A Hand of Bridge

It's always hard to explain bridge to those who don't play the game. I need to do that now in my role as Composer-in-Residence at Hartford Opera Theater. HOT is producing three operas on June 4 and 5, one of which is Samuel Barber's 10-minute opera entitled A Hand of Bridge. Neither the director nor any of the singers plays bridge, so it's up to me to explain what is going on in the opera. I thought my readers might be interested in this memo I recently sent to the director. The misuse of the word "etiquette" in place of "ethics" was intentional. I thought the concept of ethics in a game would be foreign. Etiquette is easier to understand.

Michelle,

I just got my score to Hand of Bridge today, and I was looking it over.  There are a couple of things—for whatever they’re worth—that escaped my attention when I listened to it. Notice I’m not cc’ing any of the singers. I’ll leave it up to you whether to pass these observations along or not. 

Note that the bids at the beginning (a “bid” is a number plus a suit) do not come at a consistent tempo. “One heart,” “two clubs,” and “two hearts” are roughly evenly spaced. But there is a noticeable pause before David’s “Pass.” (“Pass” is declining to make a bid.) Bill then bids “four hearts,” and Geraldine’s “Five clubs” comes out almost immediately – considerably quicker than any of the previous bids.

There is a subtext to the tempo of this bidding that I’m sure was intentional. First of all, I have to explain a little of the etiquette of the game.  By the rules of the game, you may communicate to your partner (David and Geraldine are partners; Sally and Bill are partners) only by the bids you make. You may not communicate through body language or through the tone of your voice. Nor are you allowed to communicate through the tempo of your bids (by bidding quickly or by taking a long time to decide what to bid).  If your partner inadvertently communicates with you by one of these methods, you are honor-bound to ignore the message his improper communication conveyed. 

What has happened here is that David has communicated improperly to Geraldine, and she has improperly taken advantage of that fact. His taking a long time before passing (declining to bid) carried the information that he might have bid but, reluctantly, chose not to. Geraldine's“five club” bid is illogical on its face (I won’t go into why). So it indicates she is making improper use of the  information David conveyed to her. And the fact that she bids quickly is intended as a rebuke to David. (“If you’re too timid to bid your hand, I guess I’ll just have to bid it for you.”)  I’m sure all of this would be in their tone of voice as well. David’s “Pass” is undoubtedly hesitant. Geraldine's“five clubs” is undoubtedly defiant.

Antics like this would not be tolerated in a serious game. In a social game like this one, they happen all the time, even though everyone knows they’re improper. This is roughly the equivalent of, say, playing miniature golf and surreptitiously kicking your ball a little closer to the hole when you think no one is looking. 

------------------------------------------

Phillip Martin

Composer-in-Residence

Hartford Opera Theater, Inc.

If you're in the Hartford vicinity on June 4 or 5, I encourage you to come to the performance. Tickets are only $10. How often do you get to hear an opera about bridge? On the same program, we are also performing Gian Menotti's Telephone and Leonard Bernstein's Trouble in Tahiti.

Match 2 - Board 49

Board 49
Neither vulnerable

♠ K Q 9 3 2 ♥ K 7 5 4 2 ♦ Q ♣ K 7

Partner passes; RHO opens with a Precision one diamond. At one time, it was customary to restrict Michaels' cue-bids either to hands worse than an opening bid or to very good hands. With intermediate hands like this one, one would simply overcall. Today, most players cue-bid on almost any hand of the appropriate shape. But I've never figured out how to make that work. To my mind, this hand is not good enough to cue-bid and bid again and too good to cue-bid and go quietly. So I overcall with one spade.

LHO bids two diamonds, and partner raises to two spades. RHO bids three diamonds. With five losers, I'm worth a game try. So I bid three hearts. Partner bids three spades, and RHO bids four diamonds. I have nothing further to say. I pass, and partner goes on to four spades, which ends the auction. West leads the deuce of diamonds (fourth best).

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

West	North	East	South
	Pass	1 ♦	1 ♠
2 ♦	2 ♠	3 ♦	3 ♥
Pass	3 ♠	4 ♦	Pass
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)

Continuing on to four spades was foolish. Competing at the four level when we rate to have eight trumps and they rate to have nine makes no sense at all. We were probably beating four diamonds, and we are unlikely to make this.

What do I know about the opponents' shape? Diamonds appear to be four-five. West didn't make a negative double, so hearts are either three-three or two-four. And, since East didn't open with a weak notrump, he rates to have a second suit. So, putting all this together, either East is four-five in the red suits or he is 4-3-5-1 or 1-3-5-4.

How about the high cards? It's unusual to raise a Precision diamond with only four trumps. West would probably have preferred to bid one notrump if that were an option. So I suspect he doesn't have the spade ace.There is room, however, for him to hold the club ace.

East wins with the diamond ace and shifts to the ace of clubs. This is a strange defense. I was expecting a diamond continuation. Could this be a singleton? Unlikely. How is East planning on putting his partner on play to give him a ruff? It's more likely he's trying to give his partner a ruff. That means he's 1-3-5-4.  He plans on playing a third round of clubs for a possible trump promotion when he gains the lead with the spade ace. If I'm right about all this, I have four inescapable losers.

I unblock the king to get an extra dummy entry. I'm confident enough of East's stiff ace that I would play a low spade out of my hand if I couldn't get to dummy. But as long as I have an entry, there's no need to do that. West plays the club three. East continues with the deuce of clubs. West plays the five, and I win in dummy with the eight. I play a spade from dummy--ace--deuce---six. East plays the ten of clubs. I pitch the deuce of hearts, allowing West to ruff with his natural trump trick. He continues with the king of diamonds. I ruff and claim. Down one.

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

The hand was an open book at trick two. Maybe I should have won the second club in my hand and played the deuce of spades. Perhaps my flamboyant display of card-reading prowess would demoralize the opponents. Nah. Jack seems pretty unflappable.

As I expected, four diamonds was going down. We get five matchpoints for this result, tying the pair who went down one in three spades and beating the two pairs who sold to three diamonds. Going plus against four diamonds, it turns out, would have been worth only an additional two matchpoints. To get a good score, we must buy it in three spades.

West's diamond raise made that goal hard to achieve. Not everyone would raise a Precision one diamond opening with West's hand. But I think the raise makes sense. His spade length makes diamond shortness in his partner's hand unlikely.

Would a Michaels' cue-bid have worked out better? I replayed the hand, bidding two diamonds at my first turn to see what would happen. LHO passes, partner bids two spades, and RHO doubles. I pass, LHO bids three diamonds, and partner bids three spades, ending the auction. I guess that works, but I'm still not sure why. Partner's three-spade bid is as incomprehensible to me on this auction as his four-spade bid was on the auction we had.

Score on Board 49: -50 (5 MP)
Total: 383 MP (65.1%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 48

Board 48
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 2 ♥ A Q 10 8 5 ♦ A 2 ♣ A Q 8 6

Three passes to me. I open one heart--pass--one notrump--pass. I may be in the minority here, but I prefer an off-shape two notrump to two clubs. I like to limit my hand when possible, since it simplifies the ensuing auction.

I bid two notrump, and partner bids three diamonds. I seem to have saved myself a headache. If I had bid two clubs and partner had bid two diamonds, I would have a problem. I'm worth another move, but nothing appeals. I can't bid two notrump with jack doubleton of spades. The heart suit isn't quite good enough to treat as a six-card suit. Three diamonds understates my tolerance for notrump, since partner might reasonably assume I have a singleton spade. And two spades understates my tolerance for diamonds, since partner might think I have honor third of spades and a singleton diamond. My initial two notrump rebid was a less of a distortion than any one of those continuations would be.

I pass, and West leads a third-and-lowest eight of spades.

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

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

Three diamonds strikes me as a bit cowardly. I would have bid three notrump. It's not clear whether we would make that or not.

East wins with the spade king; I play the six. East cashes the spade ace, I play the four, and West plays the three. It appears West has queen-ten-eight fourth of spades. I expect to see a third spade, tapping dummy, but East shifts to the three of clubs--four--king--ace.

Why not tap dummy? Is it possible East doesn't have another spade? Hardly. I refuse to believe West passed in third seat with queen-ten sixth of spades and the club king. One thing for sure. East doesn't have queen-third of diamonds. If he did, he would have tapped me to prevent my finessing against his diamond queen. I decide to play ace of diamonds then a diamond to the king, trying to drop West's queen. I can then play three rounds of hearts, pitching my spade.

I cash the diamond ace--four--three--queen. How come every time I decide to drop an offside doubleton queen, my opponent plays the queen on the first round? As on Board 42, I know Jack isn't capable of a falsecard. So I could just play a diamond to my nine and claim. But what would I do in a real game? The falsecard with queen-ten doubleton isn't so clear this time. For one thing, West doesn't know I have the nine. For another, he doesn't know I have a third spade. So he can't be sure his partner's club switch marked him with the queen. Still, just because the falsecard isn't 100% doesn't mean some defenders might not try it.

If I can cater to the falsecard safely, I might as well do so. If I can't, I'll back my judgment and take the trump finesse. For starters, it can't hurt to cash the club queen. West would not have kept quiet with king-jack-ten sixth of clubs, so there is no danger of its being ruffed. I cash it. East plays the deuce, and West plays the five.

It appears East has three-deuce doubleton of clubs. That means he is either 4-3-4-2 or 4-4-3-2. I can cater to both cases. I can ruff a club to my hand, then return to dummy in whichever suit East pitched. (If he pitched a heart, I play king and a heart to the ace. If he pitched a spade, I ruff a spade.) I now ruff another club to my hand and return to dummy in the other suit, reaching this position:

	NORTH ♠ -- ♥ 10 8 5 ♦ -- ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ K J 9 ♣ --

East has either three diamonds or two diamonds and a heart. I play a heart from dummy. If East ruffs, he was 4-3-4-2, and he's couped. If he follows, he was 4-4-3-2. I can ruff with the king and cash the jack, dropping West's ten. (If West falsecarded with queen-small, more power to him.)

So far, so good. What happens if East unexpectedly follows to the third club? Now I can't afford to play for the coup, since East might have begun with a singleton heart. In fact, he probably did. If East doesn't have a doubleton club, then the three was probably third best from four, and he's 4-1-4-4. So I must revert to the trump finesse and resign myself to going down if West falsecarded.

The problem, however, is that the hearts are blocked. To make it, I must lead the heart king and overtake with the queen. Now I take a trump finesse, draw trumps, and play a heart to the ten to take my spade pitch. This is fine if East is indeed 4-1-4-4. But what if he led a middle club from three and is 4-2-4-3? I don't think that's likely. But I'd hate to pay off to it if he did.

Actually, I don't have to. My nine of spades subjects West to a show-up squeeze. I can run diamonds, reaching this position at trick 12:

	NORTH ♠ -- ♥ Q 10 ♦ -- ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ 9 ♥ 4 ♦ -- ♣ --

West must hold a high spade, so he can't hold a doubleton heart. In fact, I don't even need the ten of hearts. The deuce would do just as well. (Note that I've learned my lesson about saving threat cards. I didn't stupidly drop the nine of spades under the ace or king.)

I don't see anything wrong with this line. I play a club from dummy. To my surprise, East follows with the ten. So much for the trump coup. It's on to Plan B. I ruff with the seven and play the king of hearts--deuce--ace--six I play a diamond--five--eight--spade ten. Then I run diamonds, squeezing West. It turns out the squeeze is necessary. East did lead the three from ten-three-deuce of clubs, and he has the jack of hearts. I'm not sure why he led the three. I don't think I've ever seen Jack do anything like that.

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

That was certainly fun. The kibitzers probably didn't see the point of this line. They probably thought I was just showing off--wasting my heart king for no reason, then executing a squeeze to get the trick back.

I was the only declarer to score eleven tricks in a diamond partscore. Probably not because of my declarer play but because of East's defense. He should have continued with a spade at trick three. I could still make five double-dummy. But it requires a strange line of play that I would have no reason to adopt.

Even though we beat all the other partscores, this is only an average, because three pairs bid and made game. Two pairs made three notrump, and one got a top by reaching four hearts, making five. Four hearts! That's quite a nice contract. That's another reason not to bid two clubs over one notrump, On my auction, we had no chance to get to four hearts, so I can't feel bad about missing it. Had I bid two clubs, we would have had a chance to get there. So I would be annoyed when we didn't.

Score on Board 48: +170 (6 MP)
Total: 378 (65.6 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 47

Board 47
Our side vulnerable

♠ A Q J 8 7 4 ♥ 6 5 4 ♦ A 3 ♣ 6 4

I open one spade in first seat. Partner bids two notrump, showing a game-forcing raise. Didn't we just have this auction? Almost. This time RHO chimes in with three clubs.

If RHO had passed, I would have bid three spades. This is a minimum in high cards. But with six good spades and four controls, this hand is too good just to bid four spades. There are variety of ways to handle interference after Jacoby Two Notrump. But, as far as I know, there is no standard consensus. Personally, it makes sense to me to play that pass denies a singleton or void, new suits are natural, rebidding your suit shows shortness in the overcalled suit, and double shows a semi-balanced hand with shortness in some other suit. (Partner can find out where your shortness is by passing and seeing which suit you lead.)

Whatever Jack thinks my bids mean, he surely can't be misled too much if I just pass. So I do. Partner bids four spades. If that's all he can do, I have nothing further to say. I pass again, and West leads the queen of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
			1 ♠
Pass	2 NT1	3 ♣	Pass
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)
1At least fourcard support, gameforcing

Wow! I'm happy not to be in a slam, but it does seem partner gave up awfully quickly. What should he have bid? If I hadn't just put Blackwood back on the card, I would say partner should jump to four notrump (natural and non-forcing) and I should pass. How's that for an auction? A perfectly straight-forward, quantitative slam exploration ending in exactly the right spot!

Since we've handicapped ourselves by disallowing a natural four notrump bid, this hand presents a problem. How do you issue a strong invitation while suggesting that notrump, not spades, is the right strain? Frankly, I can't think of an intelligent auction. Since I know from opener's pass that he doesn't have a complete minimum, I would probably just drive to slam. We would wind up in six notrump, which depends on three-three hearts or some unlikely squeeze possibilities. I suppose it's just as well partner held that hand rather than me.

Is there anything to the play in four spades? If I duck the club, perhaps East will think the queen is a singleton and will overtake to try to give his partner a ruff. I play low, and East plays the deuce (upside-down attitude). My card hardly matters. I randomly choose the six.

To my surprise, West shifts to the jack of hearts. I play the ace--deuce--four. It didn't take long for me to regret my play of the club six. If West guards hearts, I have the matrix for a double squeeze. But for the squeeze to operate, the club threat must be in my hand. Dummy's club king, being in front of East, is useless as a threat. So the squeeze will work only if West actually did begin with a singleton queen of clubs or if he began with queen-three doubleton. Had I not squandered my six, the squeeze would also work if West began with queen-five doubleton. Sigh. Keep winners; throw losers. When will I learn?

Too late now. I cash dummy's ten of spades; everyone follows. On the king of spades, East pitches the five of clubs. I am so happy to see that card! If I were East, I would torture declarer by holding onto it as long as possible. I cash the king and queen of hearts, on which East pitches the seven and nine of clubs. Now I run spades. West unguards diamonds, so East keeps his diamond stopper and throws all his clubs away, establishing my four. Making six.

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

This is not a top. One pair bid and made six notrump. East really led a club? I don't see how else declarer could have made it. Actually, most pairs were in slam, which isn't too surprising. Two pairs were down one in six spades, and one was down two doubled in six hearts. So simply staying out of slam was worth eight matchpoints. The extra overtrick is worth an additional two.

Presumably West shifted to a heart because he thought his partner might be void. And he might be. Jack's attitude signals indicate nothing more than whether or not he has an honor in the suit led. So the presence of a heart void would not cause him to signal any differently. How would a more sophisticated East signal a heart void?

First, let's assume right-side up signals. Some people play that a middle card is encouraging and that extreme cards are suit preference. Personally, I like to restrict three-way signals to situations where you are presumed to have six or more cards in the suit led. But, for this to work, you must have clear agreements about when six or more cards is presumed. My notes say that any three-level or higher overcall qualifies. So, by my rules, three-way signals apply here. I would play the seven to encourage, the deuce to request a diamond shift, and the jack to request a heart shift.

If I hadn't overcalled, three-way signals would not apply. I would play the nine (my highest spot card) to encourage, the deuce to request the obvious shift, and the jack as an alarm-clock to suggest an unusual shift. By sheer coincidence, this unusual shift is to the higher ranking side suit. But it needn't be. If dummy's red suits were reversed, the deuce would ask for the "obvious" heart shift, and the jack would ask for the unusual diamond shift. The reason for this is that you don't always have an alarm clock signal available. So you want to use the alarm clock to send whichever message you are least likely to want to send.

Playing upside-down, three-way signal work differently. You should play that your lowest card always encourages, even in a three-way situation. So the deuce requests a club continuation whether you are presumed to have six clubs or not. You can now use a middle card to request the lower-ranking suit and a high card to request the higher-ranking suit. This way, you needn't be so worried about whether you are on the same wavelength. Even if one of you thinks this is a three-way situation and the other doesn't, there is no ambiguity about the meaning of the deuce. The extra clarity upside-down signals gives to three-way situations is, I find, one of the major benefits to using them.

Why not play this way when playing right-side-up signals? Why not play high to encourage and middle or low for suit-preference? Because it is sometimes hard to tell whether partner's card is middle or high. The continue-or-shift message is the one you are most concerned about getting across. If partner knows you want a shift but can't tell for sure which suit you want led, he can sometimes use other clues to solve his problem.

Result on Board 47: +680 (10 MP)
Total: 372 MP (66.0 %)

Current Rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 46

Board 46
Neither vulnerable

♠ 9 7 6 5 4 ♥ A K 9 5 4 ♦ -- ♣ Q 7 2

I open one spade. It's a little light, but I like to get into the auction early with both majors. It is a six-loser hand after all. Don't tell anyone, but there was I time when I would have opened the same hand without the ace of hearts.

Partner bids two notrump, showing a forcing raise. I could bid either three diamonds to show my shortness or four hearts to show my second suit. The problem with four hearts is that it gives partner no opportunity to make a slam try below game. With five small spades, I'd just as soon partner didn't bid to the five level with a marginal hand. So I bid three diamonds, leaving partner room to get the slam try off his chest. But he doesn't. He bids four spades.

In standard practice, four spades is responder's weakest rebid, and, for once, I agree. In general, I don't believe in fast arrival. But I make an exception when the strain has already been agreed. I pass, and LHO leads the five of diamonds (fourth best).

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

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 ♠
Pass	2 NT1	Pass	3 ♦2
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)
1At least fourcard support, gameforcing
2Singleton or void

Four spades was rather pessimistic. With five good trumps and no diamond wastage, partner should not have given up so easily. Just add the jack of clubs to my hand and slam is excellent. It's not terrible even opposite this hand. Although I suppose it would be hard to reach slam whatever partner did--even if I did have the jack of clubs.

East plays the diamond ace, and I ruff with the five of spades. If both majors break, I'm making six. Ace-king of spades. Heart to the ace. Ruff a heart. Diamond ruff. Heart ruff. Diamond ruff. I can now pitch two clubs from dummy on my hearts.

What if hearts are five-two? In that case, I will need to find a doubleton ace of clubs to make six. Or I can hope someone makes a mistake and hops with the club ace for fear he will lose it. My best chance to make that happen is to lead a club from my hand at trick two. Playing a club at trick two is suspicious-looking. West may well think I have something like ace-king-queen-ten of hearts and dummy's clubs are about to disappear.

What if I play a club to the king and ace and East taps me with another diamond? Will I have lost the communication to set up hearts if they break? No. The diamond tap does deprive me of a hand entry, but I have a brand new hand entry with the queen of clubs to make up for it.

The downside to trying for this swindle is that I may miss out on the legitimate chance of finding East with ace doubleton of clubs. If I ruff hearts early and find East with five hearts, I will know to play him for club shortness. A priori, the chance of finding East with ace doubleton of clubs is about 8%. This reduces to about 3% if you assume he can't have ace-nine, ace-five, or ace-four (giving West a club sequence he might have led from). Against that,West is more than 50% to have the club ace (since he didn't lead a club). So West doesn't have to hop all that often to make the swindle the percentage play.

I suppose there is a chance West will hop with the ace and give his partner a club ruff. But that's unlikely. And, if clubs are five-one, there's a fair chance hearts weren't coming home anyway.

I play the club seven. West plays the ace--three--five, then shifts to the diamond king--seven--four--spade six. Everyone follows to the first trump, so I claim. Making six. It turns out hearts were five-two, so I needed the swindle.

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

I sympathize with West. All you have to do is add the ten of hearts to my hand and he did the right thing. Making six gives us a complete top. I suspect most pairs carelessly played this contract from the North side, in which case it would be harder for the defense to make a mistake.

Score on Board 46: +480 (12 MP)
Total: 362 MP (65.6 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 45

Board 45
Both sides vulnerable

♠ A Q 8 7 ♥ K 10 9 7 6 2 ♦ 5 4 ♣ A

Two passes to me. I open one heart. LHO doubles, partner passes, and RHO bids two diamonds. Since partner couldn't act over the double, this hand must belong to the opponents (unless partner is intending to make a cooperative double, in which case I'll find out soon enough). It's likely the opponents belong in a game. So rebidding two hearts is pointless. If the opponents bid over two hearts, my bid will have accomplished nothing other than to help declarer count my hand. And if they don't bid over two hearts, I'll probably wish they had. Two hearts doubled could prove ugly.

I pass, LHO passes, and partner bids two hearts. In the old days, some played that this auction showed a good hand (about eight or nine support points). They wanted to raise lighter than normal over the double, so, to keep the range of a single raise manageable, they passed and bid later with a constructive raise. This approach fell out of favor long before Jack was born. So I'm sure that showing a good raise is not what Jack has in mind. I suspect he is using this sequence to show a hand not worth a raise on the previous round. Perhaps something like queen-jack third of hearts and out.

RHO bids three diamonds. Partner's heart support is probably sufficient to beat three notrump. But the opponents may still be cold for five diamonds. It's tempting to pass and let sleeping dogs lie. But I hate breaking the Law. Why should I worry that opponents who were willing to stop at the two level will suddenly come to life and bid to the five level in a fit they already knew about? I bid three hearts, and everyone passes.

Why are the opponents letting me play three hearts? Someone has done something screwy. I just hope it isn't partner. West leads the deuce of spades (fourth best).

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

West	North	East	South
	Pass	Pass	1 ♥
Double	Pass	2 ♦	Pass
Pass	2 ♥	3 ♦	3 ♥
(All Pass)

It is partner! He has neither a constructive raise nor a sub-minimum. What he has is a perfectly normal raise that he failed to produce on the first round for no discernible reason. Everyone else is going to be in game and will probably be making it.

West's failure to lead a diamond suggests he has the ace. He also rates to have four spades, since East would have bid spades at some point if he had four. I play low from dummy, East plays the jack, and I win with the queen. West appears to have led a spade from king-ten fourth. So I can add to my list of inferences the fact West is unlikely to have four or more clubs with an honor sequence. (I would not assume West doesn't have an honor sequence in clubs at all. King-queen third and, to a lesser extent, queen-jack third are not attractive leads.)

I have two lines of play available. I can ruff spades in dummy and make five, or I can try to set up clubs. Let's see how the latter plan times out. Club ace, heart to dummy, club ruff, heart to dummy, club ruff. If clubs aren't three-three, I've held myself to four. (I can still ruff one spade.) If they are, I can play a heart to dummy and take three pitches, making six. Or, if hearts are two-two, I can ruff a spade to dummy and make seven. That ought to embarrass partner sufficiently to get him to raise next time.

I can ruff one club before I commit myself. So I might as well see what happens if I do that. I play the club ace--four--deuce--seven. If the opponents are giving honest count, then West has honor-six-four, and East has honor-honor-seven.Of course, there is no particular reason they should be giving honest count.

I play the six of hearts--five--jack--three, then the three of clubs. East plays the jack. I ruff with the nine, and West follow with the six. The jack was a poor play. We have already concluded that West can't have king-queen fourth of clubs. So clubs must be three-three. Had East played the club queen (the card he was known to hold), I couldn't be sure of the club split. It appears West is 4-2-4-3, which means I'm making seven.

I play the heart seven--eight--ace--four, then a club--queen--heart ten--king. Making seven.

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

This is a better result than I expected. Only three pairs were in game (making four, five, and six). Two pairs stopped in three hearts (making five and seven). And one pair sold out to three diamonds and beat it a trick. So we wind up with five matchpoints.

Partner was lucky East bid only two diamonds. Had he bid three the first time (as he should), we would have been shut out altogether. I'm not sure what I would have led, but I doubt I would find the ace of clubs lead to beat it two. That seems like a strange choice when I don't expect partner to have a quick entry.

A trump is the best lead against four hearts. Not only does it hold declarer to one spade ruff. It also kills a dummy entry, preventing declarer from utilizing the club suit. Does it actually beat four hearts? No, it doesn't. Declarer can win in dummy and play a spade to the seven. West wins with the ten and plays another trump. Declarer now plays ace and queen of spades, smothering East's jack. This is the percentage play any time East is marked with fewer than four spades. So, on most auctions, it should not be a hard line to find.

Score on Board 45: +260 (5 MP)
Total: 350 (64.8 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 44

Board 44
Our side vulnerable

♠ Q J 6 3 ♥ 9 ♦ J 10 7 6 4 ♣ Q 6 4

LHO opens one club. The opponents are playing Polish Club, so this shows either a normal one club opening bid or a weak notrump or a strong hand of any shape. Partner bids one heart, and RHO bids one spade. I pass. LHO raises to four spades, which is passed back to me.

Should I double? I have a pretty good hand for defense: a singleton in partner's suit, a trump stack, and enough junk in the other suits to give declarer problems. The opponents will probably take fewer tricks than they expect to. But I have no idea how many tricks that is. That may mean they will make only four when they would normally expect to make five. So I can't justify a double. If LHO had bid three spades and RHO had passed, I would have a better case for doubling, since nine tricks is probably their expectation. (And, if it isn't--if the opponents have somehow underbid and belong in four spades--then we are destined for a bad board anyway.)

I pass. I lead a heart, not so much to get a ruff as to threaten declarer with a ruff, so he won't take a safety play in spades. Lowenthal's Fourth Law of Opening Leads: The lead of a short suit is an attempt to force declarer to draw trumps.

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

West	North	East	South
	1 ♣1	1 ♥	1 ♠
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)
1Polish Club

Four spades? This is the second board in a row where Jack has lost his artificial mind. Was there something special about South's one spade bid? No. I ask Jack about it. He claims it shows 6 to 20 high-card points and 4 to 13 spades. I guess if you credit partner with the average of all hands that meet those criteria, you would want to be in four spades. But it does seem better to let partner refine his description a bit before you commit yourself.

Partner wins with the king; declarer plays the four. Partner cashes the heart ace, and partner drops the jack. He should have played the queen, the card he's known no hold. If I thought declarer might be ruffing the third heart. I would certainly think about pitching a club, then a second club when declarer ruffs. I don't know whether that defense makes sense or not. But now I don't even have to think about it. I pitch the four of diamonds.

Partner continues with the eight of hearts. He has ten-eight-three remaining, so this is his middle heart. While Jack is not big on suit-preference (one of our areas of agreement), he does give suit preference when giving a partner a ruff. So this should mean he doesn't have a minor-suit honor. Declarer plays the heart queen, and I ruff with the spade three.

If partner has no high cards in either minor, the diamond jack should be a safe exit. If partner had led the heart ten to show a diamond card, I wouldn't shift to a diamond, since I wouldn't want to break the suit if declarer had ace-eight fourth. I would switch to a low trump instead, assuming declarer could not afford to duck, especially with diamond losers he needed to ruff in dummy.

I lead the diamond jack--nine--deuce--ace. The fact that declarer blocked diamonds to get to his hand suggests he's about to take a double finesse in spades. Can he really do that? I don't see how he can afford to. If he loses a spade trick to partner, I'll score an overruff with the other honor. If declarer leads the ten, it could be right to cover. (Partner could have eight-seven doubleton for example.) But I really don't think he's going to let the ten ride. So, if he does lead it, I'm calling his bluff and playing low.

Declarer doesn't play the spade ten; he plays the deuce. I play the six, and declarer wins in dummy with the king. Partner plays the seven. Declarer cashes the ace--eight--four--jack.  So partner did have eight-seven doubleton. Declarer presumably is either 4-3-4-2 or 4-3-3-3. In the former case, we have no more tricks other than my queen of spades (on the assumption that partner has denied the club king with his suit preference signal), so I might as well assume declarer is 4-3-3-3. If so, we'll score a club trick unless declarer has king-jack-ten of clubs and guesses to finesse against me.

Declarer cashes the diamond queen--five--three--six. He then ruffs dummy's last heart with the nine of spades. It's frequently wrong to overruff with the master trump. In this particular layout, it doesn't appear to matter. But I decline to overruff on general principles. I pitch the four of clubs. In theory, I can't afford this pitch, because declarer might have king-jack-small. In practice, declarer will never guess to drop my queen, so the pitch is perfectly safe. And the fact that it is apparently unsafe may persuade declarer I don't have the queen if he does happen to have a guess. The one thing I can't do is pitch a diamond. Declarer could then cash the diamond king and toss me in with a trump.

Declarer cashes the diamond king, pitching the five of clubs from dummy. Partner follows, so declarer is indeed 4-3-3-3. Declarer now cashes the club king--six--seven--three. If partner's three is honest, declarer doesn't have king-jack-ten. Even though I said declarer would never guess to drop my queen if he has king-jack small, I must admit to find myself holding my breath. Declarer plays the deuce of clubs to the ace. Partner does have the club jack, so declarer is down two.

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

One other pair reached the same peculiar contract with the same result. Everyone else was in a sensible three notrump, making three. We get 11 matchpoints. I could have picked up another matchpoint by doubling.

So why did declarer bid four spades? Why not two spades? To find out, I replayed the deal with myself as North. I raised South's one spade response to two. South bid three notrump, and I passed. I then asked Professor Jack to critique my bidding. "Two spades is too passive," he said. "With this hand, you'd do better to bid game." So this really and truly is a disagreement over hand evaluation? Pretty scary.

Score on Board 44: +200 (11 MP)
Total: 345 MP (65.3 %)

Current rank: 1st