Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 5

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ K Q ♥ K 10 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 10 9 4

Two passes to me. I open one heart, LHO bids one spade, and partner doubles. Some claim this double promises at least four-four in the minors. I don't think that's quite true. First of all, you might have a three-card limit raise in hearts. In addition, there are some awkward hands with a three-card minor where a negative double is the only call that makes sense. Take

♠ x x x x ♥ Q x ♦ A x x x ♣ K x x

for example. You could pass with this pattern if your hand were weaker. But this hand is too good to pass. What else can you do but double? If partner bids two clubs, you can continue with two hearts. Since you would bid three hearts with a three-card limit raise, this bid should show precisely a doubleton heart. I would consider this hand is a minimum for the sequence. You might have as much a two notrump rebid without a spade stopper.

RHO redoubles, showing the ace or king of spades. I bid two clubs. LHO and partner pass. RHO balances with two spades. I pass, LHO passes, and partner competes with three clubs. Everyone passes. LHO leads the jack of spades.

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

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
	Pass	Pass	1 ♥
1 ♠	Double1	Redouble2	2 ♣
Pass	Pass	2 ♠	Pass
Pass	3 ♣	(All pass)
1Negative double
2Spade ace or spade king

Partner's three club bid makes no sense. We don't necessarily need nine trumps to compete at three level when the opponents are at the two level. But, with four spades and a singleton in my primary suit, partner's hand is better for defense and worse for offense than is his typical hand on this auction.

RHO plays the ace, and I drop the queen, the card I'm known to hold. He continues with the four of spades to my king; West plays the deuce.

If I can score seven trump tricks on a crossruff, I'll make this. I need to start by ducking a heart. Clearly I would rather lose the heart trick on my left, so that the presumed trump shift rides around to my hand. I can then ruff a heart, ruff a spade, ruff a heart, ruff a spade, and ruff a heart with the club king. That's seven tricks. I need two more, and I still have the diamond ace and a high trump in my hand.

I may be able to increase my chance of ducking the heart to West if I play a diamond to the ace and a heart toward my hand. But releasing the diamond ace is a bad idea. I establish a winner for the opponents, I give the opponents communication, and I expose myself to a possible overruff. If I took the time, I'm sure I could find a specific layout where playing a diamond to the ace costs the contract, but I'm not going to bother. I'm rejecting it because it's bad strategy (sort of like putting your knight on the edge of the board).

West surely has the heart ace on the auction. Should I exit with the heart king? If I were sure West would play a trump, that would make sense. But what if he doesn't? Often the most effective way to scuttle a crossruff is to avoid leading trumps in order to retain the defense's middle cards. That may be the case here. If West wins the heart ace and plays a diamond, I have no clear route to seven trump tricks. Accordingly, I'd just as soon preserve the option of ruffing out ace third of hearts on my left. Besides, leading the heart ten may suffice to keep East off play. It may be hard for West to duck with ace-queen or even ace-jack.

I lead the heart ten. West plays the three, and East wins with the jack. Probably East has the queen also. I do wish I had the benefit of some table action. In real life, even one as table-presence-challenged as I am would have some clue as to whether that was the case or not. East shifts to the deuce of clubs. I play the ten. If this holds, I can crossruff as described above. If West covers, I will be in dummy, where I don't really want to be. But at least I will have flushed out the club queen, which may make things easier.

West does cover with the queen, and I win with dummy's king. This is the position I've reached, with the lead in dummy:

	NORTH Jack ♠ 9 7 ♥ -- ♦ A 5 4 3 ♣ J 7 5
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ K 8 5 2 ♦ J 7 ♣ A 9 4

Can I still crossruff? If I ruff a spade, ruff heart, ruff a spade, and ruff a heart, I'm stuck in dummy with no way to get to my hand to ruff the third heart. Perhaps if West began with ace third of hearts, I can establish hearts instead. Say I play a trump to my hand, ruff a heart, ruff a spade to my hand, and ruff another heart, dropping the ace. My hearts are now good, and I have one trump left with which to draw the remaining defensive trump. If I were in my hand, I could claim my contract. But, again, I'm stuck in dummy.

I don't usually present Gargoyle Chronicles hands as quizzes. But this is a good problem. If I didn't offer you a chance to test yourself, you would be annoyed with me. Under the assumption that West began with ace third of hearts, how do you play to take seven more tricks?
------

I don't know if this problem is actually difficult or if I just had a blind spot. But it took me longer than I care to admit to find the answer. Finally, it dawned on me that I didn't need to ruff two hearts in dummy. I can afford to lose two more tricks. So now that I've found the trump queen, I can afford to lose a heart trick. Why waste one of dummy's trumps ruffing with it when I desperately need it as an entry to my hand? The solution is to ruff a spade to my hand, then lead a low heart pitching dummy's last spade. If the defense plays another trump, I win in my hand, ruff a heart, hopefully dropping West's ace and establishing my suit. I can then return to my hand with dummy's carefully preserved trump. A red-suit switch by the defense does no better. And a spade switch allows me to ruff in dummy and pitch my diamond loser. See? I knew there was a reason not to release the diamond ace.

I play a spade from dummy. East pitches the nine of hearts. Oops. Time to reassess. That looks like queen-jack-nine of hearts, which gives West ace fourth. Actually that makes more sense than ace third on the auction. Holding four hearts would make West's light overcall more attractive. He probably would have led a singleton diamond (or East might have bid diamonds with six of them). So West is probably 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-3-1. The latter pattern I think I can safely ignore. I doubt I can make this against a bad trump break.

The ace isn't going to ruff out. But that's OK. I just need to make a slight adjustment to my plan. Instead of leading a low heart at this point, I need to lead the king, smothering East's queen and establishing my eight. If East did start with four hearts and has falsecarded with the nine, hearts are now two-two. So leading the king doesn't hurt anything.

I ruff the spade and lead the heart king. West plays the ace, I pitch dummy's last spade as planned, and East plays the heart queen. We have now reached this position, slightly different from the one I was envisioning,  with West on play. (I'm just guessing about the diamond honors. They don't really matter.)

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

West plays the eight of clubs. I win in my hand with the nine, ruff a heart with jack, and play a club to my ace. Making three.

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

In the analysis above, I glossed over what would happen if West played a spade, offering me a ruff-sluff. Would that accomplish anything for the defense? I ruff with dummy's five. If East overuffs, I have no problem. I overruff with the nine, ruff a heart with the jack, and play a trump back to my hand. If East refuses to overruff, I can pitch my diamond loser. I've lost control, so I can no longer establish and run hearts. But I don't need to. I need only five more tricks, so I can revert to a crossruff.

The crossruff works only because West has the club eight. If East had it, refusing to overruff dummy's club five would beat me. What an unusual position! You must refuse to overruff the five, allowing declarer his ruff-sluff, so that you can overruff the seven later. Thanks for overbidding, partner. I had much more fun playing this hand than I would have had collecting an easy down two against two spades.

East did make a serious error in pitching the nine of hearts. It cost nothing double dummy, since I could always make the hand by leading the heart king. But I wasn't intending to do that until he clued me in about the lie of the heart suit.

I don't know how the play went at the other table, but somehow my counterpart managed an overtrick in the same contract, cutting our lead in half.

Table 1: +110
Table 2: -130

Result on Board 5: -1 imp
Total: +1 imp


Post script:

Rainer Herrmann points out, "The plan in the quiz scenario should certainly be to ruff only one heart. But what do you actually accomplish by the artistry of ruffing a spade and ducking a heart first? Simply come to the club nine, ruff a heart and play dummy's last club to the trump ace. Now decide which heart honor is more likely to drop, having seen the heart nine from West, which could be a false card to give declarer a losing option."

He is correct. Not only does his solution allow you to delay your decision about the lie of the heart suit, it avoids the crossruff variation, which fails on best defense if East has the club eight. So why didn't I see that? I suppose it took me so long to think of not ruffing two hearts that I wore myself out, and I gave insufficient thought to the best way to reach my hand. My instinct said to ruff a spade to force East to discard, and I didn't stop to question my instinct.

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 4

Board 4
Both sides vulnerable

♠ A 6 4 ♥ 4 3 ♦ 8 6 4 ♣ A K Q 10 3

RHO opens one heart in third seat. I can double or I can overcall two clubs. Two clubs can make it a little harder to find a spade fit, but double leaves the main feature of my hand on the shelf. Two clubs also makes it easier for me to reenter the auction if the bidding dies at a low level. Suppose, for example, I double and the auction continues two hearts--pass--pass back to me. Now what? I'm not comfortable selling out. But three clubs would show a considerably better hand than I have. If I bid clubs first, however, I can compete with a re-opening double.

I bid two clubs. LHO bids two hearts, and partner bids three clubs. RHO bids three hearts. I pass, and LHO goes on to four hearts. I guess three hearts was invitational. Not many pairs play that way.

In some partnerships, I could lead the club queen to request count at trick one. Jack doesn't play that convention, however, so I lead the club ace.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Nathanial	Jack	Marcus
	Pass	Pass	1 ♥
2 ♣	2 ♥	3 ♣	3 ♥
Pass	4 ♥	(All pass)

Partner plays the four; declarer, the nine. If a second club is cashing, I need one trick from partner. If he has a trump trick, the diamond ace, or the queen of spades (doubleton or third), there is nothing I need to do. But if he has king-queen of diamonds, I may need to switch to a diamond before my spade ace is knocked out.

If the second club isn't cashing, I need two tricks from partner. In that case, I may need to go after a spade ruff. If partner has a doubleton spade and the trump ace, I need to switch to a spade at trick two.

I was right that what I needed was a count signal. If declarer has two clubs, my best defense is (A) to cash the second club and play a diamond. If he has a singleton club, my best defense is (B) to play a low spade. Note that an obvious-shift attitude signal would not help. Partner, not knowing he needs two diamond honors for a shift to be productive, would discourage any time he has the king or queen. This would work just fine if I had a diamond honor too. Then I could adopt (A) if partner discourages and (B) if he doesn't. But, with the hand I hold, an attitude signal does not tell me what I need to know.

Jack's I-don't-have-a-club-honor signal, as usual, is no help at all. So I must simply choose the defense that works most often. For (A) to be right, I need declarer to have a doubleton club. Less obviously, I need him to have six hearts, If he has only five, he doesn't have enough pitches to get rid of all his diamonds, and there is no need for a diamond switch. That means declarer must be x-6-y-2. For (B) to be right, I need declarer to have a singleton club,and I need partner to have a doubleton spade and a doubleton ace of hearts. That gives declarer specifically 4-5-3-1.

Since (B) requires declarer to have a specific pattern and (A) requires a range of patterns, (A) is more likely to be right. It may appear that the high-card constraints counterbalanace that. (B) requires partner to have one high card (the heart ace) while (A) requires partner to have two (the king and queen of diamonds). But that's an illusion. Partner has more diamonds than hearts, so he is more likely to hold diamond honors than to hold heart honors. I won't bore you with the calculations. But it turns out partner is actually more likely to hold the king-queen of diamonds than to hold the heart ace. So (A) is a standout, at least on an a priori basis.

Of course, I've completely ignored the fact that South chose to bid three hearts over three clubs. Does the three heart bid itself suggest a singleton club? If I adopt (A), I'm playing declarer for something like

♠ Q x ♥ A K J x x x ♦ A x x ♣ x x

Three hearts would make more sense if it were competitive rather than invitational. But I don't see any reason that hand is any less likely than, say,

♠ Q x x x ♥ K J x x x ♦ A K x ♣ x,

which is a pretty thin three-heart bid whatever it means. So I'm sticking with (A).

Now that I've decided to shift to a diamond, does it matter whether I cash the club king first or not? It can't hurt to try to cash it. If the club gets ruffed, a diamond shift wasn't doing any good anyway. And not cashing it might give me a problem, since I won't be sure how many tricks I need elsewhere.

I play the club king. Partner follows with the five, and declarer ruffs with the five of hearts. Declarer plays the six of hearts--three--queen--ten. Then the deuce of hearts--jack--ace--four. How about that? Jack played the suit correctly. He guarded against the one four-zero break he could handle.

He plays the deuce of spades--four--nine--three. It appears declarer is 3-5-4-1. Unless partner has the ace-king of diamonds, we're not beating this. Declarer plays the five of diamonds--three--king. Making four.

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

Declarer was on a diamond guess. He apparently played partner for the diamond ace because he assumed I had the spade ace. But couldn't partner have ducked the spade ace? Declarer should have led the five of spades (Rule 2 for scrambling count signals ) to the king. It would be much harder for partner to duck now. From partner's perspective, declarer might have two small spades and might have just misguessed. In fact, to make this maneuver more convincing, declarer might do that at trick three, trusting us to have found a spade ruff already if one was available. It's true that if hearts were four-zero, he might regret wasting that dummy entry. But a four-zero trump break seems unlikely on the auction. I think the danger of misguessing diamonds is more pressing. As it is, the diamonds were misguess-proof.

South made a rather aggressive three heart call, apparently spurred on by his singleton club. The opponents probably would not have reached game had I passed or doubled instead of overcalling two clubs. Sometimes it seems that the worst time to bid is when your hand is pure. If all your cards are working, then all the opponents' cards are working also, and bidding just pushes them into a making game or slam that they would not have bid on their own. Perhaps two clubs is wrong. We probably can't outbid the opponents in clubs, so finding a club fit may help them more than it helps us. Maybe double, trying to find a fit where we can actually outbid them, is a better idea.

I'm not yet prepared to reach that conclusion. But I will certainly be on the look-out for additional deals involving this principle. I may change my strategy in the future. One of the things that makes bridge a difficult game to learn is that the feedback is imperfect. If you get a bad result, you can't be sure whether you did something wrong or were just unlucky. So it's easy to keep making the same mistakes over and over. To improve, you need to be continually evaluating your actions, and you need a long memory. I'm pretty good on the evaluating part. Sadly, my memory isn't what it used to be. The truth is, in a couple of weeks I'll probably have forgotten about this deal. If I do this again with a similar bad result, could you please remind me?

Luckily, our teammates reach game as well. The board is a push.

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 4: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 3

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ Q J 9 ♥ J 10 7 ♦ A 4 3 ♣ A 8 7 4

I open one notrump (12-14). Partner bids two hearts (a transfer to spades), and I bid two spades. Partner bids three hearts, a game force showing at least five-five in the majors. Even though I have a minimum in high cards, this is a terrific hand, especially given that I am limited by my failure to pre-accept. I have fillers in both of partner's suits and aces opposite his short suits. Even the distribution is a plus. While "4333" is often a poor distribution, it is actually a good distribution opposite a two-suiter. Despite what various point-count systems may tell you, when partner has two five-card or longer suits, it is usually better to be three-three in those suits than to be three-two (and much better than to be three-one). So I bid four spades to show extras.

Even if you generally play fast arrival (which I don't), fast-arrival should not apply when showing a preference. A simple preference can't promise support and a good hand, because it must frequently be made with a doubleton as a mark-time bid. Still, you need some way to show extras below game. Since the simple preference is not available for that purpose, it makes sense to assign that role to the jump preference. It is true that, in this particular auction (because opener is known to be balanced and because the three heart bid promises five), these considerations don't apply. Opener has no reason to bid three spades with a doubleton, so you could play fast arrival if you chose to. But ad hoc exceptions make me nervous. Since a jump preference should show extras in most auctions, you are less apt to have an accident if you make that a general rule.

Partner passes four spades, and LHO leads the jack of diamonds.

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

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
			1 NT
Pass	2 ♥1	Pass	2 ♠
Pass	3 ♥2	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)
1Jacoby transfer
2Forcing to game with at least five-five in the majors

I play the diamond queen and East covers with the king. It appears I must lose a diamond trick and potentially two hearts tricks. As long as trumps are three-two, I'm cold. If they aren't, I probably need to find the heart queen onside, so I can establish hearts by losing the lead only once. Otherwise, I will be tapped out.

Ducking the diamond to deprive the opponents of communication seems like a good idea, although it's not entirely safe. If East shifts to a heart, and West takes the ace and continues hearts, I will duck, assuming the shift was from a singleton. If East has queen third, he can win and give his partner a ruff, and I will go down in a cold contract. But if East is clever enough to find that shift, he deserves to beat me. These communication-killing ducks are frequently necessary for reasons you can't foresee at trick one. So it's a good idea to deploy them as a matter of routine unless you see a serious danger.

I play the diamond three. East continues with the five of diamonds--ace--six--eight. The deuce is missing. Probably East began with king-five-deuce.

I cash the spade queen. (Not the jack. As a general rule, declarer should conceal his jacks when possible. If I lead the queen, neither opponent knows where the jack is. If I lead the jack and it holds, at least one and possibly both opponents will know I have the queen.) West plays the ten; East, the four.

The ten looks suspiciously like a singleton. If so, is there anything to gain by abandoning trumps and playing on hearts right away? Maybe. Suppose I play a heart to the king and it holds. Now I'm home. I concede a heart. They tap dummy. I concede a second heart. If they don't tap dummy again, I can claim. If they do, I have a high cross ruff.

That's fine if West ducks when I lead a heart. But what if he hops and plays another heart? If I finesse, I go down when the spade ten was a falsecard and East has queen third of hearts. If I go up, I go down when East has a singleton heart. There is no way I can guarantee success whenever the ace is onside. So this line is worse than 50%, and it's better to stick with my original plan of playing West for the heart queen.

I might as well draw one more round of trumps, just in case the ten was a falsecard. I cash the jack of spades, and West pitches the deuce of clubs. I can't afford to draw the third round of trumps. I might need the spade nine as a hand entry. For example, suppose West has ace-queen fourth of hearts. I lead a heart honor, West hops, and plays another diamond. I can ruff high, play a spade to my nine, and float the other honor. East ruffs with his last trump, and I have a reentry with the club ace to repeat the heart finesse. Note, by the way, that I would be unable to cater to ace-queen fourth of hearts onside if I had not ducked the first diamond. If I draw the third round of trumps, I'm short an entry to my hand. If I don't, West can hop with the heart ace, give his partner a ruff, then gain the lead with the diamond ten for a second ruff. I don't claim credit for seeing this at trick one, but I didn't have to. It's enough to know that depriving the opponents of communication is a good idea on principle.

Which heart honor should I lead from my hand? Again, declarer should conceal his jacks when possible. (Just think of all the times you, as defender, told yourself, "If I only knew who had the jack of hippogriffs, I would know exactly what to do.") In this suit, for example, if it were necessary for West to hop with the ace, leading the ten would make it harder for him to do so. If West has the queen, hopping may cost a trick by force (if his partner holds a singleton jack). And, if he doesn't have the queen, hopping may take a guess away. (I may hold queen-ten and be fishing for the jack.) In this particular layout, I don't have any specific objective in mind in concealing the jack. I'm just following best practices.

I lead the ten. West plays the ace, and East follows with the four. I have just explained how leading the ten makes it harder for West to play the ace. So the ace is an unexpected play. What can he possibly have to making hopping look like the right move? I can think of only one hand that makes sense:

♠ 10 ♥ A x ♦ J 10 6 ♣ K J 10 x x x x

Now, if he allows his partner to gain the lead before he does, he will be unable to continue the tap when he gets in with the heart ace. Somehow, though, I don't think this is what West has. He must have some other reason for hopping that hasn't occurred to me.

West plays the six of hearts. I can stop worrying about what West has now. If I play low on this trick, I can't go down. I play low, East wins with the queen, and I claim.

