Event 3 - Match 3 - Board 1

Board 1
Neither vulnerable

♠ K 9 ♥ Q 8 4 3 ♦ K 4 2 ♣ J 9 8 5

Partner opens one diamond, I bid one heart, and partner bids one notrump (15-17). I'm worth only two notrump. But with such weak hearts, inviting is dangerous. If I bid two and partner accepts, LHO, knowing we don't have extras, can double any time he has a heart stack. If I raise to three, he must be more cautious about doubling. It's not the increased penalty I'm worried about so much as giving LHO a chance to direct the lead. I might go down doubled after a slow auction when I would have made three notrump had I just bid it.

I bid three notrump, and everyone passes. RHO leads the deuce of spades, fourth best.

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

West	North	East	South
Marcus	Phillip	Nathanial	Jack
			1 ♦
Pass	1 ♥	Pass	1 NT
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

Partner has a minimum in high cards. But with ace-ten-nine fifth of diamonds, I assume he would have accepted an invitation, so we were always getting to game. Still, this isn't much of a contract. With a normal break in diamonds, I have only seven tricks. Each suit offers some potential for an extra trick. West might have led from queen-jack fourth of spades, diamonds might come home for five tricks, or the club ace might be onside. The heart king may be onside also, but that will probably be of no use. If I have three spades losers in addition to the club ace, I can't afford to give up a trick to the king of hearts. I may, however, be able to take a second heart trick via an endplay.

I will probably need a spade entry to dummy later, either to take a second diamond finesse if I find West with a singleton diamond honor or to lead a club toward my king. So I might as well play low to this trick and see if I got lucky in the spade suit before I delve too much further into this deal. I play the nine, and East plays the jack. So much for a third spade trick.

Where am I going to find two more tricks? If I can't bring home the diamonds for five tricks, I will need the club ace onside and an endplay in hearts, which means I need some kind of defensive entanglement in the club suit. Does queen doubleton of clubs in the West hand do it? Say I take the spade ace and play three rounds of diamonds. The opponents continue spades. I win in dummy and play a club. East must duck, else I get two club tricks. I win with the king and play a second club to West's queen. If he has the heart king and no entry to his partner in the spade suit, he will be endplayed. He can get off the endplay by unblocking the club queen under my king. But maybe he has queen-ten doubleton. Or maybe even a singleton queen, in which case I can toss him in with the ten of spades (though I will have to guess which holding to play for). This isn't likely to work, but I don't see anything better.

I take the spade ace and play the five of diamonds to dummy's king. West plays the three; East, the seven. I play the deuce of diamonds from dummy, and East plays the queen. I win with the diamond ace, and West follows. I play the diamond ten. West wins with the jack, and East pitches the three of spades. That's good. Assuming West has the spade queen, the opponents have no communication in spades.

West plays the four of spades to dummy's king--six---five. Does it matter which club I lead from dummy? If I lead the nine, East may think I have king-ten third, in which case, with ace-queen, he might hop with the ace to keep me from retaining the lead in dummy to repeat the finesse. If he does, then West, with his putative king of hearts and ten of clubs, has two suits he can't afford to lead. It's not entirely clear I can exploit that fact. But at least it will give West a problem.

I lead the nine of clubs. East plays the ten. That's not good. There's no way East would play the ten from ace-ten fourth or fifth. So the layout I was hoping for isn't there. My plan isn't going to work. Is there anything else to try?

What if West doesn't have four spades? What if he led from queen third (prefering the unbid major to his own long suit) and spades are now blocked? Is that possible? Could East have pitched a spade winner? Let's give East something like

♠ J 8 7 6 3 ♥ J x x x ♦ Q 7 ♣ ? 10

He certainly might pitch a spade on the third diamond with that. If that's what he has, do I have a chance? Suppose his '?' is the ace. I play the club king, then play another club. He wins. If he plays a spade to his partner's queen, West will be endplayed. It shouldn't be hard for him to see that, however. It should be pretty easy to find a heart shift.

Suppose his '?' is the queen. Now I can duck this trick, allowing me to smother his queen later, establishing two club tricks in dummy. Again, if East plays a spade, I'll make it; and if he plays a heart, I'll go down. He might find a heart switch in this layout also, but it's a little bit harder. In general, the earlier you put someone to the test, the more likely he is to go wrong. Since it's fifty-fifty whether he has the ace or the queen, ducking seems like my best shot. I play the six of clubs; East plays the deuce. East plays the seven of spades to his partner's queen, and I pitch dummy's three of hearts. I don't think this is going to work. East would have played the eight of spades with eight-seven left, so West probably has the eight.

And indeed he does. He cashes it. I pitch the four of hearts from dummy; East plays the five of hearts. If East began with only four spades, he can't have a doubleton club. He is probably 4-4-2-3 or 4-3-2-4. He put up the ten of clubs from queen-ten because he thought I was psychic and might duck the nine to his partner's ace. If he is 4-3-2-4 and West has the heart king, we are down to this position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x x ♦ -- ♣ A		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x ♦ -- ♣ Q x x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

I can hold this to down one by pitching a club. West can cash his his club ace, but he will be endplayed. If East is 4-4-2-3,

	NORTH Phillip ♠ -- ♥ Q 8 ♦ -- ♣ J 8 5
WEST Marcus ♠ -- ♥ K x x ♦ -- ♣ A x		EAST Nathanial ♠ -- ♥ J x x ♦ -- ♣ Q x
	SOUTH Jack ♠ -- ♥ A 2 ♦ 9 6 ♣ K 3

my only chance is to stiff the heart ace and hope West doesn't work it out. I must hope he thinks I began with three hearts and two clubs and decides to cash the club ace rather than exit with a heart. I can't imagine he would get the position wrong. (Why would I have ducked the club ten with king doubleton of clubs?) So I'll go for the legitimate line. I pitch the three of clubs. West cashes the club ace--eight--seven--king, then leads the four of clubs to his partner's queen. Down two.

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

My counterpart at the other table made four notrump. That's some pretty impressive declarer play! Somehow he must have induced a diamond lead. Maybe he opened one notrump, then bid two spades over Stayman.

While I doubt Jack actually did that, I do think bidding two spades over Stayman is a reasonable and underutilized swing action at matchpoints. With top tricks and a potential ruffing value, you could easily wind up taking one more trick in a four-three spade fit than in notrump, especially if the opponents don't know you're in a four-three fit. The bid has less constructive potential at IMPs, since you need to take two more tricks in spades than in notrump for it to gain (and, specifically, ten tricks rather than eight). Of course, either at IMPs or at matchpoints, the bid has considerable potential for gain if partner doesn't raise it, either by inducing a favorable lead or by getting the opponents to miscount your hand.

Table 1: -100
Table 2: -430

Result on Board 1: -11 imps
Total: -11 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 8

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ A J 10 8 ♥ J 6 ♦ 7 5 2 ♣ Q J 7 4

RHO opens one spade in third seat. LHO bids two hearts, and RHO bids two spades, which is alerted as forcing. LHO bids two notrump--pass--pass back to me. At matchpoints this would be a clear double. I have spades behind dummy and partner has hearts behind declarer. I would not double three notrump, because they could have extras. The bad breaks may mean they're making only three when they would normally expect to make four or five. But when they stop in two notrump, I know they don't have any extras. There is very little downside to this double. If they make this despite the bad breaks, then they have underbid, in which case I have a terrible board anyway. Most of the field will be in game going down.

At IMPs, the risk of doubling is greater and the reward is smaller. It is still true that if they make this, they have underbid and our teammates will probably be in game. But doubling will still be costly. It will turn a five-imp loss into an 11-imp loss. And we must beat them at least two for the double to show any substantial gain. So I pass. Partner leads the deuce of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Jack	Stella	Phillip	Kate
			Pass
Pass	1 ♠	Pass	2 ♥
Pass	2 ♠1	Pass	2 NT
(All pass)
1Forcing

I don't understand two spades. There isn't much chance of a game opposite a passed hand, and two hearts seems as good a spot as any. So why not pass?

Partner probably has four clubs. But, since he rates to have four hearts, I must be alert to the possiblity that he is leading a three-card suit. Declarer rises with dummy's king. If I could afford the queen, I would play it. But if partner has ace third (or, more embarassingly, four small), the queen would not work out well. So I encourage with the seven; declarer plays the three.

I expect declarer to play a heart at trick two. When dummy has touching honors, it's usually right to cover the last honor if dummy has small cards and the penultimate honor if it doesn't. So my first instinct is to play the jack on the first round of hearts. Does that make sense here? Suppose declarer has ace-king-eight fifth (without the seven) and exactly one side entry. If I play low on the first heart, declarer can duck. Whether partner wins this trick or not, declarer can take four heart tricks. But if I play the jack, declarer can't afford to duck. She must win the trick and play a low heart to dummy's remaining honor. If partner ducks this trick, declarer doesn't have the entries both to establish and to run the suit, so she is held to three heart tricks. I'm sure there are other holdings that will work similarly, so it looks right to cover the first heart.

Declarer doesn't play a heart, however. She plays the nine of diamonds. I play the deuce, declarer wins with the king, and partner plays the eight. Why isn't she playing hearts? She must have the queen of diamonds as well. I can't imagine it's right to release her only side entry before playing hearts. Based on partner's eight, she would appear to have king-queen fourth. It's still not clear why she wants to be in her hand.

She plays the four of diamonds--six--ace--seven. I see. She's just trying to get a count. She plays the nine of hearts. I would have covered at trick two. But declarer has demonstrated she has no shortage of entries to her hand, so I don't see the point anymore. It's probably better to keep the favorable lie of the heart suit a secret. I play the six--king--five. On the bidding, declarer can't have the ace-king of hearts and the king-queen of diamonds. She must have king-queen in each suit, and partner must have ducked the ace.

If declarer has the heart eight, then, once she knocks out partner's ace, she has four hearts, four diamonds, and a club--nine tricks. If partner has the spade queen, as seems likely, we can cash enough tricks to beat this before declarer gets back in. If not, we can cash only five tricks--three clubs and two aces--so declarer will make it.

Declarer plays the ten of diamonds, on which partner pitches the deuce of hearts, and overtakes with dummy's jack. She leads a heart--jack--queen--ace. Partner shifts to the queen of spades. We have the rest. Down three.

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

Declarer could have cashed her fourth diamond to hold it to down two. But she was still trying to make it, hoping the spade ace was onside. Of course, partner didn't have to give her the chance. He could have reasoned, as I did, that declarer couldn't have entry problems given this line. So there was no point in ducking the heart. We were always entitled to down three. Maybe I should have doubled after all.

No. If I double, they might wriggle their way into three diamonds. Or three hearts for that matter. I can't be too unhappy when the opponents go minus 150 with two higher-ranking makable contracts available to them.

Our teammates sensibly stopped in two hearts, making four. So we pick up eight imps. That gives us 23 (out of 30) victory points. We are now n first place.

