| ♠ 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
No comments:
Post a Comment