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