BBO Daylong Tournament 1 - Apr 7, 2021 - Board 3

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ 9 8 6 ♥ 9 ♦ A K Q 9 7 4 ♣ K 7 6

I open one diamond and partner responds one heart. I rebid two diamonds, and partner bids two notrump. I have six and a half playing tricks. A typical three diamond bid is seven and a half or eight. This hand is one trick short of that, so it is a maximum two diamond bid and a clear acceptance. I bid three notrump.

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

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

If you want to follow the play using BBO's handviewer, you can click on "Board 3" above. But be advised that the East-West hands will be visible. Also, BBO does not thoughtfully rotate the deal to make South declarer as I do. 

West leads the spade three. I play the nine from dummy, and East plays the king. If diamonds break, I have nine tricks--ten if I guess the club queen. If I duck this trick, the opponents can cash two hearts, holding me to ten tricks. But since I can never do better than ten tricks, there is no reason not to duck. For all I know, East may shift to a club. Or the opponents may cash their heart winners, rendering the club finesse unnecessary. Furthermore, ducking tightens things up, which can be beneficial in a number of ways. It makes it more difficult for the opponents to find discards and, therefore, easier to count the hand. And it may lead to a squeeze position in the endgame that you can't anticipate yet. As a general rule, if you don't see how it can gain to win a trick, it's probably a good idea to duck.

Accordingly, I play the deuce. That was an error, by the way. I should have played the four. The deuce informs East that his partner did not start with five spades. There is no reason I should let him know that. 

East shifts to the four of hearts. I could duck this to the nine, but it's more deceptive to play the jack. The fourth round of hearts is never going to come into play, so squandering an honor can't hurt, and it might induce West to continue hearts.

West takes my jack with his ace (leaving the deuce and three outstanding) and continues with the queen of spades--six--ten--ace. It appears West began with QJ52 of spades; East, with K10. I lead the diamond ten--eight--ace--deuce. Then king of diamonds--six--three--five. I cash the diamond queen. East follows with the jack. I pitch the heart five; West, the heart six. East began with two spades and three diamonds, so he originally had eight cards in the round suits, and West had seven. The deuce and three of hearts are still missing. 

On the next diamond, East pitches the club nine. I pitch the heart queen; West, the heart seven. As I said on board one, the bots give count when making their first discard in a suit and are surprisingly honest about it. So it appears East has four clubs and was originally 2-4-3-4. On the penultimate diamond, the deuce and three of hearts finally appear (from East and West respectively). I pitch the spade four.This is the position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ 6 ♥ -- ♦ 4 ♣ K 7 6
	SOUTH Robot ♠ 7 ♥ 10 ♦ -- ♣ A J 10

If my reading is correct, East has king-eight of hearts and three clubs left, and West has jack-five of spades and three clubs left. Who has the club queen? I don't have much to go on except that East began with more clubs than his partner. Perhaps when I cash the last diamond, East will pitch a heart. Then I can pitch my spade, come to my hand with the club ace, and toss him in. 

I cash the diamond. No such luck, East pitches the club five, coming down to a doubleton. He has to to do that whether he has the queen or not, so I can draw no inference from the pitch. I pretty much have to play East for the club queen. Not only is he more likely to have it, but if I finesse his partner for it and I'm wrong, I'll lose the last three tricks and go down. Since East is down to a doubleton club, I don't need to finesse. I can just cash the ace and king. And I might as well lead to the club ace and lead the jack along the way, just in case West decides to cover. I pitch the spade seven, and West pitches the club deuce. 

Did both opponent's really just pitch down to a doubleton club? It appears so. East must have the queen, and West saw no reason not to pitch a club from three small. There is no longer any reason to fish for a cover of the club jack, so I cash the king of clubs--three--ten--four. Then I play the club six from dummy, expecting to see the queen from East. Instead, he follows with the eight. 

What did I miss? Is there any reason West would pitch down to queen doubleton of clubs? At first blush, it doesn't seem likely. The bots don't worry about taking your guesses away. But for all West knows his partner has jack doubleton of clubs left, and the pitch loses a trick by force. Perhaps my construction was wrong and West started with two clubs. I'm pretty sure about the spade split. So if West did start with two clubs, he was 4522 and East was 2335. It would mean both players gave false count on their first club discard. That's unlikely, but it is not impossible.

If I take the finesse and I'm wrong, I'm going down. Everyone should be in game, but not everyone will be. So I stand to lose more by finessing than I stand to gain. Even so, finessing has positive expectation if I'm sufficiently confident it's working. How confident am I? Bots don't fall asleep, so West isn't being careless. If he can see that a club pitch from queen third might give me a trick, he won't pitch one. Is it possible he doesn't see the danger?