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

This was not a spectacular defense. West can beat me by force by ducking the heart. Even after hopping with the ace, he will probably beat me if he continues diamonds. I can make it if I drop the heart queen. But unless I can figure out a reason for West to hop with ace third of hearts, I don't see why I would do that. Even looking at his hand, I can't figure out why he hopped.

Speaking of not being able to figure out the opponents' actions, why did East lead the five of diamonds at trick two? Was that systemic or was he just randomizing his spot cards? If I had needed a count on this deal, I probably would have gotten it wrong. For the remainder of the match, I need to keep in mind that the opponents might not card as I would expect them to.

The board is a push. I suspect our opponents played four spades from the North hand. And they probably got a diamond lead, killing any chance the defense might have. We were lucky Nathanial lived up to his name. This board should have been a loss for our system.

Table 1: +420
Table 2: -420

Result on Board 3: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 2

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ 5 4 2 ♥ Q 9 ♦ A K 9 8 6 ♣ Q 8 5

RHO passes. Two and a half honor tricks with a good five card suit is an opening bid as far as I'm concerned. I open one notrump (12-14). Partner bids two hearts, a transfer to spades. I bid two spades, and partner splinters with four diamonds. I sign off in four spades, and partner bids four notrump, Roman Keycard Blackwood. I bid five diamonds, showing one keycard, and partner bids seven spades. Despite being shy one high-card point, this hand can't be a disappointment to partner. The king of diamonds is duplication, but at least it's a cashing trick. And both my queens are working. In addition, I have a third spade. Given my signoff over the splinter, this is a huge hand.

West leads the three of diamonds. Their convention card says "low encouraging" versus suits. The three looks pretty low, so I guess I should be encouraged.

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

West	North	East	South
Nathanial	Jack	Marcus	Phillip
		Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♥1	Pass	2 ♠
Pass	4 ♦2	Pass	4 ♠
Pass	4 NT3	Pass	5 ♦4
Pass	7 ♠	(All pass)
1Jacoby-transfer
2Splinter
3Ace asking for spades
41 or 4 aces

Assuming trumps come home, I have twelve top tricks. If trumps are two-two, I can ruff a heart for the thirteenth trick. If not, I have three-three hearts or squeeze chances to fall back on. My squeeze chances will improve if I can isolate the diamond stopper. Ruffing one diamond will do that unless the suit splits four-four. In addition, letting this lead ride to my hand will isolate the stopper in the unlikely event that West has led from two honors fourth.

I pitch a heart from dummy. East plays the jack (presumably from queen-jack), and I win with the ace, the card I'm known to hold.

West's failure to lead a trump is suspicious. The diamond lead risked giving me a trick. What if I had held the diamond jack instead of East, for example? True, after Blackwood, West wasn't expecting a diamond void in dummy. But even if dummy had a singleton, the diamond lead might take a finesse for me that I wouldn't be inclined to take myself. A diamond lead makes some sense if he wants me to use my hand entries early, and a bad trump break is one reason he might want to do that.

I can handle a four-zero trump break by taking a double finesse at trick two. But I'm hesitant to place that much stock in this inference. Do I have any chance if I cash a high spade first? After cashing the spade, I can lead a heart to the queen for one finesse, but then I'm out of hand entries except for a heart ruff. And if I ruff a heart, I have no trumps left with which to take a finesse. This is exactly why the diamond lead makes sense with four trumps. If dummy did have a diamond, a diamond might well be the only lead to beat me.

It appears the only way I can pick up jack-ten fourth of trumps is to take a finesse now, but I'm not willing to do that. I just don't have that much respect for Jack's opening leads. So I proceed with the plan of trying to isolate the diamond stopper. I lead the nine of diamonds. West plays the ten. I ruff with the six of spades (retaining a spade lower than my five on principle, though I can't imagine how it will ever make a difference). East follows with the diamond deuce.

Now I'm worried. Why would West cover with the ten unless he held the queen as well? If he did lead a diamond from such a dangerous holding, the odds of a four-zero trump break have gone way up. (Although he should have led the queen rather than low. The queen might trap a stiff jack in dummy, or it might prevent a squeeze by allowing East to retain his jack.)

I cash the spade ace--seven--deuce--eight. Whew! On the spade king, East pitches the deuce of clubs. So I could have afforded a spade finesse at trick two after all, even though I was wrong about four-zero trumps. I'm sure the table would have found that amusing.

I don't have the communication for a minor-suit squeeze. So my only choice is a simple-played-as-double, with hearts as the double threat. Since dummy has two winners in the double-threat suit (what Clyde E. Love called a Type B₂ squeeze), the squeeze plays itself. I cash the club ace, run trumps, play a heart to the queen, and cash the ace-king of diamonds. There is no squeeze, because hearts were three-three all along. Making seven.

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

Partner's auction was pointless. The information gained both from the spinter and from Blackwood was of no use to him. How should he have bid his hand? One possibility is just to bid seven spades over one notrump. But I think I can do a little better than that. I suspect that I'm quite willing to play a grand (1) any time partner has the heart queen or (2) any time partner has four spades. (If he has four spades, I'll take my chances that he doesn't have three small hearts.) In all other cases, I'd just as soon avoid a grand. I might still make one if partner has enough winners to allow me to pitch all my hearts, but that will be hard to diagnose.

With that in mind, I'd start with two clubs, intending to raise two spades to seven. On the given hand, partner will bid two diamonds. I now need to set hearts as trump, so I can bid keycard Blackwood and find out about the queen of hearts. I can do that by bidding three spades (Smolen), ostensibly showing four spades and longer hearts. If partner bids four hearts, I can bid Blackwood immediately. If he bids three notrump (as he would on this hand), I can transfer to hearts via four diamonds and bid Blackwood. Now I can bid seven spades if he shows the "trump" queen and six spades if he doesn't.

How's that for a plan? Of course, if I wind up signing off in six spades, I'm counting on partner to realize that I was just kidding about having only four spades. Will he work that out? Or will he think hearts is agreed, so six spades must be forcing - some kind of last-train grand try with six notrump as the resting spot? To find out, I tried another bridgewinners.com poll. Everyone appeared to interpret six spades as an attempt to play there, although almost no one was willing to abandon the idea that partner has more hearts than spades. I'm not sure why. Once you conclude that partner took this auction to find out about the heart queen, it seems to me that any descriptive content of his auction becomes suspect. All you really know about partner's hand is that he is willing to play six spades if you don't have the heart queen and has something else in mind if you do.

In the poll, I did not use the actual South hand. For one thing, I needed to remove the heart queen, so partner would attempt to sign off in six spades. Also, to add a little more interest, I gave South jack-ten third of spades and two small hearts. I was curious to see how many would raise six spades to seven, concluding that the ability to ruff two hearts high had to be just as good as holding the heart queen. A little over 20% reached that conclusion.

