Match 2 - Board 52

Board 52
Both sides vulnerable

♠ J 6 ♥ 9 4 2 ♦ K J 10 5 ♣ Q J 7 2

LHO opens one diamond, partner overcalls with one spade, and RHO makes a negative double. I bid one notrump. LHO bids two hearts, and RHO raises to four. Partner leads the ten of clubs.

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

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

Wow! It seems the opponents let me off the hook. I was lucky that South couldn't pass my one notrump advance to give his partner a chance to double. Was I not supposed to bid? My call seems fairly routine.

Declarer's likeliest shapes are 1-4-4-4 and 1-4-5-3. If he has 11 high-card points, that leaves partner with at most six--perhaps both black kings. Two kings? What kind of vulnerable overcall is that? Maybe he's five-five in the black suits, giving declarer a 1-4-6-2 pattern. That seems to be the likeliest construction. It also means we weren't in as much trouble as I thought. Two clubs wouldn't fare too badly.

Dummy plays the club ace. Normally, I would discourage to let partner know I have good diamonds. But partner doesn't rate to have much to do in this hand. Any signal I give will help declarer more than partner. So I encourage with the club seven. Declarer plays the six.

Declarer plays the heart three from dummy--four--jack--queen. Partner's side card is the heart queen instead of the club king? Even five-five in the black suits doesn't make this overcall look attractive any more. Partner continues with the eight of hearts--five--deuce--ten.

Declarer plays the seven of hearts to dummy's king. Partner discards the diamond deuce. That's weird. Why offer declarer any insight into the lie of the diamond suit? Why not just pitch from his five-card club suit? It's also somewhat surprising that declarer prefers to win this trick in dummy rather than in his hand.

Declarer plays the queen of diamonds. I cover with the king--ace--seven. So Partner wasn't five-five. He seems to have made a flaky overcall with 5-2-2-4. Since declarer has only one trump in dummy, I'm destined to take two diamond tricks. Declarer plays the three of spades--deuce--queen--six, then a diamond from dummy--ten--four--spade five. I play a club. Declarer wins and concedes a trick to my jack of diamonds. Making four.

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

Declarer has an extra trick in the end position. He's pitching a winner on the spade ace. Was a spade to the queen a practice finesse? I guess so--but only because diamonds were four-two. It would have been necessary to take the spade finesse if diamonds were three-three.

Declarer didn't time the play very well. He would have done better to start diamonds earlier. It would be nice to lead toward the queen of diamonds. But he doesn't have the entries to do that conveniently, and it's probably not necessary. Even if West has the king, leading toward the queen doesn't really gain anything as long as East can't overruff dummy. West would need to have king fourth of diamonds, a virtual impossibility on the auction, before declarer would regret starting diamonds from the table.

So declarer should play the queen of diamonds from dummy at trick two. East covers with the king. Declarer takes his ace, plays a spade to the queen, then plays another diamond to East's ten.

If East foolishly switches to a trump, declarer will make six. It is frequently a bad idea to lead trumps when declarer is about to embark on a crossruff, despite the propensity of many players to do exactly that. Playing trumps simply pickles the defense's middle-ranking cards and removes the threat of overruffs or uppercuts. East does better to play another club. (A low one, of course, so declarer will not know who has the club queen.) Declarer wins and plays a diamond. West ruffs in with the eight, forcing dummy's king. Declarer can still make six by playing a heart to the ace, but I see no particular reason for him to do so. He will probably take a losing heart finesse. But then he has the rest. Making five. Only two other declarers managed to make five, so plus 650 would be a respectable score.

Too bad I wasn't declarer. It's easy to see after the fact that starting diamonds from the table is the right move. It would be nice to confirm that I would have seen that before the fact. We get eight matchpoints for holding this to four.

Score on Board 52: -620 (8 MP)
Total: 415 MP (66.5%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 51

Board 51
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A K ♥ K Q J 7 5 ♦ 8 4 2 ♣ 10 6 4

As I've said before, good things seems to happen when you open hands like this with a weak notrump, no matter how offensive it may be to your sense of propriety. And this deal is no exception. I open one notrump, and the auction proceeds pass--pass--two hearts.

In my methods, a double by me or by responder is for take-out. But Jack plays this as a penalty double. Until now, I've never seen a hand with which I would want to double for penalties on this auction. And, now that I've seen it, I don't know if I can afford to do so. Is partner really supposed to pass this double with a singleton heart? Perhaps he is. Never having played this way, I'm not entirely sure how it works. But if he is supposed to pass with a singleton, that means I can't double unless I have five. It seems wrong to reserve a useful call for such an unlikely event.

I would just pass if I thought partner was apt to pass it out. But, if he has a singleton heart, he is probably going to balance anyway. Having passed one notrump, he can bid a four-card spade suit or he can bid two notrump (unusual) with fewer spades. My best chance to shut him up is to double and hope for the best.

I double; everyone passes. Since we normally lead ace from ace-king, I lead the king of spades to show my doubleton.

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

West	North	East	South
1 NT	Pass	Pass	2 ♥
Double	(All pass)

Did partner sit with a heart void? I doubt it. More likely, declarer has balanced on a five-card suit.

Partner plays the six of spades; declarer plays the seven. On the spade ace, partner plays the five; declarer plays the ten.

Partner should not encourage in spades if he can stand the obvious shift. So, if I trusted partner's carding, I would assume he did not have the king of diamonds, in which case I would consider a club shift. (If declarer has king doubleton of diamonds and partner has the club ace, it might be necessary to put partner in before declarer can take a spade pitch.) But Jack doesn't think that way. It's too dangerous to break clubs without a compelling reason. I'm not entirely whether I would play a club if I did trust partner's carding. I'm certainly not going to play one when I don't. So I shift to a diamond. I choose the eight, since, if declarer plays low, I don't want partner inserting the ten from king-ten.

Declarer plays the queen from dummy, partner wins with the king, and declarer plays the ten. I assume this isn't a singleton. Even if partner is expected to sit with heart shortness and a semi-balanced hand, surely he should pull with a six-card suit. Partner returns the jack of spades. Declarer plays the queen, and I ruff with the heart five.

Obviously declarer has the four of spades remaining, since partner would have led the four rather than the jack if he had it. Declarer's falsecard at trick two was ill-conceived. If he had retained the ten, I wouldn't know the spade count. "Play the card you're know to hold" (or are going to be known to hold).

I play the four of diamonds--six--seven--heart deuce. Partner did sit with six diamonds! I'm just as happy this time, partner. But let's not make a habit of it. Declarer leads the eight of hearts from his hand. I play the jack, and partner follows with the six.

Declarer is 4-5-1-3, and he must have a club loser, else he would not have finessed the diamond at trick three. I will take two more heart tricks unless I get endplayed, and the only way I can get endplayed is if declarer can cash three club tricks. Thus it would be a mistake to switch to a club. If declarer has ace-king small or ace-queen small, a club switch would allow him to take three club tricks and pitch his spade on the diamond ace, reducing me to only trumps. If I play a diamond, I am guaranteed two more trump tricks.

I play a diamond to dummy's ace, and declarer pitches the seven of clubs. He plays a heart to the ten and my queen. I exit with a club and eventually score the heart king for down two.

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

Declarer could have held it to down one by rising with the diamond ace at trick three, since I must eventually break the club suit. But it would have made no difference. Even down one undoubled would have been a top for us. Everyone else declared one notrump our way. Half of them made it; half went down one.

That means we would have the same top if partner had pulled to three diamonds (as he should), assuming he made it. The defense can't beat it by force, but best defense will probably beat it in practice. Say South leads a spade. Declarer wins and plays the king of hearts. South takes his ace. He must now play a diamond to North's ace, and North must switch to the jack of clubs. Declarer covers with the queen. South wins and underleads his remaining honor. Declarer's percentage play (by restricted choice) is to play low.

