Board 70

Board 70
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A Q J 9 6 ♥ A 9 ♦ 9 4 ♣ A K 9 4

RHO passes. I open one spade, LHO bids three diamonds, and partner bids three notrump. Partner could be stretching, so this hand isn't quite worth driving to slam, although it's obviously worth a move. I could bid four clubs, but four notrump seems like a better way to invite. For one thing, I'm not so sure I want to play in a suit. If partner has king third of diamonds, I may be exposed to a diamond ruff. Partner will be more concerned about that possibility if I bid four notrump, suggesting a balanced hand, than he would be if I bid four clubs.

I bid four notrump, and partner bids five diamonds. It sounds is if partner thinks four notrump was Blackwood and is showing one ace. I'll have to remember that for future reference. I could bid six clubs now. Given I didn't bid four clubs on the previous round, I hope partner will take this as merely a suggestion and will correct to notrump, or perhaps to spades, without a club fit. Six clubs could easily be superior to six notrump if partner is missing the spade king. He might have, for example,

♠ x x ♥ K Q x ♦ A x x ♣ Q x x x x

Come to think of it, opposite that hand, seven clubs is better than six notrump. Maybe I should be trying to get to a grand. Perhaps I should bid five notrump, confirming we have all the aces. Partner won't necessarily know what he needs, but at least he would be free to bid it if he has substantial extras. If I don't bid five notrump, we have no chance to get to seven.

The problem with five notrump is that it commits us to playing slam in notrump if partner can't bid a grand. If partner thought four notrump was Blackwood rather than invitational, he might have a minimum, and six notrump could be a poor contract. I bid six clubs, and partner passes. West leads the king of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 ♠
3 ♦	3 NT	Pass	4 NT
Pass	5 ♦	Pass	6 ♣
(All pass)

Wow! Partner doesn't even have his three notrump bid, and we still belong in a grand. I play the diamond ace, and East follows with the eight. I play a club--queen--ace--five. I can now draw the last trump and cash spades. If they don't break, I can finish the top spades, then run clubs for a double squeeze. As it happens, I don't need the squeeze. Spades break. Making seven.

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

That's some hand East passed with in first seat. I hope my teammate isn't so timid. A heart pre-empt may keep them out of slam.

No such luck. My teammate passes also. What's with Jack?  Is he afraid to pre-empt because of the side four-card spade suit?  If he feels that way, he should just open one heart.  That has to be better than passing.

South opens one spade, and the auction is the same up to five diamonds, except that I suppose my counterpart intended four notrump as Blackwood and wasn't surprised by his partner's interpretation.  Over five diamonds, South bids five notrump.  He bids six notrump when his partner shows a king.

West leads the king of diamonds. Declarer wins and plays four rounds of clubs. This is a clear error. He must cash spades before his club entry to dummy is gone. Otherwise, the double squeeze won't work. Spades break, so the error doesn't cost. Making seven.

If I understand how Jack's play algorithm works, he made this mistake because he considers only double-dummy solutions.  On a double-dummy basis, it is never necessary to cash spades early; you can simply finesse in spades if East has ten fifth.  I suspect Jack would play this hand correctly if you change the nine of spades to the eight.

Me: +940
Jack: +1020

Score on Board 70: -2 IMPs
Total: -140

I'm taking the rest of the year off. The next post will be January 4. Hopefully we'll stop having such freakish deals. I seem to be better at picking up IMPs on the dull hands. Since I receive no government funding for this blog, I'm free to wish you a Merry Christmas.

Board 69

Board 69
Our side vulnerable

♠ J 10 4 ♥ J 9 5 ♦ J 10 9 5 3 ♣ K J

Partner opens one diamond in first seat, and RHO passes. Again we have a perfect opportunity for an inflationary swing action. In the old days, before everyone became so enamored with high-card points, no one would have responded with this hand. And I'm not so sure they weren't correct. Seven points or not, this hand is a bunch of garbage. Normally, I would just count my high-card points and respond like everyone else. But, since I know Jack won't pass at the other table and since pass might well be the percentage action anyway, it's a clear choice given the state of the match.

I pass, and LHO doubles. Partner passes, and RHO bids one heart. I bid two diamonds, and LHO doubles again. Partner passes, and RHO comes to life with three spades. This bid ends the auction.

As a general rule I don't like leading weak suits in which one of the opponents rates to have a singleton. Often such a lead simply sets up winners for declarer, allowing him to pitch losers in other suits. Clubs, not diamonds, rates to be our source of secondary tricks, so I lead the king of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
		1 ♦	Pass
Pass	Double	Pass	1 ♥
2 ♦	Double	Pass	3 ♠
(All pass)

Dummy plays low, partner plays the eight, and declarer plays the seven. I continue with the jack of clubs--queen--ace--four. Partner continues with the deuce of clubs, declarer plays the five, and I ruff. Not a bad opening lead!

It looks as if declarer is 4-4-1-4 and partner is 2-4-4-3. We need two more tricks, so partner will need both major suit kings. I'd better lead a heart, else declarer will be able to strip the hand and endplay partner with the spade king. I switch to the five of hearts. We eventually score partner's major-suit kings for down one.

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

There are two schools of thought about which suit to bid first opposite partner's take-out double. I think it makes more sense to bid your higher-ranking suit first. Some players argue that it is safer to bid your cheaper suit when your hand is so weak that you don't intend to bid again without further action from partner. I agree than in such a scenario it's hard to construct an auction where you would end up bidding both suits and partner would want to take a preference to your first suit. But I don't want to have to worry about it. I don't see much of a downside to bidding the higher-ranking suit first, so I would have bid one spade with South's hand. Having bid one heart, however, I would be content with two spades on the next round.

At the other table, my hand raises one diamond to three. This is not my idea of a pre-emptive three-diamond bid. If I were going to bid, I would bid one notrump. In fact, if it had occurred to me that my opponent would bid three diamonds, I wouldn't have gone out of my way to pass to generate a swing. I would have been happy with whatever edge I have in responding one notrump.

Three diamonds ends the auction. South leads the five of clubs--jack--queen--ace. Declarer plays a trump to North's ace. North shifts to a low spade, and declarer misguesses. South wins with the spade queen and plays the deuce of hearts to his partner's ace. I'm not sure why North doesn't continue hearts. If declarer finesses, he would be down three. But North shifts to ace and a spade. He does try leading hearts when he wins the diamond ace. But by that time declarer has enough information that he can hardly go wrong. He hops with the king and draws the last trump. Down two.

I'm not sure what North would have done if I had responded one notrump.  If he passes, the play could get interesting.  After a spade lead, the defense threatens to take three spades, two hearts, and two diamonds for down one.  If I rise with the king at trick one, they can manage all those tricks.  But if I play low at trick one and South wins and clears spades, they can't. Assuming North's spade lead was the five, he has no way to reach his partner in spades, so the defense can't score the heart queen if I guess everything correctly.  The defense can beat me, however.  If I play low at trick one, South can win and switch to clubs.  Or, more elegantly, he can duck the first trick also, retaining communication in spades.

Me: +50
Jack: -200

Score on Board 69: +6 IMPs
Total: -138 IMPs

Board 68

Board 68
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 6 5 2 ♥ 6 ♦ A J 9 6 5 4 ♣ Q 10

Partner opens one heart in second seat. If I bid one spade, I will probably have to bury the diamond suit, which is, after all, the main feature of my hand. If I bid one notrump, I can rebid diamonds over most of partner's actions.

What makes one notrump even more attractive is that Jack is going to bid one spade at the other table. So one notrump meets both of Edgar's criteria for a swing action: My counterpart isn't going to bid it, and it is eminently reasonable. In fact, it's so reasonable that it is arguably superior.

I bid one notrump, LHO bids two clubs, and partner bids three diamonds. Five diamonds seems about right. I assume this shows about a limit raise in playing strength (i.e., eight losers) but with more shape and less in high cards than a normal limit raise, since I had the option of bidding three spades. It suggests a singleton heart, since I have precluded our playing that suit. It also denies a club control. I'm not sure how Jack would interpret a four spade bid at this point. But if four spades is a cue-bid in support of diamonds, then five diamonds should deny a spade control as well.

Partner raises five diamonds to six. West leads the queen of spades to East's ace, and partner claims.

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

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 ♥
Pass	1 NT	2 ♣	3 ♦
Pass	5 ♦	Pass	6 ♦
(All pass)

At the other table, South opens one heart, North responds one spade, and East passes. That seems strange. The one spade bid should make two clubs more attractive, not less attractive. Partner's expected spade length has gone down and the chance of finding him with club support has gone up. Whatever East's reason, his decision show the importance of taking your swing action early in the hand. If you can induce your opponents to act differently than your teammates, the players at each table will find themselves facing different decisions, which is precisely what you are trying to accomplish. You will have increased the standard deviation of your results without biasing the expectation significantly one way or the other.

South bids three diamonds. North is not in quite the same position here as I was, since this three-diamond bid might be based on a three-card suit. Five diamonds by North is almost an illegal call. Nonetheless, with this hand it's a standout. The fact that it's almost illegal makes it highly descriptive. It indicates North hasn't the slightest interest in any other strain even if South was bidding diamonds semi-artificially. South, of course, carries on to six.

At my table, East bid clubs and West led a spade. At this table, East passed, so West of course leads a club. Since hearts don't break, declarer can't make seven. So the effect of my one notrump butterfly was simply to induce a different opening lead.

Me: +1370
Jack: +1370

Score on Board 68: 0 IMPs
Total: -144 IMPs

Board 67

Board 67
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A 10 9 6 5 4 ♥ A Q J 10 2 ♦ 3 ♣ K

Once again I'm dealt a hand where I probably don't need to work too hard to produce a swing.  I just need to do what I think is right and hope my counterpart has his own ideas. I open one spade, and partner bids two diamonds. I bid two hearts, and he bids three clubs.

Fourth-suit auctions after a two-over-one response are a little tricky. One of the hands responder must bid the fourth suit on is a balanced hand without a stopper in that suit. If he follows with three notrump on the next round, this two-step auction suggests his stopper is suspect, perhaps something like queen third. This means responder can't bid the fourth suit if he actually has it, at least not if he intends to bid three notrump next. Otherwise opener may pull three notrump for fear of an inadequate stopper. If responder does have a good holding in the fourth suit, he should bid two notrump. This doesn't preclude finding a fit in the fourth suit. In this auction, for example, opener will continue with three clubs with a 5-4-1-3 pattern. I don't know if Jack understands this or not. It would be nice to know, since if three clubs does deny good clubs, I have a better chance of finding him with fitting honors in my suits.

I have no intention of sitting for three notrump whatever three clubs means.  So the decision I face is whether to bid three hearts now, intending to pull three notrump, or whether to issue an immediate slam try by jumping to four hearts. The way to decide this is to ask yourself what you would do if you bid three hearts and partner raised. Would you bid on? If the answer is either "absolutely" or "certainly not," you should bid three hearts. If the answer is "I don't know. I would feel nervous either way," then you should bid four hearts. That's precisely what four hearts means: I have some interest in slam but not enough to risk bidding to the five level.

This hand seems to fall squarely in the "nervous either way" category. I don't need much to make a slam, but I do need a fit and three key cards (counting either major-suit king as a key card). If partner has that hand and I express some slam interest with four hearts, he will know he has a useful hand and he should bid on.  One way to think about this is to consider that an opening bid (which is all partner has shown) typically has four controls. Two aces and the king of one of my suits is one control more than his expectation, and he knows all those controls are working (unlike, say, two aces and a minor-suit king).  So if I make any move toward slam, partner should cooperate with that holding.

I bid four hearts, partner passes, and West leads the five of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
			1 ♠
Pass	2 ♦	Pass	2 ♥
Pass	3 ♣	Pass	4 ♥
(All pass)

As I suspected, partner should have bid two notrump, not three clubs, but it probably wouldn't have made any difference. Slam looks pretty good. Even if they lead a diamond, killing the entry to the club suit, I may manage by ruffing two spades in dummy. Partner does have the five controls I said should induce him to bid again,  but he doesn't have the fit.  His heart support is poor, and the singleton spade is a serious liability, so I suppose he was right to pass. What makes slam good is the fitting club honors. Make partner's club queen the diamond queen, and we don't want to be in a slam. Even removing his ten of clubs makes slam less attractive. We had no chance to diagnose that on our auction.

I have ten easy tricks. The safest play for an eleventh is to ruff a spade with the king of hearts, then lead a low heart back to my hand. What happens on that line if trumps are five-one? I can play the fifth trump, allowing the opponents to win that trick and cash whatever spades they can. Most of the time I would survive, but I would go down if one hand has five hearts and king-queen-jack fifth of spades. In fact, I might go down if someone were to ruff the spade ace. While these scenarios are improbable, it doesn't make sense not to worry about them. If I were fairly sure the opponents would play the same contract at the other table, I might be willing to take some risks to play for overtricks, since when you are losing small gains have larger than normal utility.  But here my best chance to pick up IMPs is to hope that my opponents get too high and run into bad breaks. It would be foolish for me to fail to capitalize by going down myself on the same bad breaks.