Our opponents stopped in six spades at the other table, so we pick up 13 imps and surge into the lead.

Table 1: +2210
Table 2: -1460

Result on Board 2: +13 imps
Total: +2 imps

Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 1

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ K 9 ♥ Q 8 4 3 ♦ K 4 2 ♣ J 9 8 5

Partner opens one diamond, I bid one heart, and partner bids one notrump (15-17). I'm worth only two notrump. But with such weak hearts, inviting is dangerous. If I bid two and partner accepts, LHO, knowing we don't have extras, can double any time he has a heart stack. If I raise to three, he must be more cautious about doubling. It's not the increased penalty I'm worried about so much as giving LHO a chance to direct the lead. I might go down doubled after a slow auction when I would have made three notrump had I just bid it.

I bid three notrump, and everyone passes. RHO leads the deuce of spades, fourth best.

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

West	North	East	South
Marcus	Phillip	Nathanial	Jack
			1 ♦
Pass	1 ♥	Pass	1 NT
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

Partner has a minimum in high cards. But with ace-ten-nine fifth of diamonds, I assume he would have accepted an invitation, so we were always getting to game. Still, this isn't much of a contract. With a normal break in diamonds, I have only seven tricks. Each suit offers some potential for an extra trick. West might have led from queen-jack fourth of spades, diamonds might come home for five tricks, or the club ace might be onside. The heart king may be onside also, but that will probably be of no use. If I have three spades losers in addition to the club ace, I can't afford to give up a trick to the king of hearts. I may, however, be able to take a second heart trick via an endplay.

I will probably need a spade entry to dummy later, either to take a second diamond finesse if I find West with a singleton diamond honor or to lead a club toward my king. So I might as well play low to this trick and see if I got lucky in the spade suit before I delve too much further into this deal. I play the nine, and East plays the jack. So much for a third spade trick.

Where am I going to find two more tricks? If I can't bring home the diamonds for five tricks, I will need the club ace onside and an endplay in hearts, which means I need some kind of defensive entanglement in the club suit. Does queen doubleton of clubs in the West hand do it? Say I take the spade ace and play three rounds of diamonds. The opponents continue spades. I win in dummy and play a club. East must duck, else I get two club tricks. I win with the king and play a second club to West's queen. If he has the heart king and no entry to his partner in the spade suit, he will be endplayed. He can get off the endplay by unblocking the club queen under my king. But maybe he has queen-ten doubleton. Or maybe even a singleton queen, in which case I can toss him in with the ten of spades (though I will have to guess which holding to play for). This isn't likely to work, but I don't see anything better.

I take the spade ace and play the five of diamonds to dummy's king. West plays the three; East, the seven. I play the deuce of diamonds from dummy, and East plays the queen. I win with the diamond ace, and West follows. I play the diamond ten. West wins with the jack, and East pitches the three of spades. That's good. Assuming West has the spade queen, the opponents have no communication in spades.

West plays the four of spades to dummy's king--six---five. Does it matter which club I lead from dummy? If I lead the nine, East may think I have king-ten third, in which case, with ace-queen, he might hop with the ace to keep me from retaining the lead in dummy to repeat the finesse. If he does, then West, with his putative king of hearts and ten of clubs, has two suits he can't afford to lead. It's not entirely clear I can exploit that fact. But at least it will give West a problem.

I lead the nine of clubs. East plays the ten. That's not good. There's no way East would play the ten from ace-ten fourth or fifth. So the layout I was hoping for isn't there. My plan isn't going to work. Is there anything else to try?

What if West doesn't have four spades? What if he led from queen third (prefering the unbid major to his own long suit) and spades are now blocked? Is that possible? Could East have pitched a spade winner? Let's give East something like

♠ J 8 7 6 3 ♥ J x x x ♦ Q 7 ♣ ? 10

He certainly might pitch a spade on the third diamond with that. If that's what he has, do I have a chance? Suppose his '?' is the ace. I play the club king, then play another club. He wins. If he plays a spade to his partner's queen, West will be endplayed. It shouldn't be hard for him to see that, however. It should be pretty easy to find a heart shift.

Suppose his '?' is the queen. Now I can duck this trick, allowing me to smother his queen later, establishing two club tricks in dummy. Again, if East plays a spade, I'll make it; and if he plays a heart, I'll go down. He might find a heart switch in this layout also, but it's a little bit harder. In general, the earlier you put someone to the test, the more likely he is to go wrong. Since it's fifty-fifty whether he has the ace or the queen, ducking seems like my best shot. I play the six of clubs; East plays the deuce. East plays the seven of spades to his partner's queen, and I pitch dummy's three of hearts. I don't think this is going to work. East would have played the eight of spades with eight-seven left, so West probably has the eight.

And indeed he does. He cashes it. I pitch the four of hearts from dummy; East plays the five of hearts. If East began with only four spades, he can't have a doubleton club. He is probably 4-4-2-3 or 4-3-2-4. He put up the ten of clubs from queen-ten because he thought I was psychic and might duck the nine to his partner's ace. If he is 4-3-2-4 and West has the heart king, we are down to this position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x x ♦ -- ♣ A		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x ♦ -- ♣ Q x x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

I can hold this to down one by pitching a club. West can cash his his club ace, but he will be endplayed. If East is 4-4-2-3,

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x ♦ -- ♣ A x		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x x ♦ -- ♣ Q x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

my only chance is to stiff the heart ace and hope West doesn't work it out. I must hope he thinks I began with three hearts and two clubs and decides to cash the club ace rather than exit with a heart. I can't imagine he would get the position wrong. (Why would I have ducked the club ten with king doubleton of clubs?) So I'll go for the legitimate line. I pitch the three of clubs. West cashes the club ace--eight--seven--king, then leads the four of clubs to his partner's queen. Down two.

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

My counterpart at the other table made four notrump. That's some pretty impressive declarer play! Somehow he must have induced a diamond lead. Maybe he opened one notrump, then bid two spades over Stayman.

While I doubt Jack actually did that, I do think bidding two spades over Stayman is a reasonable and underutilized swing action at matchpoints. With top tricks and a potential ruffing value, you could easily wind up taking one more trick in a four-three spade fit than in notrump, especially if the opponents don't know you're in a four-three fit. The bid has less constructive potential at IMPs, since you need to take two more tricks in spades than in notrump for it to gain (and, specifically, ten tricks rather than eight). Of course, either at IMPs or at matchpoints, the bid has considerable potential for gain if partner doesn't raise it, either by inducing a favorable lead or by getting the opponents to miscount your hand.

Table 1: -100
Table 2: -430

Result on Board 1: -11 imps
Total: -11 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 8

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ A J 10 8 ♥ J 6 ♦ 7 5 2 ♣ Q J 7 4

RHO opens one spade in third seat. LHO bids two hearts, and RHO bids two spades, which is alerted as forcing. LHO bids two notrump--pass--pass back to me. At matchpoints this would be a clear double. I have spades behind dummy and partner has hearts behind declarer. I would not double three notrump, because they could have extras. The bad breaks may mean they're making only three when they would normally expect to make four or five. But when they stop in two notrump, I know they don't have any extras. There is very little downside to this double. If they make this despite the bad breaks, then they have underbid, in which case I have a terrible board anyway. Most of the field will be in game going down.

At IMPs, the risk of doubling is greater and the reward is smaller. It is still true that if they make this, they have underbid and our teammates will probably be in game. But doubling will still be costly. It will turn a five-imp loss into an 11-imp loss. And we must beat them at least two for the double to show any substantial gain. So I pass. Partner leads the deuce of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Jack	Stella	Phillip	Kate
			Pass
Pass	1 ♠	Pass	2 ♥
Pass	2 ♠1	Pass	2 NT
(All pass)
1Forcing

I don't understand two spades. There isn't much chance of a game opposite a passed hand, and two hearts seems as good a spot as any. So why not pass?

Partner probably has four clubs. But, since he rates to have four hearts, I must be alert to the possiblity that he is leading a three-card suit. Declarer rises with dummy's king. If I could afford the queen, I would play it. But if partner has ace third (or, more embarassingly, four small), the queen would not work out well. So I encourage with the seven; declarer plays the three.

I expect declarer to play a heart at trick two. When dummy has touching honors, it's usually right to cover the last honor if dummy has small cards and the penultimate honor if it doesn't. So my first instinct is to play the jack on the first round of hearts. Does that make sense here? Suppose declarer has ace-king-eight fifth (without the seven) and exactly one side entry. If I play low on the first heart, declarer can duck. Whether partner wins this trick or not, declarer can take four heart tricks. But if I play the jack, declarer can't afford to duck. She must win the trick and play a low heart to dummy's remaining honor. If partner ducks this trick, declarer doesn't have the entries both to establish and to run the suit, so she is held to three heart tricks. I'm sure there are other holdings that will work similarly, so it looks right to cover the first heart.

Declarer doesn't play a heart, however. She plays the nine of diamonds. I play the deuce, declarer wins with the king, and partner plays the eight. Why isn't she playing hearts? She must have the queen of diamonds as well. I can't imagine it's right to release her only side entry before playing hearts. Based on partner's eight, she would appear to have king-queen fourth. It's still not clear why she wants to be in her hand.

She plays the four of diamonds--six--ace--seven. I see. She's just trying to get a count. She plays the nine of hearts. I would have covered at trick two. But declarer has demonstrated she has no shortage of entries to her hand, so I don't see the point anymore. It's probably better to keep the favorable lie of the heart suit a secret. I play the six--king--five. On the bidding, declarer can't have the ace-king of hearts and the king-queen of diamonds. She must have king-queen in each suit, and partner must have ducked the ace.

If declarer has the heart eight, then, once she knocks out partner's ace, she has four hearts, four diamonds, and a club--nine tricks. If partner has the spade queen, as seems likely, we can cash enough tricks to beat this before declarer gets back in. If not, we can cash only five tricks--three clubs and two aces--so declarer will make it.

Declarer plays the ten of diamonds, on which partner pitches the deuce of hearts, and overtakes with dummy's jack. She leads a heart--jack--queen--ace. Partner shifts to the queen of spades. We have the rest. Down three.

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

Declarer could have cashed her fourth diamond to hold it to down two. But she was still trying to make it, hoping the spade ace was onside. Of course, partner didn't have to give her the chance. He could have reasoned, as I did, that declarer couldn't have entry problems given this line. So there was no point in ducking the heart. We were always entitled to down three. Maybe I should have doubled after all.

No. If I double, they might wriggle their way into three diamonds. Or three hearts for that matter. I can't be too unhappy when the opponents go minus 150 with two higher-ranking makable contracts available to them.

Our teammates sensibly stopped in two hearts, making four. So we pick up eight imps. That gives us 23 (out of 30) victory points. We are now n first place.

Table 1: +150
Table 2: +170

Result on Board 8: 8 imps
Result on Match 2: +26 imps (23 VP)
Current Total: 42 VP


For our third match, we play Marcus and Nathanial, who play the Jack convention card, whatever that means. I don't know Jack.

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 7

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5

The opponents have the auction to themselves. LHO opens one diamond; RHO bids one spade. LHO raises to two spades; RHO bids two notrump, a relay. LHO bids three spades, showing four trumps and more than a minimum, and RHO bids four spades. I lead the club king.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
Pass	1 ♦	Pass	1 ♠
Pass	2 ♠	Pass	2 NT1
Pass	3 ♠2	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)
1Relay
2Fourcard support and not a minimum

Since the two notrump relay can apparently be used to find out whether partner has three-card or four-card support, I suppose South might have a game force with four spades. If she has five spades, however, I assume she will have only an invitational hand, else she would have bid four spades directly over the raise.

Partner plays the club eight, and declarer follows with the deuce. Diamonds is the obvious shift, so partner's card (assuming it is high) should suggest that continuing clubs looks like a better idea to him than shifting to diamonds. There is no particular reason to believe partner has the club ace. He may encourage without the club ace if a diamond shift looks wrong.

What can I conclude about partner's diamonds? That's a difficult question. It depends on whether you think partner's signal is prescriptive ("Please shift to a diamond.") or descriptive ("I have something useful in diamonds, just so you know."). As a general rule, the less you know about the deal, the more descriptive your signals should be. So, at trick one, signals are usually descriptive. But not always. It all depends on context, and I think the context here calls for a more prescriptive approach.

Let's move over to the East seat for a moment. On this auction, looking at that dummy, my judgment would be that holding the diamond king alone (without the ten or jack) gives me good reason to steer partner away from a diamond shift. So I would tend to encourage clubs with that holding.

