'm sure there are other holdings that will work similarly, so it looks right to cover the first heart.

Declarer doesn't play a heart, however. She plays the nine of diamonds. I play the deuce, declarer wins with the king, and partner plays the eight. Why isn't she playing hearts? She must have the queen of diamonds as well. I can't imagine it's right to release her only side entry before playing hearts. Based on partner's eight, she would appear to have king-queen fourth. It's still not clear why she wants to be in her hand.

She plays the four of diamonds--six--ace--seven. I see. She's just trying to get a count. She plays the nine of hearts. I would have covered at trick two. But declarer has demonstrated she has no shortage of entries to her hand, so I don't see the point anymore. It's probably better to keep the favorable lie of the heart suit a secret. I play the six--king--five. On the bidding, declarer can't have the ace-king of hearts and the king-queen of diamonds. She must have king-queen in each suit, and partner must have ducked the ace.

If declarer has the heart eight, then, once she knocks out partner's ace, she has four hearts, four diamonds, and a club--nine tricks. If partner has the spade queen, as seems likely, we can cash enough tricks to beat this before declarer gets back in. If not, we can cash only five tricks--three clubs and two aces--so declarer will make it.

Declarer plays the ten of diamonds, on which partner pitches the deuce of hearts, and overtakes with dummy's jack. She leads a heart--jack--queen--ace. Partner shifts to the queen of spades. We have the rest. Down three.

	NORTH Stella ♠ K 9 7 3 2 ♥ 10 9 ♦ A J 9 3 ♣ K 9
WEST Jack ♠ Q 6 5 4 ♥ A 5 3 2 ♦ 8 6 ♣ A 8 2		EAST Phillip ♠ A J 10 8 ♥ J 6 ♦ 7 5 2 ♣ Q J 7 4
	SOUTH Kate ♠ -- ♥ K Q 8 7 4 ♦ K Q 10 4 ♣ 10 6 5 3

Declarer could have cashed her fourth diamond to hold it to down two. But she was still trying to make it, hoping the spade ace was onside. Of course, partner didn't have to give her the chance. He could have reasoned, as I did, that declarer couldn't have entry problems given this line. So there was no point in ducking the heart. We were always entitled to down three. Maybe I should have doubled after all.

No. If I double, they might wriggle their way into three diamonds. Or three hearts for that matter. I can't be too unhappy when the opponents go minus 150 with two higher-ranking makable contracts available to them.

Our teammates sensibly stopped in two hearts, making four. So we pick up eight imps. That gives us 23 (out of 30) victory points. We are now n first place.

Table 1: +150
Table 2: +170

Result on Board 8: 8 imps
Result on Match 2: +26 imps (23 VP)
Current Total: 42 VP

For our third match, we play Marcus and Nathanial, who play the Jack convention card, whatever that means. I don't know Jack.

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 7

2011-11-13T10:16:00.000-05:00

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 7♥ J 6 5 4♦ 10 4 2♣ K Q 9 5

The opponents have the auction to themselves. LHO opens one diamond; RHO bids one spade. LHO raises to two spades; RHO bids two notrump, a relay. LHO bids three spades, showing four trumps and more than a minimum, and RHO bids four spades. I lead the club king.

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
Pass	1 ♦	Pass	1 ♠
Pass	2 ♠	Pass	2 NT¹
Pass	3 ♠²	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)
¹Relay
²Fourcard support and not a minimum

Since the two notrump relay can apparently be used to find out whether partner has three-card or four-card support, I suppose South might have a game force with four spades. If she has five spades, however, I assume she will have only an invitational hand, else she would have bid four spades directly over the raise.

Partner plays the club eight, and declarer follows with the deuce. Diamonds is the obvious shift, so partner's card (assuming it is high) should suggest that continuing clubs looks like a better idea to him than shifting to diamonds. There is no particular reason to believe partner has the club ace. He may encourage without the club ace if a diamond shift looks wrong.

What can I conclude about partner's diamonds? That's a difficult question. It depends on whether you think partner's signal is prescriptive ("Please shift to a diamond.") or descriptive ("I have something useful in diamonds, just so you know."). As a general rule, the less you know about the deal, the more descriptive your signals should be. So, at trick one, signals are usually descriptive. But not always. It all depends on context, and I think the context here calls for a more prescriptive approach.

Let's move over to the East seat for a moment. On this auction, looking at that dummy, my judgment would be that holding the diamond king alone (without the ten or jack) gives me good reason to steer partner away from a diamond shift. So I would tend to encourage clubs with that holding.

Take these two hands, for example:

(A) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ Q 3 2 ♦ K 9 6 ♣ 10 8 7 3

(B) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K 10 6 ♣ 10 8 7 4 3

With (A), I don't want a diamond shift unless partner has jack-ten of diamonds, in which case he might find the shift by himself. Simply change the diamond ten to the jack in the actual West hand, and a diamond shift would be fatal:

(A)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ A 4 2 ♥ Q 3 2 ♦ K 9 6 ♣ 10 8 7 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ Q 9 8 6 ♥ A 10 ♦ 10 7 5 3 ♣ A 4 2

But if I hold (B), I do want a diamond shift. If I don't get it, I might be endplayed:

(B)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ A 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K 10 6 ♣ 10 8 7 4 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ Q 9 8 6 ♥ A Q 3 ♦ 9 7 5 3 ♣ A 2

Accordingly, I would tend to encourage clubs at trick one with just the diamond king. If the heart suit were more threatening, I would feel different. For example, give dummy king-queen-jack fourth of hearts and take my spade ace away (so there is room for partner to hold the heart ace). Now the diamond king alone would be enough for me to discourage in clubs. Where is the dividing line? At what point are dummy's hearts sufficiently threatening that I would signal for diamonds without a supporting lower honor? I can't say exactly. It's a judgment call.

Elsewhere in this blog I have inveighed against fuzzy, context-based signals, and the discussion above may seem to belie that conviction. So let me clarify. I do think one should have clear rules about what message a signal conveys. You don't want to be in a situation where you know you want partner to play a spade but you aren't sure whether a low card or a high card is the way to ask for it. Judgment must come into play, however, in deciding whether to send that message. After all, we can agree that one spade--three spades is a limit raise yet still leave the dividing line between a limit raise and a forcing raise a matter of individual judgment.

In any event, these considerations are moot, since I'm playing with Jack. Jack isn't even looking at his diamonds, He's looking at his clubs and telling me he has the ace. Pure and simple.

Back over to the West seat. If partner has the club ace, I may need to cash our second club trick.It might go away if I don't. Should I cash the queen or lead a low one? It could be right to cash the queen so that I can stay on play to put a diamond through. Otherwise, partner may be endplayed:

(C)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ 6 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K J 6 ♣ A 8 7 4 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A Q 9 8 ♥ A Q 3 ♦ 9 7 5 3 ♣ 10 2

Could cashing the queen could work out poorly if partner is short in clubs? Let's try another layout:

(D)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ Q 9 2 ♥ Q 10 2 ♦ 7 6 5 3 ♣ A 8 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A 8 6 4 ♥ A 3 ♦ K J 9 ♣ 10 7 4 2

If I cash the queen, partner's ace will drop on the next round, establishing declarer's ten. But so what? We aren't beating the contract on this layout whatever I do. Four small clubs in declarer's hand is a very favorable assumption for declarer, so it is pointless to cater to it. I might as well cash the queen, so I can switch to diamonds at trick three.

Some might argue that a reliable partner can't have (C), that he would discourage at trick one with that hand. Indeed, in a poll I conducted on bridgewinners.com, roughly 80% of the respondents said they would discourage at trick one with (C). But I don't think you should.

Back to the East seat again. Yes, with (C) you want partner to play a diamond, but not just yet. You want him to cash the club queen first. If he doesn't, declarer can make the contract by pitching his club on dummy's fourth heart. If partner knew you had the club ace, you could discourage and trust him to work out on his own the need to cash before shifting. But partner doesn't know who has the ace. If you discourage, how will he know that he isn't supposed to shift immediately?

(E)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ A 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K J 6 ♣ 10 8 7 4 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ Q 9 8 6 ♥ A Q 3 ♦ 9 7 5 3 ♣ A 2

In this layout, if declarer wins the first trick, the defense is easy. But if she ducks, partner must find a diamond shift at trick two. It shouldn't be too hard for declarer to find this duck. You might as well give West his entry now while he is still somewhat in the dark.

Holding (C), then, you must encourage to get partner to cash the club queen. How do you get him to shift to diamonds at trick three? Actually, I doubt that's a problem. If partner held the diamond jack, a diamond shift would be dangerous. But he doesn't, so a diamond shift at trick three looks pretty routine. It's a perfectly safe exit, and it might be productive. Why would he ever not play a diamond at trick three? The idea that you somehow need to tell partner to lead diamonds comes from focusing on your own hand rather than looking at the deal from partner's perspective.

You have a difficult problem, however, if you switch the jack and ten of diamonds:

(F)

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ 6 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K 10 6 ♣ A 8 7 4 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A Q 9 8 ♥ A Q 3 ♦ 9 7 5 3 ♣ 10 2

Again, you must encourage so partner will cash the club. But he will be hard pressed to find a diamond shift at trick three on his own. How can you get him to do the right thing? One possibility is to take charge. Overtake with the ace and return a suit-preference three of clubs. Obviously, this could work out badly. Even if you aren't playing with Lowenthal (who might have king empty fourth), this maneuver might still lose a trick by force. And, if it doesn't, partner must still work out why you did this. He might attribute it to something less obscure, like holding ace doubleton of clubs.

I think the best solution is to signal with the seven. The seven is high enough that partner will probably think it is encouraging and will cash the queen. Now you play the eight. By playing up the line, you negate your original message. The seven becomes discouraging in retrospect, and partner might work out that you want a diamond shift. He might get this right even if he doesn't suspect your equivocation. He might think you had ace-eight-seven third all along. The bridgewinners were about evenly split between encouraging and discouraging on this one, which I don't understand. If you think it's right to discourage clubs with (C), why would you change your mind with (F)? Two people did choose the seven, but no one said why. I don't know if they were intending to follow with the eight or not.

Back to the West seat on the actual deal. I cash the club queen. Partner plays the three; declarer, the ten. The three should be count, so partner should have ace third or fourth but not ace fifth. Comments in the aforementioned poll indicated that some would play this card as suit preference. All I have to say about that is, "Arggggghhhh!" (No offense intended.) I'd rather take suit preference off the card altogether than worry that partner would give me suit preference here. This should be count, because I might need to know if it's safe to continue a third round of clubs. Clarifying your holding in the suit led always takes precedence over suit preference unless your holding in the suit led is clearly immaterial. Playing a third club is a serious possibility, so your club length is hardly immaterial.

Fortunately, I don't need to worry whether Jack agrees with me or not. I see no reason not to switch to a diamond. I play the diamond deuce--eight--six--five. Declarer appears to have at least king-jack-nine-five. The missing diamonds are the seven, six, and three. I don't know if Jack would play high (count) or low (attitude) with two small. (He should give count, since his failure to win the trick is all the attitude I need. But that's a bit subtle for Jack.) In any event, I don't think Jack would play middle from three. So declarer has five diamonds. We need two major-suit tricks to beat this. Declarer has at most two hearts, so the two tricks will have to be either the ace-queen of a major or the heart ace and the spade queen.

Declarer plays the three of spades from dummy--four--ace--seven. Then deuce of spades--ten--jack--queen. This looks promising. If declarer could afford to lose a spade trick, she would have taken the safety play (cashing dummy's king, then leading low toward her hand). This line indicates she couldn't afford to lose a spade trick, so she must be going down.

No, wait. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. If she has a doubleton club, she has a safety play. But not if she has three. If I have queen-ten fourth of spades and she plays king of spades, a spade to her ace, and another spade, I can hop and tap dummy to promote my spade ten. Furthermore, even if she has a doubleton club, the "safety" play isn't so safe. What if she loses to a doubleton queen of spades in my hand and I give partner a diamond ruff? I take it all back. This isn't as promising a development as I thought.

Partner returns the nine of spades to dummy's king. I pitch the four of diamonds. Declarer plays the seven of hearts--deuce--ace. I guess that's it. There is no prospect for a fourth trick.

	NORTH Kate ♠ K J 5 3 ♥ K 9 8 7 ♦ A Q 8 ♣ J 6
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5		EAST Jack ♠ Q 9 4 ♥ Q 3 2 ♦ 7 6 ♣ A 8 7 4 3
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A 8 6 2 ♥ A 10 ♦ K J 9 5 3 ♣ 10 2

So declarer did have a doubleton club and might have taken a safety play in spades. Whether she should or not is hard to say. A priori, it's more likely that the safety play is necessary than that she will run into a diamond ruff. But we didn't defend as if trumps were breaking badly. We might have tried the effect of three rounds of clubs if that were the case.

The contract and result were the same at the other table. But I'll bet they didn't spend nearly so much time as we did discussing the board. This is a pretty innocuous-looking deal, isn't it? If you were kibitzing when it was played, would you suspect this deal would spawn three poll questions and merit 2,000 words of commentary?

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 7: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 6

2011-11-06T07:30:00.000-05:00

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ 8 2♥ A 7 5♦ A 3 2♣ A 10 8 7 4

RHO opens one spade, I double, and LHO bids four spades, which ends the auction.

If partner has a trump trick or a cashing king, it won't matter what I lead. But what if he doesn't? Do I need to develop a fourth trick before declarer can take discards, or should I defend passively (i.e., lead a trump) and force declarer to break the side suits herself? The more balanced dummy is, the more likely that it is right to defend passively. But dummy doesn't rate to be balanced. One of the problems of playing against Jack is you can't ask about alternative auctions. But surely LHO has some way to distinguish a raise to four spades on power from a raise on playing tricks. Dummy rates to have some pattern like 4-3-5-1 or 4-5-3-1, in which case I may need to attack dummy's three-card suit on opening lead. If I can find partner with the queen behind dummy's king or with queen-jack in front of declarer's king, I will have established the setting trick.

Whichever red suit I lead, it is probably better to lead low rather than the ace. Not for deceptive reasons but to retain a tenace in case declarer has king-queen small or king-jack small. The danger in leading low is that partner might have the king and decide not play it. But that's less of a concern at IMPs. If partner can't see a route to four tricks without assuming I have underled an ace, he will make that assumption.

Which red suit should I lead? Hearts is marginally safer, because I would be leading a five rather than a deuce. The higher the spot, the more likely it is partner will be able to tell I've underled the ace, since he knows I must have two cards higher than the one I led. While this is unlikely to matter, it's the only reason I think of to prefer one suit over the other, so I lead the five of hearts.

	NORTH Kate ♠ Q J 10 9 ♥ Q 10 9 4 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K J 2
WEST Phillip ♠ 8 2 ♥ A 7 5 ♦ A 3 2 ♣ A 10 8 7 4

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
			1 ♠
Double	4 ♠	(All pass)

Okay. She got me. Why she didn't make a limit raise with this hand I can't imagine. If declarer has king third of hearts and partner's jack of hearts was going to be the setting trick, I may have blown it.

To my relief, declarer plays the queen from dummy. Partner plays the deuce; declarer, the jack. Partner's deuce should be attitude, suggesting that I make the "obvious shift" (to diamonds) when I get in. A high heart would be encouraging, not because partner has any particular reason to want me to continue hearts but because he has nothing in diamonds to make a shift by me worthwhile. Since we lack the tempi to develop tricks, partner has no reason to suggest a diamond shift except to cash out, so he should have the king.

That's what partner's deuce should mean. But Jack does not card this way. His deuce simply indicates he doesn't have a heart honor, as if I didn't already know that already.

What can I make of declarer's play of the heart queen? This would be a strange play holding king-jack third of hearts, since the ten is more flexible. The likeliest explanation is that she has king-jack doubleton and wants to win this trick in dummy, probably to take a spade finesee. Even so, the play is unusual. Declarer would normally expect the heart ace to be on her right, in which case the way to reach dummy in this suit is to play low. RHO will surely take the ace (since, for all he knows, his partner has the king), at which point she can drop the king. The fact that declarer chose to play the queen means she thinks the ace is more likely to be on her left than on her right. Since underleading an ace is rare, she must be fairly confident from the auction that partner can't have an ace (in addition to the spade king, which she must assume he has). That's too bad. It means if she is missing the club queen, there is no chance she will misguess that suit. (Although any chance of that happening probably vanished with my opening lead. I would not have led a heart from the ace holding a queen-high club suit.)

What are our prospects for beating this? Declarer has five spade tricks, three hearts tricks, and at least one club trick. Nine tricks in all. If she has the club queen, she has two club tricks, bringing her up to ten. In that case, I must hope partner has the diamond king, allowing us to cash four tricks first. If she does not have the club queen, however, she doesn't have ten tricks. So it would be a mistake to break diamonds. She must break the suit herself, and queen-jack of diamonds in partner's hand will be enough to beat the contract.

Declarer leads the nine of spades--seven--three--deuce, then the ten of spades--king--ace--eight. I expect to see the king of hearts, but declarer leads the three of clubs instead. One thing for sure. Declarer doesn't have three small clubs, or she wouldn't be playing clubs before hearts. Either she has a singleton or two small or she has the queen. Since I've already decided declarer is not going to misguess this suit, I can take my time deciding what to do.

Playing with a reliable partner, my correct play is to hop (in case she has a singleton) and cash the heart ace. It should be clear to partner that count is immaterial at this point. The only thing that matters is where his minor-suit honors are, so he should give a suit-preference signal: high with the diamond king, low with the club queen. (I'm not sure what he would play with neither of those cards, but it doesn't matter. If he has neither card, we aren't beating this contract anyway.) If he plays high, I play ace and a diamond. If he plays low, I defend passively. I can't count on Jack to signal that way however, so I must try something else.

I essentially have two choices (1) Hop and guess what to do next. (2) Duck to get more information.

If I choose (1), my percentage guess is to try to cash out. It's better to play partner for one card (the diamond king) than to play him for three (the club queen and the queen-jack of diamonds).

(2) loses immediately if declarer has a singleton club. But if she doesn't, I am guaranteed to get the hand right. When declarer knocks out my heart ace, I cash the club ace. If partner echos in clubs, I know declarer has queen third and I play ace and a diamond. If partner plays up the line, then I know declarer has a doubleton, and I get to see whether she has the queen or not. If so, I shift to ace and a diamond. If not, I know she has only nine tricks, and I defend passively.

(1) is superior if declarer has a singleton club and partner has the diamond king. (2) is superior if declarer has two small clubs and partner has queen-jack of diamonds. In all other cases, it doesn't matter which line I choose. Which scenario is more likely? Here is declarer's hand in each case:

(1) ♠ A x x x x♥ K J♦ Q J x x x♣ x

(2) ♠ A x x x x♥ K J♦ K x x x♣ x x

A four-two split is more likely than a five-one split, so (2) is more likely even before taking the high-card constraints into account. Accordingly, I duck. Declarer rises with the king, and partner follows with the five. That's a relief. Declarer didn't have a singleton. She continues with the deuce of clubs from dummy--nine--six. I play the seven. Partner shifts to the eight of diamonds, and declarer plays the queen. That doesn't look good. Partner wouldn't be leading the eight if he had the king. I take my red aces and play another diamond. Declarer claims. Making four for a push.

	NORTH Kate ♠ Q J 10 9 ♥ Q 10 9 4 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K J 2
WEST Phillip ♠ 8 2 ♥ A 7 5 ♦ A 3 2 ♣ A 10 8 7 4		EAST Jack ♠ K 7 ♥ 8 6 3 2 ♦ 10 8 7 4 ♣ Q 9 5
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A 6 5 4 3 ♥ K J ♦ K Q J 5 ♣ 6 3

As I said, I was supposed to underlead the ace of dummy's three-card suit. It just never occurred to me that suit was clubs. Do I get partial credit?

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 6: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 5

2011-10-30T10:50:00.000-04:00

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ J 8♥ J 7 3♦ Q J 6 5 2♣ A 6 5

Two passes to me. I pass, and LHO opens with one notrump (15-17). Partner bids two spades. Since we play Astro, this should be at least a six-card suit. And, since we do not play weak two-bids, this hand might well be opened with two spades at the other table.

RHO bids two notrump, natural and non-forcing. Wow! Some one who is even more old-fashioned that I am!

Back in pre-lebensohl days, responder's two notrump in competition was more competitive than invitational. You tended to stretch to game with most invitations. So two notrump was apt to be a hand on which you would have passed had RHO not acted. Accordingly, opener rarely pressed on to game. This approach has rightly fallen out of favor. From a total tricks perspective, it makes little sense to play this way. It's seldom right to bid two notrump as essentially a signoff in a competitive auction. If the opponents have an eight-card fit, you should probably compete in a suit rather than in notrump. If they don't, your surest plus is probably on defense.

I pass, as does LHO. Partner leads the six of spades (fourth best).

	NORTH Stella ♠ Q ♥ K 6 4 2 ♦ 10 9 7 4 ♣ Q J 8 4
		EAST Phillip ♠ J 8 ♥ J 7 3 ♦ Q J 6 5 2 ♣ A 6 5

West	North	East	South
Jack	Stella	Phillip	Kate
Pass	Pass	Pass	1 NT
2 ♠	2 NT	(All pass)

What is going on the spade suit? If partner has ace-ten seventh, the suit is running. How do we fare if partner has six spades? I will unblock the jack under dummy's queen. Hopefully, I will gain the lead before partner does and lead a spade through declarer. By the rule of eleven, declarer has two cards higher than the six. If declarer covers my eight, partner can win and drive declarer's last high card. If declarer ducks my eight, partner must overtake. Hopefully declarer will not have a major tenace left, so partner can set up his suit with one more lead. The only holding declarer can have where ducking my eight prevents us from establishing the suit is ace-ten fourth. In all other cases, partner can afford to overtake my eight and continue the suit.

Partner has at most eight high-card points (unless South opened light), so he has only one prime card outside spades: either a minor-suit king or a red ace. A diamond card will be of little use on defense. To have a realistic chance of beating this, I must hope his side card is an entry, either the club king or the heart ace. Let's examine each case in turn.

(1) The club king. Declarer might have eight tricks outside the club suit: two spades, four hearts, and two diamonds. But there is room in partner's hand for the heart queen. And declarer might have ace-queen doubleton of hearts. So it's possible declarer doesn't have four heart tricks and must play on clubs. If so, I must make sure to win the ace on the first club trick, preserving partner's entry.

(2) The heart ace. Declarer has two spades tricks and two diamond tricks. Three club tricks bring her up to seven, so she must go after a heart trick or a third diamond trick to make this. On the auction, the aces are probably split, so declarer must hope to drive partner's ace first. Since she is missing the heart jack, the natural play is to work on clubs first, hoping partner has the club ace. If I hop with the club ace and continue spades, however, as I must do in case (1), she might decide it is hopeless to play me for the heart ace as well. She may go after an extra diamond trick instead. If she has ace-king-eight of diamonds, she can take a double finesse against my queen-jack. If she has ace-king-five, she can lead the ten from dummy, hoping to pin a singleton or doubleton eight in partner's hand (a better play than hoping partner has a singleton jack or queen). To do that, however, she needs two dummy entries. I can prevent this diamond play by ducking the club. If she plays a second club, I must win it if she began with king third (else she will perforce abandon clubs, possibly playing a heart to her ten to develop two heart tricks). If she began with king fourth, however, I must duck again. When the second club holds, declarer must guess who has the club ace. If partner has it, she must play a third club. If I have it, she must switch to hearts. She will almost surely guess wrong. Normal defensive strategy in this situation is for third hand to grab his tricks early to preserve his partner's entries. It is unlikely East would duck the club ace even once, much less twice. It is surely more likely that West has ducked the ace, clinging to his only entry in quiet desperation.

So what should I do when declarer leads a club from dummy at trick two? Hop, playing for (1) or duck, playing for (2)? Partner rates to have more hearts than clubs, so he is more likely to hold the heart ace. Also, if he does hold the club king, there is a pretty good chance declarer has eight tricks outside the club suit. So many of the hands where he has the club king don't even count.

Ducking would appear to be the percentage play. But to ensure that declarer doesn't suspect anything, I must echo in clubs. I am trying to respresent ace third of clubs in partner's hand and two small in mine, and I would never fail to give count with two small. Of course, when partner echoes as well, declarer will know that one or the other of us has echoed with ace third. I'm hoping she thinks it's partner.

I play the jack of spades, and declarer plays the five. All my preperation comes to nothing when, at trick two, declarer leads the nine of diamonds. What is this all about? Whatever is going on, I don't see any gain in covering. I play the six (false count with the jack)--three--eight.

What just happened? Why did declarer take a double finesse in diamonds at trick two? If declarer is missing the club king, I don't see how this play helps. But if she is missing the heart ace, it makes a lot of sense. Any time I have the club ace, this must be superior to playing clubs at trick two. She must play diamonds eventually. Playing the suit now not only avoids the need for two dummy entries later, it also gives her an extra way to pick up the suit. Partner can't profitably continue spades. So if the nine loses to honor third or fourth in partner's hand, she has established her eighth trick. She may regret this play if our aces are switched. But even then she might survive. I might cover, the double finesse might work, or, if the finesse loses, partner might not find the necessary heart shift. Nice play, Kate. This line didn't occur to me.

Declarer leads the three of clubs from dummy. Do I still have any chance of beating this? She has two spade tricks and three diamond tricks, so I must hold declarer to two club tricks. But if I duck twice, playing her for king third, she can simply switch to hearts. I need to hope for king doubleton of clubs. I must duck the first club (to kill any squeezes against partner), win the second, then clear spades. I play the club five--king--deuce. Declarer cashes the diamond king, on which partner pitches the ten of clubs. I follow with the deuce. Declarer plays the three of clubs, and partner pitches the five of hearts. Oh, well. My only chance now is that partner began with ace-ten seventh of spades. I win and play the spade eight. No such luck. Making two.

	NORTH Stella ♠ Q ♥ K 6 4 2 ♦ 10 9 7 4 ♣ Q J 8 4
WEST Jack ♠ A 9 7 6 3 2 ♥ A 9 8 5 ♦ 8 ♣ 10 2		EAST Phillip ♠ J 8 ♥ J 7 3 ♦ Q J 6 5 2 ♣ A 6 5
	SOUTH Kate ♠ K 10 5 4 ♥ Q 10 ♦ A K 3 ♣ K 9 7 3

Our teammates collected 200 against two spades doubled. I don't know how the auction went. But if it began the same way, perhaps North made a negative double over two spades. I avoid this double with a singleton trump (so partner can pass with four), but I would double with this hand. The singleton queen and the maximum in high cards provides enough defense that I don't mind partner's passing. Besides, what's the alternative? The only other choice is to overbid and drive to game. Come to think of it, that wouldn't be so bad. Three notrump will probably make, won't it? In three, the natural play at trick two is a heart to the ten.

Table 1: -120
Table 2: +200

Result on Board 5: +2 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 4

2011-10-23T12:22:00.000-04:00

Board 4
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

Declarer could have saved a trick by not cashing the hearts. Perhaps she was worried the black aces were reversed. Or maybe she was just hoping to get a clue as to how to play diamonds. Although I should think my double is already a pretty big clue that I don't have the diamond queen.

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

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 3

2011-10-16T11:42:00.000-04:00

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ Q J 10 8 2♥ Q 7♦ K J 8 3 2♣ 5

If partner held this hand and opened one spade, I wouldn't object. It's only seven losers after all. But I have a feeling partner would object if I opened, so I humor him and pass. LHO opens one notrump (15-17), partner passes, and RHO bids two spades, a transfer to clubs, which I double. The primary purpose of doubling a transfer is to direct a lead, not to suggest declaring in that suit. So I would not double if my spades and diamonds were reversed. With the interior solidity of this suit, however, doubling seems right.

Cliff Bishop once told me that a double of a transfer should not be lead directing at all but should be a three-suited takeout of the suit shown. Perhaps Cliff was right, but I've never encountered anyone else who plays that way.

LHO bids two notrump, showing club support, and partner bids three spades.

One should rarely "raise" a lead-directing double. So partner should have at least four-card support and a good hand. Since we play Astro, partner would have had no trouble finding a call over one notrump with four or more spades and an unbalanced hand, even with a "4441." I suspect, therefore, that he is balanced, presumably with about 11 or 12 high-card points. (With more, he could have cue-bid three clubs; with less, it would be both unsafe and pointless to bid.) My hand would play poorly opposite a singleton diamond, so the fact that partner is probably balanced is a definite plus. Opposite a balanced "raise," I'm willing to bid game.

RHO bids four clubs. I might as well show my second suit to help partner decide what to do over five clubs. I bid four diamonds. For once, passing a marginal hand in first seat turned out OK. I got to show both my suits while limiting my hand. Although I was lucky that the opponents play two spades (rather than, say, two notrump) as their transfer to clubs. LHO bids five clubs, and partner doubles, ending the auction.

The opponents probably would have found an eight-card heart fit if they had one, so partner rates to have four hearts. Most likely, he is 4-4-3-2. To have doubled this, his red-suit strength must be in hearts rather than in diamonds.

Should I lead a heart on that basis? It could certainly be right if partner has the ace-jack of hearts and I can get a ruff. But that's about the only scenario I can think of where a heart lead is right. If partner's hearts are better than that, I don't need the ruff. And if they are worse, it's probably wrong for us to be breaking the suit. As pedestrian as it is, a spade lead looks better. If partner has the ace over dummy's king and I don't lead a spade, partner may find himself in some Morton's forkish situation where he must either cash the ace, setting up dummy's king, or not cash it and lose it altogether. Accordingly, I lead the queen of spades.

	NORTH Kate ♠ A K 9 ♥ K 10 4 3 ♦ 9 7 ♣ A Q 9 3
WEST Phillip ♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
Pass	1 NT	Pass	2 ♠¹
Double	2 NT²	3 ♠	4 ♣
4 ♦	5 ♣	Double	(All pass)
¹Transfer to clubs
²Shows support

Oops. Maybe a heart lead was the right idea after all. If I'm right about partner's shape, declarer is 1-3-3-6 and can now pitch a heart away. What can partner's hand be?

♠ x x x x♥ A J x x♦ A Q x♣ x x

That doesn't leave declarer much for her four club bid, though:

♠ x♥ x x x♦ x x x♣ K J x x x x

Declarer has to have more than that, but partner can hardly have less. This hand isn't adding up.

Dummy wins with the spade king--three--six. Declarer leads the three of clubs from dummy--eight--jack--five. Declarer then plays the deuce of hearts. This makes no sense. How can declarer afford to play hearts before taking a pitch on the spade ace? Apparently, she doesn't have a pitch. Partner "raised" spades with three small.

And why didn't she draw another round of trumps? Is it possible she has seven of them? That gives her a 2-3-1-7 pattern and leaves partner with 3-4-5-1. Not only does that give partner an easy Astro two-club bid, it gives him a strange double of five clubs: five-card support for my second suit and a singleton club. On the other hand, 2-3-1-7 is more consistent with declarer's four club bid than is 2-3-2-6.

If declarer is indeed 2-3-1-7, there is endplay lurking. Suppose partner has ace-jack-nine fourth of hearts. If I play low and dummy's ten loses to partner's jack, partner must underlead his diamond ace to my king and allow me to lead the heart queen. If he carelessly plays ace and another diamond, declarer can ruff out the spades, play a heart, and duck my queen. I must now give her a ruff-sluff, letting her escape for down one. Perhaps it's better for me to unblock the heart queen rather than count on partner to find the underlead. It's hard to see how it can hurt to play the queen of hearts. Declarer can hardly have the ace.

I play the heart queen--king--ace. Partner plays the diamond ace, and declarer ruffs with the deuce of clubs. Six diamonds? Six-card support for my second suit and partner chose to defend?

So declarer is 2-4-0-7. Well, that explains why partner didn't bid Astro. He didn't have a four-card major. Now partner needs the nine of hearts to beat this. If he doesn't have it, we're going minus 750 when we had a one-trick save available.

I play the deuce of diamonds. Declarer leads the five of spades--ten--ace--four. She then plays the three of hearts from dummy. Partner plays---the five. Minus 750.

	NORTH Kate ♠ A K 9 ♥ K 10 4 3 ♦ 9 7 ♣ A Q 9 3
WEST Phillip ♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5		EAST Jack ♠ 7 4 3 ♥ A J 5 ♦ A Q 10 6 5 4 ♣ 8
	SOUTH Stella ♠ 6 5 ♥ 9 8 6 2 ♦ -- ♣ K J 10 7 6 4 2

I have sympathy with partner's first-round pass but not with his three-spade bid. Three diamonds on the second round must show spade tolerance and is far more descriptive than three spades. The final decision was just plain weird. It turns out, Jack thought my four diamonds was a cue-bid, which makes no sense.

As weird as partner's decision was, he was the only one who was right on a double-dummy basis. I could have beat this with a heart lead. And the opponents were cold for five hearts. I hope partner gets some satisfaction from that fact.

I was expecting to lose 12 imps. But, miraculously, this board is a push. Or maybe it's not so miraculous. The same player is sitting East at both tables, after all.

Table 1: -750
Table 2: +750

Result on Board 3: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 2

2011-10-09T22:25:00.000-04:00

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ 10 6♥ 4 2♦ A 7 5 2♣ A K 6 3 2

RHO opens four hearts, which ends the auction. Our convention cards says "ace from ace-king." But, since one is quite likely to lead an unsupported ace after four of a major--all pass, I lead the club king. This will make it easier for partner to place my high cards if I decide to shift at trick two. The downside is that it may make partner's trick one signal harder for me to read. But making things slightly harder for me and much easier for partner seems like a good trade-off.

	NORTH Kate ♠ K 9 7 5 ♥ J ♦ Q J 9 4 ♣ J 10 9 8
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 6 ♥ 4 2 ♦ A 7 5 2 ♣ A K 6 3 2

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
			4 ♥
(All pass)

Partner plays the club seven; declarer, the four. The only time partner's club seven isn't forced is when he has queen-seven-five or seven-five. Playing with a human partner, I would rule out the former holding. I don't think partner would encourage with queen third looking at jack-ten fourth in the dummy. Playing with Jack, however, it is the latter holding I rule out. Jack tends to encourage with an honor and discourage without one whether that makes any sense in context or not. So I will assume that partner has either the club queen or a singleton.

There are three possible active strategies I might adopt at this point: (1) Cash out. (2) Go after slow tricks. (3) Go after ruffs. In addition, there is (4) Defend passively. Let's look at each strategy in turn and consider what conditions would make each strategy necessary.

(1) For a cash out to be necessary, declarer must have fast tricks on which she can pitch her losers given the chance. The only possible fast trick in dummy is the spade king. And the only way declarer can pitch something on it without giving up the lead is to have a singleton spade ace and a dummy entry. This gives declarer,

(A) ♠ A♥ A K Q x x x x x♦ x x♣ x x.

While I would never open four hearts myself with this hand, I'm not so sure about Jack. The description Jack offers is "six to thirteen high-card points, six to nine playing tricks, and seven or more hearts." This hand fits that description, so I do believe it's a possible hand. Even on this layout, however, a cashout is not necessary. Playing a trump before declarer has a chance to unblock spades will work as well.

(2) For it to be necessary to go after slow tricks, declarer must have slow tricks herself and we must have the tempi to take our slow tricks before declarer can take hers. The only suit we can have slow tricks in is spades. So for (2) to be the right strategy, declarer must have something like,

(B) ♠ A x x♥ A K Q x x x x♦ x x♣ x.

We have a slow spade trick, and declarer has slow diamond tricks. If we defend passively, declarer can drive the ace and king of diamonds and take a pitch. To prevent that, we must lead a spade now and lead a second spade on winning our first diamond trick. Again, this hand does not look like a four heart bid to me, but I suspect it's possible for Jack.

(3) For it to be necessary to go after a ruff, we must have exactly three winners aside from the ruff. Playing partner for the ace-queen of spades and going after a spade ruff, for example, implicitly assumes that neither of my minor-suit aces is cashing:

This the first hand I've constructed that actually looks like a four heart opening.

The ruff does not have to be immediate. Take this hand, for example:

(D) ♠ Q J x x♥ K Q x x x x x x♦ --♣ x.

Again, a spade shift is necessary to beat four hearts. (Although if we take away declarer's spade jack, it isn't.)

Can it be right to go after a diamond ruff? Declarer would need,

(E) ♠ x♥ A K Q x x x x♦ K x x x♣ x.

While we must get a diamond ruff to beat four hearts, it is not necessary to switch to diamonds to get our ruff. A spade shift should work as well, since it can hardly be wrong for partner to switch to his singleton diamond at trick three. A spade shift would fail if declarer's small spade were a club. But, given partner's failure to balance with four spades, I'm not worried about finding declarer with a spade void.

If it's actually necessary to switch to diamond, I probably need to switch to a small one:

(F) ♠ A x♥ A K Q x x x x♦ x x x♣ x.

Could it be right to go after a club ruff? For that to be necessary, we must have only one trick in the pointed suits:

(G) ♠ Q x♥ A K x x x x x x♦ --♣ Q x x.

Now I must continue clubs (either the ace or a low one will do). But if we simply take the spade queen away or make declarer one-one in the pointed suits, the club ruff is unnecessary. I don't mind losing the club ruff if it's not the setting trick.

All in all, a spade shift seems best if an active defense is called for. How about strategy (4)? Could a spade shift cost when a passive defense would succeed? The danger in playing spades is finding declarer with queen-eight third and a dummy entry:

(H) ♠ Q 8 x♥ A K Q x x x x x♦ x♣ x.

Actually, while a passive defense makes things easier for partner, it isn't strictly necessary on this layout. If I shift to the spade ten and declarer plays the king from dummy, we still beat it if partner ducks.

A spade seems like the best choice. But there is no clear, demonstrable answer to this problem. When you have so few constraints to work with, it's impossible to consider all the possibilities. So you can never be sure you've found the best solution. But you can be sure you've found a reasonable solution. As long as you can construct at least one specific, plausible layout where the defense you have chosen is necessary, you know you have at least some chance of doing the right thing. Failure to do this is one of the prime causes of defensive errors. Often a defender faced with a difficult problem like this will base his decision only on general principles (I'm going to cut down ruffs; I'm going to try to set up diamond tricks; etc.). If you do that, you may discover later, to your embarrassment, that there is no plausible layout where your defense is necessary. In this particular case, I have found three plausible layouts--(B), (C), and (D)--where a spade shift is the only play that succeeds. So I can rest assured that I have done my due diligence.

