The Gargoyle Chronicles: Match 2

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Match 2 - Board 24

Board 24
Neither vulnerable

♠ 10 3 ♥ K Q 10 4 3 ♦ 9 7 3 ♣ K Q 6

LHO opens one heart--pass--one spade to me. I pass, LHO bids two clubs, which is passed around to me. I pass, and partner leads the six of diamonds.

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

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

I'm not sure why partner is leading diamonds. This misfit auction calls for a trump lead, especially looking at short hearts. Declarer plays the eight from dummy. If declarer has queen-jack doubleton, I would like to play low so partner will know he has a safe exit with the diamond king. But it's possible declarer has queen-jack-deuce, so I suppose I should cover. I play the nine. Declarer wins with the queen and plays the four of spades. Partner plays the nine, dummy the queen, and I give count with the ten. I guess declarer did have queen-jack doubleton of diamonds. He made a good play from dummy at trick one, preventing me from clarifying the suit for partner. Partner probably ducked because he thought the spade was a singleton, and he would prefer to have me on play for either a trump shift or a second diamond.

I expect declarer to play a heart to the ace and ruff a heart, but he surprises me by leading the three of clubs. The only time it can be right for me to split is when I lose a critical tempo by playing low. Declarer is playing this hand as if he has all the time in the world. So, whatever is going on, it does not appear that tempo is important on this deal. I play the six. Declarer plays the ace, and partner follows with the eight.

Declarer cashes the heart ace--five--seven--three, then leads the heart jack (yes, the jack)--deuce--five of clubs--four. He plays a spade to the ace, as partner follows with the seven then leads the six of hearts. Partner ruffs with the ten, and declarer pitches the four of diamonds from dummy. I play the king to clarify the heart suit.

Partner plays the club jack, and we collect two trumps and two heart tricks, holding declarer to his contract.

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

I see. Queen-ten doubleton of diamonds. Not queen-jack. Tricky.

I would guess this not a particularly good result. A routine eight of clubs lead beats two clubs. After the diamond lead, there was nothing we could do. Hopping with the spade king wouldn't help. At least it wouldn't beat it. It would help to hold it to two. Declarer should have made three once the queen of spades held. A club to the ace looked wrong, and it was. Declarer can play a heart to the ace and ruff a heart. Then a spade to the ace and another heart. Partner ruffs in and leads a trump. Declarer wins with the ace and plays another heart. Partner can ruff in again, but we can't get the last trump off the table. Declarer will score one more heart ruff for his ninth trick.

To my surprise, this result is worth ten matchpoints. No one beat two clubs, and two pairs managed to make four. I can't imagine how. Even the jack of diamonds lead doesn't give declarer four. Somehow declarer must draw trumps and hold his side-suit losses to one trick.

How about this? Diamond to the queen, spade to the queen, heart from dummy. East splits. Declarer takes his ace and ducks a trump. The defense returns a spade. Declarer wins, ruffs a heart, plays ace and ruffs a diamond, then ace and a trump, endplaying East, who has failed to unblock. No, that still doesn't work. East is down to queen-ten-small of hearts, and declarer has jack-nine-eight. So East can exit with a low heart and still score two heart tricks. I give up.

Score on Board 24: -90 (10 MP)
Total: 190 (66.0%)

Current Rank: 1st

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

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Match 2 - Board 24

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

Blog Archive

About This Blog