Match 2 - Board 41

Board 41
Opponents vulnerable

♠ 7 6 5 ♥ K 7 5 ♦ Q 5 3 ♣ Q 8 7 4

Partner opens one notrump (12-14), and RHO doubles. Our convention card says, unhelpfully, "Escape after double." I've figured out from previous deals that this means my pass is forcing, requiring partner either to run to a five-card suit or to redouble, after which we wing it. So I pass.

LHO bids two spades, passed around to me. With three small spades, I can't safely act. It would be nice to know that partner would have doubled for take-out with an appropriate hand. Then I could pass with some confidence. But Jack plays opener's double of two spades as a penalty double. It's hard to see how partner can even have a penalty double if I can't redouble one notrump. But these are the methods I'm stuck with. Instead of passing with confidence, I have to pass a bit nervously. Partner leads the four of diamonds (third and lowest).

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

West	North	East	South
1 NT	Double	Pass1	2 ♠
(All pass)
1Forcing

Declarer plays the jack. I win with the queen, and declarer plays the seven. Taking this finesse at trick one is a strange play. With three diamonds, it would be normal to go up with the ace or king. He might be able to pitch his third diamond on a club. And, if not, he can always take the finesse later. So my first inclination is to assume that declarer has a doubleton diamond and wants to take a quick pitch. But declarer's seven can't be from a doubleton. It would have to be from seven-deuce, giving partner ten-nine-eight-six-four. And from that holding, partner would have led the ten.

If declarer wanted to conceal his count from me, then playing the seven was an error. Let's continue our discussion of a few weeks ago and examine how declarer should know that. We start with a hypothetical layout. (In the actual deal, East, not South, has the three.)

	NORTH ♦ A K J
	SOUTH ♦ 10 7 3

West leads the four of diamonds, third best from four. Dummy plays the jack, and East wins with the queen. Suppose declarer wants East to worry that West has led from a five-card suit. (Perhaps he wants to entice him into embarking on an ill-advised cashout.) He could slap his forehead, feigning disgust. Or he could just follow Rule #1 of Rules for Scrambling the Opponents' Count Signals and play the three to "signal" an odd number in West's hand. The three is the only card that works. From East's point of view, if the four is West's lowest card, then declarer must have three-deuce doubleton. So if declarer doesn't play the three, East will know his partner doesn't have five.

But in the actual deal, declarer doesn't have the three; East has it. So declarer is looking at something like this:

	NORTH ♦ A K J
	SOUTH ♦ 10 7 6

Declarer no longer has a card lower than West's, so he can't follow Rule #1. He must fall back on a more basic rule: "Play the card you're known to hold," or, more accurately, "play the card you might be known to hold." If West has the nine, then declarer is marked with the ten, since West would have led the top of a sequence. So declarer must play the ten. It is possible he has ten-deuce doubleton, but, if West has the nine, declarer cannot hold seven-deuce or six-deuce. So the play of the seven or six risks marking declarer with at least three cards. (If East has the nine, declarer's play will not matter. Ten-deuce, seven-deuce, and six-deuce are all possible holdings.)

Why, you might wonder, doesn't the "card you're known to hold" rule apply in the first example? Actually, it does. In the first layout, if West has the nine, there is nothing declarer can do to conceal his length.  If the four is West's lowest card, then declarer must have the three and the deuce. If three-deuce doubleton would give West a sequence, then declarer simply can't have a doubleton. So declarer's only chance for concealment is to follow Rule #1 and hope that East has the nine.

Back to the problem at hand. I know from declarer's careless seven that he can't have a doubleton, so he has no quick pitches. What else can I conclude about his pattern? Since my pass was forcing, there is no particular reason South should have been in a hurry to run, especially to the highest-ranking suit. That means he is unlikely to have only four spades.

What about declarer's high cards? He has from four to six high-card points. Since I'm not playing with Lowenthal, I assume from partner's failure to lead a club that declarer has the ace or king of clubs. (You can't imagine how comforting it is to be able to draw inferences like that again.) That gives him at most a king in addition. So partner must have the heart ace and probably has the ace and queen. That makes a heart shift by me perfectly safe. If partner could have queen-nine third or fourth of hearts, a heart shift would not be safe.