I shift to the spade ten--five--eight--ace. Partner should not encourage with queen-jack sixth of spades. With six spades, he knows good and well he doesn't want me continuing spades if I get in. So declarer's spade ace should not be a singleton. Unfortunately, I can't count on Jack for such subtleties, so I must ignore that inference.

Declarer leads the diamond ten. Why isn't she drawing trumps? The two reasons I can think of are (1) declarer has solid trumps and wants to use the heart jack as a later entry, or (2) she wants to finesse partner out of a trump honor.

One usually ducks the ace in this position to avoid setting up a ruffing finesse against partner if the ten is a singleton. For example, if declarer has

(I) ♠ A x x♥ A K Q x x x x♦ 10♣ x x

hopping with the ace will give declarer the contract. If I duck, we beat it, provided partner takes care to cash the club queen before exiting. (If he doesn't, declarer can lead the diamond queen and pitch her club.)

Is there any reason ducking might be a bad idea? The diamond king is partner's only entry. What if declarer has:

(J) ♠ A x x♥ A K Q x x x x♦ 10 x♣ x

Now I must hop and continue spades. If partner wins the first diamond, he's out of entries and there is no way to collect our spade trick.

How can I choose between these two layouts? Playing with Jack, I have nothing to go on. Playing with a partner I could trust, I would rule out (J) based on partner's trick one signal.

It might also be wrong to duck if ducking gives declarer a dummy entry:

(K) ♠ A♥ K 10 x x x x x x♦ K 10♣ x x

If I duck, declarer overtakes, pitches a loser on the spade king, then plays a heart through partner's ace-queen. If I hop and play a minor, declarer is down two. That brings up another problem with hopping. I don't know what to play if I do hop. If declarer has (I), I must play a spade. But if declarer has (K) or even

(L) ♠ A♥ A Q x x x x x♦ 10 x♣ x x

hopping and playing a spade lets her make it. If I do hop, I must play something else.

If I could count on partner to signal intelligently, I could rule out (J) by partner's club signal, and I could rule out (K) and (L) by partner's spade signal. I could then duck with some confidence. Playing with Jack, I just have to make a percentage guess. Since hopping and playing a spade works on only one of the four layouts I've constructed and ducking works on two, I duck, playing the seven.

Declarer overtakes with the jack, giving me a moment of panic. But partner takes the king and shifts to the queen of hearts. Declarer takes eight heart tricks and the spade king. We have no discarding problems. I save two aces, partner saves two spades, and we get a trick at the end. Making four.

	NORTH Kate ♠ K 9 7 5 ♥ J ♦ Q J 9 4 ♣ J 10 9 8
WEST Phillip ♠ 10 6 ♥ 4 2 ♦ A 7 5 2 ♣ A K 6 3 2		EAST Jack ♠ Q J 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K 8 6 3 ♣ Q 7 5
	SOUTH Stella ♠ A 4 3 ♥ A K 10 9 8 6 5 3 ♦ 10 ♣ 4

To test my trick two decision, I had Jack analyze the position. He agrees with me. After examining 1000 hands, he concluded that the spade ten was the best play, with an expectation of +21.4 points. Second best was a low club, with an expectation of +10.0 points. Since the prime factor in determining my best play is Jack's idea of what a four heart bid looks like, and since he knows that better than I do, I have to trust his judgment.

The other table plays the same contract with the same result. Why is it that the deals that require the most extensive analysis always seem to be pushes?

Table 1: -420
Table 2: +420

Result on Board 2: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 1

2011-10-02T21:51:00.000-04:00

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ 5 4 2♥ 2♦ A 8 6 2♣ 10 9 7 5 2

Two passes to me. I open one diamond. LHO doubles, partner bids one spade, and RHO bids two hearts. In theory, pass by me denies three spades. But I exercise my judgment and pass anyway. LHO bids two spades. Jack calls this a "cue-bid," but I wouldn't play it that way. The one suit LHO can't have after doubling one diamond is diamonds, so three diamonds is clearly a cue-bid. Since I see no reason to play two cue-bids, I play two spades (or any number of spades for that matter) as natural.

Partner passes. If partner were sure he wanted a spade lead against three notrump, he would double. But he can't afford to double too aggressively. Doubling sometimes works to the opponents' advantage by allowing them to exchange information via pass and redouble.

RHO bids three hearts. I pass, and LHO bids four hearts, which partner doubles. Everyone passes.

Partner presumably has four hearts, which means he has five spades, else he would have bid one heart over the take-out double. Since he has at most four cards in the minors, perhaps I should try to give him a minor-suit ruff. While a low diamond lead might be the only way to do that, the percentage lead is a club, enabling me to give partner a ruff if he has a quick entry and a singleton in either minor.

On the other hand, going after a ruff may be the wrong approach altogether. If partner has natural trump tricks, as his double suggests, he doesn't a need a ruff. Pursuing one may be wasting a tempo. Trick one may be my last chance to get spades going before declarer can pitch his spades on minor-suit tricks in dummy. So I lead the deuce of spades.

	NORTH Kate ♠ A 7 ♥ K Q 4 ♦ K Q J 3 ♣ A Q J 8
WEST Phillip ♠ 5 4 2 ♥ 2 ♦ A 8 6 2 ♣ 10 9 7 5 2

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
		Pass	Pass
1 ♦	Double	1 ♠	2 ♥
Pass	2 ♠	Pass	3 ♥
Pass	4 ♥	Double	(All pass)

I don't agree with the four-heart bid, since I don't think South's three-heart bid promised five hearts. Sometimes she is stuck and has no choice but to rebid her four-card suit. Three notrump at this point invites partner to correct, since North would have bid three notrump a round earlier with no interest in playing hearts.

Dummy plays the spade seven. Partner plays the ten; declarer plays the three. Hmm. Partner apparently doubles two spades even less aggressively than I do.

Partner surely has the heart ace, which gives us three tricks. We need one slow trump trick or a ruff to beat this.

Partner returns the six of spades, and declarer plays the eight. (Play the nine, Stella! The card you're known to hold.) I play the five, and dummy wins with the ace. Declarer plays the heart queen--five--three--deuce. Now the heart king. Partner takes the ace, and declarer follows with the seven.

If partner has another trump trick we'll beat this. The only holding he can have where a trump trick is in doubt is ten doubleton. In that case, he will return a spade to tap dummy, preventing declarer from finessing him out of his ten. Is there any danger of his being couped? I need to work out the details now so I know what my objective is. If partner can't be couped on best defense, I need to help partner out with the count so he doesn't make a mistake. On the other hand, if declarer can coup partner if she guesses his shape, I need to do what I can to obscure the count.

I can't work through the play trick by trick, since I'm not sure of declarer's minor-suit shape. But perhaps I don't need to. Whatever her shape, her general plan will be to cash winners, then ruff something to her hand to reduce her trump holding. At trick 11, she will be down to two trumps and some minor-suit card. She will need to lead that card to dummy to coup partner. But partner will be down to two trumps and a spade. Whichever suit declarer tries to use to reach dummy partner will be able to ruff. As long as partner doesn't ruff prematurely, declarer can't make this.

This wouldn't be true if partner had taken his trump ace on the previous trick. Declarer would be able to use the trump king for her entry to dummy at trick 11. Nice duck, partner. Since no deception is necessary, I play the club deuce.

As expected, partner plays the spade king--nine--four--heart four. Declarer plays the eight of clubs--six--king--ten. Then the club three--five--jack--four. The fact that declarer isn't drawing trumps suggests partner indeed has ten doubleton left. Declarer now plays the diamond jack--nine--seven. I take my ace. We have reached this position:

	NORTH Kate ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ K Q 3 ♣ A Q
WEST Phillip ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ 8 6 2 ♣ 9 7		EAST Jack ♠ Q J ♥ 10 x ♦ x ♣ --
	SOUTH Stella ♠ -- ♥ J 9 x ♦ 10 x ♣ --

In theory, it doesn't matter what I return. But a diamond requires less alertness from partner. If I play a club, partner must discard a diamond. If I play a diamond, all he has to do is follow suit. I play the diamond deuce--queen--four--five. Declarer leads the club queen. Partner pitches the spade jack. Declarer ruffs and plays a diamond to dummy, which partner ruffs. Down one.

	NORTH Kate ♠ A 7 ♥ K Q 4 ♦ K Q J 3 ♣ A Q J 8
WEST Phillip ♠ 5 4 2 ♥ 2 ♦ A 8 6 2 ♣ 10 9 7 5 2		EAST Jack ♠ K Q J 10 6 ♥ A 10 6 5 ♦ 9 4 ♣ 6 4
	SOUTH Stella ♠ 9 8 3 ♥ J 9 8 7 3 ♦ 10 7 5 ♣ K 3

Partner made a nice play ducking the heart ace. But, given the fact declarer had a road map, she still should have made it. When the heart queen holds, she should lead the diamond king. We can no longer stop the trump coup, because declarer no longer needs to reach dummy at trick eleven. She and partner will each be down to three trumps in the end position, so she can simply lead a trump to dummy's king and endplay partner.

To have a chance to beat this, we must go after a diamond ruff, which means I must duck the diamond to preserve communication. Declarer then plays three rounds of clubs. Partner can't afford to let declarer pitch a diamond or he will lose his ruff. Therefore, he must ruff the club. Declarer overruffs, ruffs a spade to dummy, and plays the fourth round of clubs. If partner ruffs this, he has no low trumps left to ruff a diamond with. If he doesn't, declarer pitches a diamond and loses only the two red aces.

Partner could have beat this by force by shifting to a diamond at trick two, provided I duck. The difference is that partner now has three low hearts instead of just two. So he can ruff both clubs to stop the diamond pitch and still have a low trump left to ruff a diamond with when he gets in with the heart ace.

Should I find the duck if partner shifts to a diamond, or should I win the trick, playing him for a singleton? With a singleton, partner can force me to do the right thing by cashing the heart ace before shifting. If he doesn't cash the ace, I can duck with confidence playing opposite a reliable partner. Of course, this inference isn't valid playing with Jack. But ducking is still the percentage play. Declarer must have the club king. Her minor-suit spot-card distribution is much more likely to be three-one than to be four-zero.

Should partner have found the diamond shift? I don't know. It's hard to work out at trick two that there's no way to stop the trump coup. Better simply not to double. We needn't defend so perfectly if declarer doesn't know trumps aren't breaking.

I know some of you are thinking that I have no right to complain about the double after I opened one diamond. But I don't agree. It would be a different matter if the opponents had competed to four hearts over three spades. But they didn't. They bid this game on their own steam. What difference would it make if I had a full opening bid? The more high cards I have, the more shape they must have. You don't double a voluntarily bid game because you think the opponents have miscounted their high-card points. You double because you know something the they don't know and that you don't mind telling them. Ace-ten fourth of trumps may meet the first criterion, but it doesn't meet the second.

If you want to lay responsibility for partner's double on me, you will have a better chance convincing me if you place the blame on my second "psyche": the failure to make a support double. Since I would probably act over two hearts with ten cards in the minors, my failure to double strongly suggests that I have two hearts, which means the opponents are in a four-three fit. In that case, with ace-ten fourth of hearts and a ready-make tap suit, partner has reason to believe we are beating four hearts several tricks. (Just to be clear, I'm not saying I should make a support double, just that the failure to do so had unexpected consequences.)

It didn't occur to me until now. But I wonder if that's why partner returned a spade at trick two. If I couldn't have three spades, the deuce had to be a singleton. Not only did my failure to double two hearts trick partner into doubling the final contract, it tricked him into misdefending. Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

Our opponents did not double four hearts at the other table, so we pick up 2 imps.

Table 1: +100
Table 2: -50

Result on Board 1: +2 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 8

2011-09-25T23:00:00.000-04:00

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ A Q 8 6♥ A 10 7 5 3♦ Q 10 3♣ 4

LHO opens one diamond, partner overcall two clubs, and RHO passes.

I bid two hearts. This isn't forcing, which is fine with me. I doubt we can make a game unless partner can raise hearts or bid two notrump. Everyone passes, and LHO leads the ace of diamonds, which could be from ace-king.

	NORTH Jack ♠ 10 5 4 ♥ K 8 ♦ 6 4 ♣ A K J 9 8 3

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q 8 6 ♥ A 10 7 5 3 ♦ Q 10 3 ♣ 4

West	North	East	South
Sophie	Jack	Jacinta	Phillip
1 ♦	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♥
(All pass)

East plays the diamond nine. I play the ten, the card I'm known to hold. West continues with the king of diamonds. East plays the five, and I play the three. East should have a doubleton and West should know this. With a potential overruff available, East should not encourage with queen third, tempting West to offer me a ruff-sluff. This is just the kind of thing Jack has trouble with, however. East probably would encourage with queen third, and West knows this. So she has a problem. She shifts to the deuce of spades. I'm quite happy to see that shift. My odds of making this contract have just gone up.

I play low from dummy, and East plays the king. With king-jack-nine, East would play the nine, since playing the king makes it impossible for her to play the suit again. This means West's spade is not a singleton. East might play the jack from king-jack-empty as a discovery play, but that's less clear. This discovery play is fine if you are the one to gain the lead next. But it can make things harder for partner if he gains the lead before you do. Thus the jack is not automatic from king-jack. You must weigh the pros and cons in context. (I have assumed, by the way, that East needn't worry that West has underled the ace. In this particular case--given the auction and given that dummy holds the ten--I can't imagine why she would do that.)

If hearts are four-two or better, I've made this. I can discard one spade on the club king, losing at most two hearts, two diamonds, and a spade. So my problem is how to make this if East has five hearts. Say I play a heart to the king, a heart off dummy, and East, with queen-jack-nine fifth, spits her honors. I take the ace, and West shows out. The diamond queen isn't going to cash. But the spade queen will cash. And two clubs will cash (else East would be 1-1-6-5, violating my assumption that she doesn't have a singleton spade). So I need to take two more trump tricks with my ten-seven-five. That's easy enough: I ruff a club and exit, waiting to score my trump ten. An uppercut on the third round of clubs would not hurt.

If West plays a heart honor on the first round of hearts, I can play a heart back to my ace and reach the same position. The problem occurs when everyone plays low to the first round and a half of hearts. If that happens, can I afford to let dummy's eight of hearts ride to guard against a five-one split? I can afford to lose two trump tricks, but I can't afford to lose three. If West wins the trick and gives her partner a diamond ruff, I need to be able to draw the one outstanding trump. But can I? What if West has a singleton club? After the diamond ruff, East returns a club to kill my dummy entry. Now I have to guess West's shape. If she is 3-3-6-1, I must play a spade to my ace, draw her trump, and play another spade. If she is 4-2-6-1, I must cash the club king while I'm in dummy.

Is there a line that works opposite either a singleton heart or a singleton club on my left? So far, West has shown up with ace-king-jack of diamonds and possibly the spade jack. If she doesn't have a heart honor, she must have the club queen for her opening bid. Perhaps I don't need to let the heart eight ride. If I play a heart to my ace and West shows out, I have three trump losers. But if West has the club queen, that's OK. I can finesse the club jack and pitch both small spades.

I play the three of hearts--deuce--king--four. then the eight of hearts to my ace. East plays the six; West, the queen.

I've made my contract. The only question now is whether I can manage an overtrick. One possiblilty is that hearts are three-three. I play the ten of hearts (more deceptive than a low heart), pitching a club from dummy to retain the spade tenace in case East has the jack. West pitches the deuce of diamonds. East wins with the jack of hearts and cashes the nine, on which West pitches the seven of diamonds.

East now exits with the nine of spades. A low spade might give me something to think about. She is down to all black cards, so she could conceivably be endplayed. But I decided at trick three she couldn't have king-jack-nine of spades. I hop with the spade queen and cash all my red cards. I know West began with at most two clubs, so this isn't really a squeeze. But it's almost as much fun. It turns out East has the club queen, so I make only two.

	NORTH Jack ♠ 10 5 4 ♥ K 8 ♦ 6 4 ♣ A K J 9 8 3
WEST Sophie ♠ J 7 2 ♥ Q 2 ♦ A K J 8 7 2 ♣ 7 2		EAST Jacinta ♠ K 9 3 ♥ J 9 6 4 ♦ 9 5 ♣ Q 10 6 5
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q 8 6 ♥ A 10 7 5 3 ♦ Q 10 3 ♣ 4

We played the wrong seven-card major-suit fit. I should be able to take nine tricks in spades. As is often the case, the four-three fit plays better than the five-two fit, because you have more flexibility. Say West starts with three rounds of diamonds. I pitch a club from dummy, and East ruffs. She switches to the nine of spades. If I duck it, I don't think I can make three any more. But suppose I play the queen. It holds, and I cash the ace. West has the spade jack left, but that's all the defense can get. I play the ace and king of clubs, ruff a club, heart to the king, ruff a club, and cash the heart ace. If West ruffs (or overruffs) at any point, dummy will be high. If she doesn't, I'll score the spade ten en passant for the ninth trick. If the defense gets off to a different start (say, a club shift at trick two), I can pitch a diamond on the club king and start crossruffing. The defense can never do better than two diamond tricks and two trump tricks.

Our teammates played two diamonds, down two. How did that happen? It's hard to see how it's possible to sell to two diamonds after a one diamond opening. Maybe our teammate opened a hefty weak two-bid. Anyway, the board is a push. We win our first match 26 imps to 13, netting 19 out of a possible 30 victory points. This puts us in a three-way tie for first place.

Table 1: +110
Table 2: -100

Result on Board 8: 0 imps
Total: +13 imps (19 VP)

Our opponents for the next match are Stella and Kate. (Interesting. Those happen to be the names of two of my ex-partners.) They play Majeure Cinquieme. Wish me bonne chance.

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 7

2011-09-18T21:12:00.000-04:00

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ K 10 7♥ A Q J 9♦ A K 6 4♣ 9 2

I bid one heart. This is a good hand for four-card majors. With a side suit like ace-king fourth, a four-three heart fit might easily be the right strain, and it may be hard to investigate without opening one heart. LHO doubles, partner passes, and RHO bids one spade. A bid of one notrump opposite a passing partner should show better than a strong notrump, and doubling without spade shortness is unthinkable. So I pass. If LHO passes as well, partner should suspect I have a strong notrump with three or more spades. (Not that my pass shows that. But my pass combined with the opponents' unwillingness to bid past the one level makes that my likeliest hand.) LHO bids two spades, which ends the auction.

Maybe this wasn't such a good hand for the system after all. A one notump opening might have shut the opponents out.

It's going to be hard to beat this without taking two heart tricks. But, since partner didn't raise hearts, there is a fair chance I have them. The likeliest heart split is 3-2-4 (in that order). That gives LHO a 4-3-3-3 pattern and RHO perhaps a 4-4-2-3 pattern. If my king-ten third of spades is worth a trick, I have book in hand and need to find only one trick from partner to beat this. Even the spade nine in partner's hand may be enough to give declarer a problem.

Should I start hearts right away to threaten a fourth-round overruff by partner? I might regret leading a heart if declarer has the king. (Although that's not necessarily true. I might find myself getting endplayed anyway.) I could postpone my decision by leading a high diamond. But that could work out badly also. Declarer probably wants to set up dummy's diamond queen for a discard and may be short of entries to her hand. Leading diamonds may just be doing her work for her. In addition, failure to lead a high diamond may get declarer to misplace the high cards. She may waste a hand entry taking a losing club finesse.

