The Gargoyle Chronicles: Board 104

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Board 104

Board 104
Neither vulnerable

♠ J 5 4 2 ♥ Q 6 4 3 ♦ J 3 ♣ A 10 7

RHO opens one spade in third seat. I pass, LHO bids one notrump, and RHO bids two hearts. I pass again. LHO bids three spades. That's surprising. I thought Jack played Drury. RHO goes on to four spades.

This is not an easy opening lead. I'm not going to lead a major, so the choice is between the jack of diamonds and the ace of clubs--or maybe the ten of clubs. Declarer's likeliest pattern is 5-4-3-1, so the jack of diamonds seems dangerous. The ace of clubs will work out badly if dummy has king-queen. But if dummy has only the king, it might not cost. Even if declarer has a third-round diamond loser that he can pitch on the king of clubs, we may have no way to get to that trick in time anyway.

As for the choice of clubs to lead, the ten might give declarer a guess if dummy has king-jack, but that might not matter. My ace may simply ruff out even if declarer misguesses. And if dummy has queen fourth or jack fourth opposite declarer's singleton jack or queen, the ace will certainly work out better than the ten. In general, the ace underlead is more attractive from length than from shortness. I lead the ace of clubs.

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

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

Partner plays the nine, and declarer drops the king. Another reason not to underlead the ace. Sometimes I wish I could get Jack to signal a little less enthusiastically. The nine killed my club exit (although my seven might make a club continuation inadvisable even if partner had signaled with the five).

It doesn't appear that I have anything terribly constructive to do. I'd like simply to get off play without giving away a trick in the process. Should I switch to a diamond now? If we assume that a fourth-round diamond trick is immaterial (a convenient assumption, though not necessarily valid), then the diamond jack is safe provided partner has two honors or one honor plus the nine. A low diamond may be even safer. If I lead low, I might survive if partner has one honor without the nine. It occurs to me, though, that the safest exit may be a spade. It gives up a spade trick. But if declarer has to ruff at least one heart in dummy, the trick comes back. One advantage of a spade shift is it retains my potential edge in not leading a diamond at trick one. Since I'm hoping for a swing, why not hope that my decision not to break diamonds was correct? I switch to the deuce of spades--nine--eight--three.

Declarer leads the ten of diamonds--queen--six. I play the three. Partner continues with the deuce of diamonds, and declarer plays the ace, dropping my jack. I'm not sure what declarer is up to with this maneuver. Perhaps he's simply trying to get a count to help him guess the queen of hearts. In any event, it appears we have a second diamond trick coming. I should score either the heart queen or the spade jack in addition. So it looks as if this is going down.

Declarer plays a spade to the king, and partner discards the club deuce. On the spade queen, partner plays the heart deuce. Declarer ruffs a club to his hand, plays a heart to the king, and plays a heart back to the jack. I win with the queen and lead another club to tap out his ace of trumps. The tap is immaterial. I just wind up ruffing partner's diamond winner in the end. Down one.

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

It looks as if declarer has two unavoidable losers after partner shows out on the second round of spades. Indeed that's what I thought at the time. But, in fact, if declarer guesses the heart queen, he can compress his diamond and trump loser and make this. And the heart queen shouldn't be too hard to guess. It should be fairly clear from my trump switch that I have a dangerous holding in every suit. This was the position after declarer cashed the spade king.

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

Declarer needs seven tricks, and he can score them on a scramble. He ruffs a club to his hand, floats the jack of hearts, then plays a heart to the king. He can then ruff another club, cash the heart ace, and score two more tricks on a high crossruff.

At the other table, the auction is the same, but West leads the jack of diamonds. Declarer takes his ace, then cashes the king and queen of spades. When East shows out, it's all over. Actually, as the cards lie, declarer was down once he won the first trick. He must duck (so that he can afford to concede a club trick to West), then play along roughly the same lines as I suggested above. Since he has less reason to guess the queen of hearts, however, he is less apt to find this line.

The jack of diamonds turned out to be a better lead than the club ace. Declarer really should have made the hand at my table. While my teammate did err in winning the first trick, it's not clear it mattered. Quite possibly he was destined to go down anyway.

Me: +50
Jack: +50

Score on Board 104: 0 IMPs
Total: -43 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

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Board 104

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

Blog Archive

About This Blog