While I know there is no hurry to cash hearts, it may make the defense easier for partner if I do so. If I can find something else more important to do, however, I shouldn't hesitate. If I don't shift to a heart, partner should suspect I have a heart honor. I would strain to shift to a heart from a worthless holding (possibly getting partner off an endplay). So failure to shift to a heart should be a red flag (both to partner and to declarer) that I have a heart honor.

Is there anything better to do? Could I give partner a club ruff for example? If partner has a doubleton club honor and a trump entry, then it might be right to shift to a club. Suppose partner has

♠ K Q x ♥ A x x x ♦ x x x x ♣ K x

Then a club shift beats two spades. Should I play for this? Not only is this a very specific hand, but it also runs counter to my assumption that declarer has five spades. If I had complete confidence in partner, I might shift to a club anyway rather than trust declarer's bidding. But I'm afraid drawing the inference that I have a heart honor is beyond Jack's capabilities. If I shift to club and partner doesn't find an immediate heart shift from a hand such as

♠ K x ♥ A Q x x ♦ x x x x ♣ K x x

then declarer will be able to set up a club for a heart pitch. The layout where a club shift is right is sufficiently obscure that I don't want to risk it.

Accordingly, I shift to the five of hearts. Declarer plays the six, and partner wins with the queen. Partner then shifts to the ace of clubs. What's this? Maybe partner does have a doubleton club after all. He's hoping I have the king and can give him a ruff. I discourage with the four, and declarer plays the five. Partner cashes the heart ace--ten--seven--deuce, then plays the three of clubs.

Partner is determined to get that club ruff, isn't he? I play low, expecting dummy to win the trick, but declarer wins with the king. What's going on? Why would partner play ace and a club with ace third? I certainly hope declarer is 5-2-4-2. If he has a third heart, he can now establish a club trick in dummy and pitch it.

Declarer cashes the king of spades--nine--eight--six. He then plays the six of diamonds to dummy, as partner plays the deuce. Oops. Partner has four diamonds, so declarer is 5-3-3-2, and we've dropped a trick. Declarer plays the ten of clubs. There is nothing to be gained by covering. I play low, and declarer ruffs with the deuce of trumps. Eventually we score a heart trick, holding declarer to his contract.

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

How could ruffing the club ever be right? Obviously declarer thought West could have ace-queen-third of clubs. Since Jack has no way of drawing inferences from his opponents' plays, he has no basis for ruling out ace-queen-third as a possible holding. It's always a little surprising when you see this flaw in Jack's design manifest itself. But the real surprise should be how well Jack plays despite this handicap.

How about partner's club continuation? Can that ever be right? Yes, it can--assuming he attaches no significance to my discouraging four of clubs. If I held this hand:

♠ K x x ♥ x x x ♦ Q x x ♣ K x x x ,

then three rounds of clubs beats declarer two tricks. On any other defense, declarer could play a spade to the jack and pick up spades for one loser. But if he does that after three rounds of clubs, I can play a fourth round of clubs for partner to ruff with the trump queen.

If declarer had made an overtrick, it would have been my fault. I know I want partner to cash hearts, so I should have played the king of hearts at trick two instead of a low one. Why rely on signals when you can force partner to do the right thing?

Only one other pair held spades to eight tricks. Three pairs were minus 140, and two pairs were allowed to play one notrump, going down either one or two. So we receive seven matchpoints for this result.

Declarer could have made nine tricks without any help from us. He had to refuse the diamond finesse at trick one and start on clubs. If partner wins the club ace and continues diamonds, he must refuse the finesse again. It's hardly clear to do this. Playing that way is essentially guessing that West holds the spade queen rather than the diamond queen. And why should he?

I suspect the declarers who made nine tricks did so not by superior guessing but by playing from the North side (after a one notrump overcall and a transfer). So the weak notrump strikes again!

Score on Board 41: -110 (7 MP)
Total: 322 (65.4%)

Current rank: 1st