Free Weekly Instant Tournament - March 31 - Board 8

Board 8
Neither side vulnerable

Phillip:

Today's guest on Gargoyle Chronicles is ChatGPT. While, strictly speaking, ChatGPT is not a bridge player, he has done an incredible amount of research on the game and is happy to share his insights with us as we analyze this week's deal. Welcome, ChatGPT, and thank you for coming.

ChatGPT: 

Thank you for having me on Gargoyle Chronicles! I'm excited to share my insights on bridge and help analyze this week's deal.

Phillip: 

With neither side vulnerable at matchpoints, I pick up

♠ 6 4  ♥ K Q J  ♦ A Q J 9 5 3  ♣ K 10

LHO opens with one spade, partner passes, and RHO bids one notrump, forcing. What would you do now?

ChatGPT: 

With your strong and distributional hand, you have several options. One possibility is to bid 2♦, which is a transfer to hearts, showing at least a five-card heart suit and asking partner to bid 2♥. If partner has four hearts and a weak hand, they will bid 2♥; if they have a strong hand or a different four-card suit, they may bid something else. 

Another option is to bid 2♣, which is a waiting bid. This shows a good hand with no immediate fit for partner's suit and asks partner to describe their hand further. They may bid a second suit, which could help you find a fit, or they may repeat their notrump bid with a balanced hand. 

A third option is to jump to 3♦, which shows a long and strong diamond suit with game-forcing values. This bid tells partner that you have at least five diamonds and are interested in exploring the possibility of a diamond contract. 

Ultimately, the best choice depends on your partnership agreements and your personal style. Each bid has its advantages and disadvantages, and you need to weigh the risks and rewards of each option. However, given your strong and distributional hand, it's likely that you will end up in a game contract of some kind.

Phillip:

Interesting ideas. I thought my choice was between passing or bidding two diamonds. If one notrump were not forcing, I might have passed in the hope of going plus defending one notrump. I'm not sure passing is right even then. But since one notrump couldn't end the auction, I saw no reason not to introduce my suit. So I bid two diamonds.

ChatGPT: 

Bidding 2♦ is also a reasonable choice with your hand. It shows a long and strong diamond suit and invites partner to bid their next highest suit, which could help you find a possible fit or even explore the possibility of a diamond contract.

Passing with your hand is also not out of the question, especially if you have a strong defensive hand and think you might be able to set the contract. However, with so many potential points and a strong suit of your own, it's understandable why you chose to bid instead.

As always, the best choice depends on your partnership agreements, style, and the specific context of the auction. But bidding 2♦ with your long and strong diamond suit is definitely a reasonable option.

Phillip:

Thank you. Over two diamonds, LHO bid two hearts, which was passed back around to me. Would you sell out or bid on?

ChatGPT: 

With your hand, bidding on is definitely a reasonable choice. You have a strong hand with a long and strong diamond suit, which suggests that you have a good chance of making a game contract in diamonds. Moreover, your partner has not yet had a chance to show any strength or distribution, so there may be additional potential for finding a fit or other good contracts.

At this point, you could bid 3♦ to show your continued interest in diamonds and your game-forcing values. This should encourage partner to bid again if they have any additional values or a diamond fit.

Alternatively, you could jump to 4♦ to show your long and strong diamond suit and your willingness to play in game opposite a minimum hand from partner. This bid should discourage partner from bidding on if they have a minimum hand with no diamond fit.

Ultimately, the best choice depends on your partnership agreements and your personal style. But with your strong hand and long diamond suit, bidding on to game seems like a reasonable choice.

Phillip:

Yes, with eight playing tricks, I wasn't about to sell out. But four diamonds seems a bit aggressive to me. I settled for three diamonds. Everyone passed and LHO led the heart ace. 

Dummy hit with ♠ A 5 2 ♥ 10 5 3 ♦ 10 6 2 ♣ 8 7 6 5.

[All hand diagrams are for the readers' benefit. They were not part of the conversation.]

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

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

ChatGPT:

Bidding 3♦ was also a reasonable choice with your hand, and it's better to err on the side of caution than to risk going down in a high-level contract.

After the opening lead of the ♥A, you can see that you have only two heart tricks, so you will need to look elsewhere for additional tricks. One option is to try to establish additional tricks in the diamond suit by playing the ♦A and then a low diamond towards your hand. If the diamonds are splitting favorably (either 3-3 or 4-2 with the longer diamonds on your right), you may be able to establish additional tricks in that suit.

Another option is to try to establish tricks in the spade suit, either by setting up the ♠K or by ruffing spades in the dummy. This will depend on the distribution of the spades and how many entries you have to the dummy.

In any case, it's important to count your winners and losers carefully and make a plan for how to take additional tricks. You have a strong hand with a good chance of making the contract, but you will need to play carefully and use your resources wisely.

Phillip:

The ace of hearts is a strange lead, so I know quite a bit about the opponents' hands. West would have led a spade from king-queen or queen-jack, so East probably has the spade queen, East would have shown a spade preference with three spades or with two-two in the majors, so he rates to be two-three, making West six-four. West would probably have preferred a singleton club lead to the heart ace, so that means West is 6-4-1-2. He might be 6-4-0-3. But if he is, I have an unavoidable diamond loser, so I might as well assume he is 6-4-1-2, giving me a chance of picking up the diamond suit.

ChatGPT:

Your analysis of the hand and the opponents' likely distribution is spot on. Given that West is likely 6-4-1-2, you have a good chance of picking up the diamond suit if you play it correctly.

Assuming that West has a singleton club, you can win the ♥K in your hand and then lead a low diamond towards the dummy's ten. If West plays low, you can play the ♦Q from the dummy, which will force West to take the ♦K. You can then win any return and play another diamond, establishing the suit for three tricks.

If West plays the ♦K on the first diamond, you can win with the ♦A and play another low diamond towards the dummy's ten. This time, West will be forced to play low, allowing you to play the ♦Q from the dummy on the next trick to establish the suit.

If West has four diamonds to the king, you will need to rely on a favorable split or a squeeze to make the contract. But given your strong hand and the favorable distribution, you have a good chance of making the contract if you play your cards right. 

Phillip:

East played the heart four at trick one, and I dropped the jack. West continued with the heart seven, East played the six, and I won with the king. 

I had eight tricks and could take either a diamond finesse or a club finesse for a ninth. Unfortunately, I had only one dummy entry, so I couldn't take both. If I took the diamond finesse, I had to lead the ten to repeat it, so I wouldn't have a dummy re-entry in diamonds if the finesse lost. I knew diamonds weren't two-two, so I couldn't have a third-round re-entry. It appeared I had to try one finesse or the other. Rather than guess which finesse to take, however, I saw a way to give myself an extra chance. Do you see it?

ChatGPT: 

Yes, there is a way to give yourself an extra chance to make the contract without having to guess which finesse to take.

Instead of immediately playing a finesse, you can cash the ♦A and then play the ♦Q, discarding a small club from your hand. This has the effect of "unblocking" the diamond suit and creating an extra entry to the dummy. If West has the ♦K, he will be forced to take it, and you can win any return and play the ♦J, hoping to drop West's remaining diamond. If the ♦K does not drop, you can still try the club finesse later, using the extra entry to the dummy to finesse both ways if necessary.

If East has the ♦K, you will need to rely on a favorable split or a squeeze to make the contract, but by unblocking the diamond suit first, you give yourself the best chance of success.

Phillip:

Yes. Cashing the diamond ace, hoping to drop the king, is a possible line. If it fails, you can then take the club finesse. That gives you two chances instead of just one. Unfortunately, if the diamond king doesn't drop, you can be pretty sure the club ace is offside. It's barely possible for West to have an opening bid with neither of those two cards. But most of the time, he will have at least one of them to open. Furthermore, East, with an ace, a king, and the spade queen, might have bid over two hearts. So cashing the diamond ace can't be my best play.

I decided on a different discovery play. I led the club king out of my hand. If it lost on my right, it would now be likely that West had the stiff king of diamonds. If it lost on my left, I would take the diamond finesse. Of course, West might thwart my plan by unblocking the club queen from queen doubleton and scoring a ruff with his diamond king. But, since my alternative is taking a diamond finesse, it doesn't hurt to try this maneuver. Maybe he won't find the unblock. Maybe it's not even possible; he might have queen-jack doubleton.

ChatGPT:

That's an interesting idea as well. By leading the ♣K, you gain additional information about the distribution of the opponents' hands. If East shows out, you can be fairly confident that West has the ♦K, and you can take the diamond finesse with more confidence. If East follows suit, you can try the club finesse, knowing that West is unlikely to hold both the ♣A and the ♦K.

However, if West does have both the ♣A and the ♦K, this line of play could result in two losers instead of one. If West wins the ♣A and returns a spade, you will be forced to lose a spade and a diamond, regardless of whether you take the diamond finesse or the club finesse. But the chance of this happening is relatively small, so your line of play is still a reasonable one.

Phillip:

I led the club king, West took the ace, and East followed with the four. West continued with the nine of hearts, East played the deuce, and I won with the queen. I could cross to dummy to take a diamond finesse. But I decided that could wait. There was no harm in exiting with a club. Sometimes if you put the opponents on play, they do something foolish. I led the club ten, West played the jack, and East followed with the deuce. West continued with the club three to East's queen, and I ruffed with the diamond three.

That was disappointing. West was 6-4-0-3. The diamond king was onside, but I still had a diamond loser. Was there any possibility of picking up the king? It would require gross misdefense, but I did see one chance. Do you?

ChatGPT:

It's always good to be alert for the possibility of a gross misdefense, even though it's unlikely. In this case, the only way you could pick up the ♦K would be if West held both the ♣A and the ♦K, and made a mistake on the club play at trick 10.

Suppose you lead a diamond to the queen at trick 10, and West plays the ♦J. This would be a very strange play if he holds the ♦K, as he could just play the king and end the defense. So, you might infer that West has made a mistake and played the ♦J instead of the ♣J (which he intended to play as a suit-preference signal).

If you now lead another club, West might misinterpret the situation and play low, thinking that East has the ♦K and is trying to set up the suit for you. If that happens, you can ruff the club and lead another diamond, forcing West to win the ♦K and give you the ninth trick.

Of course, this line of play relies on a very unlikely misdefense by West, so it's not a practical option in most cases. But it's still interesting to consider all the possibilities, as you never know when you might encounter a similar situation in the future.

Phillip:

I hadn't thought about suit-preference confusion. This was my idea: 

Suppose I crossed to dummy with the spade ace and led the diamond ten. East would duck. I could repeat the finesse [to reach the following position:]

	NORTH Robot ♠ 5 2 ♥ -- ♦ 6 ♣ 8
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ 6 ♥ -- ♦ A Q 5 ♣ --

and exit with a spade. If West won and led the thirteenth heart, I could ruff in dummy and coup East at the end. I couldn't see that happening, especially since East would probably win the spade with his queen, but I had nothing to lose by trying. I did, however, need to make sure to keep my diamond five, so I could underruff the six at trick eleven.

ChatGPT:

Your line of play is also interesting. If you lead the diamond ten from dummy and East ducks, you can continue with another diamond and ruff in your hand. Then you can lead the spade ace and a spade, hoping that West wins and leads a heart, which you can ruff in dummy to set up your last diamond. However, this line requires that East has the diamond king and that West has the thirteenth heart, which is unlikely.

If you do decide to try your line of play, make sure to be careful with the order of your discards. You need to keep your diamond five for the endgame, but you also need to make sure to discard correctly on the hearts to signal to your partner which suit you want to keep. Good luck!

Phillip:

I didn't have much luck actually. I played the spade four--three--ace--jack. Now the diamond ten. East played the four, and I unblocked the nine. Unfortunately, West pitched the heart eight. There went my only chance. He no longer had the option of giving me a ruff-sluff. I repeated the diamond finesse but still had to lose to the diamond king, so I was down one.

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

ChatGPT:

It's too bad that it didn't work out, but it was a good effort nonetheless. Sometimes, even the best efforts don't yield the desired results. It's important to remember that bridge is a game of probabilities, and sometimes the odds just aren't in your favor. Don't get discouraged by one result and continue to focus on making the best decisions possible in future hands.

Phillip:

Excellent advice. But it turned out to be a pretty good result. Minus 50 was worth 86%. Some players sold to two hearts. Others passed over one notrump, which had a strange effect. Without the diamond overcall, East had no reason to slow down the auction, so he corrected two hearts to two spades. Now, when South bid a belated three diamonds, West knew to compete to three spades. It's not surprising that bidding late rather than early worked out badly. It often does. But the reason it worked out badly in this case is a little surprising.

ChatGPT:

Yes, bidding late in the auction can often lead to confusion and suboptimal results. In this case, the delayed bid of three diamonds by South allowed West to make an informed decision to compete to three spades, as opposed to the blind decision he would have made had South bid diamonds earlier in the auction. This underscores the importance of making your intentions clear early on in the bidding process and not waiting until later to make your bid. Additionally, it's important to consider the potential impact your bid might have on the subsequent auction, as it can influence your opponents' decisions and potentially lead to unexpected outcomes. 

Phillip:

Thank you for your assistance. I had no idea you knew so much about bridge. It was a pleasant surprise. While some of the things you said didn't make a lot of sense to me, our discussion did make more sense than some I have had on BridgeWinners. 

ChatGPT:

You're welcome! I'm glad that I could be of help to you. As an AI language model, I've been trained on a wide range of texts and topics, including bridge, so I'm always happy to share my knowledge and insights. If you have any other bridge questions or if there's anything else I can help you with, feel free to ask!