In the the Bath Swiss teams we were leading after six of the seven rounds, but then proceeded to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by losing 19-1 in the final round, when a 16-4 loss would have been enough to win the event.
The last match was a comedy of errors - a routine 6 Hearts was played in grand slam at one table and game at the other, and the opponents let through 3NT by allowing Ann to make three tricks with a holding of A 9 7 opposite Q 4 3. Although it turned out to be a flat board, this was an interesting declarer play problem from the match.
The best line of play can be followed by clicking 'Next'. Did I manage all this? Not quite. I started correctly but when East ruffed the Ace of diamonds at trick 5 I discarded a club instead of overruffing. Now there are two ways for the defence to get a trump promotion; the easier is for East to play a spade now, followed by another spade when he wins the King of hearts. Fortunately my mistake did not cost as East played two rounds of clubs, so I was able to play Ace and a low trump to restrict the defence to one more trick.
The defence missed another chance, as West could have dropped the Jack or 10 of hearts under the Ace to give me a losing option. Even if I believe that my opponent is capable of this subterfuge (and she was a former world champion), I should not be deflected by the false card as playing a low heart wins when West started with ♥KJ, ♥K10 or ♥J10x, much more likely than specifically ♥J10 doubleton.
In the other room declarer took a different tack by playing the Jack of diamonds at trick 1, then cashing the top spades and ruffing a spade. This is a much inferior line as it requires the Queen of spades to fall in three rounds as well as the diamond finesse. Declarer's luck was in and he could cross to dummy's Ace of diamonds and discard a club on the Jack of spades. West had to ruff but when the 10 of hearts fell under the Ace declarer had a choice - had West started with ♥J10x or ♥K10x? Restricted choice makes K10x more likely so he followed with a small trump. This should have led to defeat but West played a diamond and East, still musing over a previous hand, ruffed with the King, allowing declarer to dispose of his last club loser.
Weak two-suited openers are very fashionable at the moment but they can sometimes be a double-edged sword when they encourage opponents into making contracts that they might not otherwise have bid. This deal from an early round against one of the joint winners was a case in point.
The 2♦ opener showed a weak hand with at least 5-4 in the majors. Our agreement against these bids is that an initial double shows a balanced 13-15 or a very strong hand, and that subsequent doubles are for take-out. So North's two doubles showed a rather stronger hand, but her rose-tinted spectacles had already made one successful appearance that afternoon so I could hardly complain. No doubt she would have bid differently without the 9 and 10 of hearts.
West led a spade to partner's Ace, East returned a heart to my Queen and West went into the tank for a while. I was willing him to cover with the king and when he did it was easy - I cashed the ace of trumps, played a trump to my 9, ruffed a spade, drew trumps via a second finesse, unblocked the jack of hearts and crossed to dummy with the Ace of clubs to cash two more winning hearts.
It seemed a clear mistake for West to cover the queen of hearts, and at the time I thought that ducking would defeat the contract, but Deep Finesse showed that there is still a winning line with an unusual squeeze and endplay. Click on 'Next' to follow the play. (West might have tried to avoid the endplay by unblocking the Ace of clubs, hoping that partner held the Queen, but to no avail on the actual hand.) Would I have been up to this at the table? I don't think so somehow.
East's return of a heart at trick 2 was also an error - if he plays a club I have no chance.
The last match was a comedy of errors - a routine 6 Hearts was played in grand slam at one table and game at the other, and the opponents let through 3NT by allowing Ann to make three tricks with a holding of A 9 7 opposite Q 4 3. Although it turned out to be a flat board, this was an interesting declarer play problem from the match.
The best line of play can be followed by clicking 'Next'. Did I manage all this? Not quite. I started correctly but when East ruffed the Ace of diamonds at trick 5 I discarded a club instead of overruffing. Now there are two ways for the defence to get a trump promotion; the easier is for East to play a spade now, followed by another spade when he wins the King of hearts. Fortunately my mistake did not cost as East played two rounds of clubs, so I was able to play Ace and a low trump to restrict the defence to one more trick.
The defence missed another chance, as West could have dropped the Jack or 10 of hearts under the Ace to give me a losing option. Even if I believe that my opponent is capable of this subterfuge (and she was a former world champion), I should not be deflected by the false card as playing a low heart wins when West started with ♥KJ, ♥K10 or ♥J10x, much more likely than specifically ♥J10 doubleton.
In the other room declarer took a different tack by playing the Jack of diamonds at trick 1, then cashing the top spades and ruffing a spade. This is a much inferior line as it requires the Queen of spades to fall in three rounds as well as the diamond finesse. Declarer's luck was in and he could cross to dummy's Ace of diamonds and discard a club on the Jack of spades. West had to ruff but when the 10 of hearts fell under the Ace declarer had a choice - had West started with ♥J10x or ♥K10x? Restricted choice makes K10x more likely so he followed with a small trump. This should have led to defeat but West played a diamond and East, still musing over a previous hand, ruffed with the King, allowing declarer to dispose of his last club loser.
Weak two-suited openers are very fashionable at the moment but they can sometimes be a double-edged sword when they encourage opponents into making contracts that they might not otherwise have bid. This deal from an early round against one of the joint winners was a case in point.
The 2♦ opener showed a weak hand with at least 5-4 in the majors. Our agreement against these bids is that an initial double shows a balanced 13-15 or a very strong hand, and that subsequent doubles are for take-out. So North's two doubles showed a rather stronger hand, but her rose-tinted spectacles had already made one successful appearance that afternoon so I could hardly complain. No doubt she would have bid differently without the 9 and 10 of hearts.
West led a spade to partner's Ace, East returned a heart to my Queen and West went into the tank for a while. I was willing him to cover with the king and when he did it was easy - I cashed the ace of trumps, played a trump to my 9, ruffed a spade, drew trumps via a second finesse, unblocked the jack of hearts and crossed to dummy with the Ace of clubs to cash two more winning hearts.
It seemed a clear mistake for West to cover the queen of hearts, and at the time I thought that ducking would defeat the contract, but Deep Finesse showed that there is still a winning line with an unusual squeeze and endplay. Click on 'Next' to follow the play. (West might have tried to avoid the endplay by unblocking the Ace of clubs, hoping that partner held the Queen, but to no avail on the actual hand.) Would I have been up to this at the table? I don't think so somehow.
East's return of a heart at trick 2 was also an error - if he plays a club I have no chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment