Event 3 - Match 6 - Board 7

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ A Q 7 5 ♥ 10 7 ♦ Q 4 ♣ A Q J 6 3

I open one club, LHO bids one diamond, partner passes, and RHO bids two hearts (fit-showing). Partner couldn't act at the one level, so there is little reason for me to bid. I pass, and LHO bids four hearts, ending the auction.

To beat this, I probably need to find declarer with one of the black kings and partner with an entry. Partner's entry might be the other black king. But, for that to work, neither opponent can have a black singleton. Since the opponents have bid game with 22 high-card points, that's unlikely.

I'm more likely to find partner with a red-suit entry. In that case, what should I lead? A passive red-suit lead would be best, so I don't have to guess which black-suit king declarer has. But I don't have one; either red suit is dangerous. Either black suit is dangerous also, but I have more to go on in choosing between them. The opponents are more likely to have a singleton club than a singleton spade, so a club lead may not cost even if declarer has the king. I lead the ace of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Thomas	Jack	Adrian
1 ♣	1 ♦	Pass	2 ♥1
Pass	4 ♥	(All pass)
1Fitjump

Four hearts? I don't get it. This hand isn't worth driving to game. And, even if it were, why give up on three notrump? If partner has ace fourth of diamonds and the heart king, you rate to have nine easy tricks. Two notrump, intending to pass if partner bids three diamonds, is a more sensible call.

What are our prospects on defense? Personally, I would always hold at least five-four in the red suits for South's fit-showing jump, and I believe that's the usual agreement. But Jack claims he could have only three diamonds. That's good to hear, since we may have a hard time beating this if declarer has only four black cards. If we can establish a third-round winner in a black suit, however, we may have a chance. Here is one possibility:

(A) ♠ x x ♥ K Q 9 x x ♦ A J x ♣ x x x

If I continue clubs, partner will gain the lead in trumps in time for us to cash our tricks. Since I have the heart ten, declarer can't hook partner out of his jack fourth of hearts.

(B) ♠ x x x ♥ K Q 9 x x ♦ A J x ♣ x x

I can play ace and a spade to set up the third spade. But declarer can simply lead a diamond to his ace and ruff the spade in dummy. All we get after that is partner's heart trick. If partner has the queen of hearts instead of the jack, however, declarer will go down. He must ruff a club to return to his hand. Partner can then tap him out when he gets in with the queen of hearts.

(B) is a likelier pattern than (A) (since four-three is a likelier spade split than five-two), but it's not twice as likely. If declarer has three spades, I need partner to have the heart queen to beat this. If declarer has three clubs, the heart queen or the heart jack will do. So continuing clubs is the percentage play. Partner would probably play a low club in either case, so the a priori odds are all I have to go on.

Another possibility is to shift to a diamond. If declarer does have four diamonds, then partner has a singleton. If partner has the heart king as well, then he can put me in with the spade ace for a diamond ruff. That would leave declarer with

(C) ♠ x x ♥ Q J x x x ♦ A J x x ♣ x x

Or perhaps declarer is five-five in the red suits. Then partner doesn't need the heart king.

(D) ♠ x x ♥ K Q x x x ♦ A J x x x ♣ x

We take the first four tricks if I shift to a diamond. Did partner have a way to signal for a diamond shift? If he had the queen or jack of clubs, he could play it at trick one as an alarm-clock signal. But I have both of those cards. Without a club honor, partner has no way to ask for the non-obvious shift. So either of these hands is possible unless I think partner would not pass one diamond with nine major-suit cards and diamond shortness.

Playing against myself, I would shift to a diamond, since (A) is not a possible hand. But Jack says his auction doesn't promise four diamonds. Why should I play for something unusual when a straightforward defense might work? I play the queen of clubs--king--ten--eight.

Declarer cashes the ace of hearts--deuce--four--seven, then plays the deuce of diamonds. Partner plays the eight, and declarer wins with the ace. I don't see any gain in dropping the queen. I play the four. Declarer cashes the heart queen, partner playing the three, then the heart king. I pitch the three of clubs, declarer plays the three of diamonds from dummy, and partner follows with the heart nine. That's a good card to see. Partner must have the jack left. If declarer is 2-5-3-3, he's going down.