I have no real confidence in this decision. If a heart lead is wrong, it may be hard to justify in the post-mortem. Partners tend not to understand when you have an ace-king and lead something else. But it feels right, and Jack doesn't yell much. So I lead the heart ace.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ J 9 8 6 ♥ K 7 6 ♦ Q 7 ♣ A K J 3
WEST Phillip ♠ K 10 7 ♥ A Q J 9 ♦ A K 6 4 ♣ 9 2

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Sophie	Jack	Jacinta
1 ♥	Double	Pass	1 ♠
Pass	2 ♠	(All pass)

What kind of dummy is that? I don't care for either of North's calls. The hand is not good enough for an offshape double or for a raise to two spades.

Dummy plays the six; partner, the deuce; and declarer, the three. The deuce is attitude. Since I already know partner's attitude, it's not very informative. I continue with the heart queen--king--five--four. Partner's five should be present count, so he should be out of hearts now. Jack is rather inconsistent about present count, however. Most of the time--though, curiously, not always--he seems to play up-the-line after the initial signal.

Declarer plays the club three--four--queen. If partner's four is honest, declarer rates to be 4-4-3-2. She seems to want to pitch her fourth heart before touching trumps. But what's the point of that? I must be wrong about her shape. Maybe she's 4-3-4-2 and wants to pitch her only heart before touching trumps. That makes more sense. I guess partner decided not to give count in hearts this time. I play the club deuce. (No reason to advertise my doubleton. Partner will find out my count soon enough.) Declarer plays the seven of clubs--nine--jack--five, then the club king--six--heart eight. I ruff with the spade seven.

It's hard to see where the setting trick is coming from unless partner has a trump trick. If he has the spade ace, I have nothing to worry about. Is there any way to exploit the spade queen in partner's hand? Maybe I can get declarer to play me for a stiff ten of spades. Perhaps I can entice her to lead the spade jack from dummy in a position where I can win the king and give partner a ruff with the queen. What if I lead ace-king and a third diamond, ignoring the temptation to try to cash my heart? If declarer thinks I have

♠ 10 7♥ A Q J 10 9♦ A K x x♣ x x

then she will lead the spade jack. I can then win with my king and lead a fourth diamond for partner to overruff.

Can it ever cost to try this? How about if the heart is actually cashing and I have to ruff the fourth club with a natural spade trick? That gives declarer

♠ A Q x x ♥ x x x x ♦ x x x ♣ Q x

which is inconsistent with both the auction and the play. I play the king of diamonds--seven--deuce--five. Partner's deuce should be telling me that he is out of hearts. But Jack's attitude signals are not that sophisticated. He is probably just telling me he doesn't have the diamond jack. I play the ace of diamonds--queen--three--nine. The three should show three diamonds remaining. But I don't believe it. I think partner's just not in the mood for present count today. I play the diamond six. Dummy ruffs with the spade six. Partner follows with the eight; declarer, with the ten. Not that it would have mattered, but declarer should have played the jack, the card she was known to hold (assuming partner's diamond deuce was intended to deny that card).

This ploy might actually work. If declarer is missing the spade queen and thinks I am 2-5-4-2, leading the spade jack is the right play. A singleton king or queen in my hand does her no good, so she might as well play me for a stiff ten.

Declarer plays the heart seven and ruffs it with the spade deuce as partner follows with the heart ten. Ah! If partner follows, she knows I'm 3-4-4-2, and she can play ace and another spade. If he doesn't follow, she can still choose to play me for a stiff ten of spades by leading a low spade to the ten and jack. Partner wins and must either lead a spade for her or put her in dummy with a club. Nice discovery play, Jacinta. I didn't think of that.

Declarer now leads the spade three. Partner must have the space ace, since this play makes no sense of declarer has it. I might as well duck in case it's singleton, although I don't think that's likely. Even if partner does have queen doubleton of spades, I have no need to give him an overruff in diamonds. He can give me an overruff in clubs instead. I play the ten--jack--ace. Partner returns a club. I ruff with the spade king and concede the balance. Down one.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ J 9 8 6 ♥ K 7 6 ♦ Q 7 ♣ A K J 3
WEST Phillip ♠ K 10 7 ♥ A Q J 9 ♦ A K 6 4 ♣ 9 2		EAST Jack ♠ A 5 ♥ 10 5 2 ♦ 8 3 2 ♣ 10 8 6 5 4
	SOUTH Jacinta ♠ Q 4 3 2 ♥ 8 4 3 ♦ J 10 9 5 ♣ Q 7

At the other table, our opponents play one notrump, making two. So we lose one imp. It does seem our teammates dropped a trick, doesn't it? The king of clubs lead and a spade shift seems like a normal start. How will declarer find an eighth trick now?

Table 1: +100
Table 2: -120

Result on Board 7: -1 imp
Total: +13 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 6

2011-09-11T22:22:00.000-04:00

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 10 2♥ Q 7 5♦ J 7 5♣ A 10 9 8

RHO passes, I pass, and LHO opens with a Polish club (showing either a weak notrump, a natural one club opening, or at least 18 high-card points). Partner overcalls with one heart, and RHO bids three clubs, which is explained as showing 10 to 12 points and five or more clubs. I've never played Polish club, but I don't see how that treatment makes sense. Isn't partner's likeliest hand a weak notrump?

Given the opponents could be in a silly spot, I see no reason to stretch with three hearts. If we have a game, I'll hear from partner again. And I suspect we have a better shot at a plus score defending three clubs than declaring three hearts. Of course, I may regret not raising hearts if LHO bids three notrump and partner chooses to lead something else.

I pass, LHO bids three notrump--pass--pass to me. Exactly the auction I was worried about. Should I double to make sure partner leads a heart? I do have a double stopper in dummy's long suit. But for all I know they can take nine tricks outside the club suit. Or perhaps they can even afford to lose two club tricks if partner doesn't have a side entry. For that matter, why am I even so sure I want him to lead a heart? If he has, say, ace-jack-ten fifth of hearts and out, a heart might be the only lead to let them make it.

All in all, doubling seems like a bad idea. I pass, and partner leads the king of spades.

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 3 ♥ K ♦ 10 9 8 6 ♣ K Q 7 4 2
		EAST Phillip ♠ J 10 2 ♥ Q 7 5 ♦ J 7 5 ♣ A 10 9 8

West	North	East	South
Jack	Jacinta	Phillip	Sophie
	Pass	Pass	1 ♣¹
1 ♥	3 ♣	Pass	3 NT
(All pass)
¹Polish Club

Since declarer appears not to have a natural one club opening (and can hardly have a weak notrump), she must have at least 18 high-card points, which leaves partner with at most six. If I credit partner with the king-queen of spades and a side jack, how many tricks does that give declarer? Four diamonds (I hope only four), two hearts, and one spade. All she needs is two club tricks, so I have to hope partner's jack is the club jack.

Dummy plays the three of spades. The fact that partner led the spade king without the jack or ten suggests he is leading a short suit, hoping to find me with length. If so, I don't like our chances, so I might as well assume that's not the case. Perhaps partner decided to lead the king rather than low from king-queen-nine fourth. I play the jack, and declarer wins with the ace. That's a surprise. Why isn't she ducking this trick?

Before I turn my card over, I need to figure that out. Any time declarer does something unexpected, it's time to stop and think. Often, there is only one explanation for declarer's play, and if you take the time to work out what it is, you will be double-dummy from that point on.

The usual reason for spurning a duck at trick one is that you are afraid of a shift. What shift could that be? Perhaps she is afraid of a heart shift, which would kill the entry to dummy's clubs. Maybe she has this hand:

♠ A x x♥ A J x x♦ A K Q x♣ x x

She intends to play partner for the club ace, taking a spade, two hearts, four diamonds, and two clubs. But a heart shift at trick two might kill the only entry to the second club. (She might have a diamond entry. But not if I have jack fourth of diamonds.) Whether this is the right line or not doesn't concern me, since I'm not declaring. But it's certainly a reasonable line. And it's the only explanation I can think of for winning the first trick. This construction does give partner a rather questionable one heart overcall:

♠ K Q 9 x♥ x x x x x♦ x x♣ J x

That looks more like a one spade overcall to me. But it wouldn't be the first time I disapproved of Jack's bidding.

Now that I know declarer's plan, I know what to do. When she leads a club to dummy's king, I'm going to duck. We don't have enough cashable tricks to beat this, and I have nothing constructive to do with the tempo. So there is nothing to gain by winning the trick. Declarer will then play a diamond to her hand and a club to the queen, allowing us to cash three clubs and three spades for down two. Come to think of it, this beats it one even if partner did lead a three-card spade suit. I guess it was pre-mature to give up on that layout. OK. I'm ready. I turn my jack of spades over.

Declarer plays the diamond queen, Why cash a diamond? Is she unblocking with ace-king-queen tight? No. Partner plays the four, which must be from four-three or four-deuce doubleton. I play the diamond seven, following the routine procedure of giving false count when holding the jack. (It's hard to see how it will matter here. But it pays to be consistent. In my opinion, partner is entitled to assume I don't have the jack if I give correct count.)

Declarer plays the five of clubs--three--queen. I duck as planned. Since I want declarer to think partner has the club ace, I play the eight of clubs, as I would if I had ten-nine-eight.

Declarer plays a diamond to her ace. I play the five and partner follows with the deuce. I expect another club, but declarer cashes the king of diamonds, on which partner discards the heart deuce. What's this? Declarer is now out of entries to her hand and hearts are still blocked. What's she up to? Time to pause and take stock again.

If declarer is stranding her heart ace, she must be intending to force us to play hearts for her. It appears she is abandoning the idea of playing for the club ace onside (And I thought I ducked smoothly!) Instead, she is playing me for the heart queen (or no spade entry, which seems wildly unlikely given my play at trick one). She is going to cash diamonds, cash the heart king, and play a spade. If partner began with a singleton club or with ace doubleton, then there is no way for us to avoid handing declarer her ninth trick. Say, for example, that partner began with a singleton club. Then this will be the position in the endgame:

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ K 7 4 2
WEST Jack ♠ Q 9 x ♥ x x x ♦ -- ♣ --		EAST Phillip ♠ 10 2 ♥ Q ♦ -- ♣ A J 10
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ x x ♥ A J x ♦ -- ♣ x

When declarer leads a spade from dummy, there is no way for us to avoid giving her a club trick or an extra heart trick. She will end up taking two hearts or a heart and a club whatever we do. Pretty clever, that Sophie.

Except it isn't going to work, because partner has another club, and it's the jack, not the ace. So this will be the end position

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ K 7 4 2
WEST Jack ♠ Q 9 x ♥ x x ♦ -- ♣ J		EAST Phillip ♠ 10 2 ♥ Q ♦ -- ♣ A 10 9
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ x x ♥ A J x ♦ -- ♣ x

When declarer plays a spade, partner will cash his spades, and I will pitch my queen of hearts. When partner plays the club jack, declarer will duck. But I will overtake and return a club to dummy's king, establishing my club nine as the setting trick.

Declarer's line fails because the heart ace is stranded. Could she have made this by not cashing the third diamond, retaining communication to her hand? We would reach this position:

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 ♥ -- ♦ 10 9 ♣ K 7 4 2
WEST Jack ♠ Q 9 x ♥ x x x x ♦ -- ♣ J		EAST Phillip ♠ 10 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ J ♣ A 10 9
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ x x ♥ A J x ♦ K x ♣ x

When declarer plays a spade from dummy, I duck it to partner's nine. Partner switches to the club jack, which declarer and I must duck. Partner can't afford to cash the spades now, as he will have only hearts left. So he leads a low spade to my ten, and I exit with the jack of diamonds. Declarer can't take a ninth trick.

So declarer must cash three diamonds to strip me of my exit. But she must also retain a fourth-round diamond entry to her to hand to avoid stranding the heart ace. The way to do that is to take a finesse against my jack of diamonds. When she played the eight of diamonds from dummy, she needed to let it ride. She could then play a diamond to ace, a heart to the king, and a spade. There is no longer any defense. What a great hand!

Back to the actual problem. In case you've lost track, this is where we are, with declarer on lead:

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 ♥ K ♦ 10 ♣ K 7 4 2
		EAST Phillip ♠ 10 2 ♥ Q 7 5 ♦ -- ♣ A 10 9

Declarer plays a diamond to dummy, and partner discards a second heart, the three. I need all my black cards, so I pitch the five of hearts. Declarer cashes the heart king--seven--six--nine. The nine? That's an unexpected card. It must be present count from four remaining, so partner began with six hearts. But the nine can't be his highest card, so he must have begun with jack-nine sixth. My whole construction is wrong. Partner is 3-6-2-2, making declarer 4-3-4-2. Furthermore, declarer has only a 17-count:

♠ A x x x♥ A 10 x♦ A K Q x♣ x x

That's a pretty good 17-count, though. Perhaps she upgraded it. And it does give partner a less questionable one heart overcall. (Though Adam Meredith might still overcall one spade.)

Declarer leads the five of spades from dummy. I hop with ten. Declarer plays the four, and partner plays the nine. Yes. That confirms it. Partner is indeed 3-6-2-2. He wouldn't play the nine of spades with queen-nine-small left. Instead of playing a spade as I intended, I must play the heart queen, establishing partner's hearts before declarer can set up her long spade.

It is strange, however, that declarer made no attempt to make this contract. She could have played partner for the club ace (which wouldn't work) or she could have played for three-three spades (which would). The line of play she chose makes no sense at all unless she has the heart jack. I'm inclined to think partner miscarded, dropping the nine instead of the ten from ten-nine fourth remaining. Still, it can't be right to play a spade, since I'm 100% sure about the count. As weird as it is to signal with the nine while holding the ten, it's even weirder to give false count in hearts, then drop the spade nine under my ten for no reason.

I play the queen of hearts. Declarer wins with the ace, then cashes the jack of hearts. Oh, well. I pitch a club. Declarer plays a club to the jack, king, and my ace. Partner has a high heart and a high spade left. I'm not about to cash my last club and give him a chance to pitch the wrong thing. I play the spade deuce, and partner claims.

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ 8 5 3 ♥ K ♦ 10 9 8 6 ♣ K Q 7 4 2
WEST Jack ♠ K Q 9 ♥ 10 9 8 4 3 2 ♦ 4 2 ♣ J 3		EAST Phillip ♠ J 10 2 ♥ Q 7 5 ♦ J 7 5 ♣ A 10 9 8
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ A 7 6 4 ♥ A J 6 ♦ A K Q 3 ♣ 6 5

We were never beating this. But partner's nine of hearts could have caused an accident. Any card intended as high should deny the touching higher card. It's important to be disciplined about that, so that any deviation can be safely interpreted as some kind of alarm-clock signal.

Did I err in ducking the club? If declarer was 3-4-4-2 as I was assuming, I allowed her to make it, albeit by a line few declarers would find. Had I taken the club ace and returned a club, nothing bad could happen. (Taking the club ace and playing a spade works as well provided partner plays a club after cashing spades to get me off the club-heart squeeze. It's better if I play clubs myself to take the pressure off partner.) On the other hand, ducking and hoping declarer would play partner for the club ace was my only shot to beat it on the actual layout. I suspect ducking was the right play, but I still have to give myself a charge for not appreciating the risk I was taking.

Might declarer find the winning line with 3-4-4-2? Perhaps. If she is confident for whatever reason that I ducked the club ace, what else is there to do but try for an endplay? But to execute the endplay, she must guess diamonds. If partner is three-one in the minors, she must cash the top diamonds. If partner is two-two in the minors with both jacks, she must cash two diamonds and play the third diamond to dummy. And if partner is two-two with only the club jack, she must finesse against my diamond jack. Note that, as the cards lie, if the defense can be counted on to give honest count but do not play mandatory false cards with the jack, declarer can work out the lie of the diamonds. West plays the diamond four on the first trick; East plays five-seven. West must have the deuce and East must the jack. But if they do play mandatory false cards with the jack, South can't read the position. West plays the diamond four; East plays seven-five. She knows one defender gave correct count with two small and the other gave false count with jack third. But there is no way to know which defender is which. This is the principle behind the mandatory false card. It allows you to give honest count to partner without revealing the count to declarer. But I've never seen it work in quite this way before.

Our teammates also made three notrump, so the board is a push. A classic Gargoyle Chronicles deal! Lots of things to discuss. But the board is a push and every decision I made proved to be immaterial.

Table 1: -600
Table 2: +600

Result on Board 6: 0 imps
Total: +14 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 5

2011-09-05T00:25:00.000-04:00

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ K 7 6 ♥ Q 9 8 3 ♦ K 10 4 ♣ Q 5 4

RHO opens one notrump (15-17) in second seat. LHO bids two hearts, a transfer to spades. RHO bids two spades, which ends the auction.

With nothing much to go on, I lead the eight of hearts, choosing my longest suit.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ 10 9 4 3 2 ♥ K 10 5 ♦ 8 6 ♣ 10 9 6
WEST Phillip ♠ K 7 6 ♥ Q 9 8 3 ♦ K 10 4 ♣ Q 5 4

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Sophie	Jack	Jacinta
		Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♥¹	Pass	2 ♠
(All pass)
¹Jacoby-transfer

Partner has from 10 to 12 high-card points. Make that 10 to 11, since he's a passed hand. It's inconceivable he didn't balance with a singleton spade. So declarer has at most three spades.

Dummy plays the heart ten, partner plays the jack, and declarer follows with the seven. Partner switches to the ace of clubs. With ace-jack doubleton of hearts, partner would cash the ace and try for a heart ruff. With ace-jack fourth, partner might worry that declarer can ruff a heart and might switch to a trump. (He can't be sure I have four hearts, but it's likely, since queen-nine-eight third is a rather unattractive lead.) I am going to assume, therefore, that hearts are three-three, although I can hardly be certain about that just yet. Partner might have reasons I don't know about to prefer a club switch to a trump switch.

Why is partner leading the club ace rather than a low one? Perhaps he has ace doubleton and is looking for a ruff. Or perhaps he has the jack and sees no gain in leading low. Perhaps he would prefer to retain the option of switching plans if, say, declarer dropped an honor under the ace. Leading the ace from length without the jack would be dangerous, since it could cost a trick if I had queen doubleton or queen-jack doubleton. (Not to mention taking declarer off a potential guess, although that's something Jack wouldn't worry about.)

Declarer plays the eight. Do I want partner to continue clubs or to switch to diamond? Say partner plays a club and declarer hops with the king and plays another one to my queen. Partner still has the ace of hearts as an entry to put a diamond through. And I have a spade entry to cash it. So we won't lose my king of diamonds. If partner switches to a diamond, however, and if declarer has ace-queen-jack, there may be no way for us to stop my club trick from disappearing. Accordingly, I encourage with the five.

Partner continues with the seven of clubs, and declarer wins with the king. If the seven is an honest card, partner should have either (1) ace-seven doubleton, (2) ace-jack-seven, or (3) ace-jack-seven fifth (where the seven is present count). He might also have (4) ace-seven third. As I explained earlier, I'm inclined to think won't have length without the jack. But I will include that holding anyway for the time being. I can always discard that possibility later if it becomes too hard to cater to it. That gives declarer:

(1) ♣ K J 8 3 2

(2) ♣ K 8 3 2

(3) ♣ K 8
(4) ♣ K J 8 x

(2) is impossible. Declarer cannot afford to falsecard the eight with that holding. So I'm left with (1), (3), and (4).

What else do I know? Since partner has shown up with nine high-card points and is a passed hand, he can't have both spade honors. Declarer also knows partner is limited to two additional high-card points. so, from his point of view, I am marked with both the diamond king and spade king.

I follow with the club four. Declarer cashes the spade ace. He needn't bother finessing with ace-queen. But he would probably make a more concerted effort to pick up spades if he had ace-jack. So I am going to assume he has ace-queen, ace-queen-small, or ace-queen-jack.

I play the seven--deuce--five. Declarer now leads the diamond jack. Whoa! What is going on? What's the hurry to play diamonds? For that matter, why play diamonds at all? All our round-suit tricks are ready to cash, so there is nothing to gain by setting up diamond tricks.

I play the king, and partner follows with the deuce, showing an odd number. I should be able to construct declarer's hand now. Declarer must have either

(1) ♠ A Q ♥ x x x ♦ A Q J ♣ K J 8 x x

(3) ♠ A Q ? ♥ x x x ♦ A Q J x x ♣ K 8
(4) ♠ A Q ? ♥ x x x ♦ A Q J ♣ K J 8 x

(1) and (4) are not possible. Declarer has nothing to gain by conceding a diamond with those hands. He would play clubs, intending to pitch a diamond on the club jack and hoping we must ruff with a natural trump trick. Playing on diamonds makes perfect sense with (3), however. Declarer must knock out the diamond before trumps are drawn, else we will be able to cash a club trick. Driving the diamond king allows him to pitch dummy's club if diamonds are three-three, if someone ruffs the third diamond with a natural trump trick, or if we make a mistake on defense. In fact, I suspect I can go even further and assume that the '?' is the jack. If it is the eight, declarer probably would not have cashed the spade ace. Cashing the ace risks allowing us to draw his trumps (heart to the ace and a spade to my putative king-jack) and cash the club.

I play the nine of hearts (the lowest card I can afford, to show an odd number remaining. The queen should show a doubleton.) Declarer plays king from dummy. Partner wins with the ace and returns the deuce to my queen. If my construction is correct, it doesn't matter what I do. So I must assume I'm wrong. It's hard to believe I'm wrong about declarer's having a doubleton club. Abandoning trumps to establish diamonds is simply pointless otherwise. But I might be wrong about the spade jack. If partner has it and I continue a club, declarer will ruff and play the spade queen, smothering the jack. If I play a diamond, allowing declarer to pitch his club loser, he must play trumps out of his hand and might misguess.

Of course, a human expert could not possibly misguess. If I had king doubleton, I could take two trump tricks by force by tapping him. So, against a human, I would play a club anyway. Even though I'm fairly sure it's not cashing, there's nothing else worth trying. Jack, however, cannot draw inferences from my defense. So he's perfectly capable of "misguessing" spades. I play the ten of diamonds--eight--seven--ace. Declarer cashes the queen of diamonds, pitching dummy's club, then plays the eight of spades from his hand, which I let ride to partner's jack. Down two.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ 10 9 4 3 2 ♥ K 10 5 ♦ 8 6 ♣ 10 9 6
WEST Phillip ♠ K 7 6 ♥ Q 9 8 3 ♦ K 10 4 ♣ Q 5 4		EAST Jack ♠ J 5 ♥ A J 2 ♦ 9 7 2 ♣ A J 7 3 2
	SOUTH Jacinta ♠ A Q 8 ♥ 7 6 4 ♦ A Q J 5 3 ♣ K 8

My care in going for the extra trick was worthwhile, since our teammates played the same contract, down one. We pick up two imps.

Table 1: +100
Table 2: -50

Result on Board 5: +2 imps
Total: +14 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 4

2011-08-28T23:09:00.000-04:00

Board 4
Both sides vulnerable

♠ J 7 4 2 ♥ A 9 ♦ 7 5 4 ♣ J 8 6 5

Partner opens one diamond, RHO doubles, and I bid one spade. Partner raises to three spades, and RHO bids four hearts. I wasn't bidding if she passed, and I have no surprises on defense. So I pass. Partner goes on to four spades.

I've never cared for auctions like this. As far as I'm concerned, once you've made a limit bid, you're out of the auction unless partner invites you back in. But, putting my personal bias aside for the moment, this bid might be excusable if three spades was based primarily on shape. Perhaps partner is six-four in diamonds and spades. Excusable or not, I still wouldn't do it myself. If partner knows I'm capable of this kind of auction, it puts too much pressure on him to make close penalty doubles. RHO passes, I pass, and LHO bids on to five hearts. Partner doubles.

I suppose I should be grateful for partner's break in discipline on the previous round. But this double makes no sense at all. It's not as if he needs to double to stop me from bidding five spades when I wasn't willing to bid four. So he must be doubling to increase the penalty. If he expects to beat them only one, the imp odds on doubling are rather poor. And if he expects to beat them more than one, why did he sacrifice on the previous round? Unless partner misbid earlier, this double is sheer bravado.

Everyone passes. What should I lead? Partner's likeliest pattern is 4-1-6-2. In general, it's dangerous to lead a weak nine-card fit. If the opponents have bid a lot, the suit rates to be three-one. So, unless there is some urgency to cash your ace, there is probably nothing to gain by leading the suit. And it may help declarer by setting up pitches for him. For example, I might catch dummy with king third and declarer with a singleton queen. Leading a weak eight-card fit is both more likely to be productive (since you are more likely to have tricks to establish in that suit) and, in my experience, tends to be safer as well.

Note this caveat applies only to weak nine card fits. If I had the king or queen of diamonds, I would lead a diamond. With no fillers in diamonds, however, I lead the four of spades.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ 10 9 ♥ 10 7 6 5 4 ♦ 10 6 ♣ K 10 9 4
WEST Phillip ♠ J 7 4 2 ♥ A 9 ♦ 7 5 4 ♣ J 8 6 5

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Sophie	Jack	Jacinta
	Pass	1 ♦	Double
1 ♠	Pass	3 ♠	4 ♥
Pass	Pass	4 ♠	Pass
Pass	5 ♥	Double	(All pass)

It appears partner has a void in hearts. He's probably 4-0-6-3, leaving declarer with 3-6-2-2. Perhaps that explains his four spade bid. Some players advise you to "bid one more than normal" with a void in the opponents' suit. Although that rule seems dangerous to me. Once you internalize it, your idea of "normal" changes, and you wind up with infinite regression problems.

Partner plays the spade king and declarer wins with the ace. So much for spade tricks. It's a good thing I have the spade jack, else my lead might have allowed declarer to pitch one of dummy's diamonds away, which would be quite embarrassing after my lecture about opening leads.

A typical jump raise by opener contains about three and half honor tricks if balanced and about three honor tricks with a shapely hand. (I know it's old fashioned to think in terms of honor tricks instead of high-card points. But I often find honor tricks easier to work with in contructing hands, particularly when you are trying to count tricks on defense.) The king of spades is half an honor trick. Partner should have about two and half left. There are various possiblities. He might have (1) king-queen of diamonds and the ace-queen of clubs, (2) the ace and king of diamonds plus both minor-suit queens, or (3) both minor-suit aces and one of the minor-suit queens. It would be highly optimistic to count on a second-round diamond trick on defense. So, given partner's double, (1) and (2) seem unlikely. If partner has (3), what does that leave declarer?

♠ A Q x ♥ K Q J x x x ♦ K ? ♣ ? x

where one of the question marks is a queen. Personally, I would overcall one heart with that hand rather than double one diamond. But some people think 17 high card points is too much for a simple overcall. Perhaps Jacinta is one of them.

The problem with this construction is that it doesn't matter what I do. We will take our three aces and perhaps partner's club queen. Nothing is going away. For it to matter what I do, I need to credit declarer with one of the aces. I need to consider (1) and (2), even though they each give partner a less attractive double.

If partner has (1), then declarer has,

♠ A Q x ♥ K Q J x x x ♦ A x ♣ x x

If I don't switch to a club on winning the heart ace, declarer can strip the hand and endplay partner.

If partner has (2), declarer has,

♠ A Q x ♥ K Q J x x x ♦ x x ♣ A x

Now switching to a club costs a trick. The diamonds aren't going anywhere, however. Is there anything to gain by not cashing them? Maybe. If declarer happens to have the eight of spades, refusing to cash them gives her the option of trying to make the hand by finessing partner for the spade jack. If she does that, she'll go down two instead of one. So opposite this hand, my best play on winning the heart ace is to return another heart.

Fortunately, partner can help me when I win the heart ace. If he wants a club switch, he will pitch a discouraging diamond.

Declarer leads the deuce of hearts. If I need to switch to a club, I can't afford to duck this. Declarer has no need to play a second heart. She can simply strip the hand and play ace and a diamond. Accordingly, I hop with the heart ace. Partner follows with the three.

So declarer bid this way with a five-card heart suit? That means I get no signal from partner. But it also gives declarer an extra minor-suit card, which means I don't have to worry about case (1). There is no endplay, since declarer either has a third diamond or a third club (in which case a ruff sluff doesn't cost).

Since there is no reason for me to play a club, my choice is between cashing partner's diamonds or going for the sucker play by exiting with a trump. Is there any risk in exiting a trump? Some. If declarer has ace-queen third of clubs, she can finesse me out of my club jack, pitch a diamond from her hand, and make this. But if she has that hand, partner has an inconceivable double of five hearts:

♠ K x x x ♥ x ♦ A K Q x x x ♣ x x

Inconceivable or not, am I willing to bet the contract that partner doesn't have that? And how likely is my ploy to work anyway? For a heart exit to gain, not only must declarer have the spade eight, but she must also play me to be an idiot, failing to cash partner's diamonds for no reason.

On second thought, playing me to be an idiot might not be such a bad idea, because I am an idiot for even thinking about this. We pushed the opponents to the five level, doubled them, and now I'm going to risk letting them make it in search of an extra undertrick? That makes no sense. I play the seven of diamonds. Partner wins with the queen, cashes the ace, then shifts to the six of spades. The six, eh? That means declarer does have the eight. Declarer hops with the queen and claims. Down one.

	NORTH Sophie ♠ 10 9 ♥ 10 7 6 5 4 ♦ 10 6 ♣ K 10 9 4
WEST Phillip ♠ J 7 4 2 ♥ A 9 ♦ 7 5 4 ♣ J 8 6 5		EAST Jack ♠ K 6 5 3 ♥ 3 ♦ A K Q 2 ♣ Q 7 3 2
	SOUTH Jacinta ♠ A Q 8 ♥ K Q J 8 2 ♦ J 9 8 3 ♣ A

Partner bid this way with a 4-1-4-4 pattern? I guess I can't argue. He was right. Four hearts is making, and four spades is a good save. I'm lucky we weren't sitting in opposite seats.

Would the sucker play have worked? One of the nice things about Jack is you don't have to speculate about such matters. You can find out. I replay the deal, exiting with a trump after winning the heart ace. Jacinta indeed takes the spade finesse and goes down two.

As one might expect, however, my "error" did not cost much. Our teammates were allowed to play four hearts, making, so we pick up 13 imps. The extra trick would have been worth an additional two imps, whereas allowing them to score this (were that possible) would have cost 19 imps. Given that risk-reward ratio, I think I did the right thing.

Table 1: +200
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 4: +13 imps
Total: +12 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 3

2011-08-21T23:45:00.000-04:00

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A K J 7 6 2 ♥ 8 ♦ 7 ♣ A J 10 9 5

If I open one spade and partner responds one notrump, I have a problem. This hand isn't good enough to force to game with three clubs, but I could easily miss a game if I rebid only two clubs. Fortunately, I have an Acol two-bid available for precisely this situation I open two spades, partner responds two notrump (negative), and I bid three clubs. Some play this auction as forcing to three spades, but that doesn't make sense to me. Acol two-bids shouldn't have playability in more than two strains, so why do you a need a forcing three club bid? If three clubs doesn't do your hand justice, bid four clubs.

Over three clubs, partner bids three diamonds. Maybe I'm supposed to pass this. But with a sixth spade and a singleton diamond it seems advisable to bid three spades. Partner bids five diamonds. He must have thought three diamonds was forcing. Or maybe he's just mad at me for not passing three diamonds. Given the original negative response, I can't see how we're going to make this. I pass. LHO, agreeing with my assessment, doubles, ending the auction. West leads the king of hearts.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K J 7 6 2 ♥ 8 ♦ 7 ♣ A J 10 9 5

	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ J 10 3 ♦ Q J 10 9 8 5 4 2 ♣ 7 6

West	North	East	South
Jacinta	Phillip	Sophie	Jack
	2 ♠¹	Pass	2 NT²
Pass	3 ♣	Pass	3 ♦
Pass	3 ♠	Pass	5 ♦
Pass	Pass	Double	(All pass)
¹Acol Strong two
²Negative

What was wrong with four diamonds? Was partner really worried that we would make five if I passed? Perhaps I should have passed three diamonds, but it didn't seem like a good idea at the time.

There isn't much to the play. West finds the obvious diamond shift at trick two, and the opponents cash their hearts. We lose three hearts and two diamonds for down three.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K J 7 6 2 ♥ 8 ♦ 7 ♣ A J 10 9 5
WEST Jacinta ♠ 9 5 4 ♥ K Q 9 6 4 2 ♦ K 3 ♣ Q 8		EAST Sophie ♠ Q 10 8 3 ♥ A 7 5 ♦ A 6 ♣ K 4 3 2
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ J 10 3 ♦ Q J 10 9 8 5 4 2 ♣ 7 6

Look at that! The diamond shift wasn't quite so obvious as I thought. Nor is it obvious which diamond to lead. There are plenty of three-card holdings East might have where it would be right to lead the king. Jack third, queen-ten third, and ace-jack third come to mind. I guess Jacinta thought her partner was more likely to hold a singleton than to hold three.

Can the opponents make anything? Four hearts goes down on a ruff, but they can make three notrump. In fact, they can make four notrump. So, technically, five diamonds doubled is par. I'll have to point that out when our teammates complain about our result. Actually, this result might not look so bad to them. We benefited from the pre-emptive effect of the Acol two-bid. After a one spade opening, East-West will probably reach four hearts. And, while it does go down, it may be hard for South to sell out. So, even though we should have played four diamonds at our table (or maybe even three), five diamonds doubled is probably a fairly normal result.

When we compare, we discover our teammates defended four spades undoubled, down two. There is no way to find out from Jack what the auction was at the other table, but they must have had some auction that, like ours, prevented West from sticking in a heart overcall. If West bids, surely East, looking at five potential defensive tricks in his own hand and the high probability that his side can make a game, will double four spades.

Maybe North opened four spades. That's about the only way I can imagine his playing there without being doubled. It's also the only way I can imagine his getting out for down two. If West bids hearts, East will lead the heart ace, and declarer will finish down three. After a four-spade opening, however, East will probably lead a club.

Table 1: -500
Table 2: +100

Result on Board 3: -9 imps
Total: -1 imp

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 2

2011-08-15T09:10:00.000-04:00

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ Q 6 5 ♥ 9 ♦ Q J 9 8 3 ♣ Q 8 7 3

RHO opens with a Polish club, showing, as I understand it, either a weak notrump or a normal one club opening or a good hand. Such an ambiguous call screams for me to act, but no bid appeals, especially at this vulnerability. I pass. LHO responds one heart (natural). Partner passes, and RHO bids two diamonds (artificial), showing a game force with at least three hearts. I double. This might not be such a good idea. With queens in the other two suits, I might regret talking partner out of his normal lead. But I hate going through an entire auction without bidding or doubling something.

LHO bids three notrump. This should be mildly slammish. Even if you generally play fast arrival (which I don't), fast arrival should not apply here. Two notrump can't promise slam interest, because it's needed to allow further exploration for the right strain. Thus, if one doesn't play three notrump as slammish, one has no unambiguous way to show extras without bidding past game. But who knows what Jack thinks? Everyone passes three notrump, and partner leads the deuce of diamonds.

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ A 7 3 ♥ A 7 2 ♦ A 6 ♣ A K 6 4 2
		EAST Phillip ♠ Q 6 5 ♥ 9 ♦ Q J 9 8 3 ♣ Q 8 7 3

West	North	East	South
Jack	Jacinta	Phillip	Sophie
	1 ♣¹	Pass	1 ♥
Pass	2 ♦²	Double	3 NT
(All pass)
¹Polish Club
²Relay. At least threecard support and strong.

Presumably declarer has the diamond king. As I understand Jack's leads, partner would lead high from three small. So he has either ten third or four small diamonds. (I guess he could have a singleton, too. But, in that case, we might be defending two diamonds redoubled.) Declarer plays low from dummy. It crosses my mind to make a discovery play of the eight. If I'm right that partner can't have three small, the eight can't hurt. And if declarer wins with the ten, I will know right away that partner has four diamonds.

It crosses my mind, but I'm not going to do it. Perhaps it comes from playing with Lowenthal. But I prefer to give partner more leeway on opening lead than that. Not to mention how silly I'd feel if Sophie had brazenly bid three notrump with ten third. I play the jack, and declarer wins with the king. Declarer plays the three of hearts to dummy's ace. Partner plays the four. It appears declarer has four hearts and partner has five. Declarer continues with the deuce of hearts from dummy. It probably can't hurt to pitch a spade. I surely can't afford a club, and I may need the long diamond trick. So I pitch the five of spades. Declarer wins with the queen, and partner follows with the six. Jack plays up the line after his initial count signal, so declarer must have the five of hearts, presumably king-queen-five-three. Now I know enough about the hand to start counting tricks. Declarer has one spade, three hearts, two clubs, and two diamonds. I must assume partner has the spade king, else declarer has nine tricks.

Declarer plays the five of clubs--ten--king. Partner should have either a singleton ten or ten-nine. The eight and seven are too important to part with, so I play the three. Declarer plays the seven of hearts. If declarer had jack-nine of clubs remaining, she would have played a low club from dummy, establishing her ninth trick, so clubs must be two-two. That makes declarer 4-4-3-2. After this trick, declarer will be out of entries to her hand, so I needn't worry about holding on to diamond winners. As long as we prevent declarer from developing a trick in the black suits, she's going down. I can't afford another spade, since that will give declarer a trick if she has jack-ten. I pitch the nine of diamonds. Declarer wins with the king, and partner plays the ten. The ten? What happened to playing up the line?

Declarer plays the five of hearts, and partner pitches the four of diamonds. I see. Declarer has six hearts. Time to reevaluate. Declarer has eleven cashing tricks, twelve if she has the spade king. Our objective now is to stop the overtricks. It would simplify my analysis to know if declarer had the spade king or not. Do I have any clues? The play is more consistent with having twelve cashing tricks than with having eleven. With eleven cashing tricks, the normal procedure is to duck a trick to set up a potential squeeze. So I would expect declarer to duck a club. In addition to setting up a possible squeeze, this would offer her the chance of finding three-three clubs. The fact that declarer isn't ducking a club suggests she has twelve cashing tricks and is trying to take thirteen. It also means that my inference above about two-two clubs was wrong. The reason declarer didn't duck a club was that she doesn't intend to lose any more tricks.

On the other hand, the spade king gives her an awfully good hand. King-queen-jack-ten sixth of hearts and two kings? Six playing tricks opposite a hand willing to force to game opposite a simple response? Surely she would have made a more serious slam move with that hand. I'm changing my mind. I'm going to assume partner has the spade king. But if declarer has only eleven tricks, why isn't she ducking a club? Instead of going for a squeeze, she must be intending some kind of endplay.

What is declarer's shape? Partner's diamond four should show an odd number remaining. But Jack's present count signals aren't always reliable. Fortunately, logic confirms the message of his signal. He would be disinclined to pitch a diamond with ten doubleton remaining, leaving me to guard diamonds by myself. So he must have started with four. That makes him either 5-3-4-1 or 4-3-4-2, leaving declarer with either 2-6-2-3 or 3-6-2-2. The latter seems more likely. Partner might have pitched a spade from five. And, if I'm right that declarer is planning an endplay in spades, she must have three. There can be no endplay with jack doubleton of spades. So I am going to assume that declarer is 3-6-2-2, but I will keep 2-6-2-3 in the back of my mind as a remote possibility.

Declarer pitches the deuce of clubs from dummy; I pitch the three of diamonds. On the next heart, partner pitches the four of spades. Declarer plays the four of clubs from dummy; I pitch the club seven. On the last heart, partner pitches the five of diamonds, and dummy pitches the six of clubs. This is the position I'm assuming, with me still to play.

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ A 7 3 ♥ -- ♦ A ♣ A
WEST Jack ♠ K ? ? ♥ -- ♦ x ♣ 9		EAST Phillip ♠ Q 6 ♥ -- ♦ Q 8 ♣ Q 8
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ ? ? ? ♥ -- ♦ x ♣ J

Which minor should I unguard? If my construction is correct, it doesn't matter. So I might as well assume my construction is wrong. This is where the back of my mind comes in handy. I've already decided that there is a remote possibility declarer was 2-6-2-3. Accordingly, I'll guard clubs and pitch a diamond. (If this is wrong, I can always blame partner. What's he doing holding on to the nine of clubs anyway? He should have pitched it. Then I would know for sure declarer didn't have another club.)

Before I play, however, I need to think about what's going to happen in the end position. This is a familiar matrix. It appears declarer has jack-ten third of spades and is hoping to catch partner with king-queen. She has kept both minor-suit aces in dummy to prevent partner from pitching down to king-queen doubleton of spades. Partner must hold king-queen third of spades and two minor-suit cards. If partner is void in one of the minors, declarer now cashes that ace, forcing partner to come down to a singleton in the other minor. Declarer then cashes the other ace and leads a spade to the jack, endplaying partner. Nicely done.

Except that the endplay isn't going to work, since I have the spade queen. So, when declarer leads a spade from dummy at trick eleven, I have two choices: (1) hop with the queen and cash my club, holding declarer to five; or (2) duck, hoping declarer plays partner for both spade honors. If she does, we'll take the last three tricks, holding declarer to four. If she doesn't--if she rises with the ace when partner leads a spade at trick twelve--she'll drop my queen and make six.

At matchpoints, this problem would be a nightmare. At IMPs, it's much easier. If I trust my teammates to reach six hearts, then it makes no difference whether we hold declarer to ten tricks or eleven. Either way, we gain 11 imps. If I let declarer make six, however, we gain only 10 imps. So there is nothing to gain by ducking. My proper play is to hop and cash my club.

Now I'm ready. I pitch the eight of diamonds. Declarer plays the ten of diamonds to the ace, and partner follows with the seven. Declarer cashes the club ace--eight--nine--jack. Apparently partner miscarded on the first club trick, though that doesn't change anything. Declarer now plays a low spade from dummy. As planned, I hop with the queen and cash the club queen. Making five.

	NORTH Jacinta ♠ A 7 3 ♥ A 7 2 ♦ A 6 ♣ A K 6 4 2
WEST Jack ♠ K 10 8 4 ♥ 10 6 4 ♦ 7 5 4 2 ♣ J 10		EAST Phillip ♠ Q 6 5 ♥ 9 ♦ Q J 9 8 3 ♣ Q 8 7 3
	SOUTH Sophie ♠ J 9 2 ♥ K Q J 8 5 3 ♦ K 10 ♣ 9 5

Declarer had jack-nine of spades. I didn't think of that. I should have ducked. Then we would see the kind of stuff partner is made of. Declarer would play the nine, and partner must win the trick with the king, not the ten. When he returns the eight, it would take an awfully suspicious declarer not to duck. I apologize, partner, for not giving you the chance to find that play. (Between you and me, there isn't a chance in the world partner would have found it. He should be grateful I didn't duck. I saved him from embarrassing himself.)

As expected, our teammates are in six hearts, making six, so we pick up 11 imps.

Table 1: -460
Table 2: +980

Result on Board 2: +11 imps
Total: +8 imps

Event 3 - Match 1 - Board 1

2011-08-07T22:47:00.000-04:00

For those of you who are just joining us, a word or two about the Gargoyle Chronicles. These articles discuss matches I play against the computer program Jack, the winner of seven out of the last ten World Computer Bridge Championhips. The deals are random, and I report on each one. Accordingly, the deals fairly represent the types of problems one actually faces at the table. Bridge books tend to over-represent the spectacular and gloss over bread-and-butter decisions. I believe this tendency leaves a gap in bridge literature. There is a good deal to learn from the most quotidian hands. How do you figure out what is going on? How do you try to conceal what’s going on to the opponents? How do you try to clarify the position to partner? The ability to answer these questions separates the expert from the intermediate player more than the ability to execute a backwash squeeze.

By sheer chance, the spectacular will appear in these articles from time to time. But, most of the time, I simply focus on the questions I ask myself and how I reach each decision. The emphasis is on process, not on results. I am more concerned with how I make each decision than whether it worked or not. As in real life, a decision I take great pains to make frequently turns out not to matter. Or it turns out be wrong, hopefully because of bad luck and not because I made a mistake.

Speaking of mistakes, if I do make one, I report it and try to figure out why I made it. I don't give myself any second chances. I will confess, however, that I take considerably more time in playing these deals than I could ever afford at the table. So I do make fewer mistakes here than I do in real life. Sadly, I still occasionally make them.

I am starting the third event of this series: a round-robin team event, scored at victory points. This is the first board of the first match. There will be nine matches in the event. In this match, my opponents, Sophie and Jacinta, play Polish club. My partner and I play Acol. If you wish to play the board yourself before reading my analysis, clicking on the hyperlink below will bring up a pdb file, which you can load into a variety of bridge-playing programs.

Board 1

Neither vulnerable

♠ A Q♥ K 9 8 2♦ 9 8 3♣ A K J 10

Partner opens one diamond. Normally, one responds one heart with this pattern. But with this hand, we may be in slam territory. If partner has, say, ace doubleton of hearts, it's easy to see a four-three club fit offering the best chance for slam. So I decide to bid two clubs, representing my clubs as a five-card suit.

Partner rebids two notrump, showing 15 to 17 high-card points. We are clearly in slam territory now. I bid three hearts, and partner bids three spades.

One never knows about Jack, but this bid should show doubt about the right strain, presumably because of lack of a spade stopper. The fact that partner's high cards are outside of spades is a definite plus. We might even have a grand slam:

♠ x x x♥ A x♦ A K Q x x♣ Q x x

Not that I intend to make any attempt to get to seven. I can't possibly find out enough to bid a grand intelligently. But the fact that seven is odds on opposite the right minimum convinces me that my hand is worth driving to a small slam rather than simply inviting.

Unfortunately, we've wrong-sided notrump. If partner were barred and I had to pick the final contract right now, I would guess to bid six clubs. It's hard to construct a two notrump rebid with no honor in spades or clubs. And as long as partner has the club queen, six clubs can't be a terrible spot. But I'd just as soon avoid a four-two fit if possible to minimize the chance that an opponent has more trumps than I do. While it would be nice to protect my spade tenace, it might not be necessary. Sometimes, we will be able to take twelve tricks without losing the lead.

I don't relish having a sophisticated slam auction with Jack. (No offense, Jack.) But it can't hurt to give it a try, especially if I'm content to set a modest goal for myself: finding out whether partner has three clubs or not. Choosing six clubs whenever partner has three clubs and six notrump whenever he has two is probably better than just blasting six clubs, which is my alternative. I start by bidding four clubs. I hope partner thinks this is forcing.

Partner bids four hearts, presumably suggesting a four-three heart fit. Partner doesn't yet know I'm contemplating a slam, so he's bidding under the assumption that we are searching for the best game. Now that I know he doesn't have a doubleton heart, six clubs has become less attractive. But I decide to probe further by bidding four spades. I still don't think I've shown slam interest, by the way, although Jack may not agree. Four spades, to my mind, simply asks partner to choose between four notrump and five clubs. We haven't necessarily found our best strain yet, and choice of games always takes precedence over exploring for slam. Since how partner responds to a choice-of-games inquiry often helps you in a potential slam decision, this approach seldom causes much of a hardship.

LHO passes four spades, which is a good sign. She might have doubled with the spade king. And, if she choose not to, her failure to double might put her partner off the lead. I'm a little less worried about playing six notrump now.

Partner bids four notrump. If we were on the same wavelength, this would be natural, and I would raise it to six. I know from past experience, however, that Jack plays most four notrump bids as Blackwood. He probably thinks my four spade bid was a slam try, showing the spade ace and confirming hearts as trump. I decide to humor him by bidding five clubs, showing zero or three keycards. If partner bids six hearts, I'll correct to six notrump.

Partner surprises me by bidding six clubs. Well. This was easier than I thought it would to be. Jack must be offering me a choice between six clubs and six hearts. If partner thinks six clubs might be the right spot, surely it is. I pass. LHO leads the five of spades.

	NORTH Jack ♠ K 10 4 ♥ A Q 5 ♦ A Q 10 7 2 ♣ 6 2

	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q ♥ K 9 8 2 ♦ 9 8 3 ♣ A K J 10

West	North	East	South
Sophie	Jack	Jacinta	Phillip
	1 ♦	Pass	2 ♣
Pass	2 NT	Pass	3 ♥
Pass	3 ♠¹	Pass	4 ♣
Pass	4 ♥	Pass	4 ♠
Pass	4 NT²	Pass	5 ♣³
Pass	6 ♣	(All pass)
¹4th suit gameforcing
²Ace asking for hearts
³0 or 3 aces

I guess I didn't achieve my modest goal. I don't understand three spades or six clubs. This is a pretty silly contract, although I don't see how I could sensibly have avoided it. As I said, if I had decided just to blast a slam instead of trying to have a cooperative auction, six clubs is what I would have chosen. I did try to steer us back into notrump. Other than just deciding that partner's three spade bid bore no relation to his hand, I don't see what more I could have done.

I play the spade ten (might as well find out where the jack is), East plays the deuce, and I win with the ace (the card I'm known to hold). I play the deuce of hearts--four--queen--three, then a club from dummy--four--jack--three.

If West has four hearts, it would be a good play to duck the club queen. If I return to dummy with the heart ace and repeat the club finesse, she can give her partner a ruff. But it would be dangerous to duck with queen doubleton or third. For all she knows, repeating the finesse isn't an option, since she doesn't know I have the club ten. And she would be unlikely to duck with queen fourth, since she doesn't expect her partner to have a third trump to ruff with. I think I'm safe in assuming the club queen is onside, which means I have eleven tricks.

I have lots of prospects for a twelfth. I can play a diamond to the queen, finding the king onside, or to the ten, finding the jack onside. If that fails, I need three-three hearts or the other diamond honor dropping doubleton or a red-suit squeeze. To preserve the squeeze chances, however, I must play diamonds now. If I play a heart to the ace, repeat the club finesse, then take a losing diamond finesse, a heart return will break up the squeeze.

The opponents' convention card says they do not signal on declarer's leads. I know from past experience with Jack that this does not mean they card randomly (as it should) but that they always play up the line. Against such opponents, the normal rules for falsecarding don't apply. Instead, I must also play up the line. Each opponent will know that her partner doesn't have a card lower than the one she plays, so I will be marked with any low cards I don't play. Accordingly, I play the three of diamonds. West plays the five. Should I finesse the queen or the ten? The king and jack are equally likely to be onside, but the queen has the advantage of being more likely to win the trick. This could be important for two reasons: (1) West might have a singleton heart. (2) Clubs might be five-two. If East, for example, has

♠ x x x♥ x x x♦ J x♣ Q x x x x

I can still make this if I play the diamond queen.

I play the queen, and East follows with the four. I play another club--seven--ten--five, then cash the club ace--eight--diamond deuce--club nine. I've made six. If I can bring home the hearts or catch someone in a red-suit squeeze, I'll make an overtrick. Neither comes to pass, however. I wind up making only six.

	NORTH Jack ♠ K 10 4 ♥ A Q 5 ♦ A Q 10 7 2 ♣ 6 2
WEST Sophie ♠ J 9 7 6 5 ♥ 6 4 ♦ K J 5 ♣ 8 5 3		EAST Jacinta ♠ 8 3 2 ♥ J 10 7 3 ♦ 6 4 ♣ Q 9 7 4
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q ♥ K 9 8 2 ♦ 9 8 3 ♣ A K J 10

Not surprisingly, our opponents are in six notrump making seven (no reason not to play a diamond to the ten in notrump), so we lose three imps.

Table 1: +920
Table 2: -1020

Result on Board 1: -3 imps
Total: -3 imps

Next event

2011-07-31T12:26:00.000-04:00

I'm taking a week off. www.bridgewinners.com wants to include my blog on their page and wants to start with board one of the next event, so they've asked me to hold off for one week. Also, starting next week, the new post will appear on Monday rather than on Sunday.

For the next event, I toyed with the idea of a rubber bridge session, but a few practice hands persuaded me to forget that idea. Jack seems to have serious difficulty bidding with a partscore.

Instead, I've decided to do a round-robin team event. I wasn't aware that was even an option until I explored Jack's menus recently. Apparently, you can play a series of eight-board matches against each of nine teams, with matches scored at victory points. Eight-board matches should add a little more suspense to the proceedings. It seems I'm unlikely to lose a long match unless Jack improves significantly or I start becoming senile. But, as I've discovered often enough, you can lose an eight-board match to anybody.

Next week, then, I'll start the first match of the new event. Jack even gives your opponents names to add a more personal touch. I'll be playing against Sophie and Jacinta, who play the Polish Club.

Match 2 - Board 64

2011-07-24T00:19:00.000-04:00

Board 64
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A 10 4♥ 10♦ Q 9 8 7 4♣ K J 10 8

LHO opens one club. So much for my plan to pass the board out. Partner overcalls one heart, and RHO makes a negative double. I bid one notrump, and everyone passes. LHO leads the deuce of spades.

	NORTH ♠ K Q 3 ♥ 8 7 6 3 2 ♦ A J 10 ♣ 9 2

	SOUTH ♠ A 10 4 ♥ 10 ♦ Q 9 8 7 4 ♣ K J 10 8

West	North	East	South
1 ♣	1 ♥	Double	1 NT
(All pass)

One heart? What's that? A lead-inhibiting overcall? Partner was hoping I would bid three notrump and he wanted to stop the heart lead? A take-out double would make more sense, after which we would probably land in a diamond partscore.

I have an easy route to seven tricks: four diamonds and three spades. So my objective is going to be to keep the opponents from taking seven tricks first. Potentially they can take four hearts, a diamond, and two clubs. I will need either to avoid losing to the diamond king or to avoid the loss of two club tricks.

When I first saw dummy, my instinct was to rise with the spade king, preserving the spade entry to my hand. If I play low from dummy and East plays the jack, he will drive my only sure entry prematurely. On reflection, however, that might not be such a good idea. If I rise with the spade king, I give up on picking up the diamonds. That means I must find a club honor onside, else the opponents can cash seven tricks. But if I need luck in the club suit anyway, what have I gained by preserving my spade entry? I might as well play low at trick one. If I'm able to win the trick with the spade ten, I have a chance to pick up the diamonds and not worry about the club suit. If not, I'm no worse off than I would have been rising with the king. In fact, I'm better off. I still might find king doubleton of diamonds onside. Only if that fails am I forced to rely on a lucky lie of the club suit.

I play low from dummy, East plays the five, and I win with the ten. I lead the queen of diamonds--three--ten--king. Oops. East shifts to the six of clubs.

Either this is East's highest club or it's low from honor-seven-six. Given West's opening bid, my percentage guess is to play East for the queen. But if that works, I take only seven tricks. I doubt plus 90 will be much of a score, since it's hard to see anyone doing worse than plus 110 in diamonds. While it's unlikely East has the club ace, it's not impossible. If he does, I can score 120 by playing the king. In addition, there is some chance that playing the king will entice the defense to persist in clubs rather than shift to hearts. This last hope is probably a pipe dream. I can't construct a plausible layout where it makes any sense to persist in clubs after I play the king. But I have seen such plays work at the table, even against supposedly competent players.

I play the king. West takes the ace and plays the five of hearts to East's jack. What's this heart suit? West has ace-king fourth and East has queen-jack third? Why wouldn't West cash the heart king before leading a low one? I might have a singleton queen, after all. The only reason I can think of to lead a low heart from ace-king fourth is to preserve communication if partner has queen doubleton. Since there would be no need to preserve communication if West has the club queen, this means East has it and I could have made this contract.

East plays the five of clubs. I doubt he's underleading the queen, so my inference must be wrong. The low heart shift was apparently just a mistake. I play the ten, since East can't have that card. If he did, he would have led it, smothering dummy's nine. I know it can't matter, but playing the right card is a matter of pride. West takes the queen and cashes three hearts. Down one.

	NORTH ♠ K Q 3 ♥ 8 7 6 3 2 ♦ A J 10 ♣ 9 2
WEST ♠ J 9 2 ♥ A K 9 5 ♦ 6 3 ♣ A Q 7 4		EAST ♠ 8 7 6 5 ♥ Q J 4 ♦ K 5 2 ♣ 6 5 3
	SOUTH ♠ A 10 4 ♥ 10 ♦ Q 9 8 7 4 ♣ K J 10 8

Minus 50 is worth four matchpoints. We beat the pair who allowed two spades to score and the pair who defended one notrump, making one. (As Howard Chandross used to tell me, some hands are a race to see which side can get to one trump first.) As I suspected, the normal contract was three diamonds making three. Even if I had somehow managed to make one notrump, it would not have improved my score. I needed plus 120 to do any better, so my judgment to take an anti-percentage guess in clubs to try for that score was correct.

Should three diamonds necessarily make? I assumed so as I was playing the hand. But that's not entirely clear. Say the defense starts with two rounds of hearts, tapping declarer. If declarer cashes three spades and crossruffs, he'll make it. But what if he decides to play for a dummy reversal? Diamond to the ten, heart ruff, diamond to the jack, heart ruff (with his last trump), spade to dummy, cash the diamond ace. Making four (or five if the club finesse works).

That's a perfectly reasonable line. But look what happens if East is wily enough to duck the first diamond. Diamond to the ten (wily duck), heart ruff, diamond to the jack. Now East wins and plays a third trump. We are down to this position:

	NORTH ♠ K Q 3 ♥ 8 7 ♦ -- ♣ 9 2
WEST ♠ J 9 2 ♥ A ♦ -- ♣ A Q 7		EAST ♠ 8 7 6 5 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ 6 5 3
	SOUTH ♠ A 10 4 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ K J 10 8

Is declarer in trouble? Must he lose two clubs and a heart for down one? Actually, no. He can play three rounds of spades, ending in dummy, and lead a heart, pitching the jack or ten of clubs. The defense can no longer score the club queen.