Take these two hands, for example:

(A) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ Q 3 2 ♦ K 9 6 ♣ 10 8 7 3

(B) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K 10 6 ♣ 10 8 7 4 3

With (A), I don't want a diamond shift unless partner has jack-ten of diamonds, in which case he might find the shift by himself. Simply change the diamond ten to the jack in the actual West hand, and a diamond shift would be fatal:

(A)

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

But if I hold (B), I do want a diamond shift. If I don't get it, I might be endplayed:

(B)

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

Accordingly, I would tend to encourage clubs at trick one with just the diamond king. If the heart suit were more threatening, I would feel different. For example, give dummy king-queen-jack fourth of hearts and take my spade ace away (so there is room for partner to hold the heart ace). Now the diamond king alone would be enough for me to discourage in clubs. Where is the dividing line? At what point are dummy's hearts sufficiently threatening that I would signal for diamonds without a supporting lower honor? I can't say exactly. It's a judgment call.

Elsewhere in this blog I have inveighed against fuzzy, context-based signals, and the discussion above may seem to belie that conviction. So let me clarify. I do think one should have clear rules about what message a signal conveys. You don't want to be in a situation where you know you want partner to play a spade but you aren't sure whether a low card or a high card is the way to ask for it. Judgment must come into play, however, in deciding whether to send that message. After all, we can agree that one spade--three spades is a limit raise yet still leave the dividing line between a limit raise and a forcing raise a matter of individual judgment.

In any event, these considerations are moot, since I'm playing with Jack. Jack isn't even looking at his diamonds, He's looking at his clubs and telling me he has the ace. Pure and simple.

Back over to the West seat. If partner has the club ace, I may need to cash our second club trick. It might go away if I don't. Should I cash the queen or lead a low one? It could be right to cash the queen so that I can stay on play to put a diamond through. Otherwise, partner may be endplayed:

(C)

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

Could cashing the queen could work out poorly if partner is short in clubs? Let's try another layout:

(D)

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

If I cash the queen, partner's ace will drop on the next round, establishing declarer's ten. But so what? We aren't beating the contract on this layout whatever I do. Four small clubs in declarer's hand is a very favorable assumption for declarer, so it is pointless to cater to it. I might as well cash the queen, so I can switch to diamonds at trick three.

Some might argue that a reliable partner can't have (C), that he would discourage at trick one with that hand. Indeed, in a poll I conducted on bridgewinners.com, roughly 80% of the respondents said they would discourage at trick one with (C). But I don't think you should.

Back to the East seat again. Yes, with (C) you want partner to play a diamond, but not just yet. You want him to cash the club queen first. If he doesn't, declarer can make the contract by pitching his club on dummy's fourth heart. If partner knew you had the club ace, you could discourage and trust him to work out on his own the need to cash before shifting. But partner doesn't know who has the ace. If you discourage, how will he know that he isn't supposed to shift immediately?

(E)

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

In this layout, if declarer wins the first trick, the defense is easy. But if she ducks, partner must find a diamond shift at trick two. It shouldn't be too hard for declarer to find this duck. You might as well give West his entry now while he is still somewhat in the dark.

Holding (C), then, you must encourage to get partner to cash the club queen. How do you get him to shift to diamonds at trick three? Actually, I doubt that's a problem. If partner held the diamond jack, a diamond shift would be dangerous. But he doesn't, so a diamond shift at trick three looks pretty routine. It's a perfectly safe exit, and it might be productive. Why would he ever not play a diamond at trick three? The idea that you somehow need to tell partner to lead diamonds comes from focusing on your own hand rather than looking at the deal from partner's perspective.

You have a difficult problem, however, if you switch the jack and ten of diamonds:

(F)

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

Again, you must encourage so partner will cash the club. But he will be hard pressed to find a diamond shift at trick three on his own. How can you get him to do the right thing? One possibility is to take charge. Overtake with the ace and return a suit-preference three of clubs. Obviously, this could work out badly. Even if you aren't playing with Lowenthal (who might have king empty fourth), this maneuver might still lose a trick by force. And, if it doesn't, partner must still work out why you did this. He might attribute it to something less obscure, like holding ace doubleton of clubs.

I think the best solution is to signal with the seven. The seven is high enough that partner will probably think it is encouraging and will cash the queen. Now you play the eight. By playing up the line, you negate your original message. The seven becomes discouraging in retrospect, and partner might work out that you want a diamond shift. He might get this right even if he doesn't suspect your equivocation. He might think you had ace-eight-seven third all along. The bridgewinners were about evenly split between encouraging and discouraging on this one, which I don't understand. If you think it's right to discourage clubs with (C), why would you change your mind with (F)? Two people did choose the seven, but no one said why. I don't know if they were intending to follow with the eight or not.

Back to the West seat on the actual deal. I cash the club queen. Partner plays the three; declarer, the ten. The three should be count, so partner should have ace third or fourth but not ace fifth. Comments in the aforementioned poll indicated that some would play this card as suit preference. All I have to say about that is, "Arggggghhhh!" (No offense intended.) I'd rather take suit preference off the card altogether than worry that partner would give me suit preference here. This should be count, because I might need to know if it's safe to continue a third round of clubs. Clarifying your holding in the suit led always takes precedence over suit preference unless your holding in the suit led is clearly immaterial. Playing a third club is a serious possibility, so your club length is hardly immaterial.

Fortunately, I don't need to worry whether Jack agrees with me or not. I see no reason not to switch to a diamond. I play the diamond deuce--eight--six--five. Declarer appears to have at least king-jack-nine-five. The missing diamonds are the seven, six, and three. I don't know if Jack would play high (count) or low (attitude) with two small. (He should give count, since his failure to win the trick is all the attitude I need. But that's a bit subtle for Jack.) In any event, I don't think Jack would play middle from three. So declarer has five diamonds. We need two major-suit tricks to beat this. Declarer has at most two hearts, so the two tricks will have to be either the ace-queen of a major or the heart ace and the spade queen.

Declarer plays the three of spades from dummy--four--ace--seven. Then deuce of spades--ten--jack--queen. This looks promising. If declarer could afford to lose a spade trick, she would have taken the safety play (cashing dummy's king, then leading low toward her hand). This line indicates she couldn't afford to lose a spade trick, so she must be going down.

No, wait. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. If she has a doubleton club, she has a safety play. But not if she has three. If I have queen-ten fourth of spades and she plays king of spades, a spade to her ace, and another spade, I can hop and tap dummy to promote my spade ten. Furthermore, even if she has a doubleton club, the "safety" play isn't so safe. What if she loses to a doubleton queen of spades in my hand and I give partner a diamond ruff? I take it all back. This isn't as promising a development as I thought.

Partner returns the nine of spades to dummy's king. I pitch the four of diamonds. Declarer plays the seven of hearts--deuce--ace. I guess that's it. There is no prospect for a fourth trick.

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

So declarer did have a doubleton club and might have taken a safety play in spades. Whether she should or not is hard to say. A priori, it's more likely that the safety play is necessary than that she will run into a diamond ruff. But we didn't defend as if trumps were breaking badly. We might have tried the effect of three rounds of clubs if that were the case.

