The Gargoyle Chronicles: Board 13

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Board 13

Board 13
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 7 5 ♥ A 5 ♦ J 9 6 5 ♣ A Q 8 4

Two passes to me. Since some would open this hand in first or second seat, I see no reason not to open in third. As for the choice of bids, I believe in opening one diamond with four-four in the minors. I know there is disagreement about this, and I've heard the arguments for preferring one club. But, for me, the determining factor is that, if the auction gets competitive, partner has fewer problems after a one diamond opening than he does after a one club opening. For example, suppose you open one of a minor, LHO bids a major, and partner has four cards in the other major. If your opening bid was one diamond, partner can make a negative double regardless of his minor-suit lengths. If you bid clubs over his double, he can correct to diamonds at the same level. But if your opening bid was one club, partner can be stymied by lack of diamond support.

I open one diamond, LHO doubles, and partner bids one spade. RHO bids two hearts, I double to show three-card spade support, and partner bids two spades, which ends the auction:

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

West	North	East	South
			Pass
Pass	1 ♦	Double	1 ♠
2 ♥	Double¹	Pass	2 ♠
(All Pass)

¹Three-card support

West leads the nine of spades--ten--ace--three. It appears I have eight easy tricks: four spades, three hearts, and the ace of clubs. Can I find a ninth? The king of clubs is probably offside, and if I ruff a heart in dummy, I can no longer pick up the spade suit. Perhaps I could ruff out king third of clubs. That's probably not going to work. Since East has only three hearts, he is unlikely to have three clubs as well. For that to be the case, he would have to be 4-3-3-3. More likely he is 4-3-2-4, which would make West 1-4-5-3. Maybe I can duck a couple of diamonds and squeeze West in the red suits. That's not likely to work either. They can just lead hearts and kill my entries.

East returns the four of spades--deuce--deuce of clubs--five. That doesn't add up. Why is West pitching a club if he has five diamonds? Maybe I'm wrong about East's shape. Perhaps he's 4-3-3-3 after all. In that case I can ruff out king third of clubs. I need to repeat the spade finesse now, because I'm short of entries to dummy. So, spade to my hand, draw the last trump, duck a club. The opponents shift to hearts. I win in my hand, club to the ace, ruff a club. I can get back to dummy with the ace of hearts to cash the club, but I have no way to get back to my hand to score the king of hearts.

Since that's not going to work, I'll just play on diamonds and see what develops. I'm not sure exactly what's going to happen--a lot depends on how the opponents choose to defend--but at least I've got two threats going: a red-suit squeeze against West and an endplay in clubs against East. Perhaps they can't counter both threats. I learned that strategy from tic-tac-toe.

I play the five of diamonds--deuce--ten--queen. West, defending against the squeeze, opts to cut my communication. He leads the deuce of hearts--five--ten--queen. I play my last diamond, West plays the seven, and my nine drives the king. East plays the six of hearts--three-seven--ace. The defense has left East open to be endplayed in clubs if I can find something to throw him in with. I wasn't planning on losing a second trump trick. But now it looks like a good idea. I ruff a diamond. East follows. He was indeed 4-3-3-3. I ruff my low heart, and ruff dummy's last diamond as East pitches a club. East now has one more trump than I do. I cash the spade king and lead the king of hearts. East ruffs and is endplayed. That was fun! Making three.

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

Could West stop this by hopping with the ace on the second round of diamonds and shifting to a club? No. I can duck (or, if he leads the ten, I can cover with the queen and unblock the nine). After that, East's best continuation is a heart. I win in dummy, ruff out the king of diamonds, ruff a heart to the board, and play the jack of diamonds. If East ruffs, I overruff and claim. If not, I pitch the king of hearts, and he's trump couped. To be honest, I didn't see all this from the start. Playing diamonds just seemed to retain more flexibility than any other approach.

In the replay, the auction was as follows:

West	North	East	South
			Pass
Pass	Pass	1 ♣	1 ♠
Double	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♠
3 ♣	(All Pass)

Usually it makes life harder for the opponents if you open the bidding in front of them. Here, the opponents have a tougher time if you stay out of their way. I can't blame my teammate for competing to three clubs. At our table, with six of his seven high card points opposite probable shortness in his partner's hand, I'm sure West wasn't even tempted to compete.

Fortunately for West, neither opponent could double. Three clubs was down two.

Me +140
Jack +200

Score on board 13: -2 IMPs
Total: +36 IMPs

2 comments:

Jeffrey.LehmanOctober 22, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Wrt the Jack N-S auction ...

I agree with North's pass in third chair (that is, perhaps an issue of style), but I think 1NT response is better advance than 2C cue bid (and so is 2S; opposite a passed hand, I do not think that North hand is game-going). If opponents persist to two-level, North can compete later with 2S. I do think that North can double 3C should the opponents get there. 2 1/2 quick tricks and the absence of a high spade honor are pretty attractive, no?
ReplyDelete
Replies
Phillip MartinOctober 22, 2009 at 5:08 PM
I hadn't really thought about North's bidding at the other table. I agree with you that the cue-bid is sort of silly opposite a passed hand. I, like you, would have bid 1NT. Although that probably wouldn't have worked out very well. After pass-pass, West can get his club support in at the two-level and may now feel justified selling to two spades. As for doubling three clubs, maybe I'm chicken, but I don't like it, though I concede it's close. I don't think my prospects of beating it two tricks are quite good enough to risk it.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

About This Blog

First, a word or two about who am I so you have some idea how seriously to take the advice you find here. I retired from tournament bridge in 1992 (coincidentally, the year my daughter was born). At the time, I had accumulated a little over 5000 masterpoints. I had won numerous regional events and had finished second or third in several national events. Annoyingly, I have never won a national event of any significance. (The qualification is necessary. I did win one national event of little significance.) My best result was second place in the Grand National Teams (with John Lowenthal, Michael Becker, Ron Rubin, Michael Rosenberg, and Brian Glubok). I have theories about why this is, but I won't bore you with them now.

I am still in contact with many of my friends from tournament days. So I still discuss bridge and, occasionally, still write articles for Bridge World magazine, some of which you can find reprinted here: Phillip Martin's Bridge Articles

I have always enjoyed writing about bridge and have, from time to time, considered starting a blog. I think there is a void in the bridge literature that I can make some attempt to fill. Bob Hamman has stated that most people play bridge by asking themselves what they should do. Instead, they should be asking themselves what is going on. Once you figure that out, what to do will often suggest itself. I think he is right about that, and I think bridge literature is partly responsible. Bridge books and articles focus on the unusual and the spectacular. They can get you in the habit of looking for opportunities to shine, which isn’t what you should be thinking about.

The late John Lowenthal, my partner for years, was perhaps the king of doing the unusual, especially on defense. But he always found these plays by being alert to what was going on, not by simply looking for opportunities to do something unexpected. If declarer spurned a finesse John expected him to take or failed to attack a suit that John expected him to attack, John would ask himself why. Frequently, the answer to this question would reveal the entire deal. Then John could be creative and think about finding some way to deflect declarer from the winning line. And, often, he succeeded.

What I am going to attempt to do in this blog is to show by example how one should think about the game. The focus will be on process, not on results. 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? These are the skills that separate the expert from the intermediate player more than the ability to execute a backwash squeeze. And, for this purpose, almost any deal can provide material for discussion.

What I propose to do is to play in BBO robot individuals and report on each deal in detail, focusing on the questions I ask myself and how I reach each decision. I will report on each deal, not just the ones I find interesting or instructive. This blog will probably not be of much help to a beginner, but I think it will be instructive for an intermediate player. And my expert friends will finally see what is going on inside my head when I’m in one of my interminable huddles.

I will be South, but, following convention, I will always make South declarer in the diagrams. Thus my reported compass direction may change from deal to deal.

I should point out that not all of my ideas are mainstream. I considered including a catalog of quirks, but I decided that was unnecessary. They will become apparent in due time.

The Gargoyle Chronicles

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Board 13

2 comments:

Followers

Blog Archive

About This Blog