Board 3
Opponents vulnerable
Opponents vulnerable
♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5 |
If partner held this hand and opened one spade, I wouldn't object. It's only seven losers after all. But I have a feeling partner would object if I opened, so I humor him and pass. LHO opens one notrump (15-17), partner passes, and RHO bids two spades, a transfer to clubs, which I double. The primary purpose of doubling a transfer is to direct a lead, not to suggest declaring in that suit. So I would not double if my spades and diamonds were reversed. With the interior solidity of this suit, however, doubling seems right.
Cliff Bishop once told me that a double of a transfer should not be lead directing at all but should be a three-suited takeout of the suit shown. Perhaps Cliff was right, but I've never encountered anyone else who plays that way.
LHO bids two notrump, showing club support, and partner bids three spades.
One should rarely "raise" a lead-directing double. So partner should have at least four-card support and a good hand. Since we play Astro, partner would have had no trouble finding a call over one notrump with four or more spades and an unbalanced hand, even with a "4441." I suspect, therefore, that he is balanced, presumably with about 11 or 12 high-card points. (With more, he could have cue-bid three clubs; with less, it would be both unsafe and pointless to bid.) My hand would play poorly opposite a singleton diamond, so the fact that partner is probably balanced is a definite plus. Opposite a balanced "raise," I'm willing to bid game.
RHO bids four clubs. I might as well show my second suit to help partner decide what to do over five clubs. I bid four diamonds. For once, passing a marginal hand in first seat turned out OK. I got to show both my suits while limiting my hand. Although I was lucky that the opponents play two spades (rather than, say, two notrump) as their transfer to clubs. LHO bids five clubs, and partner doubles, ending the auction.
The opponents probably would have found an eight-card heart fit if they had one, so partner rates to have four hearts. Most likely, he is 4-4-3-2. To have doubled this, his red-suit strength must be in hearts rather than in diamonds.
Should I lead a heart on that basis? It could certainly be right if partner has the ace-jack of hearts and I can get a ruff. But that's about the only scenario I can think of where a heart lead is right. If partner's hearts are better than that, I don't need the ruff. And if they are worse, it's probably wrong for us to be breaking the suit. As pedestrian as it is, a spade lead looks better. If partner has the ace over dummy's king and I don't lead a spade, partner may find himself in some Morton's forkish situation where he must either cash the ace, setting up dummy's king, or not cash it and lose it altogether. Accordingly, I lead the queen of spades.
NORTH
Kate ♠ A K 9 ♥ K 10 4 3 ♦ 9 7 ♣ A Q 9 3 |
||
WEST
Phillip ♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5 |
West | North | East | South |
Phillip | Kate | Jack | Stella |
Pass | 1 NT | Pass | 2 ♠1 |
Double | 2 NT2 | 3 ♠ | 4 ♣ |
4 ♦ | 5 ♣ | Double | (All pass) |
1Transfer to clubs | |||
2Shows support |
Oops. Maybe a heart lead was the right idea after all. If I'm right about partner's shape, declarer is 1-3-3-6 and can now pitch a heart away. What can partner's hand be?
♠ x x x x ♥ A J x x ♦ A Q x ♣ x x |
That doesn't leave declarer much for her four club bid, though:
♠ x ♥ x x x ♦ x x x ♣ K J x x x x |
Declarer has to have more than that, but partner can hardly have less. This hand isn't adding up.
Dummy wins with the spade king--three--six. Declarer leads the three of clubs from dummy--eight--jack--five. Declarer then plays the deuce of hearts. This makes no sense. How can declarer afford to play hearts before taking a pitch on the spade ace? Apparently, she doesn't have a pitch. Partner "raised" spades with three small.
And why didn't she draw another round of trumps? Is it possible she has seven of them? That gives her a 2-3-1-7 pattern and leaves partner with 3-4-5-1. Not only does that give partner an easy Astro two-club bid, it gives him a strange double of five clubs: five-card support for my second suit and a singleton club. On the other hand, 2-3-1-7 is more consistent with declarer's four club bid than is 2-3-2-6.
If declarer is indeed 2-3-1-7, there is endplay lurking. Suppose partner has ace-jack-nine fourth of hearts. If I play low and dummy's ten loses to partner's jack, partner must underlead his diamond ace to my king and allow me to lead the heart queen. If he carelessly plays ace and another diamond, declarer can ruff out the spades, play a heart, and duck my queen. I must now give her a ruff-sluff, letting her escape for down one. Perhaps it's better for me to unblock the heart queen rather than count on partner to find the underlead. It's hard to see how it can hurt to play the queen of hearts. Declarer can hardly have the ace.
I play the heart queen--king--ace. Partner plays the diamond ace, and declarer ruffs with the deuce of clubs. Six diamonds? Six-card support for my second suit and partner chose to defend?
So declarer is 2-4-0-7. Well, that explains why partner didn't bid Astro. He didn't have a four-card major. Now partner needs the nine of hearts to beat this. If he doesn't have it, we're going minus 750 when we had a one-trick save available.
I play the deuce of diamonds. Declarer leads the five of spades--ten--ace--four. She then plays the three of hearts from dummy. Partner plays---the five. Minus 750.
NORTH
Kate ♠ A K 9 ♥ K 10 4 3 ♦ 9 7 ♣ A Q 9 3 |
||
WEST
Phillip ♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5 |
EAST
Jack ♠ 7 4 3 ♥ A J 5 ♦ A Q 10 6 5 4 ♣ 8 | |
SOUTH
Stella ♠ 6 5 ♥ 9 8 6 2 ♦ -- ♣ K J 10 7 6 4 2 |
As weird as partner's decision was, he was the only one who was right on a double-dummy basis. I could have beat this with a heart lead. And the opponents were cold for five hearts. I hope partner gets some satisfaction from that fact.
I was expecting to lose 12 imps. But, miraculously, this board is a push. Or maybe it's not so miraculous. The same player is sitting East at both tables, after all.
Table 1: -750
Table 2: +750
Result on Board 3: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps
No comments:
Post a Comment