Table 1: +150
Table 2: +170

Result on Board 8: 8 imps
Result on Match 2: +26 imps (23 VP)
Current Total: 42 VP


For our third match, we play Marcus and Nathanial, who play the Jack convention card, whatever that means. I don't know Jack.

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 7

Board 7
Both sides vulnerable

♠ 10 7 ♥ J 6 5 4 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣ K Q 9 5

The opponents have the auction to themselves. LHO opens one diamond; RHO bids one spade. LHO raises to two spades; RHO bids two notrump, a relay. LHO bids three spades, showing four trumps and more than a minimum, and RHO bids four spades. I lead the club king.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
Pass	1 ♦	Pass	1 ♠
Pass	2 ♠	Pass	2 NT1
Pass	3 ♠2	Pass	4 ♠
(All pass)
1Relay
2Fourcard support and not a minimum

Since the two notrump relay can apparently be used to find out whether partner has three-card or four-card support, I suppose South might have a game force with four spades. If she has five spades, however, I assume she will have only an invitational hand, else she would have bid four spades directly over the raise.

Partner plays the club eight, and declarer follows with the deuce. Diamonds is the obvious shift, so partner's card (assuming it is high) should suggest that continuing clubs looks like a better idea to him than shifting to diamonds. There is no particular reason to believe partner has the club ace. He may encourage without the club ace if a diamond shift looks wrong.

What can I conclude about partner's diamonds? That's a difficult question. It depends on whether you think partner's signal is prescriptive ("Please shift to a diamond.") or descriptive ("I have something useful in diamonds, just so you know."). As a general rule, the less you know about the deal, the more descriptive your signals should be. So, at trick one, signals are usually descriptive. But not always. It all depends on context, and I think the context here calls for a more prescriptive approach.

Let's move over to the East seat for a moment. On this auction, looking at that dummy, my judgment would be that holding the diamond king alone (without the ten or jack) gives me good reason to steer partner away from a diamond shift. So I would tend to encourage clubs with that holding.

Take these two hands, for example:

(A) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ Q 3 2 ♦ K 9 6 ♣ 10 8 7 3

(B) ♠ A 4 2 ♥ 10 2 ♦ K 10 6 ♣ 10 8 7 4 3

With (A), I don't want a diamond shift unless partner has jack-ten of diamonds, in which case he might find the shift by himself. Simply change the diamond ten to the jack in the actual West hand, and a diamond shift would be fatal:

(A)

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

But if I hold (B), I do want a diamond shift. If I don't get it, I might be endplayed:

(B)

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

Accordingly, I would tend to encourage clubs at trick one with just the diamond king. If the heart suit were more threatening, I would feel different. For example, give dummy king-queen-jack fourth of hearts and take my spade ace away (so there is room for partner to hold the heart ace). Now the diamond king alone would be enough for me to discourage in clubs. Where is the dividing line? At what point are dummy's hearts sufficiently threatening that I would signal for diamonds without a supporting lower honor? I can't say exactly. It's a judgment call.

Elsewhere in this blog I have inveighed against fuzzy, context-based signals, and the discussion above may seem to belie that conviction. So let me clarify. I do think one should have clear rules about what message a signal conveys. You don't want to be in a situation where you know you want partner to play a spade but you aren't sure whether a low card or a high card is the way to ask for it. Judgment must come into play, however, in deciding whether to send that message. After all, we can agree that one spade--three spades is a limit raise yet still leave the dividing line between a limit raise and a forcing raise a matter of individual judgment.

In any event, these considerations are moot, since I'm playing with Jack. Jack isn't even looking at his diamonds, He's looking at his clubs and telling me he has the ace. Pure and simple.

Back over to the West seat. If partner has the club ace, I may need to cash our second club trick. It might go away if I don't. Should I cash the queen or lead a low one? It could be right to cash the queen so that I can stay on play to put a diamond through. Otherwise, partner may be endplayed:

(C)

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

Could cashing the queen could work out poorly if partner is short in clubs? Let's try another layout:

(D)

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

If I cash the queen, partner's ace will drop on the next round, establishing declarer's ten. But so what? We aren't beating the contract on this layout whatever I do. Four small clubs in declarer's hand is a very favorable assumption for declarer, so it is pointless to cater to it. I might as well cash the queen, so I can switch to diamonds at trick three.

Some might argue that a reliable partner can't have (C), that he would discourage at trick one with that hand. Indeed, in a poll I conducted on bridgewinners.com, roughly 80% of the respondents said they would discourage at trick one with (C). But I don't think you should.

Back to the East seat again. Yes, with (C) you want partner to play a diamond, but not just yet. You want him to cash the club queen first. If he doesn't, declarer can make the contract by pitching his club on dummy's fourth heart. If partner knew you had the club ace, you could discourage and trust him to work out on his own the need to cash before shifting. But partner doesn't know who has the ace. If you discourage, how will he know that he isn't supposed to shift immediately?

(E)

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

In this layout, if declarer wins the first trick, the defense is easy. But if she ducks, partner must find a diamond shift at trick two. It shouldn't be too hard for declarer to find this duck. You might as well give West his entry now while he is still somewhat in the dark.

Holding (C), then, you must encourage to get partner to cash the club queen. How do you get him to shift to diamonds at trick three? Actually, I doubt that's a problem. If partner held the diamond jack, a diamond shift would be dangerous. But he doesn't, so a diamond shift at trick three looks pretty routine. It's a perfectly safe exit, and it might be productive. Why would he ever not play a diamond at trick three? The idea that you somehow need to tell partner to lead diamonds comes from focusing on your own hand rather than looking at the deal from partner's perspective.

You have a difficult problem, however, if you switch the jack and ten of diamonds:

(F)

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

Again, you must encourage so partner will cash the club. But he will be hard pressed to find a diamond shift at trick three on his own. How can you get him to do the right thing? One possibility is to take charge. Overtake with the ace and return a suit-preference three of clubs. Obviously, this could work out badly. Even if you aren't playing with Lowenthal (who might have king empty fourth), this maneuver might still lose a trick by force. And, if it doesn't, partner must still work out why you did this. He might attribute it to something less obscure, like holding ace doubleton of clubs.

I think the best solution is to signal with the seven. The seven is high enough that partner will probably think it is encouraging and will cash the queen. Now you play the eight. By playing up the line, you negate your original message. The seven becomes discouraging in retrospect, and partner might work out that you want a diamond shift. He might get this right even if he doesn't suspect your equivocation. He might think you had ace-eight-seven third all along. The bridgewinners were about evenly split between encouraging and discouraging on this one, which I don't understand. If you think it's right to discourage clubs with (C), why would you change your mind with (F)? Two people did choose the seven, but no one said why. I don't know if they were intending to follow with the eight or not.

Back to the West seat on the actual deal. I cash the club queen. Partner plays the three; declarer, the ten. The three should be count, so partner should have ace third or fourth but not ace fifth. Comments in the aforementioned poll indicated that some would play this card as suit preference. All I have to say about that is, "Arggggghhhh!" (No offense intended.) I'd rather take suit preference off the card altogether than worry that partner would give me suit preference here. This should be count, because I might need to know if it's safe to continue a third round of clubs. Clarifying your holding in the suit led always takes precedence over suit preference unless your holding in the suit led is clearly immaterial. Playing a third club is a serious possibility, so your club length is hardly immaterial.

Fortunately, I don't need to worry whether Jack agrees with me or not. I see no reason not to switch to a diamond. I play the diamond deuce--eight--six--five. Declarer appears to have at least king-jack-nine-five. The missing diamonds are the seven, six, and three. I don't know if Jack would play high (count) or low (attitude) with two small. (He should give count, since his failure to win the trick is all the attitude I need. But that's a bit subtle for Jack.) In any event, I don't think Jack would play middle from three. So declarer has five diamonds. We need two major-suit tricks to beat this. Declarer has at most two hearts, so the two tricks will have to be either the ace-queen of a major or the heart ace and the spade queen.

Declarer plays the three of spades from dummy--four--ace--seven. Then deuce of spades--ten--jack--queen. This looks promising. If declarer could afford to lose a spade trick, she would have taken the safety play (cashing dummy's king, then leading low toward her hand). This line indicates she couldn't afford to lose a spade trick, so she must be going down.

No, wait. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. If she has a doubleton club, she has a safety play. But not if she has three. If I have queen-ten fourth of spades and she plays king of spades, a spade to her ace, and another spade, I can hop and tap dummy to promote my spade ten. Furthermore, even if she has a doubleton club, the "safety" play isn't so safe. What if she loses to a doubleton queen of spades in my hand and I give partner a diamond ruff? I take it all back. This isn't as promising a development as I thought.

Partner returns the nine of spades to dummy's king. I pitch the four of diamonds. Declarer plays the seven of hearts--deuce--ace. I guess that's it. There is no prospect for a fourth trick.

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

So declarer did have a doubleton club and might have taken a safety play in spades. Whether she should or not is hard to say. A priori, it's more likely that the safety play is necessary than that she will run into a diamond ruff. But we didn't defend as if trumps were breaking badly. We might have tried the effect of three rounds of clubs if that were the case.

The contract and result were the same at the other table. But I'll bet they didn't spend nearly so much time as we did discussing the board. This is a pretty innocuous-looking deal, isn't it? If you were kibitzing when it was played, would you suspect this deal would spawn three poll questions and merit 2,000 words of commentary?


Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 7: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 6

Board 6
Opponents vulnerable

♠ 8 2 ♥ A 7 5 ♦ A 3 2 ♣ A 10 8 7 4

RHO opens one spade, I double, and LHO bids four spades, which ends the auction.

If partner has a trump trick or a cashing king, it won't matter what I lead. But what if he doesn't? Do I need to develop a fourth trick before declarer can take discards, or should I defend passively (i.e., lead a trump) and force declarer to break the side suits herself? The more balanced dummy is, the more likely that it is right to defend passively. But dummy doesn't rate to be balanced. One of the problems of playing against Jack is you can't ask about alternative auctions. But surely LHO has some way to distinguish a raise to four spades on power from a raise on playing tricks. Dummy rates to have some pattern like 4-3-5-1 or 4-5-3-1, in which case I may need to attack dummy's three-card suit on opening lead. If I can find partner with the queen behind dummy's king or with queen-jack in front of declarer's king, I will have established the setting trick.

Whichever red suit I lead, it is probably better to lead low rather than the ace. Not for deceptive reasons but to retain a tenace in case declarer has king-queen small or king-jack small. The danger in leading low is that partner might have the king and decide not play it. But that's less of a concern at IMPs. If partner can't see a route to four tricks without assuming I have underled an ace, he will make that assumption.

Which red suit should I lead? Hearts is marginally safer, because I would be leading a five rather than a deuce. The higher the spot, the more likely it is partner will be able to tell I've underled the ace, since he knows I must have two cards higher than the one I led. While this is unlikely to matter, it's the only reason I think of to prefer one suit over the other, so I lead the five of hearts.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
			1 ♠
Double	4 ♠	(All pass)

Okay. She got me. Why she didn't make a limit raise with this hand I can't imagine. If declarer has king third of hearts and partner's jack of hearts was going to be the setting trick, I may have blown it.