The contract and result were the same at the other table. But I'll bet they didn't spend nearly so much time as we did discussing the board. This is a pretty innocuous-looking deal, isn't it? If you were kibitzing when it was played, would you suspect this deal would spawn three poll questions and merit 2,000 words of commentary?


Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 7: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 6

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ 8 2 ♥ A 7 5 ♦ A 3 2 ♣ A 10 8 7 4

RHO opens one spade, I double, and LHO bids four spades, which ends the auction.

If partner has a trump trick or a cashing king, it won't matter what I lead. But what if he doesn't? Do I need to develop a fourth trick before declarer can take discards, or should I defend passively (i.e., lead a trump) and force declarer to break the side suits herself? The more balanced dummy is, the more likely that it is right to defend passively. But dummy doesn't rate to be balanced. One of the problems of playing against Jack is you can't ask about alternative auctions. But surely LHO has some way to distinguish a raise to four spades on power from a raise on playing tricks. Dummy rates to have some pattern like 4-3-5-1 or 4-5-3-1, in which case I may need to attack dummy's three-card suit on opening lead. If I can find partner with the queen behind dummy's king or with queen-jack in front of declarer's king, I will have established the setting trick.

Whichever red suit I lead, it is probably better to lead low rather than the ace. Not for deceptive reasons but to retain a tenace in case declarer has king-queen small or king-jack small. The danger in leading low is that partner might have the king and decide not play it. But that's less of a concern at IMPs. If partner can't see a route to four tricks without assuming I have underled an ace, he will make that assumption.

Which red suit should I lead? Hearts is marginally safer, because I would be leading a five rather than a deuce. The higher the spot, the more likely it is partner will be able to tell I've underled the ace, since he knows I must have two cards higher than the one I led. While this is unlikely to matter, it's the only reason I think of to prefer one suit over the other, so I lead the five of hearts.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
			1 ♠
Double	4 ♠	(All pass)

Okay. She got me. Why she didn't make a limit raise with this hand I can't imagine. If declarer has king third of hearts and partner's jack of hearts was going to be the setting trick, I may have blown it.

To my relief, declarer plays the queen from dummy. Partner plays the deuce; declarer, the jack. Partner's deuce should be attitude, suggesting that I make the "obvious shift" (to diamonds) when I get in. A high heart would be encouraging, not because partner has any particular reason to want me to continue hearts but because he has nothing in diamonds to make a shift by me worthwhile. Since we lack the tempi to develop tricks, partner has no reason to suggest a diamond shift except to cash out, so he should have the king.

That's what partner's deuce should mean. But Jack does not card this way. His deuce simply indicates he doesn't have a heart honor, as if I didn't already know that already.

What can I make of declarer's play of the heart queen? This would be a strange play holding king-jack third of hearts, since the ten is more flexible. The likeliest explanation is that she has king-jack doubleton and wants to win this trick in dummy, probably to take a spade finesee. Even so, the play is unusual. Declarer would normally expect the heart ace to be on her right, in which case the way to reach dummy in this suit is to play low. RHO will surely take the ace (since, for all he knows, his partner has the king), at which point she can drop the king. The fact that declarer chose to play the queen means she thinks the ace is more likely to be on her left than on her right. Since underleading an ace is rare, she must be fairly confident from the auction that partner can't have an ace (in addition to the spade king, which she must assume he has). That's too bad. It means if she is missing the club queen, there is no chance she will misguess that suit. (Although any chance of that happening probably vanished with my opening lead. I would not have led a heart from the ace holding a queen-high club suit.)

What are our prospects for beating this? Declarer has five spade tricks, three hearts tricks, and at least one club trick. Nine tricks in all. If she has the club queen, she has two club tricks, bringing her up to ten. In that case, I must hope partner has the diamond king, allowing us to cash four tricks first. If she does not have the club queen, however, she doesn't have ten tricks. So it would be a mistake to break diamonds. She must break the suit herself, and queen-jack of diamonds in partner's hand will be enough to beat the contract.

Declarer leads the nine of spades--seven--three--deuce, then the ten of spades--king--ace--eight. I expect to see the king of hearts, but declarer leads the three of clubs instead. One thing for sure. Declarer doesn't have three small clubs, or she wouldn't be playing clubs before hearts. Either she has a singleton or two small or she has the queen. Since I've already decided declarer is not going to misguess this suit, I can take my time deciding what to do.

Playing with a reliable partner, my correct play is to hop (in case she has a singleton) and cash the heart ace. It should be clear to partner that count is immaterial at this point. The only thing that matters is where his minor-suit honors are, so he should give a suit-preference signal: high with the diamond king, low with the club queen. (I'm not sure what he would play with neither of those cards, but it doesn't matter. If he has neither card, we aren't beating this contract anyway.) If he plays high, I play ace and a diamond. If he plays low, I defend passively. I can't count on Jack to signal that way however, so I must try something else.

I essentially have two choices (1) Hop and guess what to do next. (2) Duck to get more information.

If I choose (1), my percentage guess is to try to cash out. It's better to play partner for one card (the diamond king) than to play him for three (the club queen and the queen-jack of diamonds).

(2) loses immediately if declarer has a singleton club. But if she doesn't, I am guaranteed to get the hand right. When declarer knocks out my heart ace, I cash the club ace. If partner echos in clubs, I know declarer has queen third and I play ace and a diamond. If partner plays up the line, then I know declarer has a doubleton, and I get to see whether she has the queen or not. If so, I shift to ace and a diamond. If not, I know she has only nine tricks, and I defend passively.

(1) is superior if declarer has a singleton club and partner has the diamond king. (2) is superior if declarer has two small clubs and partner has queen-jack of diamonds. In all other cases, it doesn't matter which line I choose. Which scenario is more likely? Here is declarer's hand in each case:

(1) ♠ A x x x x ♥ K J ♦ Q J x x x ♣ x

(2) ♠ A x x x x ♥ K J ♦ K x x x ♣ x x

A four-two split is more likely than a five-one split, so (2) is more likely even before taking the high-card constraints into account. Accordingly, I duck. Declarer rises with the king, and partner follows with the five. That's a relief. Declarer didn't have a singleton. She continues with the deuce of clubs from dummy--nine--six. I play the seven. Partner shifts to the eight of diamonds, and declarer plays the queen. That doesn't look good. Partner wouldn't be leading the eight if he had the king. I take my red aces and play another diamond. Declarer claims. Making four for a push.

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

As I said, I was supposed to underlead the ace of dummy's three-card suit. It just never occurred to me that suit was clubs. Do I get partial credit?

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 6: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps