Gold Cup 2024

It's almost exactly 50 years since I first played in the Gold Cup. Back then the entry was about 600 teams and the quality was variable so that we could usually expect to get through a couple of rounds. Nowadays the entry has dropped below 100 teams but the standard is much higher and there are no easy matches. 

After a comfortable win in Round 1, we were pleasantly surprised to survive a close match against Clive Owen's team and then had to play against Peter Lee's team in the last 32.  We were big underdogs for this match, as the opposition could field two players with Gold Cup victories on their palmares. 

We were down by a few imps after 8 boards, but then came one of those rare sets where everything we touched turned to gold.

Ann and I had a rather agricultural auction to slam, which made easily on a heart lead. At the other table Richard Granville and David Burn were playing Richard's own Mosso system, which is partly based on the methods used by Fantoni and Nunes (before the Italians were banned for their illegal signals on defence). On this hand South opened a natural but unlimited and forcing 1♥ and after a few relays showed a balanced 17+ and then a mimimum.  North might have tried for slam but chose to leave matters in 3NT. The irony is that during the Mosso relays South had spades first, so that they had the chance to reach the optimum contract of 6♠ by South.

On the next board you had to find a lead from

after the auction 1NT-3NT. I led the queen of spades which in our methods asks for an attitude signal, while in the other room a low spade was chosen. Although I think it is normal to lead a top card from this holding, it is easy enough to find layouts where a low card works better. This hand was not one of them.

At our table declarer ducked the spade lead and after I switched to a heart he ended down two, while the low spade lead gave Chris an easy ride in the other room.

The opponents then went off in a ridiculous slam, but the icing on the cake was this piece of outrageous good fortune.

The opponents stopped in a sensible 3♠, but my partner had the rose-tinted specs on and pushed us into a seemingly hopeless game. East kicked off with a top club but it was not clear who had the singleton so he switched to the jack of diamonds. I drew trumps and led a heart to the eight, ten and ace. The contract seemed to have no play but when West went into the tank I began to figure out what was going on. Eventually he exited with a low heart so I could win in hand and lead a club to set up a discard while West's heart winner was stranded.

West missed a chance there - if he exits with a diamond I can win in dummy and lead a heart, but he can rise with the ace and play another diamond to take out my entry to dummy while the heart suit is blocked. I can counter this by playing all my trumps before touching hearts. In order to keep four hearts, West must come down to two diamonds. Now I cash my diamonds ending in dummy and lead a heart towards the queen. It's a much easier game when you can see all four hands.

All that added up to a 47 imp set. Last year we had a similar purple patch in our Crockfords match against David Mossop's team and contrived to give it all away on the last set, but this time there were no major alarms and we kept a healthy lead to the end.

Déjà vu all over again.

Since Covid we have played all of our knockout matches online, which has some advantages in avoiding travel and being able to play a wider range of opponents. But when we were drawn against David Mossop's team of professionals in the third round of Crockfords, we were surprised that they insisted in playing the match face-to-face even though Mossop had to travel from Switzerland and Diego Brenner from Barcelona.

In the first set Ann and I missed a good slam that was bit by the Hackett twins, but we had a few small gains and only trailed by 4 imp. The second set was rather more exciting.

On the first board I was on lead with  ♠ 10 4 3 2   ♥ K J 10 8 5   ♦ K Q 3   ♣ 8   after the auction 2♥ - 4♣ - pass - 6♣. Ann's 2♥ was weak with hearts and a minor, and 4♣ showed clubs and spades. Fortunately I had an obvious diamond lead and we took the first two tricks for a gain of 12 imps when Keith and Roger stopped in 5♣.

Two boards later came this

Ann led a club to the jack, king and ace and declarer now played a heart to the ten which I ducked in tempo. The contract makes easily if declarer plays for a 3-2 heart split, but he was worried that Ann might have king jack to four hearts, so he cashed a top spade and led a diamond up. I won and cleared the clubs, and when declarer took another heart finesse I was able to cash the clubs for two down and a gain of 11 imp when 4♠ made at the other table. Gunnar had a little chunter to himself but was kind enough to say 'good duck'. 

The opponents missed a slam and then came this declarer play problem. (Hand rotated for convenience). West led a spade to the ace and a spade was returned. I took the king and cashed two rounds of trumps to get the bad news. Now I can either cross to the ace of clubs to take a diamond finesse and ruff the third diamond in dummy, or just take the club finesse. If the minor suit kings are split than both lines will work or both fail, so the critical case is where both kings are in the same hand.

It seemed to me that it was slightly better to play West to hold both kings.  He has more vacant spaces in his hand as he has the singleton trump, and with small cards in a suit he might have led that suit rather than a spade. I'm not sure if this argument is totally sound, but the club finesse worked and we gained another 10 imps when Paul Hackett took the diamond finesse at the other table.

 

The next board brought a further 11 imps when Hackett and Brenner lost the first six tricks in 3NT instead of making an easy 4♠, and we had won the set by 56 imps to 8! That was not in the script.

The sponsor had now played his quota of boards and retired to the sidelines, leaving his four pros to try and retrieve the situation, but the third set was fairly quiet and we only lost four imps. 40 imps up with only eight boards to play - could we hang on?

 

We needed a lot of part scores or flat games but the great dealer had other ideas, giving us only one part score and potential for game swings on all of the other hands, but with two boards to go we were still 21 imp ahead. This was the penultimate board and the auction at our table

At the other table our boys had no good reason to bid and the Hacketts had an unopposed auction to 4♠. Brenner's decision to open his nine count worked out very well and the 3♣ fit jump enabled them to find their double fit. But I should both have bid on to 5♠ which would have saved a few crucial imps.

 

This was the final hand, where both tables played 4♠ on the nine of diamonds lead.

At our table Brenner covered the opening lead with the jack and ruffed Ann's queen. Now he played a trump to dummy and led the ten of diamonds, which Ann correctly ducked and I ruffed as declarer discarded a heart. I now cashed the ace of hearts and gave Ann a heart ruff, but that was the end of the defence as declarer could cross to dummy in trumps and take a ruffing finesse to finally set up a dimaond winner. 

 

I would have done better to return a trump rather than playing ace and another heart, but declarer can still prevail by ruffing out the diamonds and leading a low club from hand. Would Brenner have found this? I expect so but we shall never know.

 

At the other table West had entered the auction with a double on the second round, so declarer played him for a 5-5 shape. After the same start declarer played two rounds of trumps and tried to cash the ace of diamonds but West ruffed and exited with the king of clubs. There is still a way to make double dummy, but this is not at all obvious and the contract failed. This gave the opponents a 10 imp swing to win the match by 3. 

It was disappointing to lose and we can all think of several hands where we could have done something different to change the result. But at least we gave a top professional squad a good run for their money and can always look back on the 56-8 set. 

In August 2018 we also played Papa Hackett in the semi final of the Faulkner. We lost by 3 imp in that match as well.

Better to be Lucky than Good

In our second round Gold Cup match we scraped a single figure win against a team from London, helped by this rather fortunate slam deal.

Chris and Keith had stopped in game, so a lot of IMPs were riding on whether declarer could bring home his slam.  Declarer ran my club lead to the jack and ace, cashed a top spade, crossed to the ace of hearts and took a losing trump finesse. I exited with my last trump and declarer unblocked the king of hearts, crossed to the ace of diamonds, cashed the queen of hearts and returned to hand with a heart ruff. He then ran the remaining trumps, hoping to squeeze Ann in the minors. (The squeeze would also have worked if I held the king of diamonds and queen of clubs, but in that case I would probably have led a heart.) Unlucky for declarer.

Or was it? Go back to the bidding where North has shown a diamond control but South has denied one. Surely this suggests a diamond lead if West doesn't hold the king? And if Ann did hold the king of diamonds, I could have broken up the squeeze by returning a diamond when I won the queen of trumps. Given that I am likely to hold the king of diamonds, maybe declarer should play king of hearts, ace of clubs, queen of hearts throwing a club, club ruff and run the trumps to squeeze me in the red suits. But I don't mind being insulted if it means that we gain 13 IMP.

I think the best line is to win the opening lead in dummy and take an immediate trump finesse - better than cashing a top trump first as Qxxx is four times more likely than singleton queen. Then you can come down to a three card ending with ♥10 ♦Q ♣7 in hand and ♥AQ8 in dummy, winning if the hand with long hearts has either the king of diamonds or sole control of clubs. It's an easy game when you can see all four hands.