To my relief, declarer plays the queen from dummy. Partner plays the deuce; declarer, the jack. Partner's deuce should be attitude, suggesting that I make the "obvious shift" (to diamonds) when I get in. A high heart would be encouraging, not because partner has any particular reason to want me to continue hearts but because he has nothing in diamonds to make a shift by me worthwhile. Since we lack the tempi to develop tricks, partner has no reason to suggest a diamond shift except to cash out, so he should have the king.

That's what partner's deuce should mean. But Jack does not card this way. His deuce simply indicates he doesn't have a heart honor, as if I didn't already know that already.

What can I make of declarer's play of the heart queen? This would be a strange play holding king-jack third of hearts, since the ten is more flexible. The likeliest explanation is that she has king-jack doubleton and wants to win this trick in dummy, probably to take a spade finesee. Even so, the play is unusual. Declarer would normally expect the heart ace to be on her right, in which case the way to reach dummy in this suit is to play low. RHO will surely take the ace (since, for all he knows, his partner has the king), at which point she can drop the king. The fact that declarer chose to play the queen means she thinks the ace is more likely to be on her left than on her right. Since underleading an ace is rare, she must be fairly confident from the auction that partner can't have an ace (in addition to the spade king, which she must assume he has). That's too bad. It means if she is missing the club queen, there is no chance she will misguess that suit. (Although any chance of that happening probably vanished with my opening lead. I would not have led a heart from the ace holding a queen-high club suit.)

What are our prospects for beating this? Declarer has five spade tricks, three hearts tricks, and at least one club trick. Nine tricks in all. If she has the club queen, she has two club tricks, bringing her up to ten. In that case, I must hope partner has the diamond king, allowing us to cash four tricks first. If she does not have the club queen, however, she doesn't have ten tricks. So it would be a mistake to break diamonds. She must break the suit herself, and queen-jack of diamonds in partner's hand will be enough to beat the contract.

Declarer leads the nine of spades--seven--three--deuce, then the ten of spades--king--ace--eight. I expect to see the king of hearts, but declarer leads the three of clubs instead. One thing for sure. Declarer doesn't have three small clubs, or she wouldn't be playing clubs before hearts. Either she has a singleton or two small or she has the queen. Since I've already decided declarer is not going to misguess this suit, I can take my time deciding what to do.

Playing with a reliable partner, my correct play is to hop (in case she has a singleton) and cash the heart ace. It should be clear to partner that count is immaterial at this point. The only thing that matters is where his minor-suit honors are, so he should give a suit-preference signal: high with the diamond king, low with the club queen. (I'm not sure what he would play with neither of those cards, but it doesn't matter. If he has neither card, we aren't beating this contract anyway.) If he plays high, I play ace and a diamond. If he plays low, I defend passively. I can't count on Jack to signal that way however, so I must try something else.

I essentially have two choices (1) Hop and guess what to do next. (2) Duck to get more information.

If I choose (1), my percentage guess is to try to cash out. It's better to play partner for one card (the diamond king) than to play him for three (the club queen and the queen-jack of diamonds).

(2) loses immediately if declarer has a singleton club. But if she doesn't, I am guaranteed to get the hand right. When declarer knocks out my heart ace, I cash the club ace. If partner echos in clubs, I know declarer has queen third and I play ace and a diamond. If partner plays up the line, then I know declarer has a doubleton, and I get to see whether she has the queen or not. If so, I shift to ace and a diamond. If not, I know she has only nine tricks, and I defend passively.

(1) is superior if declarer has a singleton club and partner has the diamond king. (2) is superior if declarer has two small clubs and partner has queen-jack of diamonds. In all other cases, it doesn't matter which line I choose. Which scenario is more likely? Here is declarer's hand in each case:

(1) ♠ A x x x x ♥ K J ♦ Q J x x x ♣ x

(2) ♠ A x x x x ♥ K J ♦ K x x x ♣ x x

A four-two split is more likely than a five-one split, so (2) is more likely even before taking the high-card constraints into account. Accordingly, I duck. Declarer rises with the king, and partner follows with the five. That's a relief. Declarer didn't have a singleton. She continues with the deuce of clubs from dummy--nine--six. I play the seven. Partner shifts to the eight of diamonds, and declarer plays the queen. That doesn't look good. Partner wouldn't be leading the eight if he had the king. I take my red aces and play another diamond. Declarer claims. Making four for a push.

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

As I said, I was supposed to underlead the ace of dummy's three-card suit. It just never occurred to me that suit was clubs. Do I get partial credit?

Table 1: -620
Table 2: +620

Result on Board 6: 0 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 5

Board 5
Our side vulnerable

♠ J 8 ♥ J 7 3 ♦ Q J 6 5 2 ♣ A 6 5

Two passes to me. I pass, and LHO opens with one notrump (15-17). Partner bids two spades. Since we play Astro, this should be at least a six-card suit. And, since we do not play weak two-bids, this hand might well be opened with two spades at the other table.

RHO bids two notrump, natural and non-forcing. Wow! Some one who is even more old-fashioned that I am!

Back in pre-lebensohl days, responder's two notrump in competition was more competitive than invitational. You tended to stretch to game with most invitations. So two notrump was apt to be a hand on which you would have passed had RHO not acted. Accordingly, opener rarely pressed on to game. This approach has rightly fallen out of favor. From a total tricks perspective, it makes little sense to play this way. It's seldom right to bid two notrump as essentially a signoff in a competitive auction. If the opponents have an eight-card fit, you should probably compete in a suit rather than in notrump. If they don't, your surest plus is probably on defense.