This would be an unlikely defense to find. Not the jack of clubs shift. That's a well-known position. The hard part is the diamond shift. It's right only when partner has the diamond ace and the jack-nine of clubs. A club shift, however, is right anytime partner has the club queen and a slow diamond trick. Surely that's more likely.

Score on Board 51: +500 (12 MP)
Total: 407 MP (66.5%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 50

Board 50
Our side vulnerable

♠ Q ♥ 9 4 2 ♦ K 6 3 2 ♣ A 10 6 3 2

RHO opens with a Precision club. I like to interfere over strong clubs. But at this vulnerability, there's not much I can do with this hand. I pass.

LHO bids one heart, showing five hearts and eight or more high-card points and creating a game force. Partner bids one spade, and RHO raises to three hearts.

I pass, LHO bids four hearts, and RHO continues with Blackwood. This auction makes no sense. Why bid three hearts with a hand where you intend to bid again over a signoff? Better to bid two hearts, keeping the auction low in case partner can cooperate. Three hearts should show an intermediate hand--a hand with moderate slam interest, where you wish to wish to get your invitation off your chest then leave further action up to partner. Two hearts should be either a minimum or a hand with serious slam interest. That way, you get to show three ranges instead of just two.

(In classic Precision, two hearts is a trump-asking bid, and three hearts shows a minimum. But I assume my opponents aren't playing asking bids, else RHO would have chosen that route over a clunky Blackwood auction.)

LHO bids five diamonds, showing one or four key cards. RHO bids five spades to ask about the trump queen. Thanks, RHO. Perhaps my failure to double this will steer partner to a minor-suit lead, hopefully a diamond. I pass. LHO bids five notrump, denying the trump queen, and RHO settles for six hearts.

What lead should a double by me call for? Obviously it should call for some minor-suit lead. But, since the opponents have bid no side suits naturally, it's not clear which minor it should call for. Some partnerships have a specific agreement. (For example, "Lead the lower-ranking unbid suit.") Others, like me, prefer to leave it more flexible. ("Lead the suit you think I'm most apt to be void in.") A diamond lead is surely our best shot, even though it might not work. So, if I had reason to believe that double would elicit a diamond lead, I might try it. But I don't, so I pass. Partner leads the jack of spades.

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

West	North	East	South
	1 ♣1	Pass	1 ♥
1 ♠	3 ♥	Pass	4 ♥
Pass	4 NT2	Pass	5 ♦3
Pass	5 ♠4	Pass	5 NT5
Pass	6 ♥	(All pass)
116+ HCP
2Ace asking for hearts
31 or 4 aces
4Asking for queen of trumps
5No trump queen

If declarer has at least two diamonds, I may yet regret not doubling. Given South's Blackwood response, partner must have the ace or king of hearts. If it's the king, declarer, fearing a spade ruff, might decide to play a heart to the ace and bank on the diamond finesse. He is wrong about the diamond finesse, but he will be pleasantly surprised when the heart king drops. Either minor-suit lead would leave declarer with no reason not to take the heart finesse.

(I have known players--though I won't mention any names--who would solve this problem by "accidentally" letting declarer see the king of diamonds in their hand. Once declarer knows the diamond finesse is off, he'll take the heart finesse. Even if I were unburdened by any sense of ethics and inclined to try this maneuver, I couldn't. Jack's programmers forgot to include a flash-half-your-hand-to-declarer button.)

Declarer plays the spade king--queen--seven. Now ten of hearts--four--three--ace. Yay! Partner leads the nine of spades--ace--heart deuce--spade deuce.

What was the spade nine all about? For whatever reason, partner wanted to play a low card, and the nine was the lowest card he could afford. So declarer must have the eight (and he should have played it). It appears declarer is 3-5-2-3 or 3-5-1-4 with the king and queen of clubs. In the latter case, he will likely choose a ruffing finesse against my diamond king. In the former case, we have at least one more trick coming. Can I contrive to take another one?

Suppose I lead the ace of clubs to tap dummy. Declarer leads a heart to his king and plays a diamond to dummy's ten. (Hopefully, partner's doubleton includes the nine.) Say I duck. Now declarer can't get off dummy to repeat the finesse. He will probably play ace and ruff a diamond, trying to drop partner's king. When it doesn't drop, he has a spade loser left. But all I've done is broken even. No, wait. I haven't even done that. He can cash the king and queen of clubs, pitching dummy's spades, then ruff his spade. I've lost a trick on this line.

Although, come to think of it, giving declarer two club tricks might not be such a bad idea for another reason. What if he's 3-5-1-4? If I lead the club ace, setting up his king and queen, he is left with only one unruffable black-suit loser. So he needs only two diamond tricks to take the rest. If I don't hand him the club suit, he pretty much has to take the ruffing finesse in diamonds against me. But if I do, then he has the option of finessing partner for the diamond king.

I play the ace of clubs--seven--four--heart eight. Declarer plays the jack of hearts. But, instead of overtaking as I expect, he lets it hold, as partner plays the five of clubs. If declarer intended to finesse partner for the diamond king, surely he would have overtaken the jack of hearts. He must have a singleton diamond, and he's decided to take a ruffing finesse against me.

No. Declarer plays dummy's last heart and overtakes with his king. I play the club deuce; partner plays the spade four. Since dummy is out of entries, declarer can no longer take a ruffing finesse in diamonds. Furthermore, he can no longer ruff a loser in dummy, so one pitch on the diamonds must be sufficient. 3-5-1-4 is no longer possible. Declarer must have

♠ 8 7 2 ♥ K 7 6 5 3 ♦ 9 x ♣ K Q 7

Declarer leads the nine of diamonds--seven--eight. There is no reason to take this trick. If declarer repeats the finesse, I can exit with a club, locking him in his hand. He is left with a spade loser for down three. If he doesn't repeat the finesse, no harm done. We take partner's spade trick instead of my king of diamonds. I play the three of diamonds.

Declarer cashes the king and queen of clubs, pitching dummy's spades. I see. Declarer doesn't need to repeat the diamond finesse. He can now cash his trumps, executing a show up squeeze against partner. If the diamond king is onside, he will take the rest. If not, he will lose the last trick.

Oops. Declarer doesn't see the squeeze. He plays the four of diamonds--five--ten.  I take my king and exit with a club. Declarer ruffs and eventually loses a spade trick. Down three.

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

Jack must have been upset with his contract to have misplayed the end position so badly. Still, it didn't matter how many we beat this. No one else ventured past the four level, so we were the only East-West pair to go plus. While I would not have chosen North's auction, I do sympathize with him. He was probably the only one in the room who knew his partner had five hearts, and the fifth heart makes a huge difference in his hand evaluation. Consider that slam isn't all that bad opposite as little as

♠ x x ♥ A 9 x x x ♦ x x x ♣ x x x.

Score on Board 50: +150 (12 MP)
Total: 395 MP (65.8%)

Current rank: 1st

More A Hand of Bridge Notes

Michelle,

I don’t know how realistic you want the staging of A Hand of Bridge to be. But, if it were completely faithful to reality, this is what would happen:

The players are seated at the card table as pictured below:

                Geraldine

Bill          (Table)                  Sally

                David

Bill and Sally are across from each other. Geraldine and David are across from each other. Geraldine is to Bill’s left. Each player is holding thirteen cards. There is a second deck face down on the corner of the table between Sally and Gertrude. (Bill has just finished dealing the cards. Sally was shuffling the other deck and has placed it next to Geraldine, who will be dealing the next hand in the sequel to this opera whenever it’s written--which is whenever you give the word.) There is also a score pad  (I’ll see if I can find one. I may have one at home.) and a pencil by whoever is keeping score.

The bidding proceeds as discussed in my previous email. David’s “You play” at the end of the bidding is directed at Geraldine. Bill’s “put down your cards” is directed at Sally (who, as dummy, is supposed to place her cards face up on the table). He is, however, jumping the gun. She isn’t supposed to put down her cards until Geraldine has played.  Geraldine is obviously taking awhile to decide what to play, because David prompts her again with “You lead.” At the fermata, Geraldine leads (places a card face up on the center of the table). Sally then places her entire hand face up on the table, with the suits arranged in columns, the hearts to her own right.  The hearts should be placed down first. The cards should not be quite at the edge of the table but closer to the center, because Bill must be able to reach them. The “dummy” photo attached shows how they should look from Bill’s perspective.

The play proceeds as follows:  Bill plays a card from dummy (i.e., pulls a card from the dummy toward the center of the table near Geraldine’s card). David plays a card. Then Bill plays a card from his own hand.  Bill then gathers all four cards and places them face down in front of him. (I’ll assume the audience won’t be able to see which cards are played, so  if the choice of cards is logically impossible, it won’t matter.) This collection of four cards is called a “trick.”  Bill then starts the next trick by playing a card either from his hand or from the dummy. Each person, in clockwise rotation, contributes a card to this trick. Bill then gathers this trick and places it face down in front of him, staggered over the first trick, and play continues similarly. The picture “tricks” shows what Bill’s stack looks like after three tricks have been played.

There will usually be some pause between the conclusion of one trick and the start of the next trick as Bill decides to what to do. Geraldine and David will sometimes play immediately and will sometimes pause to think. After six tricks have been played, Bill will gather those six tricks together into a single stack, then proceed with staggering the remaining tricks as before. (This is simply an aid to counting how many tricks he has. The number of tricks he has in excess of six is what he is interested in.)

At one point, Sally says “From the table, darling!”  What has happened here is that Bill has thought a long time since the conclusion of the last trick and has forgotten whether the next trick should be started from his hand or from the dummy. He has, incorrectly, reached to pull a card from his hand to start the next trick. Sally, alert to this fact, stops him and tells him that the first card to this new trick should come from the dummy. Bill replaces the card in his hand and starts the trick from the dummy. (This is perfectly proper. Stopping declarer from playing from the wrong hand is one of dummy’s jobs.)

Of course, you may not care about any of this. But these are the actions implied by the text.  And be aware that any action completely out of sync with the text will annoy the heck out of any bridge players in the audience. I’m reminded of a movie I once saw on TV where someone was reading Psalm 100 from a Bible. But they were reading from somewhere toward the beginning of the book. “You mean to tell me there isn’t a single person on the lot who knows that the Psalms are in the middle of the Bible?” I thought. I was so disgusted I turned the movie off.

More later. I can’t make much sense out of the dialog after rehearsal 9. I’m going to have to think about it.

------------------------------------------

Phillip Martin

Composer-in-Residence

Hartford Opera Theater, Inc.

A Hand of Bridge

It's always hard to explain bridge to those who don't play the game. I need to do that now in my role as Composer-in-Residence at Hartford Opera Theater. HOT is producing three operas on June 4 and 5, one of which is Samuel Barber's 10-minute opera entitled A Hand of Bridge. Neither the director nor any of the singers plays bridge, so it's up to me to explain what is going on in the opera. I thought my readers might be interested in this memo I recently sent to the director. The misuse of the word "etiquette" in place of "ethics" was intentional. I thought the concept of ethics in a game would be foreign. Etiquette is easier to understand.

Michelle,

I just got my score to Hand of Bridge today, and I was looking it over.  There are a couple of things—for whatever they’re worth—that escaped my attention when I listened to it. Notice I’m not cc’ing any of the singers. I’ll leave it up to you whether to pass these observations along or not. 

Note that the bids at the beginning (a “bid” is a number plus a suit) do not come at a consistent tempo. “One heart,” “two clubs,” and “two hearts” are roughly evenly spaced. But there is a noticeable pause before David’s “Pass.” (“Pass” is declining to make a bid.) Bill then bids “four hearts,” and Geraldine’s “Five clubs” comes out almost immediately – considerably quicker than any of the previous bids.

There is a subtext to the tempo of this bidding that I’m sure was intentional. First of all, I have to explain a little of the etiquette of the game.  By the rules of the game, you may communicate to your partner (David and Geraldine are partners; Sally and Bill are partners) only by the bids you make. You may not communicate through body language or through the tone of your voice. Nor are you allowed to communicate through the tempo of your bids (by bidding quickly or by taking a long time to decide what to bid).  If your partner inadvertently communicates with you by one of these methods, you are honor-bound to ignore the message his improper communication conveyed. 

What has happened here is that David has communicated improperly to Geraldine, and she has improperly taken advantage of that fact. His taking a long time before passing (declining to bid) carried the information that he might have bid but, reluctantly, chose not to. Geraldine's“five club” bid is illogical on its face (I won’t go into why). So it indicates she is making improper use of the  information David conveyed to her. And the fact that she bids quickly is intended as a rebuke to David. (“If you’re too timid to bid your hand, I guess I’ll just have to bid it for you.”)  I’m sure all of this would be in their tone of voice as well. David’s “Pass” is undoubtedly hesitant. Geraldine's“five clubs” is undoubtedly defiant.

Antics like this would not be tolerated in a serious game. In a social game like this one, they happen all the time, even though everyone knows they’re improper. This is roughly the equivalent of, say, playing miniature golf and surreptitiously kicking your ball a little closer to the hole when you think no one is looking. 

------------------------------------------

Phillip Martin

Composer-in-Residence

Hartford Opera Theater, Inc.

If you're in the Hartford vicinity on June 4 or 5, I encourage you to come to the performance. Tickets are only $10. How often do you get to hear an opera about bridge? On the same program, we are also performing Gian Menotti's Telephone and Leonard Bernstein's Trouble in Tahiti.

Match 2 - Board 49

Board 49
Neither vulnerable

♠ K Q 9 3 2 ♥ K 7 5 4 2 ♦ Q ♣ K 7

Partner passes; RHO opens with a Precision one diamond. At one time, it was customary to restrict Michaels' cue-bids either to hands worse than an opening bid or to very good hands. With intermediate hands like this one, one would simply overcall. Today, most players cue-bid on almost any hand of the appropriate shape. But I've never figured out how to make that work. To my mind, this hand is not good enough to cue-bid and bid again and too good to cue-bid and go quietly. So I overcall with one spade.

LHO bids two diamonds, and partner raises to two spades. RHO bids three diamonds. With five losers, I'm worth a game try. So I bid three hearts. Partner bids three spades, and RHO bids four diamonds. I have nothing further to say. I pass, and partner goes on to four spades, which ends the auction. West leads the deuce of diamonds (fourth best).

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

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

Continuing on to four spades was foolish. Competing at the four level when we rate to have eight trumps and they rate to have nine makes no sense at all. We were probably beating four diamonds, and we are unlikely to make this.

What do I know about the opponents' shape? Diamonds appear to be four-five. West didn't make a negative double, so hearts are either three-three or two-four. And, since East didn't open with a weak notrump, he rates to have a second suit. So, putting all this together, either East is four-five in the red suits or he is 4-3-5-1 or 1-3-5-4.

How about the high cards? It's unusual to raise a Precision diamond with only four trumps. West would probably have preferred to bid one notrump if that were an option. So I suspect he doesn't have the spade ace.There is room, however, for him to hold the club ace.