I play four rounds of hearts. East follows to four rounds; West discards the four of diamonds and the three of spades. I play a low spade out of my hand. West wins with the queen and shifts to the jack of diamonds. When the jack of clubs does not drop, I'm held to ten tricks.

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

I would have made six if I had been there, so I'm a little nervous about this result.

At the other table the auction is the same up to three clubs. South then rebids three hearts, and North raises on his doubleton king. South takes over with Blackwood. I don't see how Blackwood solves his problem. If partner shows three key cards, he can bid a slam with some confidence. But what does he plan to do if his partner shows two? Slam might still be good if his partner has the spade king, and it will lie somewhere between poor and hopeless if he doesn't.

North bids five clubs, showing zero or three key cards. I'm pretty sure I've lost this board, but South bids five spades and North passes. I'm not sure how South intended five spades nor how North interpreted it. Perhaps the bid was supposed to get his partner to bid a grand with the spade king. It's strange that Jack could have a misunderstanding playing opposite himself, but that seems to be what happened. Whatever South had in mind when he bid five spades, I doubt he intended to play there. Declarer loses three trump tricks for down one.

We pick up 10 imps. Bidding the slam would have been worth only four more.

Me: +420
Jack: -50

Score on Board 67: +10 IMPs
Total: -144 IMPs

Board 66

Board 66
Our side vulnerable

♠ 10 ♥ 10 ♦ K Q 10 9 8 7 6 ♣ J 9 7 6

RHO opens four spades in first seat. 

This is just the kind of deal you want to see when you're behind. You don't need to do anything to generate IMP inflation. There is already ample opportunity for a swing. Your goal is simply to do the right thing and to hope your counterpart at the other table doesn't. If being down in the match has any effect on your tactics with such a hand, it would be to make you less inclined to take a sacrifice. Since you are hoping for a large gain, your goal is to be plus at both tables. Trading a minus for a smaller minus isn't the way to pick up a lot of IMPs. So, if I had any inclination to bid five diamonds (which I don't), the state of the match makes that choice even less attractive. I pass, as does everyone else.

My singleton heart looks like the best chance to beat this, so I lead it.

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

West	North	East	South
			4 ♠
(All pass)

My lead doesn't look so good any more. I wish I'd led my other singleton. Dummy wins with the ace; partner plays the seven; declarer, the queen. Declarer plays the deuce of hearts from dummy and ruffs with the jack of spades. I'm not sure why he did that. But surely he has eight solid spades. With only seven spades, he would risk manufacturing a trump loser with this play. I discard the six of diamonds.

Declarer plays the three of diamonds. A diamond ruff in dummy will be his tenth trick, and it's too late to stop it. Perhaps, however, I can make some use of my ten of spades. If declarer is 8-1-2-2, I can win this trick and play a club. If partner cashes two clubs and plays another heart, declarer will need to decide whether to ruff with the nine, risking an overruff, or to ruff high, risking a three-zero trump break. He'll probably make the right decision, so we aren't all that likely to beat it. But I see nothing else to try.  At least we'll make declarer feel foolish for his play at trick two. Maybe he'll lose concentration on the next board.

I rise with the diamond queen, since a low diamond might suggest I'm willing for partner to win this trick. Partner plays the deuce. I shift to the nine of clubs. When leading a count card in the middle of the hand, you should lead the highest spot you an afford from an even number--not third best. Partner often needs count right away and can't wait for your clarifying card on the second round of the suit.

Declarer plays the king--ace--four. Partner doesn't get the idea. He shifts to a spade. Declarer wins with the king, dropping my ten, and has no further problems. Making four.

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

Partner's defense would be correct if declarer were 7-1-3-2 and I had no promotable trump spot. One might ask why I would adopt this defense if that were the case. There is no hurry for me to play clubs. If I had no chance of a trump promotion, wouldn't I play a trump myself on winning the diamond?  Or, more likely, wouldn't I play low on the diamond, allowing partner to overtake and play a trump from his side?  Still, it's hard to argue with partner's defense.  It does offer a legitimate chance to beat this unlike the line I was trying to direct.  Since I'm looking at the spade ten, I know declarer can't have seven spades, but partner doesn't.

At the other table, the auction and lead are the same. Declarer again ruffs a heart to his hand with the trump jack and plays a diamond. West plays the nine, which holds the trick. He switches to the ten of spades. Making four for a push.

As it happens, overcalling five diamonds might have worked out. In fact, it might have worked out spectacularly well if partner were to let me play it.  In practice,  he would surely raise, and the opponents would double. I would either gain 6 imps or lose 2 depending on how I play clubs.

But defending four spades was where the real opportunity lay. If I had found a black-suit lead, I would have picked up 10 imps. I have a friend who thinks a trump lead should be virtually routine against this auction. I wish he had been filling in for me on this deal.

Should I intentionally lead something other than a heart in an attempt to produce a swing? Not if I genuinely think a heart lead is right. That's exactly the kind of action Edgar was denigrating in our discussion. For one thing, I don't know my counterpart will be faced with the same decision. My teammate may open one spade at the other table, leading to an entirely different auction. For another, even if he is faced with the same decision, I don't know what my opponent thinks is the right lead. If we don't agree on what the right lead is and I intentionally do something I think is wrong, I've given up my edge. (Assuming I have one.)

Me: -420
Jack: -420

Score on Board 66: 0 IMPs
Total: -154 IMPs

Board 65

After 64 boards, I was up 158 IMPs. To keep things interesting, I decided to switch teams. I am now down 158 IMPs and have 64 more boards to pull the match out.

Board 65
Neither vulnerable

♠ K Q J 9 5 3 ♥ A 10 ♦ A K 9 ♣ 10 6

Recall that, in the analysis of Board 61, I related a conversation I had with Edgar Kaplan about how to play in a match you are losing. His opinion was that you should take IMP-inflationary actions: You should try to take reasonable actions that won't be taken at the other table in an effort to increase the average number of IMPs scored per board. Having lots of IMPs in play renders your opponents' lead less significant and increases the chance that your superior skill will see you through.

After two passes, I open one notrump. At least this call meets one of Edgar's two criteria. One notrump ends the auction. That wasn't exactly what I was hoping for. West leads the king of hearts.

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

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

This may not be so bad. If hearts are four-four, they will need to cash three clubs to beat this. It's possible they can't. And, even if they can, it may not be easy to switch to dummy's long suit. Meanwhile, it looks as if eight tricks is all we can take in spades.  Par would seem to be three hearts by the opponents, so even going down might not be a bad result.

East plays the four of hearts on his partner's king. I duck. West continues with the queen of hearts. East plays the six, and I take my ace. I lead the king of spades (not the queen--I don't want them ducking and possibly finding out how many spades I have). West takes the ace--deuce--four. West cashes the jack of hearts. East follows with the seven, and I discard the diamond nine. West cashes the eight of hearts. I pitch a diamond from dummy. I want to keep all of dummy's clubs as though I'm intending to run them. East pitches the deuce of clubs. That's disappointing. Now they need only two club tricks to beat this. I probably have to hope for a misdefense. I pitch the six of clubs.

On the last heart, I pitch the seven of diamonds from dummy, and East pitches the eight of clubs. East isn't signaling like a man with both club honors, and if West has them, I'm going down. I must assume the club honors are split and that clubs are currently two-two (else they can't beat me). If I pitch the ten of clubs, West may think I'm down to a singleton honor. He may lead a low club from king doubleton, or he may cash the ace from ace doubleton to avoid getting endplayed with it later on. Since I don't need all my spade tricks, I decide to pitch a low spade. This makes it look as though either (A) my spades aren't running or (B) I have a minor tenace in diamonds and I'm squeezed. Either way it makes an aggressive play by West less attractive.

West shifts to the six of diamonds.  I win, and, once everyone follows to a spade, I claim my contract.

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

At the other table, South opens an unimaginative one spade. West bids two hearts, passed around to South. South bids three spades. This looks about right. After one spade--pass--pass--two hearts, two spades would be sufficient. But when partner passes after a two-level overcall, there is no reason to assume he is broke. He will frequently pass with a hand where he would have responded in an uncontested auction, especially with three or more hearts. (See The Cooperative Pass.) If advancer passes also, opener should simply credit responder with the values for a minimum response and bid accordingly, much as one does over an opponent's pre-empt. Of course opener should lean toward the conservative side with a borderline hand, but this hand is not borderline. The only serious question is whether to bid three spades directly or whether to double, intending to bid three spades over three of a minor. This hand is so offensively oriented, I think an immediate three spades is more to the point. Declarer lost the obvious five tricks for down one, and we pick up four imps.

Just so you don't think I'm about to go completely wild in attempt to win these IMPs back, let me attempt a defense of my opening bid.  At one time, my partner, John Lowenthal, had a fear of opening one notrump.  He would often be dealt an obvious one trump opening and find some reason to do something else.  Once, when he was playing with Chuck Lamprey, Chuck became exasperated with this quirk.  He mentioned that he had a partner who opened one notrump on all kinds of hands: hands with six- or seven-card suits, hands with singleton honors.  Nothing bad ever seemed to happen. 

John agreed to give it a try.  It worked so well he went to the other extreme and began opening any 15 to 17-point hand one notrump regardless of the distribution.  I kept hoping for bad outcomes so he would stop, but, to my chagrin, we had far fewer bad outcomes than you would expect. And we had a good many entertaining ones.  After a while, John toned it down a bit.  But ever since then he and I were both considerably less afraid to open an offbeat one notrump.  Now I typically do it to avoid rebid problems, which this hand clearly doesn't have.  But it can also be useful as a way to introduce some variety into your results.  I know this hand looks too strong.  It looks more like about 19 points than 15 to 17.  But one of things John concluded was that upgrading for long suits didn't work out too well.

Me: +90
Jack: -50

Score on Board 63: +4 IMPs
Total: -154 IMPs

Boards 1-64

After 64 boards, I'm up 158 IMPs, an average of 2.5 imps per board. It's time for another assessment. After the first 32 boards, I discussed my methodology for analyzing where the swings came from. Here's where we stand after 64 boards, along with the results of my last analysis for comparison. Defensive card play is still where most of the IMPs have come from, which is precisely what one would expect. The confidence levels have come in, but they are still too large for the results to be very meaningful.

Category	Boards 1-32	Boards 1-64
Defensive play	+1.9 ±2.7	+1.9 ±1.8
Declarer play	+0.8 ±1.6	+1.1 ±1.2
Defensive bidding	+1.5 ±2.9	+1.5 ±1.7
Constructive bidding	+0.9 ±2.7	+.4 ±2.1
Overall edge	+2.4 ±2.0	+2.5 ±1.4

In the analysis of Board 61 I discussed Edgar Kaplan's fiscal strategy for playing when you are behind in the match. That gave me the idea of switching over to the other team so I would have an opportunity to try this strategy out. While the deals have been interesting, I'm so far ahead that the match itself is getting dull. Switching teams should spice things up a bit. So, beginning tomorrow, I'm playing for the other side. I'll start Board 65 down 158 IMPs and see if I can pull the match out by Board 128. Fasten your seat belts, and wish me luck.

Board 64

Board 64
Opponents vulnerable

♠ K Q 2 ♥ 6 5 3 ♦ J 6 5 4 ♣ 10 5 2

Partner opens one notrump in second seat, and RHO passes. I pass, and LHO balances with two diamonds, showing the majors. RHO bids two hearts. I pass, and LHO bids two spades. I assume he is showing a six-four pattern. I suspect he has a hand I would have opened one spade. Two spades is passed around to me, and I see no reason to disturb it. Partner leads the ace of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
			Pass
1 NT	Pass	Pass	2 ♦1
Pass	2 ♥	Pass	2 ♠
(All pass)
1Majors

Declarer has nine to eleven high-card points. If he has ace sixth of spades, he has four spade tricks and two clubs, which means to beat this we have to hold him to one heart trick. Is that even possible? Maybe. Perhaps he has something like

♠ A J x x x x ♥ J x x x ♦ Q x ♣ J.

In any event, I see no reason to suggest a shift. Dummy plays the deuce of diamonds, I encourage with the six, and declarer plays the eight. Partner continues with the king of diamonds--three--four--four of spades. So my first construction is wrong.  It appears declarer is 6-4-1-2.  Since he doesn't have the diamond queen, he must have either the club king or a high heart honor.  Declarer plays the ace of spades--three--eight--deuce and continues with the five of spades--nine--club three--queen.

We can take at most two heart tricks, so we need to tap declarer out and score a long diamond to beat this. Let's give partner ace-jack-ten of hearts and the king of clubs. If I tap declarer, he will be down to two trumps. He can play a club to the queen and ace, ruff a club, then play his last trump. The best we can do now is to take one heart and a diamond, since declarer can reach dummy with the queen of hearts to cash club tricks.

Maybe I need to postpone the tap. What if I play a heart, attempting to kill dummy's entry? I suspect declarer does best to play the king of hearts. Partner must take his ace. Now what? If partner plays another heart, declarer can win and play a third heart. His long heart is good, and he still has enough trumps to retain control. If partner taps him instead, he can ruff out the clubs and play his last spade. He's tapped out, but we have only one diamond to cash. Dummy takes the rest. I guess declarer can make it whatever I return. But a heart shift might make it a little harder for him.

I shift to the heart six--seven (a good sign)--ace (a bad sign)--deuce. Partner returns the ten of hearts to declarer's jack. Our only remaining trick is the king of spades. Making three.

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

I was right. Declarer did have a hand I would have opened one spade. I doubt that opening would have led to a different result. Though it turns out you can make four spades by finessing spades through East.

On the auction we had, I would have doubled two spades for take-out with partner's hand (see Countering Notrump Interference), but Jack probably doesn't play that double for take-out. I'm not sure what would have happened then. In theory, the opponents could double us in three diamonds and collect 500. (Club to the queen, low club back, ruffed, and a heart shift.)  But that would require a string of spectacular decisions on their part.

At the other table, the auction is the same. My teammate plays a club to the ace and takes the double spade finesse to make four. I'm not sure that's the right play. If East has a spade honor, your contract is in no danger even if you play spades out of your hand. But if West has king-queen-nine fourth of spades behind you, it would be nice to find that out before you give up your option to take the club finesse. Perhaps my teammate judged East would not have sold to two spades with a singleton spade and six high-card points. Whatever his reason, we pick up an imp.

Me: -140
Jack: -170

Score on Board 64: +1 IMP
Total: +158 IMPs

Board 63

Board 63
Our side vulnerable

♠ K 7 6 4 3 2 ♥ K 6 2 ♦ A Q ♣ A K

I open one spade in first seat--pass--one notrump--pass back to me. I don't have many options here. I'm not about to jump shift in a doubleton in the interest of maintaining flexibility. Three notrump looks like a reasonable contract, so I bid it. West leads the deuce of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
	1 ♠	Pass	1 NT
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

I have eight tricks, although my entries are tangled up so that I can't cash them all. To come to nine tricks, it seems I will need either the jack of clubs to drop in three rounds or to find the heart ace onside. Perhaps, if the jack of clubs doesn't drop, I can devise some kind of endplay to avoid having to lead up to the king of hearts, but I can work that out later. I rise with the diamond ace. East plays the four. I play the six, since the three would let West know that East's four was his lowest. I cash the ace and king of clubs. East plays eight, four; West plays deuce, jack.

Too bad. I would have better a chance of picking up some IMPs if this hand were harder to make. What are my prospects for overtricks? I have two ways to cash my nine tricks. I could (A) cash the diamond queen, play a spade to my ace, and run cash my minor suit tricks, leaving the spade king stranded; or I could (B) play a spade to the ace, cash clubs, then cross to the diamond queen and cash the spade king, leaving the diamond king stranded.

(A) looks more straight-forward, so I'll try (B). I play a spade--five--ace--eight. It appears spades are three-three, giving West a 3-4-4-2 pattern and giving East 3-3-3-4. I cash two clubs, pitching spades from dummy. West plays the nine and ten of spades as East follows. On the last club, West pitches the jack of spades. I wasn't expecting that. Dummy's spades are now good. Why did I pitch so many of them? I pitch a heart on this trick, then lead a diamond to the queen to cash dummy's three remaining spades. Making five.

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

I guess the six of diamonds at trick one paid off. West would not have pitched all his spades had he known his partner didn't have the diamond king. Of course, he doesn't really need a signal to know that. He should know I have the diamond king because I didn't finesse at trick one. But Jack doesn't seem to draw inferences from declarer's line of play.

How should the opponents defend? This is the position we reached on the play of the last club:

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

Could it cost for West to pitch a diamond? Not if I've played sensibly. But if I had jack third of diamonds remaining, it would actually cost the contract. After a diamond pitch I could play a diamond to East's king. East would now have a choice of leading hearts, giving me two tricks in dummy, or leading a diamond, giving me two tricks in my hand.

Could it cost to pitch a heart? Yes. It costs on overtrick on the actual hand. I pitch a spade from dummy, play a diamond to the queen, cash the spade king, and play a heart. East is winkled. He must allow me to score one red king or the other. (That's why I kept dummy's hearts. I knew it looked like a good idea.) The only way the defense can hold me to three is for West to pitch a diamond so that, in the end position, he can overtake his partner's nine of hearts with the ten and return one.

At the other table, North bids four spades over one notrump. Once again we have an example of the difficulties computers face playing bridge. Jack defines three notrump as 18-20 HCP and 5-3-3-2 distribution (though, personally, I think 18 is worth only two notrump). I'm quite sure Jack "knows" that three notrump rates to be a better game than four spades opposite a random one notrump response, so I suspect he bid four spades because, with six spades, three notrump would be a violation of system. If computers are to become expert players, they must learn to distinguish between serious system violations and white lies calculated to improve your chance of reaching the right contract.

East and South pass over four spades, and West, looking at three natural trump tricks, doubles. East leads the five of clubs. Declarer wins and starts cashing minor-suit tricks. He manages to pitch two hearts before West can ruff in, holding his losses to three trump tricks and the ace of hearts. Down one.

Me: +660
Jack: -200

Score on Board 63: +13 IMPs
Total: +157 IMPs

Board 62

Board 62
Neither vulnerable

♠ Q J 10 9 8 4 ♥ 10 6 ♦ 7 6 ♣ A K 10

RHO passes. I open one spade. LHO bids two spades, showing hearts and a minor. Partner bids two notrump, and RHO passes. I correct to three spades, and partner goes on to four. This is getting tiresome. I wish partner would respect my signoffs. It's frustrating to have a choice of contracts to go down in but no way to go plus. West leads the ace of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 ♠
2 ♠1	2 NT	Pass	3 ♠
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)
1Michaels cue-bid

Partner might have doubled two spades, but that could prove awkward. If the auction were to continue two notrump--pass--three diamonds, his pass would be forcing, and he doesn't really want it to be. Two notrump shows his values without creating a force at the risk of letting the opponents off the hook if they are in trouble.  I approve of that choice, but he really should have passed three spades.

I'm off the ace of spades and three tricks in the red suits. Somehow I've got to avoid one of those losers, and it's probably not going to be the spade ace. East plays the deuce of diamonds at trick one. The way Jack cards, that means West has ace-king-queen. West shifts to the deuce of hearts. Ducking this isn't going to help. I rise with the ace, and East plays the jack. Normally, I would think he has king-jack doubleton. But I know Jack would drop the jack from queen-jack doubleton as well.

Is there anything I can do? Perhaps if I lead another diamond as though I need to ruff a diamond in dummy, East will hop with the diamond jack to play ace and a trump. From his point of view, I might have

♠ Q J 10 x x x ♥ K x ♦ x x x ♣ A x

in which case that would be the right defense. This illusion requires West to have begun with six diamonds. Otherwise East will know I don't have three. But I don't see anything else to try.

I play a diamond. East hops with the jack. Aha! I play low. West isn't about to give his partner the chance to make a mistake. He overtakes with the queen and cashes the king of hearts. Down one.

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

At the other table, South opens two spades, weak. Two and a half honor tricks and a good six-card suit doesn't look like a weak two-bid to me. If honor tricks are too old-fashioned for you, you can count playing tricks.  Six playing tricks is a full trick better than a typical weak two-bid.  Or you can count losers.  A weak two-bid has eight losers; an opening bid has seven.  This hand has seven.  It looks like an opening bid to me however you choose to evaluate.

West bids four diamonds (leaping Michaels), showing the red suits, and East corrects to four hearts.  Four diamonds strikes me as an overbid.  I was curious if I was alone in this assessment, so I tried to find some guidelines in the literature.  Surprisingly, I could find no specifics.  Every reference I found simply describes leaping Michaels as showing "a good hand."  I prefer more definition than that.  My partnership notes say that advancer is expected to make a move toward slam with a fit and two cover cards.  Since I might easily go down in game opposite that, I wouldn't bid four diamonds. East apparently doesn't agree with me, since he is willing to play four hearts in an inadequate fit rather than risk the five-level in their better trump suit.

Best defense beats four hearts three tricks. South can play three rounds of clubs, tapping declarer. Then, when North takes his trump ace, a fourth round of clubs allows South to uppercut the dummy. Pitching on the third club doesn't help.

I don't think I would find that defense, and neither did my opponent. He led the spade queen. Declarer pitched a club on the ace of spades and eventually lost two clubs and two hearts. Down one.

Me: -50
Jack: +50

Score on Board 62: -3 IMPs
Total: +144 IMPs

Board 61

Board 61
Both sides vulnerable

♠ A K 10 ♥ A J 3 ♦ A 10 3 2 ♣ A 7 2

Two passes to me. I once had a conversation with Edgar Kaplan about how to play when you are down in a match. Edgar was of the opinion that the way many people play--taking anti-percentage actions and hoping to get lucky--was wrong. He thought the best approach was to strive for IMP inflation. You try to generate a lot of IMPs, both plus and minus, by taking reasonable actions that you don't think will be taken at the other table. Just as retirees' hard-earned savings are eroded by monetary inflation, he explained, your opponents' hard-fought IMP savings will be rendered paltry by IMP inflation. (I don't think that's quite verbatim, but it's close.) One example he gave of an inflationary action was to open one of a suit with a normal two notrump opening. It might work out well; it might work out poorly. But you have an excellent chance of producing a different result than the one obtained at the other table.

If I were down in the match, this might be a good opportunity to try this theory. Certainly there are ways opening one diamond could work out badly, but there are also lots of ways it could win. Partner might pass one diamond, for example. If so, whether RHO balances or not, you will probably have a better chance at a plus score than your opponent, who is playing two notrump at the other table. If partner were not a passed hand, one diamond might also make it easier to investigate slam. You will probably have a more intelligent auction after a two-club or an inverted two-diamond response than you would after a two-notrump opening. Even giving the opponents a chance to enter the auction could work out to your benefit. Their bidding might steer you away from a poor three notrump contract, or it might help you in the play. The worst development after opening one diamond would be to hear the auction continue pass--one of a major--pass. You are then left with no intelligent action.

As an experiment, I decide to pretend I'm down 148 imps in this match instead of up 148 imps and test the effect of a one diamond opening. As it happens, I encounter one of the lucky scenarios. LHO and partner both pass. RHO balances with two clubs. I could double, but with better defense than offense, I have no particular reason to encourage partner to bid. If he has diamond support, I'll hear from him. If he doesn't, he probably has some club length, and we rate to go plus on defense. I pass, LHO passes, and partner bids two diamonds, which ends the auction. West leads the jack of clubs.

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

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

East plays the nine of clubs, and I duck. West continues with the king. I assume he began with king-jack-ten and East began with queen-nine fifth. East plays the three, and I win with the ace.

There are two reasonable ways to play the diamond suit: (A) Play ace and low to the nine. (B) Play low to the nine. If this loses to the jack, finesse against the king.

Against best defense, these plays are equally good against three-two breaks. (A) is superior against king doubleton on your left (3 cases), and (B) is superior against two small on your left (also 3 cases). Of course, you don't always get best defense. If you lead low, West may hop with king doubleton, nullifying (A)'s advantage. So, as a practical matter, (B) is superior provided we don't have to worry about four-one breaks. (B) fails when East has a singleton honor. It also fails when West has a singleton king (unless you go against the odds by cashing the queen next instead of the ace).

Since East's failure to balance with a double makes it unlikely he has a singleton diamond, I'm going to go with (B). I play a low diamond to the nine, which loses to the king.

East shifts to the deuce of spades. I can't see how either opponent could have a singleton spade, so I play the ten. If East's diamond king was a singleton, I may need an extra trick. West wins with the jack and continues with the ten of clubs, which I ruff in dummy. If I'm going to try a double finesse in hearts, I need to do it now, since I have only one dummy entry left. I play a heart--four--jack--king. West returns the five of hearts to East's queen and my ace. Trumps do break, as I suspected they would, so I make two.

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

At the other table, South opens two notrump and buys it. It looks as if this should go down, so I have a chance for a pick-up.

West leads the ten of hearts to the queen and ace. A bad start, since declarer now threatens to develop a heart trick. With no side entries to dummy, declarer has no choice but to adopt line (A) in the play of the diamond suit. He cashes the ace, then floats the ten, losing to East's king.

The defense has to take three tricks in the black suits before declarer establishes dummy's eight of hearts.  So East must switch to a spade at this point.  If he switches to a club, declarer can duck. West can't profitably attack spades from his side, and the defense can't arrange for East to win the second round of clubs without blocking the club suit (thus allowing declarer to win the club ace on the second round).

Remarkably, East finds the spade switch. He plays the deuce of spades, declarer hops with the ace, and West plays the three. Declarer plays a diamond to the queen, and East drops the three of clubs. Declarer leads a heart to the jack and king, and the moment of truth has arrived. The defense must play two rounds of clubs, then switch back to spades.  They don't. West shifts to the jack of spades. Declarer wins and plays another heart. Making two.

Assuming partner's spade deuce was fourth best, the jack of spades is unlikely to be the right play. The defense can't take enough tricks in spades to beat this unless spades are running. And they can't be.  West knows declarer needs a spade honor for his opening two notrump. 

East also knows a spade continuation is likely to be wrong, given his partner's three of spades and declarer's failure to duck the spade shift. So East's low club pitch was ill-advised.  A spade on the third round of diamonds would virtually force partner into the right defense. Even if East is hesitant to insist on a club shift, he should at least pitch a high club.  On this hand, that would be sufficient.  Once West knows his partner has a club honor, he can see that a club shift can't cost. 

The hardest part of the defense was East's spade shift.  Once he found that, I think the defense should solve this. Either hand had a chance to get it right, although I think West deserves the preponderance of the blame. We lose one imp instead of winning five.

Me: +90
Jack: +120

Score on Board 61: -1 IMP
Total: +147 IMPs

Board 60

Board 60
Our side vulnerable

♠ 5 4 ♥ K 7 6 2 ♦ 10 8 7 4 2 ♣ Q 3

LHO opens one club, partner bids one spade, and RHO bids two diamonds. I pass, LHO bids two notrump, and RHO raises to three. Partner leads the five of clubs.

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

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

Assuming declarer has a weak notrump, partner has at most ten high-card points. He should be leading his lowest club, since he is leading from length in the opponents' suit, but Jack doesn't know that. I'm going to assume the five of clubs is fourth best, probably from a five-card suit.

Dummy plays the eight, I play the queen, and declarer plays the six. It seems normal to return a club, but let me think about that a minute. There is no need to return the suit if it's running. Even if declarer has three spade tricks, he can take only eight tricks off the top. We can always cash clubs when I'm in with the king of hearts. The layout where it's necessary to return a club is where we need to establish partner's clubs while he still has an entry. Partner might have, for example,

♠ A x x x x ♥ x x ♦ x ♣ K J 9 x x

Can it be wrong to continue clubs? Suppose partner has ace-king fifth of clubs. A club continuation certainly isn't productive in that case. It will establish partner's long club, but he will have no entry. Continuing clubs will merely set up a club trick for declarer. But is anything else any better?

Perhaps I can establish a spade trick by leading one spade now and another when I get in with the king of hearts. For that to help, however, partner's clubs must be entries. That means declarer must have a hand where he needs to play clubs himself to come to nine tricks. He has four diamonds tricks and two spade tricks. So if he has a four-card heart suit, he can drive my king of hearts and come to nine tricks without touching clubs. For this construction to work, declarer must have only three hearts. That's as far as we need to take this argument. Perhaps we can construct a hand where a spade shift is necessary, but it would be a waste of time.  We can already tell such a layout would involve more constraints than the construction where a club continuation is necessary. So a club continuation is the better play.

I return a club--deuce--king--ten. Partner cashes the ace of clubs, dummy pitches a heart, I pitch the four of spades, and declarer plays the nine of clubs. Partner continues with the seven of clubs, dummy discards the jack of hearts, and I play the heart seven. Declarer wins with the club jack and cashes the queen of diamonds. Partner discards the three of spades. We are down to this position:

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

Unless declarer has the spade jack, he has only eight tricks. He must have the heart queen, however, to come to an opening bid, so I'm about to be strip squeezed. If he cashes the diamond king, then ace of hearts, king of spades, and a spade to the ace, I have to stiff the king of hearts. He can then toss me in to lead into the diamond tenace. I can't get out of this.

Declarer cashes the diamond king, on which partner discards the five of hearts. He leads a diamond to dummy as partner pitches the six of spades. That's unexpected. He then leads the nine of diamonds from dummy. I see. He's correcting the count for a major-suit squeeze against partner. He thinks partner has the heart king. I win with the diamond ten and return a heart. Eventually I score my heart king for down one.

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

If partner did have the heart king, this would have worked, provided declarer read partner's shape. If I return a heart or a diamond when I'm in with the diamond king, the squeeze plays itself.  But if I return a spade, declarer must win in dummy and play a criss-cross squeeze.  As is often the case with a criss-cross squeeze, he must guess which threat partner has established and cash his tricks in the right order. 

I'm not sure why declarer adopted this line.  The squeeze against me seems more attractive for a lot of reasons:  (1) Even if this line works, he might guess wrong in the end position.  (2) With more hearts than partner I'm a priori more likely to have the heart king.  (3) I told him I had the heart king with my foolish signal of the seven of hearts. And it was certainly foolish, since partner had no decisions left to make.  The only thing I can think of that suggests I don't have the king of hearts is my spade pitch on the third round of clubs.  My reluctance to pitch a heart suggests ten fourth rather than king fourth.  Are Jack's card-reading skills that sophisticated?

The auction is the same at the other table, and the play begins the same way. On the ace of clubs, however, East discards the deuce of hearts instead of a spade. Somehow, this pitch seems to wake declarer up. On the fourth round of clubs, he pitches the three of diamonds from dummy instead of the jack of hearts. He then leads a heart to the jack. This is a foolproof line. Whether the finesse wins or loses, he has nine tricks.

This deal points out another flaw in the way computers play. Humans can reason that this diamond suit doesn't necessarily produce five tricks and can look for a sure-trick line rather than counting on the suit to break. A computer doesn't do that. It deals out lots of random hands, and if it doesn't happen to deal out a hand where diamonds are five-zero offside, it never occurs to it that diamonds don't necessarily produce five tricks.

I'm sure that pitching two hearts from dummy worked 100% of the time on the set of deals declarer generated at my table. My teammate just got lucky in that the set of deals he generated happened to include at least one in which diamonds were five-zero. So he stumbled across the sure-trick line.

For practice, let's go back and see if we can indeed construct a hand where a spade shift at trick two is necessary. We were considering this layout.

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

I win the queen of clubs and shift to a spade. Declarer wins in dummy and plays the ten of clubs. Partner wins and shifts to a heart. If declarer finesses, I can win and play another spade for down one. But if he guesses to play me for the heart king, he can rise, cross to his hand with a diamond, and lead the club jack, coming to nine tricks before our spade is established. So this layout doesn't work.