I pass, as does LHO. Partner leads the six of spades (fourth best).

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

West	North	East	South
Jack	Stella	Phillip	Kate
Pass	Pass	Pass	1 NT
2 ♠	2 NT	(All pass)

What is going on the spade suit? If partner has ace-ten seventh, the suit is running. How do we fare if partner has six spades? I will unblock the jack under dummy's queen. Hopefully, I will gain the lead before partner does and lead a spade through declarer. By the rule of eleven, declarer has two cards higher than the six. If declarer covers my eight, partner can win and drive declarer's last high card. If declarer ducks my eight, partner must overtake. Hopefully declarer will not have a major tenace left, so partner can set up his suit with one more lead. The only holding declarer can have where ducking my eight prevents us from establishing the suit is ace-ten fourth. In all other cases, partner can afford to overtake my eight and continue the suit.

Partner has at most eight high-card points (unless South opened light), so he has only one prime card outside spades: either a minor-suit king or a red ace. A diamond card will be of little use on defense. To have a realistic chance of beating this, I must hope his side card is an entry, either the club king or the heart ace. Let's examine each case in turn.

(1) The club king. Declarer might have eight tricks outside the club suit: two spades, four hearts, and two diamonds. But there is room in partner's hand for the heart queen. And declarer might have ace-queen doubleton of hearts. So it's possible declarer doesn't have four heart tricks and must play on clubs. If so, I must make sure to win the ace on the first club trick, preserving partner's entry.

(2) The heart ace. Declarer has two spades tricks and two diamond tricks. Three club tricks bring her up to seven, so she must go after a heart trick or a third diamond trick to make this. On the auction, the aces are probably split, so declarer must hope to drive partner's ace first. Since she is missing the heart jack, the natural play is to work on clubs first, hoping partner has the club ace. If I hop with the club ace and continue spades, however, as I must do in case (1), she might decide it is hopeless to play me for the heart ace as well. She may go after an extra diamond trick instead. If she has ace-king-eight of diamonds, she can take a double finesse against my queen-jack. If she has ace-king-five, she can lead the ten from dummy, hoping to pin a singleton or doubleton eight in partner's hand (a better play than hoping partner has a singleton jack or queen). To do that, however, she needs two dummy entries. I can prevent this diamond play by ducking the club. If she plays a second club, I must win it if she began with king third (else she will perforce abandon clubs, possibly playing a heart to her ten to develop two heart tricks). If she began with king fourth, however, I must duck again. When the second club holds, declarer must guess who has the club ace. If partner has it, she must play a third club. If I have it, she must switch to hearts. She will almost surely guess wrong. Normal defensive strategy in this situation is for third hand to grab his tricks early to preserve his partner's entries. It is unlikely East would duck the club ace even once, much less twice. It is surely more likely that West has ducked the ace, clinging to his only entry in quiet desperation.

So what should I do when declarer leads a club from dummy at trick two? Hop, playing for (1) or duck, playing for (2)? Partner rates to have more hearts than clubs, so he is more likely to hold the heart ace. Also, if he does hold the club king, there is a pretty good chance declarer has eight tricks outside the club suit. So many of the hands where he has the club king don't even count.

Ducking would appear to be the percentage play. But to ensure that declarer doesn't suspect anything, I must echo in clubs. I am trying to respresent ace third of clubs in partner's hand and two small in mine, and I would never fail to give count with two small. Of course, when partner echoes as well, declarer will know that one or the other of us has echoed with ace third. I'm hoping she thinks it's partner.

I play the jack of spades, and declarer plays the five. All my preperation comes to nothing when, at trick two, declarer leads the nine of diamonds. What is this all about? Whatever is going on, I don't see any gain in covering. I play the six (false count with the jack)--three--eight.

What just happened? Why did declarer take a double finesse in diamonds at trick two? If declarer is missing the club king, I don't see how this play helps. But if she is missing the heart ace, it makes a lot of sense. Any time I have the club ace, this must be superior to playing clubs at trick two. She must play diamonds eventually. Playing the suit now not only avoids the need for two dummy entries later, it also gives her an extra way to pick up the suit. Partner can't profitably continue spades. So if the nine loses to honor third or fourth in partner's hand, she has established her eighth trick. She may regret this play if our aces are switched. But even then she might survive. I might cover, the double finesse might work, or, if the finesse loses, partner might not find the necessary heart shift. Nice play, Kate. This line didn't occur to me.

Declarer leads the three of clubs from dummy. Do I still have any chance of beating this? She has two spade tricks and three diamond tricks, so I must hold declarer to two club tricks. But if I duck twice, playing her for king third, she can simply switch to hearts. I need to hope for king doubleton of clubs. I must duck the first club (to kill any squeezes against partner), win the second, then clear spades. I play the club five--king--deuce. Declarer cashes the diamond king, on which partner pitches the ten of clubs. I follow with the deuce. Declarer plays the three of clubs, and partner pitches the five of hearts. Oh, well. My only chance now is that partner began with ace-ten seventh of spades. I win and play the spade eight. No such luck. Making two.

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

Our teammates collected 200 against two spades doubled. I don't know how the auction went. But if it began the same way, perhaps North made a negative double over two spades. I avoid this double with a singleton trump (so partner can pass with four), but I would double with this hand. The singleton queen and the maximum in high cards provides enough defense that I don't mind partner's passing. Besides, what's the alternative? The only other choice is to overbid and drive to game. Come to think of it, that wouldn't be so bad. Three notrump will probably make, won't it? In three, the natural play at trick two is a heart to the ten.

Table 1: -120
Table 2: +200

Result on Board 5: +2 imps
Total: +18 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 4

Board 4
Both sides vulnerable

♠ Q J 8 7 2 ♥ Q J 8 7 ♦ 2 ♣ A 8 4

LHO opens one diamond, partner overcalls two clubs, and RHO bids two hearts. When you have your own suit and support for partner in a competitive auction, there is always some question as to which suit you should show. Most of the time, raising partner is better. But here, bidding spades makes more sense, since four spades is our likeliest game. I bid two spades. LHO and partner pass, and RHO bids three notrump.

How can they be making this? Partner might strain to overcall with a good suit. But that can't be the case here. He is missing the ace of clubs and, apparently either the king or the queen-jack. So he must have high cards on the side, which means the opponents are stretching. I have hearts stacked behind declarer and partner rates to have diamonds behind dummy. (Since partner apparently overcalled light, there is an inference he has four diamonds. Three-card length in opener's suit makes a light overcall unattractive, and it's unlikely he is short in diamonds.) On top of all that, we have a source of tricks of our own. Not only do they rate to go down, they rate to go down a lot.

I criticized partner on board one for doubling a voluntarily bid game on the assumption the opponents didn't know how to add up their high-card points. But in this case I have additional information. I know their suits aren't breaking, and they don't appear to have distributional values to compensate for their lack of high cards. If LHO had bid three diamonds over two spades, I would not double. They might easily take six diamonds and three tricks on the side. But she passed, so she is presumably balanced. The opponents have clearly stepped out of line. I double, and everyone passes.

Now what to lead? If LHO had bid rebid diamonds, I might have reason to steer clear of a club lead, since the club king might be their ninth trick. But, on this auction, I have no reason to think declarer has eight cashing tricks. Leading a club might give up a trick unnecessarily. But setting up partner's club suit seems like a good way to start the defense. Accordingly, I lead the four of clubs.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
	1 ♦	2 ♣	2 ♥
2 ♠	Pass	Pass	3 NT
Double	(All pass)

Can I change my mind now? Why is declarer lucky enough to catch dummy with six diamonds? Partner plays the nine of clubs, and declarer wins with the king. I can't construct a hand for declarer that doesn't include the queen of diamonds. The worst hand I can construct for her is:

♠ K x x ♥ A x x x x ♦ Q x x ♣ K x

leaving partner with

♠ A x ♥ x x ♦ x x x ♣ Q J 10 9 x x

That's not a hand I would have overcalled with, but to each his own. If this construction is correct, they're going to make this, and we had the first seven tricks if I had led a spade.

Declarer plays the four of diamonds--deuce--king--seven. Now the king of hearts--six--five. That's encouraging. If she isn't running diamonds, maybe she's missing the queen after all. I play the seven of hearts. (Always give false count with the jack, remember. Since partner should echo with jack third, declarer can't tell how hearts are splitting.) Declarer plays the nine of hearts--three--ace--eight, then the six of diamonds. I play the spade deuce (in case partner has any bright ideas about trying to run spades instead of clubs)--ace--nine. Declarer plays a diamond to partner's queen; I discard the spade seven.

Partner shifts to the queen of clubs. We should have the rest: five clubs and two hearts. That means partner has the spade ace, else declarer would have cashed it. So, in fact, we have one more trick than we can use. I overtake the queen of clubs with my ace, cash my hearts (letting partner pitch one of his winners), and lead the club eight, so partner can overtake and claim. But he doesn't overtake. He ducks my eight of clubs, letting me take one more trick. What a nice partner, redistributing the wealth like that. We get to take four tricks each.

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

Declarer could have saved a trick by not cashing the hearts. Perhaps she was worried the black aces were reversed. Or maybe she was just hoping to get a clue as to how to play diamonds. Although I should think my double is already a pretty big clue that I don't have the diamond queen.

Did I make a bad lead? The only reason we beat this after my club lead is that South had made a gross overbid. By all rights, she should have the diamond queen, in which case I needed to lead a spade. But that seems double-dummy to me. Dummy certainly didn't have to have six diamonds.

Partner's pushy overcall while holding queen third of opener's suit was, of course, ill-advised. Although he survived the main danger: that we would go minus on offense when we were entitled to go plus on defense. The moment I doubled three notrump, I imagine he was quite happy he had bid.

How should the opponents' auction have gone after two spades? While it's rare for opener to pass with six diamonds, I agree with the pass in this case - not because she has a minimum but because she has a good hand for defense. With three spades and top cards in diamonds, North is quite happy to defend if it looks right to South.

After two spades is passed around to South, some would reopen with an "action double." But I don't think South should double with diamond support. To my mind, double is essentially a "take-out double" of partner's suit. It shows at most two diamonds and "support" for both black suits. If South does double, I think North should pass, which would not work out well on this deal. With this South hand, I would bid two notrump (natural and non-forcing), which partner would correct to three diamonds.

Our teammates were down two in five diamonds. Why is everyone bidding so much? And, come to think of it, how did they manage to go down only two?

Table 1: +1100
Table 2: -200

Result on Board 4: +14 imps
Total: +16 imps

Event 3 - Match 2 - Board 3

Board 3
Opponents vulnerable

♠ Q J 10 8 2 ♥ Q 7 ♦ K J 8 3 2 ♣ 5

If partner held this hand and opened one spade, I wouldn't object. It's only seven losers after all. But I have a feeling partner would object if I opened, so I humor him and pass. LHO opens one notrump (15-17), partner passes, and RHO bids two spades, a transfer to clubs, which I double. The primary purpose of doubling a transfer is to direct a lead, not to suggest declaring in that suit. So I would not double if my spades and diamonds were reversed. With the interior solidity of this suit, however, doubling seems right.

Cliff Bishop once told me that a double of a transfer should not be lead directing at all but should be a three-suited takeout of the suit shown. Perhaps Cliff was right, but I've never encountered anyone else who plays that way.

LHO bids two notrump, showing club support, and partner bids three spades.

One should rarely "raise" a lead-directing double. So partner should have at least four-card support and a good hand. Since we play Astro, partner would have had no trouble finding a call over one notrump with four or more spades and an unbalanced hand, even with a "4441." I suspect, therefore, that he is balanced, presumably with about 11 or 12 high-card points. (With more, he could have cue-bid three clubs; with less, it would be both unsafe and pointless to bid.) My hand would play poorly opposite a singleton diamond, so the fact that partner is probably balanced is a definite plus. Opposite a balanced "raise," I'm willing to bid game.

RHO bids four clubs. I might as well show my second suit to help partner decide what to do over five clubs. I bid four diamonds. For once, passing a marginal hand in first seat turned out OK. I got to show both my suits while limiting my hand. Although I was lucky that the opponents play two spades (rather than, say, two notrump) as their transfer to clubs. LHO bids five clubs, and partner doubles, ending the auction.

The opponents probably would have found an eight-card heart fit if they had one, so partner rates to have four hearts. Most likely, he is 4-4-3-2. To have doubled this, his red-suit strength must be in hearts rather than in diamonds.

Should I lead a heart on that basis? It could certainly be right if partner has the ace-jack of hearts and I can get a ruff. But that's about the only scenario I can think of where a heart lead is right. If partner's hearts are better than that, I don't need the ruff. And if they are worse, it's probably wrong for us to be breaking the suit. As pedestrian as it is, a spade lead looks better. If partner has the ace over dummy's king and I don't lead a spade, partner may find himself in some Morton's forkish situation where he must either cash the ace, setting up dummy's king, or not cash it and lose it altogether. Accordingly, I lead the queen of spades.

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

West	North	East	South
Phillip	Kate	Jack	Stella
Pass	1 NT	Pass	2 ♠1
Double	2 NT2	3 ♠	4 ♣
4 ♦	5 ♣	Double	(All pass)
1Transfer to clubs
2Shows support

Oops. Maybe a heart lead was the right idea after all. If I'm right about partner's shape, declarer is 1-3-3-6 and can now pitch a heart away. What can partner's hand be?

♠ x x x x ♥ A J x x ♦ A Q x ♣ x x

That doesn't leave declarer much for her four club bid, though:

♠ x ♥ x x x ♦ x x x ♣ K J x x x x

Declarer has to have more than that, but partner can hardly have less. This hand isn't adding up.

Dummy wins with the spade king--three--six. Declarer leads the three of clubs from dummy--eight--jack--five. Declarer then plays the deuce of hearts. This makes no sense. How can declarer afford to play hearts before taking a pitch on the spade ace? Apparently, she doesn't have a pitch. Partner "raised" spades with three small.

And why didn't she draw another round of trumps? Is it possible she has seven of them? That gives her a 2-3-1-7 pattern and leaves partner with 3-4-5-1. Not only does that give partner an easy Astro two-club bid, it gives him a strange double of five clubs: five-card support for my second suit and a singleton club. On the other hand, 2-3-1-7 is more consistent with declarer's four club bid than is 2-3-2-6.

If declarer is indeed 2-3-1-7, there is endplay lurking. Suppose partner has ace-jack-nine fourth of hearts. If I play low and dummy's ten loses to partner's jack, partner must underlead his diamond ace to my king and allow me to lead the heart queen. If he carelessly plays ace and another diamond, declarer can ruff out the spades, play a heart, and duck my queen. I must now give her a ruff-sluff, letting her escape for down one. Perhaps it's better for me to unblock the heart queen rather than count on partner to find the underlead. It's hard to see how it can hurt to play the queen of hearts. Declarer can hardly have the ace.

I play the heart queen--king--ace. Partner plays the diamond ace, and declarer ruffs with the deuce of clubs. Six diamonds? Six-card support for my second suit and partner chose to defend?

So declarer is 2-4-0-7. Well, that explains why partner didn't bid Astro. He didn't have a four-card major. Now partner needs the nine of hearts to beat this. If he doesn't have it, we're going minus 750 when we had a one-trick save available.

I play the deuce of diamonds. Declarer leads the five of spades--ten--ace--four. She then plays the three of hearts from dummy. Partner plays---the five. Minus 750.

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

I have sympathy with partner's first-round pass but not with his three-spade bid. Three diamonds on the second round must show spade tolerance and is far more descriptive than three spades. The final decision was just plain weird. It turns out, Jack thought my four diamonds was a cue-bid, which makes no sense.

As weird as partner's decision was, he was the only one who was right on a double-dummy basis. I could have beat this with a heart lead. And the opponents were cold for five hearts. I hope partner gets some satisfaction from that fact.

I was expecting to lose 12 imps. But, miraculously, this board is a push. Or maybe it's not so miraculous. The same player is sitting East at both tables, after all.

Table 1: -750
Table 2: +750

Result on Board 3: 0 imps
Total: +2 imps