Why couldn't partner have doubled one club? Three diamonds would have so much more fun to play than one notrump.

Score on Board 64: -50 (4 MP)
Total: 510 MP (66.4 %)

Final rank: 1st (Woo hoo!)

For the next event, I'm trying something new. Stay tuned.

Match 2 - Board 63

2011-07-16T21:14:00.000-04:00

Board 63

"Last chance to beat the other couples." (Another Brooks Hughsism. This time I know the reference.)

Our side vulnerable

♠ J♥ 10 6♦ A 5 4♣ A Q 10 7 6 5 4

I open one club, partner responds one heart, and RHO bids four spades. I hate putting pressure on partner to act when I have the spade shortness. But there is a fair chance the clubs are stacked behind me. Maybe I would bid if you added the club jack. But with this hand I don't think I can act unilaterally at the five-level. I pass. Partner balances with five hearts.

At a different vulnerability, I would pass without a second thought, since partner might be sacrificing. But at unfavorable, he expects to make this. What could he have? Solid hearts and the club king perhaps? It feels inconsistent to bid on after passing four spades. But I do know considerably more about partner's hand than when I passed. There is a big difference between being able to respond at the one level and thinking you have a fair shot at eleven tricks. And, while partner might be stretching somewhat, hoping to find me with a better than a minimum opening bid, he can't be playing me for as much as I actually have. I have six and a half playing tricks and five controls, two tricks and two controls better than a typical minimum.

At IMPs I would pass, since the risk-reward ratio for bidding slam is poor. If we can make a slam, the opponents rate to have a good save. LHO will be well-placed to judge whether we can make slam or not. So, if he lets us play it, we are probably going down. That means if I bid, I may be risking 13 imps to gain three. This is a point that is often overlooked.

At matchpoints, however, I care only about the frequency of gain. If I think I can make a slam more than half the time, which I do, it's right to bid on. As for what to bid, six clubs seems right. If partner's hearts are solid, he'll correct. If not, clubs may play better. The right bid, of course, is five notrump, offering a choice of slams. But I doubt Jack would understand that bid, so I have to do the best I can. I think he should infer some degree of heart tolerance. I couldn't bid on the previous round, and I would be unlikely to change my mind now with a misfit. Of course, that might be wishful thinking. It's always tempting to think a bid shows the hand you happen to be looking at.

I bid six clubs. LHO bids six spades. Since LHO is saving, it appears I made the right decision. Partner doubles and everyone passes. Now what should I lead? I have no assurance the club ace is cashing. And, if it is, it can probably wait. So I lead the ten of hearts, hoping to make some use of my spade jack.

	NORTH ♠ 10 7 4 ♥ Q 9 8 7 ♦ K 9 8 6 2 ♣ K
WEST ♠ J ♥ 10 6 ♦ A 5 4 ♣ A Q 10 7 6 5 4

West	North	East	South
1 ♣	Pass	1 ♥	4 ♠
Pass	Pass	5 ♥	Pass
6 ♣	6 ♠	Double	(All pass)

That's some save! A probable trick in each of our suits and the diamond king for good measure! Dummy plays the seven. Partner overtakes with the jack and declarer follows with the four. Partner continues with the king of hearts, and declarer ruffs with the spade queen. That's not good. If declarer is 8-1-3-1, he can now establish a heart trick (using the ten and seven of spades as entries) and pitch his club away. Why did partner think I had a singleton heart? Perhaps my failure to lead the club ace suggested that. Now that I think about, it seems unlikely my spade jack could do any damage. Maybe it was wrong to lead a heart.

Declarer cashes the spade king; partner follows with the deuce. Declarer now leads the club nine. Whew! I survived my questionable lead. I take my ace, and partner plays the deuce. Assuming partner is giving correct count, declarer must be 8-1-2-2. Is there any way to score a second diamond trick? I can't afford to underlead (or duck) my ace. Declarer can take his king, ruff out partner's heart ace, and return to dummy to pitch his last diamond. I might as well just cash the ace and accept my plus 300. That's what I do.

	NORTH ♠ 10 7 4 ♥ Q 9 8 7 ♦ K 9 8 6 2 ♣ K
WEST ♠ J ♥ 10 6 ♦ A 5 4 ♣ A Q 10 7 6 5 4		EAST ♠ 2 ♥ A K J 5 3 2 ♦ Q J 10 ♣ 8 3 2
	SOUTH ♠ A K Q 9 8 6 5 3 ♥ 4 ♦ 7 3 ♣ J 9

Partner certainly wasn't making five hearts. Would I have made six clubs if North had let me play it? It's possible. I might decide to cash the club ace. Not because I expect the king to drop but because I expect the finesse to be futile: North might have saved with a small singleton club.

In the finals of the 1981 Grand National Teams (see The Bridge World, September 1981), I missed that inference. The opponents suspiciously failed to take a cheap save over our slam. Had I deduced that they had a potential trump trick. I would have made my contract. While that result by itself would not have swung the event, it certainly would have changed the dynamics of the match. Who knows what would have happened? If I had considered playing for a bad trump break and rejected it, I wouldn't have felt so bad. But it never crossed my mind until Lowenthal brought it up later. Ever since then, when the opponents spurn a cheap save, I'm at least cognizant of that fact in attempting to construct the layout.

Of course, even if I pick up the trumps, I'm not home yet. I must now decide to take the heart finesse rather than play for a three-two break. That problem I'm pretty sure I would get right. I wouldn't play North to have passed over one club at favorable vulnerability with six diamonds. So I would assume he was either 4-3-5-1 or 3-4-5-1, with the latter being more likely. In that case, the heart finesse looks pretty attractive. Too bad North didn't decide to defend. I'd like to know whether I would have made this contract or not.

One declarer did take twelve tricks in clubs, but he was only in five. Everyone else either went down in something or defended a lower number of spades. Plus 300 is worth ten matchpoints. It's a good thing partner balanced. Minus 420 would have been worth one matchpoint. Four notrump for takeout would have been a better choice than five hearts, but these notrump-for-takeout bids don't seem to be in our arsenal.

Only one board left. We're probably far enough in the lead that I have nothing to worry about. If I get the chance, maybe I should just pass it out, so we can head over to Shoney's for a hot fudge cake before the crowd gets there.

Score on Board 63: +300 (10 MP)
Total: 506 MP ( 66.9 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 62

2011-07-09T22:14:00.000-04:00

First things first. Please click the 'like' button on the right. The Gargoyle Chronicles now has a Facebook page, which is updated via an RSS feed linked to this blog. So, if you 'like' the page, you will automatically receive a link to each new post on your news feed.

Please invite anyone else you think might be interested to 'like' the page as well. We are rapidly approaching the end of Match 2. Whether there will be a Match 3 or not depends largely on how many 'likes' I get.

Board 62

Neither vulnerable

♠ 8 4♥ K Q 8 7 5♦ Q 5 3♣ Q 8 5

RHO passes, I pass, and LHO opens with one diamond. Partner bids two clubs, and RHO passes. There are some tactical reasons to bury the hearts and raise clubs: (1) Three clubs jacks up the auction and puts a little more pressure on LHO than does two hearts. (2) If I bid two hearts, the auction may get too high, and I may miss my chance to raise clubs conveniently.

But the fact that RHO passed over two clubs makes those reasons less compelling. It's quite possible this is simply our hand, so perhaps I should pay less attention to tactics and more attention to constructive bidding. If RHO had made a negative double, I would certainly bid three clubs. But, over a pass, I'm bidding two hearts.

LHO bids two spades, and partner raises to four hearts. Since partner has heart support and didn't make a take-out double over one diamond, he is unlikely to have three spades. RHO should have at least five spades as well as moderate diamond support, so I fully expect him to bid four spades. But he doesn't. He passes, as do I. LHO passes as well and leads the king of spades. This doesn't add up. Why is the bidding stopping at four hearts with double fits all around? Somebody has done something strange.

	NORTH ♠ A 10 5 ♥ A 10 3 ♦ 8 6 ♣ A K 7 6 2

	SOUTH ♠ 8 4 ♥ K Q 8 7 5 ♦ Q 5 3 ♣ Q 8 5

West	North	East	South
		Pass	Pass
1 ♦	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♥
2 ♠	4 ♥	(All pass)

Aha! It's partner. He failed to make a normal take-out double on the first round. He was lucky that it was convenient for me to bid hearts. We might easily have missed the fit had RHO acted over two clubs.

I can't afford to duck this trick, since I don't want West to play three rounds of diamonds next. I win the spade ace. East plays the deuce, and I play the four. The deuce should show a diamond honor (tolerance for the obvious shift), but Jack probably intends it to deny the spade jack.

West should be at least four-six for his two spade bid. So, by the Majority Rule, my percentage play in hearts is to cash the heart ace and float the ten. That is the wrong play, however, when considering the hand as a whole. If West is 4-2-6-1, I can make the contract by cashing the king and queen of hearts, ruffing out the clubs, then returning to dummy with the heart ace to cash the last club. I will give up on that possibility if I start by cashing the heart ace. If I cash the king instead, I can still pick up a singleton jack of hearts (and a singleton nine if I choose to) in addition to any singleton club. Better to cater to all singleton clubs and some singleton hearts than to cater only to all singleton hearts.

I play the three of hearts--deuce--king--nine. Of course! The one card that gives me a problem. Do I play a heart back to the ace in case the nine is a singleton? Or do I cash the heart queen in case the nine is a falsecard and clubs aren't breaking? (If West has jack-nine doubleton of hearts, it doesn't matter what I do. Either play will work.)

If West always drops the nine of hearts from nine-small (as he should), then my percentage play is to cash the heart queen. There are three ways for West to hold nine-small of hearts and five ways for him to hold a singleton club. So cashing the heart queen caters to 15 cases. There are ten ways for West to hold a doubleton club, so a heart to the ace caters only to ten cases. But I doubt West appreciates the need for the mandatory falsecard. If he chooses his card at random from nine doubleton, then cashing the queen caters to only seven and a half cases. In addition, I don't have enough confidence in West's bidding to rule out his being 4-1-5-3. If that is a possible pattern, then cashing the heart ace is a standout.

I play the five of hearts to the ace. West, I'm happy to see, discards the diamond seven. I float the ten of hearts, and West plays the diamond nine. Am I home? I am if West is 4-1-6-2. But what if he's 4-1-7-1? I don't think there is anything I can do about that against best defense, but it doesn't hurt to lay a trap. I cash club ace and unblock the eight from my hand. Maybe if West drops a singleton jack, ten, or nine and East splits when I play a club from dummy, I can work some kind of magic in the end position. West follows with the three of clubs, so there is no trap to set. I have to hope clubs break. I play a club to the queen. Everyone follows. I draw the last trump and claim 11 tricks.

	NORTH ♠ A 10 5 ♥ A 10 3 ♦ 8 6 ♣ A K 7 6 2
WEST ♠ K Q J 7 ♥ 9 ♦ A K 10 9 7 ♣ 10 9 3		EAST ♠ 9 6 3 2 ♥ J 6 4 2 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ J 4
	SOUTH ♠ 8 4 ♥ K Q 8 7 5 ♦ Q 5 3 ♣ Q 8 5

It turns our West was four-five after all. Personally, I would pass over two hearts with West's hand, viewing the three-card club suit as a serious liability. If partner has club length also, the hand doesn't fit well. If not, then he doesn't have much, since he will strain to act over the overcall with two clubs or fewer. Some might choose to double with West's hand, but I think a double should show short clubs, not short hearts. In addition to the fact that I'm disinclined to act with club length, there is the consideration that responder may be tempted to pass the double with a club trap. In order to do that, he needs the assurance of some heart length in opener's hand.

Could the trap I tried to set in clubs ever pay off? I hadn't planned anything specific. I was just trying set up the right matrix in case something worked out. This kind of tactic is more common in checkers than in bridge. Thinking more carefully about it now, I can see that East's splitting isn't the only mistake the defense would have to make. Consider this end position:

	NORTH ♠ 10 5 ♥ -- ♦ 8 6 ♣ K 7
WEST ♠ Q J 7 ♥ -- ♦ A J 10 ♣ --		EAST ♠ 9 6 3 ♥ -- ♦ K ♣ J 4
	SOUTH ♠ 8 ♥ 8 ♦ Q 5 3 ♣ 5

Let's say West had a singleton nine of clubs. East, afraid I might be psychic and thinking he had nothing to lose in any event, split his honors when I led a club to the queen. I drew the last trump, reaching the position above.

Now I exit with a spade. West wins with the jack and plays the queen. I pitch a diamond. West can beat me by exiting with a low diamond while his partner still has a spade exit. But if he woodenly plays his last spade, I ruff and play a diamond, winkling him. There is no need to see this position ahead of time. It's sufficient to know that establishing a tenace over East in clubs is a good thing, so you might as well do it if you can. You can work out the details of how to exploit the tenace later.

One pair reached three notrump and scored 460. Not bad! Two pairs made five hearts, two made four, and one pair defeated three spades two tricks. We wind up with eight matchpoints.

One round left. I don't remember for sure, but I think the last time we weren't in the lead was Board 4. Let's hope we manage to hang in there.

Score on Board 62: +450 (8 MP)
Total: 496 (66.7 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 61

2011-07-02T22:04:00.000-04:00

Board 61
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 5 3♥ K Q 6 5♦ A J 9 2♣ 9 8 4

Partner opens three spades, and everyone passes. West leads the six of diamonds.

	NORTH ♠ 5 3 ♥ K Q 6 5 ♦ A J 9 2 ♣ 9 8 4

	SOUTH ♠ A Q 10 8 7 4 2 ♥ 10 4 2 ♦ K ♣ J 2

West	North	East	South
			3 ♠
(All pass)

That looks more like a one spade bid to me. But I guess there was no harm done. Even if we make four, we wouldn't have reached game after a one spade opening. I play the nine from dummy (no reason to advertise my singleton). RHO covers with the ten, and I win with the king.

If I were content to take nine tricks, I would evaluate the merits of cashing the spade ace. But I see no particular reason to think that simply going plus will be a good score, so I'm not willing to give up on bringing home the spade suit. I play the heart deuce, intending to take a spade finesse on reaching dummy. But a funny thing happens on the way to the dummy. I reach it sooner than I expected. West plays the heart nine, dummy plays the king, and East plays the seven.

I can't imagine why East would duck the heart ace, nor can I imagine the opponents' giving false count in a cash-out situation. So I assume that West has the ace and that hearts are four-two. (I suppose it's possible West has ace-nine-three and East has jack-eight-seven, since the hand with the ace can get away with falsecarding. But Jack isn't that sneaky, so I'm dismissing that possibility.)

Why would West duck the heart ace? It makes no sense if he has the diamond queen. But, if he doesn't, it could be right to duck if I have two hearts and three small diamonds. West hopes to play another diamond before dummy's hearts are established. On the actual layout, however, ducking enables me to dispose of a club loser. I cash the diamond ace--three--club deuce--diamond four.

I was intending to take a trump finesse. But now that I know I'll run into a heart ruff if the finesse loses, I'm not so sure I want to do that. (I had anticipated pitching a heart on the diamond ace to forestall the ruff. I wasn't expecting to be allowed to pitch a club.)

Whether or not to take the spade finesse turns out to be a more subtle problem than I realized when I played this deal. With the advantage of knowing that ahead of time, I suggest you pause to decide what you would do. As usual, making the right decision isn't enough. To get full credit, you must make the right decision for the right reason.

I reasoned as follows: If I find a doubleton king on my right, finessing gains a trick. If I find a doubleton king on my left, finessing loses a trick by allowing the opponents to take their ruff. Those cancel out. If West has a singleton spade, finessing loses if it is the king and gains otherwise. Since West will have a singleton king one time in four, finessing is the percentage play.

I play the spade three from dummy. My intentions prove immaterial, since East plays the king. I play the ace, and West follows with the six. I cash the spade queen. West plays the nine, and East, surprisingly, follows with the jack. I lose a heart and a club, making five.

	NORTH ♠ 5 3 ♥ K Q 6 5 ♦ A J 9 2 ♣ 9 8 4
WEST ♠ 9 6 ♥ A J 9 8 ♦ 6 4 ♣ K Q 7 6 3		EAST ♠ K J ♥ 7 3 ♦ Q 10 8 7 5 3 ♣ A 10 5
	SOUTH ♠ A Q 10 8 7 4 2 ♥ 10 4 2 ♦ K ♣ J 2

Plus 200 is a top. One pair was plus 170, one was plus 140, and four unenterprising pairs passed the board out.

Now I need to figure out why East hopped with the spade king. Of course! He hopped because he didn't know who had the ace. If West holds the ace, East must hop with the king to take his heart ruff. If he allows his partner to win with the ace, he will score his ruff with a natural trump trick. In fact, if West has the spade ace, hopping with the king beats three spades and ducking allows it to score.

That means my analysis above was flawed. If I play a spade from dummy and East plays low, I have good reason to think he doesn't have king doubleton of spades. If I rule out king doubleton onside, then there are four ways the finesse can lose (three offside king doubletons and one offside stiff king) and only three ways it can gain (king third onside). The odds are four to three in favor of refusing the finesse.

Of course, I can't rule out king doubleton onside entirely. East might decide his partner would have acted over three spades with the ace, so there is no point in hopping; or he might simply make a mistake and play low without giving it much thought. So I must judge the frequency with which East will play low with king doubleton and add that to the "finesse" column of the balance sheet above. Since there are three ways for East to hold king doubleton, if I judge he will play low more often than one time in three, I should finesse. Otherwise, I shouldn't.

Fortunately, I know my opponent pretty well, so this judgment is easy. One of Jack's weaknesses is the inability to draw negative inferences, and one of his strengths is that he never falls asleep. So I think I can count on Jack to hop. Therefore, I should have decided to refuse the finesse if East played low.

Why did I make this mistake? I focused too intently on my own problem and forgot to think about the deal from East's perspective. It's hard to examine deals consistently from your opponent's seat rather than from your own, but this deal shows how important this practice can be. I was lucky that East had king doubleton, else I might never have noticed my mistake. If the king had been offside and I had suffered a ruff after finessing, I would have chalked it up to bad luck.

Score on Board 61: +200 (12 MP)
Total: 488 (66.7 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 60

2011-06-26T00:17:00.001-04:00

Board 60
Our side vulnerable

♠ A 6 3♥ Q 6 3 2♦ A 5♣ J 9 8 2

Partner opens one diamond, I bid one heart, LHO overcalls with one spade, and partner doubles, showing three-card heart support. RHO bids two spades. Had he passed, two notrump would have been the obvious call. I'm less sanguine about our prospects of making three notrump after the raise, but no call other than two notrump appeals. Some players would double showing "cards," but I've never understood that approach. What does partner care that I have extra high cards? I've never figured out what he's supposed to do with that information. It seems to me the only thing a card-showing double accomplishes is that it makes the doubler feel better.

I bid two notrump, LHO passes, and partner bids three hearts. Three diamonds by him would be (or at least should be) a signoff. It's less clear what three clubs would be. I would play it as a scramble. I don't think opener should have to pass two notrump with a 1-3-5-4 minimum, knowing full well he's going down and might be able to make a partscore elsewhere. Three hearts, however, should be forcing. It makes no sense to run to a known four-three heart fit, bypassing potentially playable spots in the minors. So this should suggest that four hearts may be a better game than three notrump.

Ace third of spades opposite partner's presumed shortness suggests playing in hearts, but my weak hearts suggest playing in notrump. The right game probably depends on how many tricks we have ready to cash. Even eight cashing tricks may be enough, since we may have squeeze possibilities. But if we have to knock out aces in our side suits, hearts will probably be better. I bid three spades to express my own doubt. Partner bids four hearts. I pass, and LHO leads the king of clubs.

	NORTH ♠ 9 ♥ A 9 8 ♦ K Q J 9 3 ♣ A 10 5 4

	SOUTH ♠ A 6 3 ♥ Q 6 3 2 ♦ A 5 ♣ J 9 8 2

West	North	East	South
Pass	1 ♦	Pass	1 ♥
1 ♠	Double¹	2 ♠	2 NT
Pass	3 ♥	Pass	3 ♠
Pass	4 ♥	(All pass)
¹Support double

This is exactly the kind of hand I was hoping partner would bid three notrump with: interior solidity in diamonds and aces on the side. Of course, I'm not sure which game I would rather be in. If West has the king and queen of clubs as he appears to, I would guess that I want to be in three notrump when West has the heart king and in four hearts when East has it.

The club king is a strange lead. We've announced that spades is a weak spot, so it would seem like the logical suit to attack. I suspect West has club length. We are obviously in a shaky contract, so this is hardly the time to try a speculative lead from a short suit. My initial guess is that West is 5-2-2-4, which makes East 4-4-4-1.

Is finding East with the heart king sufficient to make this? Say I win the club ace and play a low heart. East hops with the king and switches to a spade. I take the ace, ruff a spade, cash the heart ace, play a diamond to my hand, and cash the heart queen. If hearts are three-three, I'm home. But if East has the long heart, I need him to follow to four diamonds. If he does, I can promote my last trump with the fifth round of diamonds: three hearts tricks, one ruff in dummy, four diamonds, and two black aces.

While I suspect East has four diamonds, I'd rather not have to count on it. Is there a better line? What if, after winning the spade ace, I immediately drive the club queen? East may get a ruff. But that's fine with me unless he has a doubleton trump, which seems almost impossible. I will have lost only three tricks, and I will have the rest.

What if West declines to give his partner a ruff? Suppose he wins the club queen and taps dummy with a spade. I ruff, ace of hearts, diamond to the ace, queen of hearts. If East has a high trump left, I play a diamond to the king, queen of diamonds pitching my last spade, and I'm home. Now all I need is for East to follow to two diamonds.

Can West tangle up my entries by winning the club queen and playing a diamond? That doesn't appear to present any insurmountable problems, but I may have to do some guessing about how the red suits split. I'll worry about that if that happens. A low heart toward my queen looks like my best start.

I play the club ace. East follows with the six, and I play the deuce. I play the eight of hearts, and East follows with the five. I wasn't expecting that. Why didn't he hop with the king? If we consider the heart suit in isolation, hopping with the king is the wrong play. But, if I were East, I would be disinclined to give declarer a tempo. For example, suppose this is the layout:

	NORTH ♠ 9 ♥ A 9 8 ♦ K Q J 9 3 ♣ A 10 5 4
WEST ♠ A J x x x ♥ x x ♦ x x ♣ K Q x x		EAST ♠ Q x x x ♥ K 10 x x ♦ x x x x ♣ x
	SOUTH ♠ K x x ♥ Q J x x ♦ A x ♣ J 9 x x

If East hops, he can beat me off the top. If he ducks, I can make it. I win with the queen, play a heart to the ace, and start diamonds. Allowing me to draw West's trumps without losing the lead is fatal.

It's right for East to duck if he knows I have the spade ace. He can no longer beat me by force, so he might as well hope I do something foolish in the trump suit. But how can he know I have the spade ace? He's not looking at my hand. In fact, if I were East, I would assume my partner had the spade ace from his failure to make the obvious spade lead.

Should I play low, trying to duck out a doubleton king on my left? If I'm right that hearts are two-four, then a priori West will hold the heart king one time in three. If I expect East to hop with the heart king more than half the time, playing low is my percentage play.

Are there any other clues? What about the auction? Perhaps West led a club because his spades were weak. If they are headed by the queen or jack, he might not have overcalled without the heart king. In addition, if I give East good spades, the heart king, and the singleton club I think he has, he might have bid something more aggressive than a simple raise.

What about my matchpoint odds? If West has the heart king, three notrump is making. (To keep his heart and club stoppers, West must pitch a spade on the run of the diamonds. The defense no longer has a fifth trick, so declarer can set up clubs.)

Let's make some simplifying assumptions:

(1) If I guess hearts, I'll make four hearts. If not, I'm down one.

(2) Those pairs who play three notrump will make it if West has the heart king and will go down one if East has it.

Under these assumptions, if I play the heart queen and I'm right, I gain one matchpoint against each pair in four hearts (either beating or tying them instead of tying or losing to them) and one matchpoint against each pair in three notrump (beating them, instead of tying them at down one). If I play low and I'm right, I gain one matchpoint against each pair in four hearts, but I gain two matchpoints against each pair in three notrump. Instead of losing to them by going down, I beat them by scoring 620. So playing low gains more when it's right. It's the Half-Dollar Principle in action.

The arguments for ducking this trick seem pretty compelling. I hope I can persuade partner of that fact if it doesn't work. I play the deuce.

West wins with the king. Yay! He cashes the club queen, and East pitches the four of spades. West continues with the seven of clubs. I play low from dummy. Instead of ruffing, East pitches the ten of spades, and I win in my hand with the jack. I guess East has a natural trump trick and sees no reason to ruff with it.

This is the position:

	NORTH ♠ 9 ♥ A 9 ♦ K Q J 9 3 ♣ 10

	SOUTH ♠ A 6 3 ♥ Q 6 3 ♦ A 5 ♣ 9

The only thing that can beat me now is five-one trumps, which would presumably make East 4-5-3-1. Can I make it if I play for that? How about this: Ace of spades, spade ruff, diamond to the ace, diamond to the king, ruff a diamond, ruff a spade with the trump ace. I need two more tricks. I'm down to queen-six of hearts and a club. East has jack-ten-seven of hearts. I guess I can't make it. I need the seven of hearts instead of the six.

It's just as well I can't handle five-one trumps. Now I have nothing to think about. I play a heart to dummy's ace. West plays the four; East, the seven. I have pitches for both my spade losers, so there is no longer a need to ruff a spade in dummy. I play a heart back to my queen as West pitches the spade deuce, then concede a heart. Making four.

	NORTH ♠ 9 ♥ A 9 8 ♦ K Q J 9 3 ♣ A 10 5 4
WEST ♠ Q 8 7 5 2 ♥ K 4 ♦ 10 8 ♣ K Q 7 3		EAST ♠ K J 10 4 ♥ J 10 7 5 ♦ 7 6 4 2 ♣ 6
	SOUTH ♠ A 6 3 ♥ Q 6 3 2 ♦ A 5 ♣ J 9 8 2

Two other pairs made four hearts, two made three notrump, and one went down in four hearts, so we score eight matchpoints.

One pair managed to make five clubs doubled. The defense must have slipped up to allow this contract to score. But that mistake wouldn't have been so costly if not for the double. Minus 600 would have been worth eight matchpoints, since there was a higher scoring game available, and plus 100 would have been worth 11. So the double cost eight matchpoints and stood to gain only one. As usual, doubling five of a minor was a poor bet.

Score on Board 60: +620 (8 MP)
Total: 476 (66.1 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 59

2011-06-18T21:07:00.001-04:00

Board 59

Neither vulnerable

As Brooks Hughes used to say before the antepenultimate round, "Turning for home now. Three rounds to go." I never did understand what that meant.

♠ A K J♥ Q 7 3♦ 10 7 5 3 2♣ 9 5

I pass. Partner opens one notrump (12-14) in third seat and buys it. West leads the king of clubs.

	NORTH ♠ A K J ♥ Q 7 3 ♦ 10 7 5 3 2 ♣ 9 5

	SOUTH ♠ Q 5 3 ♥ K 9 ♦ K 9 8 6 4 ♣ A 6 3

West	North	East	South
	Pass	Pass	1 NT
(All pass)

Some pairs, perhaps many, will play this hand in a diamond partscore after a one diamond opening. If they can avoid the loss of two trump tricks, they will score 130. If not, they will score 110. This is something I will need to keep in mind as I plan the play.

I play the five of clubs from dummy, and East plays the eight. I discourage with the three. West continues with the seven of clubs, and East plays the jack. East seems to have king-queen-ten-seven fourth. The seven, his original fourth best, is the standard card to lead from either four or five clubs, so, in theory, I can't tell how clubs are splitting. But I have observed that Jack doesn't seem to know this. From a five-card suit, he would lead his lowest club at trick two, so I am fairly confident that clubs are four-four. That means there is no reason to duck. (This is why paying attention to your opponents' quirks comes in handy. In general, I like to zone out when I'm dummy to save mental energy. But, in a long knockout match, I try not to do that. I watch the opponents' carding carefully, since knowing their tendencies may help me later as declarer.)

If there were no danger in ducking, I would duck anyway, just in case I'm wrong. But there is a danger. East may find a heart shift. There are a number of hands where a heart shift, while not clear cut, will at least look attractive. For example:

♠ x x♥ A J 10 x x♦ Q J♣ J 8 4 2

A club continuation sets up only one more club trick. A heart shift might actually beat the contract if you catch declarer with king doubleton and partner with a diamond entry.

♠ x x x x♥ J 10 x x♦ A♣ J 8 4 2

If partner has ace fourth or even ace-nine third of hearts, a heart shift sets up more tricks than a club continuation. I don't know whether Jack would play a heart from either of these hands or not. But he might. And I am confident enough that clubs are four-four that I don't want to risk it. I play the club ace.

I have little chance to go plus 150. If I am to beat the pairs playing in a diamond partscore, I must hope they are scoring 110, which means the ace of diamonds must be offside. Perhaps I should lead a spade to dummy, lead a diamond toward my hand, and, if East plays the queen or jack, duck it, hoping to find a singleton ace offside. If I'm right about four-four clubs, I will then be plus 120, beating all the diamond partscores (unless they magically play diamonds this way as well).

Is this actually the right play? Let me think about it more carefully. If West has a doubleton diamond, my play will not matter. If he has a singleton, it will be the ace one third of the time.

First, let's consider how I do against a pair who also plays a notrump partscore. If I play low and I'm wrong, I will cost myself a matchpoint. (It doesn't matter how the other declarer plays. If he ducks also, my ducking will tie the board instead of win it. If he plays the king, my ducking will lose the board instead of tie it.) Similarly, if I play low and I'm right, I will gain a matchpoint. Thus I will lose a matchpoint two thirds of the time and gain a matchpoint one third of a time for a net expected loss of one third of a matchpoint.

How do I do against a pair in a diamond partscore? If I play low and I'm right, I convert a loss to a win and gain two matchpoints. If I play low and I'm wrong, it makes no difference; I was losing the board anyway. I gain two matchpoints a third of the time. Thus my net gain is two thirds of a matchpoint.

My expectation from ducking, then, is two thirds times x minus one third times y, where x is the percentage of pairs in diamonds and y is the percentage of pairs in notrump. In other words, if there are twice as many pairs playing notrump as playing diamonds, ducking will break even. If there are fewer people playing notrump, ducking shows a net gain. I think it's safe to say that notrump partscores will not be twice as popular as diamond partscores, so my percentage play is to duck.

I lead the five of spades--deuce--king--seven. I play a diamond from dummy. East plays the ace. So much for my plan. I play the six, and West drops the jack. East shifts to the four of clubs--six--ten. I pitch a diamond from dummy. West, instead of cashing his last club, shifts to the six of spades. What's that all about? One thing for sure. West has the heart ace. He doesn't know who has the thirteenth club. So he would never decline to cash the club queen unless he knew he had an entry. I can cash out for plus 120, but that will surely be a below-average score. If I can sneak a heart through him, I'll make the 150 I need. I play the spade jack--eight--queen. Now the nine of hearts. West plays the jack. I play the queen. It holds, and I claim all but one of the remaining tricks. Making three.

	NORTH ♠ A K J ♥ Q 7 3 ♦ 10 7 5 3 2 ♣ 9 5
WEST ♠ 9 6 4 2 ♥ A J 8 4 ♦ J ♣ K Q 10 7		EAST ♠ 10 8 7 ♥ 10 6 5 2 ♦ A Q ♣ J 8 4 2
	SOUTH ♠ Q 5 3 ♥ K 9 ♦ K 9 8 6 4 ♣ A 6 3

I'm still not sure what the spade shift was all about. But I'm not complaining.

To my surprise, my decision to try to duck out the singleton ace of diamonds was wrong. I was right that the field was in diamonds. In fact, every pair but us played in three diamonds. But I was wrong about how many tricks they took. Only one pair was plus 130, so plus 120 would have been a fine score.

I was curious how so many declarers were holding themselves to nine tricks. So I had Jack bid and play the deal himself, playing Eastern Science Fiction. The auction went one diamond--double--three diamonds--all pass. West led the club king. South took his ace and played a low diamond from his hand at trick two.

Five out of six declarers played the hand this way? For this line to make sense, declarer must think West is better than two-to-one to have the diamond ace as a result of his double. I don't think that's true, especially given he has the king and queen of clubs. And, even if it were true, why lead low from your hand? How can it be wrong to lead up the king just to give East a chance to hop? I'm not impressed with Jack's declarer play on this deal.

Score on Board 59: +150 (12 MP)
Total: 468 (66.1%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 58

2011-06-11T22:39:00.000-04:00

Board 58
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 9 7 2♥ K 9 5 4♦ 6 5♣ 9 5 4 3

RHO opens one heart. I pass, LHO bids two clubs, partner passes, and RHO bids two diamonds. I pass again, and LHO bids four hearts, ending the auction. Four hearts should show four-card support. But my heart suit suggest that's not what LHO has. Spades seems like the suit to attack. Perhaps it will kill the entry to dummy's clubs, or perhaps we will simply cash some top spade tricks before declarer has a chance to pitch them. I lead the deuce of spades.

	NORTH ♠ A 10 4 3 ♥ A 10 6 ♦ J ♣ K J 8 7 6
WEST ♠ 9 7 2 ♥ K 9 5 4 ♦ 6 5 ♣ 9 5 4 3

West	North	East	South
			1 ♥
Pass	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♦
Pass	4 ♥	(All pass)

Declarer's likeliest shape is 2-5-5-1. Dummy plays the three of spades, partner plays the king, and declarer follows with the five. Presumably he has queen-five. Partner shifts to the deuce of hearts. Shifting to a singleton trump is a dangerous move. This suggest partner has both minors under control and envisions a crossruff as declarer's best chance to take tricks.

Declarer plays the three. I cover with the four, and dummy wins with the six. Declarer plays the ten of spades--six--queen. What's the spade ten all about? It's hard to see the point of that play. In any event, partner's failure to cover suggests to declarer that he does not have jack-nine, so I play nine, the card I'm suspected to hold.

Declarer leads the heart seven. So he isn't crossruffing. He apparently intends to establish his diamond suit. I play the five, declarer rises with the ace, and partner pitches the three of diamonds. I suppose declarer needs to ruff one diamond in dummy, so there was no point in taking the heart finesse.

Declarer cashes the spade ace--eight--club ten--nine. This confirms he is 2-5-5-1. He then leads the jack of diamonds--seven--queen. I suspect partner already knows how many diamonds I have, so I play the five. Declarer cashes the diamond ace, pitching dummy's spade, and partner follows with the four.

What are declarer's diamonds? He can't have ace-queen-ten-nine fifth. He would have taken a ruffing finesse against me rather than take a fruitless finesse against partner. Declarer leads the diamond nine. Obviously partner has king-ten left. If declarer ruffs this trick, then ruffs a club to his hand, he is down to two trumps. When he drives partner's king of diamonds, partner will tap him, promoting my long trump for down one.

I pitch the three of clubs. Declarer sees the futility of ruffing. He pitches a club as well, allowing partner to score the ten. Partner plays the spade jack--diamond deuce--club four--ruff. Declarer then leads the seven of clubs. When partner plays the deuce, he pitches the eight of diamonds. Nice play, Jack! The old isochromatic coup! The hope is that West just assumes declarer is ruffing this trick, sees a red card, and carelessly follows with five. I once saw Marshall Miles make a grand slam this way. (Against someone nicknamed "Rocket." Isn't that exactly the nickname you'd like your opponent to have if you try this play?) Fortunately, I'm awake. I win the trick with the nine of clubs. The heart king is the setting trick.

	NORTH ♠ A 10 4 3 ♥ A 10 6 ♦ J ♣ K J 8 7 6
WEST ♠ 9 7 2 ♥ K 9 5 4 ♦ 6 5 ♣ 9 5 4 3		EAST ♠ K J 8 6 ♥ 2 ♦ K 10 7 4 3 ♣ A Q 2
	SOUTH ♠ Q 5 ♥ Q J 8 7 3 ♦ A Q 9 8 2 ♣ 10

Four pairs made this contract, so we get ten matchpoints.

Declarer was in too big a hurry to pitch his club loser. It's not even clear that pitching it is a good idea. The ten of clubs is potentially a useful card. Upon winning the heart six in dummy, declarer should float the jack of diamonds. If the jack of diamonds loses to the king and the defense cashes a club, you will need to bring home the trumps. But, if you do, you are well placed. You have five heart tricks, two spades, and two diamonds. Either one club trick or the ten of diamonds dropping will see you home.

If the jack of diamonds holds, you lead a spade to your queen and cash the ace of diamonds. You are now down to this position, needing six more tricks:

	NORTH ♠ A 4 ♥ A 10 ♦ -- ♣ K J 8 7

	SOUTH ♠ -- ♥ Q J 8 7 ♦ Q 9 8 ♣ 10

At this point, you have two sensible ways to proceed:

(1) Play for a crossruff: Ruff a diamond, ace of spades pitching a club, club ruff, diamond ruff with the heart ace, club ruff. That's nine tricks and you still have the queen-jack of hearts to produce a tenth. As it happens, this line will fail. LHO pitches his last spade as you ruff a diamond to dummy, so you can't cash the spade ace.

(2) Play for a club trick: Float the ten of clubs. This may drive the ace or West may hop. Failing that, you can take a ruffing finesse against the ace later. If you score a club trick, you need only one diamond ruff, so you can time the play differently to ensure you score the spade ace. As the cards lie, this line will work.

Which line is better? It's impossible to calculate precisely, since it requires making some guesses about what the opponents will do. Would East have covered the jack of diamonds with king third? How about king-ten third? Will West hop with the club ace when you lead the ten of clubs? What can you conclude about East's minor-suit holdings from the fact that he shifted to a trump at trick two? In the end, you have to rely more on instinct than on calculation. And it's hard to be objective about your instincts when you already know the right answer. To be honest, I think I would have gotten it wrong. (1) feels like a stronger line to me.

Score on Board 58: +100 (10 MP)
Total: 456 MP (65.5%)

Current rank: 1st