The Gargoyle Chronicles: Board 64

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

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

No comments:

Post a 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

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Board 64

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

Blog Archive

About This Blog