Declarer leads the ten of diamonds to the king, partner following with the five. He leads a diamond back to the ten. Partner pitches the three of spades; I pitch the spade five. Declarer exits with a trump, desperately hoping partner has the spade ace. Partner leads a spade to my ace, and I cash the jack of clubs. Down one.

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

I have high hopes of at least tying the match on this board. Any plus score by our teammates will suffice. And it's pretty hard for them to go minus. They can beat two spades. And they can make any contract they are likely to bid, including an aggressive three notrump or five diamonds. But no. Our teammates also reach game in the unlikely five-two fit, so the board is a push. We are still down five imps going into the last board.

Table 1: +100
Table 2: -100

Score on Board 7: +0 imps
Total: -5 imps

Event 3 - Match 6 - Board 6

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ Q J 9 7 5 ♥ J 10 9 ♦ A 8 4 ♣ A 9

RHO passes, and I open one notrump (12-14). Most players are happy enough to open a strong notrump with a five-card major, but they shy away from opening a weak notrump with a five-card major. I have no such qualms. For one thing, it makes your rebid structure easier if one of a major denies a balanced minimum. For another, good things seem to happen when you open these hands one notrump, though I've never understood why. I will tell you in advance that one notrump should have worked out poorly this time, but not for any reason you would be likely to guess.

Everyone passes, and LHO leads the ace of hearts.

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

West	North	East	South
Thomas	Jack	Adrian	Phillip
		Pass	1 NT
(All pass)

Partner's pass look strange, but he didn't have much choice. We are playing Jack's generic Acol card, and we have no way to sign off in a minor after a one notrump opening. On this deal, that might prove to be lucky for us. Unless the opponents lose their club trick, three diamonds will go down. But we have seven tricks in notrump unless the opponents take seven first.

Their convention card doesn't say anything about this lead, and I have no way to ask. If the ace asks for an unblock or count, it doesn't matter what I do, so I'll assume it's their standard lead from ace-king. East plays the five (upside-down attitude). Presumably East has the queen. Since I have no card lower than the five to conceal, my best chance to sow some confusion is if East has queen doubleton. Perhaps I can convince West that I have queen doubleton and get him to cash his king.

If I did have queen doubleton, what must my lower card be to be consistent with East's play of the five? If I had queen-jack, then East, with ten-nine-five, would play the ten. If I had queen-ten, East, with jack-nine-five, would play the nine. But if I had queen-nine, East would have jack-ten-five. In that case, he might play the five to avoid giving me a trick with queen-nine-third. True, he might play the jack instead. But deciding what East would actually do with that holding is West's problem, not mine. Jack-ten-five is the only three-card holding without the queen where the five is a possible play, so I must play the nine.

West shifts to the ten of clubs. I play the queen, East plays the seven, and I claim eight tricks.

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

The club shift looks like the right play. It has two ways to work. East might hold the club ace. Or East might hold ace doubleton of diamonds, in which case the shift kills the entry to the diamond suit. I'm less sure about the opening lead. I know ace (or king) from ace-king fourth is more common now than it used to be. But I'm still not convinced. If I chose to lead a heart, I would lead a low one. Leading an honor does maintain flexibility. But, in my experience, you frequently don't have enough information to take advantage of that flexibility. You wind up having a winning option at trick two but are unable to find it. Why should I risk blocking the suit on the opening lead if I'm just going to do the wrong thing at trick two anyway?

So why did I say my one notrump opening should have worked out poorly? Because this hand belongs to the opponents. East-West can make two spades, and a one spade opening picks off their suit. Admit it. Of the all the reason to open one spade, that one didn't occur to you, now did it?

Of course, two spades isn't the only thing they can make. They can make two hearts or three clubs as well. But, because each opponent has spade length, a one spade opening makes it hard for them to get into the auction. If I open one spade, it is likely that partner would respond one notrump and buy it. After my one notrump opening, East has a clear balance.

It's strange that East was so timid this time. On the previous board, holding a flat, defensively oriented hand, he refused to sell to two hearts on a potential misfit. Here, he sold out to one notrump with a singleton and seven losers. (The seven losers part is just a bonus. The singleton all by itself is almost enough reason to bid.)