What if we give partner the nine of clubs? Now a spade shift surely beats him, since it destroys his entries for doing anything fancy. But is it necessary? What happens if I continue clubs? Partner wins and plays a heart. Declarer ducks in dummy. I win with the king. If I don't play a spade now, declarer will eventually have a black-suit squeeze against partner (after ducking a diamond to correct the count). So I must play a spade. Declarer wins in dummy, then cashes his diamonds. He is down to

	NORTH ♠ 10 9 ♥ A J ♦ 3 ♣ - -
	SOUTH ♠ A x ♥ Q x ♦ -- ♣ J

Ace and a heart to the queen squeezes partner. He must come down to a singleton club, allowing declarer to toss him in to lead spades. Note that declarer needs the queen of hearts as a late entry to his hand for this to work.

Can I stop this by ducking the first round of hearts? No. Declarer can simply cash king-queen of diamonds and his spades, then play ace and a heart. Now I'm endplayed. I score my long heart instead of partner's club ace. Then I must lead into dummy's diamond tenace. So we can construct a layout where the spade shift is necessary, but it's not easy. Clearly the club continuation works on more deals.

Me: +50
Jack: -400

Score on Board 60: +10 IMPs
Total: +148 IMPs

Board 59

Board 59 (Click to download pbn file)
Neither vulnerable

♠ 8 6 ♥ 9 7 5 4 ♦ 6 3 2 ♣ K 10 7 3

I pass, and LHO opens one notrump. RHO bids two clubs, then four notrump (natural) over his partner's two spades. West goes on to six notrump, and partner leads the four of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♠
Pass	4 NT	Pass	6 NT
(All pass)

Partner has either four or five high-card points, and I doubt he's leading from an honor on this auction. That means he must have either the queen of hearts or a high spade honor. Declarer is likely to be 4-3-3-3, since he didn't rebid spades or introduce a new suit over four notrump.

Dummy plays the ten of diamonds, I play the deuce, and declarer wins with the king. He plays the deuce of hearts--ten--king.  I play the five.  If partner does have the queen of hearts, it's dropping. 

Declarer leads the four of spades from dummy. As I've mentioned in an earlier post, the right way to card in a suit in which declarer might need to guess the jack is to give correct count when you don't hold the jack and false count when you do--not as a deceptive maneuver but as a matter of agreement. This method allows you to give count to partner without giving the suit away to declarer. From declarer's point of view, if West plays up the line and East echoes, the suit could be either

WEST ♠ J x x x

EAST ♠ x x

or

WEST ♠ x x x

EAST ♠ J x x

Similarly, if West echoes and East plays up the line, the suit could be either

WEST ♠ x x

EAST ♠ J x x x

or

WEST ♠ J x x

EAST ♠ x x x

If you don't have this agreement, it is dangerous to give count routinely in suits like this, since declarer just might decide to believe you.  Since Jack and I don't have this agreement, I play the six.  Declarer wins with the ace and partner plays the deuce.  If we were carding properly, that would be from three small, king-jack third (not king-empty third, else declarer would have finessed), or jack fourth. But I suspect what partner actually has is three spades with or without the jack. That means declarer is 5-3-3-2 or 5-2-3-3, probably the former, since it appears partner has queen-ten doubleton of hearts.  So declarer has five spade tricks, three diamonds, two hearts, and the club ace--eleven tricks.  He has a third heart trick he doesn't know about yet.  If he has the club jack, he can drive my club king for twelve tricks, so I must assume partner has it, and we must offer declarer some alternative to dropping partner's heart queen. 

Declarer plays the three of spades--five--queen--eight. He plays the six of hearts. I play the four--queen--jack. Didn't I decide declarer can't have that card? Ace-king of spades, ace-king-queen of diamonds, queen of hearts. That's eighteen high-card points. No wonder he accepted the invitation. Declarer plays the nine of diamonds, another card he can't have, since we "know" he has ace-king-queen tight. Perhaps he's 4-3-4-2 and partner did give false count with jack fourth of spades. Partner plays the seven of diamonds--jack--three. Declarer plays the ten of spades to his king as I pitch the three of clubs. Partner plays the spade jack. Declarer leads the spade seven, and partner pitches the deuce of clubs.

So declarer does have five spades. What's going on? And why isn't declarer claiming seven? The only thing I can figure out is that partner must have underled the diamond ace at trick one, then ducked the ace on the lead of the nine. That means declarer's hand is

♠ A K x x x ♥ Q x x ♦ K Q x ♣ J x

He accepted with a minimum in high cards because of his fifth spade. If I'm right, he has eleven tricks, and he has me caught in a strip squeeze. If dummy and I both come down to two hearts and two clubs, declarer can cash the ace of hearts, and, when he discovers hearts don't break, he can toss me in with a heart to lead into the ace-queen of clubs. To stop the endplay, I must save a diamond and stiff my king of clubs.

On the fourth round of spades dummy pitches the five of diamonds, and I pitch the seven of clubs. Declarer cashes his last spade and everyone pitches clubs: five--eight--ten. Declarer, apparently realizing the endplay won't work because I still have a diamond, plays a club to the queen. I win with my singleton king and play a diamond to partner. Partner cashes his long diamond. Down two.

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

Was partner right to duck the second diamond? What if he wins and shifts to a club? If he does that, declarer's percentage play is to hop with the ace and cash his tricks. If hearts break, he has twelve tricks. If they don't, he has a squeeze, provided the hand with the long heart has the king of clubs. Ducking the diamond avoids correcting the count for the simple squeeze. Declarer can still make his contract, but he has to guess who has the club king. Nice play, partner.

At the other table, the auction and lead are the same. But East pitches his last diamond on the run of the spades, leaving himself exposed to the strip squeeze. Declarer works it out and makes six.

Jack, like all bridge-playing programs I know of, defends by searching for plays that beat the hand double dummy. I'm not sure how he selects his plays once he concludes that the hand is cold double dummy. Human defenders can select plays that offer declarer a losing option, but computers seem unable to do that, except perhaps by accident. I suspect ducking the diamond ace was one such accident. West "thought" at the time that his play didn't matter and chose to play low either at random or because he always plays low when it doesn't matter.

If computers are ever to play as well as humans, they need to be able to analyze hands from their opponent's single-dummy point of view. The inability to do so was very costly on the deal.  I must confess, however, I can't even imagine how to design a program to do this. 

Me: +100
Jack: -990

Score on Board 59: +14 IMPs
Total: +138 IMPs