East wins with the diamond ace and shifts to the ace of clubs. This is a strange defense. I was expecting a diamond continuation. Could this be a singleton? Unlikely. How is East planning on putting his partner on play to give him a ruff? It's more likely he's trying to give his partner a ruff. That means he's 1-3-5-4.  He plans on playing a third round of clubs for a possible trump promotion when he gains the lead with the spade ace. If I'm right about all this, I have four inescapable losers.

I unblock the king to get an extra dummy entry. I'm confident enough of East's stiff ace that I would play a low spade out of my hand if I couldn't get to dummy. But as long as I have an entry, there's no need to do that. West plays the club three. East continues with the deuce of clubs. West plays the five, and I win in dummy with the eight. I play a spade from dummy--ace--deuce---six. East plays the ten of clubs. I pitch the deuce of hearts, allowing West to ruff with his natural trump trick. He continues with the king of diamonds. I ruff and claim. Down one.

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

The hand was an open book at trick two. Maybe I should have won the second club in my hand and played the deuce of spades. Perhaps my flamboyant display of card-reading prowess would demoralize the opponents. Nah. Jack seems pretty unflappable.

As I expected, four diamonds was going down. We get five matchpoints for this result, tying the pair who went down one in three spades and beating the two pairs who sold to three diamonds. Going plus against four diamonds, it turns out, would have been worth only an additional two matchpoints. To get a good score, we must buy it in three spades.

West's diamond raise made that goal hard to achieve. Not everyone would raise a Precision one diamond opening with West's hand. But I think the raise makes sense. His spade length makes diamond shortness in his partner's hand unlikely.

Would a Michaels' cue-bid have worked out better? I replayed the hand, bidding two diamonds at my first turn to see what would happen. LHO passes, partner bids two spades, and RHO doubles. I pass, LHO bids three diamonds, and partner bids three spades, ending the auction. I guess that works, but I'm still not sure why. Partner's three-spade bid is as incomprehensible to me on this auction as his four-spade bid was on the auction we had.

Score on Board 49: -50 (5 MP)
Total: 383 MP (65.1%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 48

Board 48
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 2 ♥ A Q 10 8 5 ♦ A 2 ♣ A Q 8 6

Three passes to me. I open one heart--pass--one notrump--pass. I may be in the minority here, but I prefer an off-shape two notrump to two clubs. I like to limit my hand when possible, since it simplifies the ensuing auction.

I bid two notrump, and partner bids three diamonds. I seem to have saved myself a headache. If I had bid two clubs and partner had bid two diamonds, I would have a problem. I'm worth another move, but nothing appeals. I can't bid two notrump with jack doubleton of spades. The heart suit isn't quite good enough to treat as a six-card suit. Three diamonds understates my tolerance for notrump, since partner might reasonably assume I have a singleton spade. And two spades understates my tolerance for diamonds, since partner might think I have honor third of spades and a singleton diamond. My initial two notrump rebid was a less of a distortion than any one of those continuations would be.

I pass, and West leads a third-and-lowest eight of spades.

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

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

Three diamonds strikes me as a bit cowardly. I would have bid three notrump. It's not clear whether we would make that or not.

East wins with the spade king; I play the six. East cashes the spade ace, I play the four, and West plays the three. It appears West has queen-ten-eight fourth of spades. I expect to see a third spade, tapping dummy, but East shifts to the three of clubs--four--king--ace.

Why not tap dummy? Is it possible East doesn't have another spade? Hardly. I refuse to believe West passed in third seat with queen-ten sixth of spades and the club king. One thing for sure. East doesn't have queen-third of diamonds. If he did, he would have tapped me to prevent my finessing against his diamond queen. I decide to play ace of diamonds then a diamond to the king, trying to drop West's queen. I can then play three rounds of hearts, pitching my spade.

I cash the diamond ace--four--three--queen. How come every time I decide to drop an offside doubleton queen, my opponent plays the queen on the first round? As on Board 42, I know Jack isn't capable of a falsecard. So I could just play a diamond to my nine and claim. But what would I do in a real game? The falsecard with queen-ten doubleton isn't so clear this time. For one thing, West doesn't know I have the nine. For another, he doesn't know I have a third spade. So he can't be sure his partner's club switch marked him with the queen. Still, just because the falsecard isn't 100% doesn't mean some defenders might not try it.

If I can cater to the falsecard safely, I might as well do so. If I can't, I'll back my judgment and take the trump finesse. For starters, it can't hurt to cash the club queen. West would not have kept quiet with king-jack-ten sixth of clubs, so there is no danger of its being ruffed. I cash it. East plays the deuce, and West plays the five.

It appears East has three-deuce doubleton of clubs. That means he is either 4-3-4-2 or 4-4-3-2. I can cater to both cases. I can ruff a club to my hand, then return to dummy in whichever suit East pitched. (If he pitched a heart, I play king and a heart to the ace. If he pitched a spade, I ruff a spade.) I now ruff another club to my hand and return to dummy in the other suit, reaching this position:

	NORTH ♠ -- ♥ 10 8 5 ♦ -- ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ K J 9 ♣ --

East has either three diamonds or two diamonds and a heart. I play a heart from dummy. If East ruffs, he was 4-3-4-2, and he's couped. If he follows, he was 4-4-3-2. I can ruff with the king and cash the jack, dropping West's ten. (If West falsecarded with queen-small, more power to him.)

So far, so good. What happens if East unexpectedly follows to the third club? Now I can't afford to play for the coup, since East might have begun with a singleton heart. In fact, he probably did. If East doesn't have a doubleton club, then the three was probably third best from four, and he's 4-1-4-4. So I must revert to the trump finesse and resign myself to going down if West falsecarded.

The problem, however, is that the hearts are blocked. To make it, I must lead the heart king and overtake with the queen. Now I take a trump finesse, draw trumps, and play a heart to the ten to take my spade pitch. This is fine if East is indeed 4-1-4-4. But what if he led a middle club from three and is 4-2-4-3? I don't think that's likely. But I'd hate to pay off to it if he did.

Actually, I don't have to. My nine of spades subjects West to a show-up squeeze. I can run diamonds, reaching this position at trick 12:

	NORTH ♠ -- ♥ Q 10 ♦ -- ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ 9 ♥ 4 ♦ -- ♣ --

West must hold a high spade, so he can't hold a doubleton heart. In fact, I don't even need the ten of hearts. The deuce would do just as well. (Note that I've learned my lesson about saving threat cards. I didn't stupidly drop the nine of spades under the ace or king.)

I don't see anything wrong with this line. I play a club from dummy. To my surprise, East follows with the ten. So much for the trump coup. It's on to Plan B. I ruff with the seven and play the king of hearts--deuce--ace--six I play a diamond--five--eight--spade ten. Then I run diamonds, squeezing West. It turns out the squeeze is necessary. East did lead the three from ten-three-deuce of clubs, and he has the jack of hearts. I'm not sure why he led the three. I don't think I've ever seen Jack do anything like that.

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

That was certainly fun. The kibitzers probably didn't see the point of this line. They probably thought I was just showing off--wasting my heart king for no reason, then executing a squeeze to get the trick back.

I was the only declarer to score eleven tricks in a diamond partscore. Probably not because of my declarer play but because of East's defense. He should have continued with a spade at trick three. I could still make five double-dummy. But it requires a strange line of play that I would have no reason to adopt.

Even though we beat all the other partscores, this is only an average, because three pairs bid and made game. Two pairs made three notrump, and one got a top by reaching four hearts, making five. Four hearts! That's quite a nice contract. That's another reason not to bid two clubs over one notrump, On my auction, we had no chance to get to four hearts, so I can't feel bad about missing it. Had I bid two clubs, we would have had a chance to get there. So I would be annoyed when we didn't.

Score on Board 48: +170 (6 MP)
Total: 378 (65.6 %)

Current rank: 1st