Perhaps this was an awkward pattern for whatever method they play. It is an easy pattern for Astro, my preferred method. East starts with two diamonds, showing spades and a second suit. West then has a choice. He can bid two hearts (artificial) or two spades (natural). Two hearts has the advantage that it guarantees finding your eight-card fit if you have one. If partner has five spades, he will "rebid" them. If he has four spades and a longer suit, he will bid that suit (passing if it's hearts). The problem is, he might be 4-1-4-4, in which case he will bid two notrump, and you will not be happy. As a general rule, when I am 4-3-3-3, I bid two hearts over two diamonds with a four-card minor, but I bid two spades with four hearts. In this case, it doesn't matter. Either way, responder will bid three diamonds, and the balance will have turned a minus score into a plus score.

At the other table, our counterparts played two notrump, making two, so we push the board. The only auction I can think of where North-South wind up in two notrump is one spade--two diamonds--two notrump--pass. If West leads a low heart, six tricks are easy; so I must assume he led an honor.

Our teammates play standard attitude, so East would play the seven. South has a different problem than I did. He must play a card consistent with his holding queen third (where his lowest card is whatever card East holds lower than the seven). He would play the nine from Q9x. But he probably would not play the jack from QJx or the ten from Q10x, since that might cost a trick. So, even though his problem is different from mine, his solution is the same: He must play the nine.

Since West is looking for six tricks, not seven, and since, unlike my West, he knows declarer can't have four hearts, the club shift isn't nearly so attractive. It could be right, but it is playing partner for a specific hand: jack-ten-seven of hearts and the club ace. The best play is to cash the heart king and continue with the four. This draws a box around partner, forcing him to find the club shift. Thus this line works whenever partner has the heart queen and any ace. That is, unless partner decides he is expected to unblock the queen under the king. But he shouldn't. We aren't defending three notrump. If West has ace-king-jack fifth of hearts, he needs East to have another trick anyway. So he has no reason to continue hearts at trick two.

Only two boards to go, and we're still down five imps. The pressure is on.

Table 1: +120
Table 2: -120

Score on Board 6: +0 imps
Total: -5 imps

Event 3 - Match 6 - Board 5

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ K 9 5 ♥ A J 10 ♦ A 9 7 ♣ 10 6 5 4

Two passes to me. I open one notrump (12-14), partner bids two diamonds (a transfer), I bid two hearts, and partner passes. RHO isn't through yet. He doubles. As I've mention before, I think you should play support redoubles in this auction. To play that redouble shows a desire to penalize the opponents, as redoubles of take-outs doubles sometimes do, makes little sense here for obvious reasons.

Jack and I have no agreement about this redouble one way or the other, so I assume he will interpret it as natural. I redouble, hoping it will encourage him to compete with an appropriate hand.

LHO bids two spades, which is passed around to me. I can hardly bid to the three level on my own. I pass, and partner leads the queen of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Jack	Adrian	Phillip	Thomas
Pass	Pass	1 NT1	Pass
2 ♦2	Pass	2 ♥	Pass
Pass	Double	Redouble	2 ♠
(All pass)
112-14
2Jacoby transfer

That's some balance! I agree you should avoid selling out at the two level when the opponents have found a fit. But on this auction, you don't know if they have a fit or not. This is a dangerous auction to balance on in general, and this flat, defensive hand does not make it any safer.

If partner has the heart king and queen-jack doubleton or third of clubs, we can take two hearts, a diamond, and a club. To come to six tricks, we will need to take two spade tricks (queen-eight of spades, maybe) or a spade and two diamonds (ten doubleton of spades and queen third of diamonds).

Declarer plays low from dummy, I encourage with the six, and declarer wins with the king. He plays the three of hearts to the deuce and eight. If the deuce is honest count (as it rates to be, since partner didn't compete to three hearts), then partner has king fifth. That was awfully gutsy of him ducking the king of hearts. Why not hop and play another club? How did he know declarer didn't have the ace of hearts?

I win with the ten and shift to the four of clubs--deuce--jack--ace. Declarer plays the three of spades--five--queen--eight. That looks like ten-eight doubleton, which means we have a spade trick. Now all I need is queen third of diamonds in partner's hand. That gives declarer a 4-3-3-3 pattern. The only way declarer can make this is if he can endplay one of us. Can he? Say he leads a heart to my ace. I cash the club ten and tap dummy with a heart. If declarer plays ace and a spade, I have my fourth club as an exit. It doesn't appear there is anything declarer can do.

Declarer plays the six of hearts, and partner plays the king. Since I know how to defend, it would be a serious error for me to duck this, suggesting I needed partner to do something that I couldn't do myself. If I duck and partner can think of any logical reason to play a diamond, he should do so. I overtake with the ace and lead the ten of clubs--eight--seven--nine. Now the jack of hearts--seven--four--spade four. Declarer plays the six of spades to his ace and partner's ten and leads the deuce of diamonds. Partner plays the eight. I suppose that's queen-ten-eight, which means we were never in any danger of being endplayed. We could have led diamonds from either side if we had to.

Declarer plays the jack of diamonds. I take my ace, cash the spade king, and lead my last club. Declarer classily pitches a diamond on it and claims the balance. Down one.

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

Unless South leads a trump, I suspect I would go down in two hearts. The percentage play in hearts in a vacuum is to cash the ace and finesse through South. If you finesse through North, you can't afford to cash the king first, so you may lose to a singleton queen. It's true that North would balance on some hands with heart shortness (perhaps all hands with heart shortness for this North), so finessing through North does have some appeal. Unfortunately, you lack the communications to do that conveniently.

My teammates went to the other extreme in balancing. They sold out to one heart. Selling out so low apparently had the secondary effect of causing them to lose interest in the defense. They allowed declarer to make three, so we lose three imps.

Table 1: +50
Table 2: -140

Result on Board 5: -3 imps
Total: -5 imps

Event 3 - Match 6 - Board 4

Board 4
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 ♥ 7 5 3 ♦ Q 9 3 ♣ Q J 10 8 5 4

LHO opens one spade, partner bids two hearts, and RHO bids two spades. I have heart support, a singleton in the opponents' suit, and a potential source of tricks. Even so, this hand is a bit thin for a raise to the three-level. I pass. I"m a little nervous about it. But perhaps I'm overreacting to the previous deal, where I lost 13 imps after failing to produce a marginal raise.

LHO bids four spades--pass--pass back to me. I pass, and partner leads the seven of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Jack	Adrian	Phillip	Thomas
			1 ♠
2 ♥	2 ♠	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)

What do I know about this deal? For starters, I can assume from partner's failure to lead a red-suit honor that declarer has the ace or king hearts and the ace or king of diamonds. Partner would probably not be leading a short suit if he had four trumps, so declarer probably has six. Finally, for his four spade bid, declarer should have about five losers. None of these inferences is 100%, so I have to keep an open mind. But a good first guess of declarer's hand is something like:

♠ A Q x x x x ♥ A x ♦ K x ♣ A x x

I have to discard that construction, however, since there is no way to beat that hand. Declarer can set up the heart queen for a discard. To give us a chance, I can change the heart ace to the heart king, or I can give declarer a diamond loser instead of a heart loser:

♠ A Q x x x x ♥ A ♦ K x x ♣ A x x

Declarer plays the deuce from dummy. I play the ten, and declarer wins with the ace. He plays the three of spades--seven--king, then the deuce of spades from dummy. If partner has the ace of spades and a singleton club, he may be looking for an entry to my hand to get a club ruff (unaware that I have a natural club trick).

The clearest way to identify your entry is to pitch a discouraging card in the other suit. One way you should not identify your entry is by pitching an encouraging card in the suit you want led. Partner may sometimes have a hard time determining whether your card is high or low. But, assuming he has his glasses on, he should have no trouble determining what suit you play. If you always pitch the suit you don't want led and partner knows that, he won't be misled by an inconvenient spot card. With nine-eight doubleton of hearts and ace-three-deuce of diamonds, for example, you can pitch the eight of hearts without worrying that partner will get the wrong message.

Of course, you can't always afford to pitch from the suit you don't want led. Add the ace of hearts to this hand, for example, and you can't afford a diamond pitch. Thus there is an alternative way to signal: pitch a suit-preference card in the suit partner is ruffing. This method should be used only as a last resort, when you can't afford the unambiguous attitude signal.

Why only as a last resort? Because you also need a way to tell partner you don't have an entry.

So far, everything I have said is mainstream. What am I about to say now is not, although it should be. The clearest way to signal "no entry" is with an unbelievable suit-preference signal. Looking at that dummy, partner will be alert to the fact that, if you have a heart entry, you might not be able to afford a diamond pitch. So partner should interpret a high club as suit preference. (He can also assume you can't afford to pitch a diamond, so the signal implicitly says something about your diamonds as well.) If, however, you have a diamond entry, it is unlikely that you would be unable to afford a heart pitch, so he should view a low club with suspicion.

