Board 4
Both sides vulnerable
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 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 |
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
No comments:
Post a Comment