Remember that bots analyze double dummy. If West knows I have the club jack, then, once his partner has come down to a doubleton club, a club pitch from Q42 can't cost double dummy. Do I have to have the club jack? No. I have a two notrump rebid without it. But remember also that bots don't construct layouts by asking themselves when their plays matter. They construct a number of layouts consistent with the auction, then determine which play works most often. I'm not sure how many deals West constructed. But if I happened to have the club jack in all of his constructions, then he would have encountered no scenarios where a club pitch from queen third would cost, and he would choose at random between a club pitch and a spade pitch. 

Since that might easily be the case, I'm not going to risk my contract by finessing. I go up with the ace. West drops the queen. Making four.

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

It's important to know how the opponents card. And the only way to know is by observation. Even the most forthright opponents tend to be evasive if you quiz them about their carding in the middle of a deal. And who can blame them? Much of carding is a matter of judgment, not agreement. While your opponents are required to reveal any specific agreements they have, they aren't required to offer lessons in judgment. So in a face-to-face knockout match, I spend much of my time as dummy following the opponents' carding, trying to figure out what their tendencies are for future reference. I have also paid close attention to how the bots card. 

Note their carding on this deal. Both opponents gave honest count on their first club discard, as I expected them to do. But their other carding is harder to understand. East did not give present count on his second club. He played the five from 853. And all their plays in the heart suit appear to be random. East shifted to the heart four from K842. (Since their opening leads are fourth best, I doubt that choice is systemic.) West, with A763, won the ace, then later discarded the six, then the seven. If there is any method to this carding, I haven't figured it out yet. It's almost as if West thought they were playing hearts instead of bridge. Keep those low cards so you have something to exit with in the endgame. East, however, did not follow this hearts-like strategy. He pitched the heart deuce from K82. But, come to think of it, he couldn't afford the eight at that point. Maybe he would have pitched it if he could.

+430 was worth 68%. Most declarers found the club queen, but seven were not in game. Some passed two notrump; others corrected two notrump to three diamonds. That is simply a mis-evaluation. A six-and-a-half trick hand is an acceptance opposite responder's invitational two notrump. 

Added on 9/30/21: As Barry Goren points out below, the line I intended to take should West pitch a spade on the last diamond (playing East for queen doubleton of clubs) was wrong. If West pitches a spade, I can just toss him in with a spade and claim. So the end position was actually quite interesting. Neither opponent can afford to hold three clubs, else he is endplayed. It was a double strip squeeze, and I didn't even notice.

BBO Daylong Tournament 1 - Apr 7, 2021 - Board 2

Board 2
Our side vulnerable

♠ A Q 10 5 4 ♥ A 8 2 ♦ K 7 ♣ A J 9

I open one spade in second seat, and partner raises to three spades. This doesn't look like a slam try opposite a limit raise, but let's check. According to Culbertson's rule, your hand is worth a slam try if a perfect minimum from partner makes slam laydown with normal breaks. A minimum limit raise would be an ace, a king, a queen, and a doubleton. Let's give partner a hand where all those assets are working: the diamond ace, the spade king, the club queen, and a doubleton heart. That leaves us with two losers, so I"m not worth a slam try. 

Culbertson's rule works pretty well. You make one optimistic assumption (that partner's values are all working) and balance it out with two pessimistic assumptions (placing partner with a minimum and requiring slam to be cold). You hope that, if partner has a maximum and accepts, that this "perfect minimum" will be part of his maximum. And by requiring slam to be cold opposite that perfect minimum, you give yourself some leeway. Opposite the wrong cards, slam won't be cold, but it might still have play. If you try for slam when a perfect minimum simply makes slam good but not cold, you will reach too many slams that have no play when the hands don't fit well.

With two suits I might want to ruff in dummy, this is the wrong hand to suggest three notrump. So I bid four spades, and everyone passes. West leads the diamond three.

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

West	North	East	South
Robot	Robot	Robot	Phillip
		Pass	1 ♠
Pass	3 ♠	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)

After all that talk about what constitutes a slam try, it turns out we missed an excellent slam. But that's because partner doesn't have a limit raise. Thirteen support points. Seven losers. However you look at it, this hand is a game drive, not a limit raise.

I play low from dummy and East wins with the ace. I see no particular reason to unblock, so I play the seven. East returns the five--king, six, eight. I don't even need to ruff anything. I have three discards on the diamonds. Since I can cash the spade ace to guard against either four-one split, I have a claim. I claim without bothering to cash the spade ace first just to see if they accept. They do. Such a claim would be unwise in a real game, but the bots give me credit for playing correctly without my having to state a line. They even accept claims on a double squeeze as long the position is known with 100% certainty. No trying for the Zuckerberg coup.

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

Plus 680 is worth 38.9%. Five of the other 27 tables reached six spades, usually by rebidding four clubs, after which North drove to slam. I stand by my decision not to make a move. Partner's hand was simply too good for a limit raise. 

One player bid Blackwood over three spades, then signed off in five spades after his partner showed a key card. It hardly seems fair he gets the same score I did. Shouldn't there be some kind of automatic penalty for that? 

Another player opened two notrump. (I've never understood stretching for two notrump. Two notrump auctions are awkward if partner has a good hand; and if partner has a bad hand, you are often too high. So I try to avoid opening two notrump.) Over Stayman, he continued his ruse by denying a major. Then, over partner's four diamonds, he signed off in four notrump. West, who apparently has read the Bird books on opening leads, spurned the pedestrian fourth from longest and strongest and chose the jack of spades. So declarer took the same twelve tricks as everyone else for 81.5% of the matchpoints. 

There will be around 1000 participants in this event. Some people think it takes shenanigans like this to have any chance of coming in first in a field that size. I don't agree. My strategy is to try to do the right thing on every board. I realize that even if you succeed in that effort, you still won't win unless you have some luck breaking your way. But I think this approach requires less luck than tempting the Fates on every board. Besides, doing the right thing is something that, at least in theory, is within your power. Getting lucky isn't. 

Note I said the "right" thing, not the "normal" thing. I'm not criticizing this player's actions because they aren't normal. I'm criticizing them because I think they are anti-percentage. I don't advocate blind compliance in bridge or in any other context, so I wouldn't hesitate to bid this way if I believed it gained in the long run. But I don't.

BBO Daylong Tournament 1 - Apr 7, 2021 - Board 1

It's been a while, but I"m going to try my hand at this blog again. 

Robot bridge has changed considerably in the nine years since I stopped posting. You can now compete with other players in individual tournaments, where your partner and opponents are robots. I'll be doing just that, playing in an eight-board BBO "best-hand" tournament with matchpoint scoring. ("Best-hand" means you are dealt the hand with the greatest or equal-greatest number of high-card points, not necessarily the best hand.)

Each week, I will post a new deal, which will be available Monday morning.

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ 10 5 ♥ A J 7 ♦ K Q J 2 ♣ A J 10 6

Partner opens one club and RHO passes. The bots play strong jump shifts at the two level. Two diamonds could be right, since if I don't show my strength right away, it may be hard to do so later. But it could be hard to find a rebid. Say partner bids three diamonds. Now what? Three hearts would show a stiff heart and club support. So I have to bid either three notrump with no spade stopper or four clubs, propelling us past three notrump. Perhaps it's better to bid a straight-forward two clubs, showing a limit raise or better.

I bid two clubs and partner bids two spades. If I had known he was going to do that, I would have responded two diamonds. Two notrump now would describe my hand nicely. As it is, I have no good bid. Two notrump isn't forcing, and my hand is over strength for three notrump. I could temporize with three diamonds, but I'm not sure what that will accomplish. If I were willing to raise three notrump to four, there might a point to bidding three diamonds. But my hand isn't worth that, so three diamonds simply makes the auction complicated for no reason. In addition, it risks something awkward like a four club bid from partner. Underbidding slightly with three notrump looks best. I bid three notrump and everyone passes.

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

West	North	East	South
Robot	Robot	Robot	Phillip
	1 ♣	Pass	2 ♣
Pass	2 ♠	Pass	3 NT
(All Pass)

West leads the three of spades. If I win in dummy and drive the diamond ace, I have ten tricks. What are my chances for doing better? One possibility is to duck the spade, hoping the lead was from queen-jack. If that loses, however, East will probably shift to a heart, and my chances of taking eleven tricks will vanish. Rather than take a 25% chance, I'm better off winning the lead in dummy and floating the diamond nine. That gives me a 50% chance at an extra trick. The problem with that line is I risk going down if the finesse loses. This was an awkward hand to bid, and some tables may get too high; so I don't want to risk going minus. I still think winning the spade offers better chances than ducking. If the diamond ace is onside, East may hop on the first or second round. And if he doesn't, I have a chance to work on a developing a heart trick.

I rise with the space ace, and East plays the queen. It's nice to know ducking would not have worked. The spade deuce is still missing. I follow with the spade five and lead the diamond nine from dummy--three--queen--five. Both opponents played low. The bots sometimes give count when following suit, but they don't do so consistently, so you can't rely on it. (Strangely, their first discard in a suit is count rather than attitude, and that signal is almost always honest.) If East's three happens to be an honest count card, then West has an even number, so his five may be the start of an echo. 

The queen, incidentally, was the right diamond to play. If West has the ace and you play the king, he can pretty sure you have the queen, since this would be an unlikely trick-two play otherwise, and he might duck. But if you play the queen, he will worry that his partner has the king and might be afraid to duck. The jack is the worst option of the three. It leaks too much information. Of course none of this matters against bots, since they don't draw inferences from your play. But it's still good practice.

I cash the club ace--three, deuce, four, then lead the club jack to dummy's king. West plays the seven; East, the nine. I play the diamond eight from dummy and East follows with the seven. The jack would be an error on this round also, since it would mark me with the king. So I play the king. West follows with the ten. It's possible he began with ten doubleton. But it's also possible he holds the six and is playing randomly from equals. One thing I don't think is possible is that East began with ace third. The bots play as if you can see their hands, so they often see no gain in ducking with ace doubleton. If East had ace doubleton remaining, he would probably hop to avoid losing the tempo. That means diamonds were initially either two-five or three-four. In the latter case, West would have begun with 1065 and East with A743, playing three, then seven on the two diamond plays. Against a human that's an unlikely sequence of plays, but against bots it's quite possible. As I said, they don't necessarily give accurate count when following suit, (Note no one gave club count.) and playing high spots gratuitously after the first play in a suit is something they like to do.

I play the club six to dummy's eight, retaining flexibility in the club suit. West discards the nine of hearts; East, the five. Again, their discards are almost always honest count. So it appears West has four hearts and East has three. East would not have given me a heart trick by pitching from honor third, so West presumably began with KQ94. This is the current position:

	NORTH Robot ♠ K 7 ♥ 10 3 2 ♦ -- ♣ Q 5
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 10 ♥ A J 7 ♦ J 2 ♣ 10

I still don't know where the spade deuce is, and the spade three is consistent with either a four- or five-card spade suit; so West began with either 5-4-2-2 or 4-4-3-2. If I cash the remaining clubs, West must come down to five cards. He will hold two spades and KQ4 of hearts. If his spades were high, I could cash the spade ace and endplay him. But East has the spade jack (given his trick one play), so that isn't going to work. I don't appear to have much of a chance of finding an eleventh trick.

I cash the club queen. East discards the heart eight (presumably from eight-six), and West discards the spade six. Still no deuce in sight. On the last club, East discards the diamond six; West, the spade nine. The spade deuce is still out, but the diamond six is revealing. If West didn't hold the six, his diamond ten was likely an honest card. That means he was 5-4-2-2. He is left with two small spades and KQ4 of hearts. East is left with Jx of spades, the heart six, and A4 of diamonds. It doesn't appear there is anything I can do except hope that my construction is wrong. Perhaps East did start with honor third of hearts and has pitched down to a stiff honor? It's not likely, but it's the only thing I can think of to hope for. I play the heart deuce; East follows with the six. Oh, well. I see nothing to gain by taking my ace. I play the jack. West wins with the queen and returns the four.

What! What's going on? West for some reason thinks I'm down to a stiff ace and he has something to gain by driving it? I play low from dummy and win with the seven as East discards the diamond four. The heart ace squeezes East in spades and diamonds. He throws the diamond ace, so I make six.

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

See what I mean about the bots' playing high spots gratuitously? West, with 9642 of spades remaining, discarded the six, then the nine, isolating the spade guard in his partner's hand.

I lost concentration at the end. I should have played the heart ten when West exited with a heart. If my construction was correct it wouldn't matter. But if East somehow held the heart king, it would. I have to win the second heart in my hand for the squeeze to operate. Forgetting to cater to cases where my construction is wrong and catering doesn't cost is a mistake I make more often than I should. That's especially true if I have just spent a fair amount of time working through possibilities, as I did here, and exhausted myself.

This result was worth 95.5% of the matchpoints. While the defense was uninspired, everyone is playing against the same opponents, so one might expect this result to be duplicated at some other tables. It wasn't. Those who played three notrump from the South side all deviated from my play before reaching this end position. Two pairs did manage to make six. But they played from the North side, and the defense began with the lead of the spade eight from QJ8.

A fair number of players responded one diamond, thereby reaching three notrump from the other side. One diamond certainly works well when partner rebids one notrump, since you can raise to three without fear of missing anything. But other auctions could prove awkward. I like getting my club support into the auction without taking three rounds of bidding to do it. If partner splinters over two clubs, for example, I will be better placed than those who started with one diamond.

One player did bid two clubs, followed by three diamonds over the two spade rebid, as I considered briefly. This led to the result I feared. North should have punted with three hearts, but he bid four clubs. Now there was no way to recover. They finished in six clubs down two. Temporizing because you have extras is fine if you have a plan. But often it is just a feel-good action. It feels good to bid something other than three notrump, because your hand is too good for three notrump. But if it doesn't accomplish anything as a practical matter, what's the point?

The critical play was the heart jack. I had given up. It appeared there was no chance to take another trick, and it made no difference what I did. So I might just as well have played the heart ace. Fortunately I didn't, but it is was more instinct than a conscious decision. When all appears lost, ducking a trick is often a better idea than winning it. It's easier for an opponent to do something foolish if you put him on play.