Why not pitch a middle club to show no preference? Because middle cards are frequently unreadable. If the eight of clubs is the only outstanding spot higher than the five, partner may decide the five is your highest spot card. If you play the five and if partner underleads his heart ace to declarer's stiff king as a result, it will be entirely your fault.

Three-way signals are fine when partner knows what your spot cards are. If he doesn't, your signals should be binary and loud. If partner can count on any club you play to be either your lowest or the highest you can afford, he should have no trouble reading your signal.

If you still aren't convinced, consider this: Declarer, we are assuming, has two spot cards. If they are the nine-three or nine-deuce and you employ three-way signals, then all your cards are ambiguous. The eight could be high or middle, the four could be low or middle, and the five could be anything. What sense does it make to play a signaling method where any card you play is unreadable?

I discard the club four, declarer plays the spade queen, and partner wins with the ace. It turns out, partner didn't have a singleton club after all. He shifts to the three of clubs--king--five--queen. We don't have a club trick, so that means we need three tricks in the red suits. Time to revise my construction. How about this hand?

♠ Q J x x x x ♥ K x ♦ A x x ♣ A x

That's six losers. It's a little light for a four spade bid. How about

♠ Q J x x x x ♥ A ♦ K x x x ♣ A x

Now we need three diamond tricks, so we will need a little help from declarer.

Declarer leads a spade to his jack. I pitch the club five. Partner follows with the spade nine. Declarer cashes the heart ace, and partner plays the nine, presumably showing count with king-jack-ten-nine sixth, and I play the three. Apparently I'm right that declarer is 6-1-4-2, so I need partner to have ace-ten of diamonds and I need declarer to butcher the diamond suit.

Declarer plays the deuce of diamonds from his hand, and partner plays the king. Declarer has ace fourth of diamonds, not king fourth. Do we have any chance left? What if partner's remaining diamond is the ten? If declarer thinks I have queen-ten-nine fourth of diamonds, is there any way he could try to strip the hand and endplay me? No. Not now that dummy's club king is gone. Perhaps, if we had defended differently earlier, we could have left him with a losing option.

Partner leads the heart king. Declarer ruffs and plays ace and a diamond. Making four for a push.

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

If the defense gets off to a different start, might we actually beat this contract by persuading declarer I had four diamonds? Suppose partner leads a heart at trick one. Declarer takes his ace, draws trumps (partner continuing spades when in with his ace), and plays a low diamond. Partner wins with the king. If partner deduces declarer's shape and credits declarer with the minor-suit aces, he will know there is no legitimate defense. Perhaps he will see the need to persuade declarer diamonds aren't breaking and will switch to the three of clubs, pretending to be 3-6-1-3. While it isn't strictly necessary, it will help if I cooperate by playing the club jack instead of the ten. This is exactly the kind of cooperative deception Kaplan and Kay were masters at.

If declarer is taken in by our illusion and thinks I am 1-3-4-5, he may play for a strip squeeze. He can cash all but one trump, coming down to

	NORTH Adrian ♠ -- ♥ Q ♦ J 8 7 ♣ K
	SOUTH Thomas ♠ 4 ♥ -- ♦ A 5 4 ♣ 9

If I have kept three diamonds, a heart, and a club, declarer can play a club to dummy, ruff a heart, and duck a diamond. If I have kept three diamonds and two hearts, he can play a club to the king. I must pitch a heart. Declarer now ruffs a heart and ducks a diamond. If I have kept three diamonds and two clubs, he can cash the last trump, pitching dummy's queen of hearts. I must pitch a club. Declarer plays a club to the king and ducks a diamond.

So, provided declarer's squeeze technique is good enough, he does indeed have a losing option. Unfortunately, in order to offer him this option, the defense has two hurdles to clear. First, we must avoid a club lead. (See? I knew I should have raised hearts, although I wouldn't have guessed that the reason was to direct the lead.) Second, partner must read declarer's shape when he is in with the diamond king. If he knows declarer is 6-1-4-2, the deception is his only chance. But if he thinks declarer has

♠ Q J x x x x ♥ A ♦ A x x ♣ A x x

then he must continue diamonds. It's hard to see how partner can know which hand to play for.

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Score on Board 4: 0 imps
Total: -2 imps