Against my better judgement I was persuaded to have a go at the Senior Pairs at Brighton. The second day was a game of two halves. In the semi-final we made a few mistakes and apparently normal results always seemed to give us a poor score, so we were consigned to the Also Rans Final. Then it was the other way round - we made fewer errors, luck was on our side, the opponents were often in a generous mood and we managed to win.
My partner is well known for her rose-tinted spectacles, so I normally bid rather conservatively to compensate. It is not usually a good plan for both partners to overbid on the same hand, but when your luck is in...
My partner did not think much of my opening bid, although it does conform to the rule of 19 and the Losing Trick Count. Ann's 2NT showed a good four-card raise in hearts (a fit-jump of Three Diamonds might have been more descriptive) and Four Spades was a Sharples game-try (you bid it and then try to make it). No worries. When the trumps broke the contract was secure and even though I mis-guessed the diamonds to make only ten tricks we still got a huge score for bidding game.
This was another hand where we were a bit fortunate. East might (should?) have bid Four Spades over the double but he fancied his chances in defence against Four Hearts.
I could have bid 3NT over the double and taken ten top tricks, but the play in Four Hearts was more interesting. East must have been quite confident when dummy went down with the top heart honours, but he was soon to be disappointed. Even after the 5-0 break is revealed, the contract is cold provided that East has at least two diamonds, as a simple elimination leads to East being endplayed. Click on 'Next' to follow the play.
At this point East could choose his poison. If he leads the spade I ruff in hand and play a diamond, forcing East to ruff and lead a trump into the KJ. Alternatively, if he leads a trump I can cash the other trump and play a diamond winner. At the table East chose to play a trump, which at least gave him the small satisfaction of only being endplayed once rather than twice.
Wednesday 17 August 2011
Tuesday 9 August 2011
Trying to Lose
In our fourth round Silver Plate match against a team from Devon, both sides seemed to be doing their best to avoid progressing into the next round, but we managed to squeak home by 5 imps. At our table the opponents started by playing a laydown Six Clubs in an equally laydown 3NT. Dummy compounded the error by putting the clubs down on his right, so that declarer forgot the contract and fell foul of Burn's Third Law - 'you cannot make 3NT on a cross-ruff' - to go three down.
This was an interesting declarer play problem - how do you play after the king of spades lead, East following with the four?
In our room North bid a rose-tinted Four Hearts at his second turn, which encouraged his parther to bid a hopeless slam. When I played briefly with Mike Pownall, he taught me a rule for supporting partner after intervention - you should allow yourself to be pushed one level higher than normal but not two levels. On this hand North would have rebid Two Hearts if West had passed. So he can bid Three Hearts over a Two Spade overcall, but should pass after a Three Spade overcall.
Back to earth in Four Hearts. If trumps are 3-2, the contract is a simple make by drawing two rounds of trumps and ruffing spades in dummy, but this will fail if trumps are 4-1, which is of course much more likely than normal when the missing spades are known to be 7-1. According to my unreliable arithmetic, the chance of East having four trumps is 35%, and a 3-2 break is still the favourite at 54%.
At the table Chris was worried about a possible bad trump break and started with ace and another diamond, but West held a doubleton diamond and the defenders were able to cross ruff in diamonds and spades for one down. I think a better line is to cash the ace of trumps and then lead a low diamond from hand, covering West's card. Win the return, unblock the ace of diamonds and cross to the king of trumps. If trumps are 3-2 you are home, but if East has four trumps you ruff a diamond, cross to a top club, ruff another diamond and continue clubs, making if the clubs are 3-3. Of course you will look silly if West started with a singleton diamond, but this is much less likely than a singleton trump.
This was the full deal
This was an interesting declarer play problem - how do you play after the king of spades lead, East following with the four?
In our room North bid a rose-tinted Four Hearts at his second turn, which encouraged his parther to bid a hopeless slam. When I played briefly with Mike Pownall, he taught me a rule for supporting partner after intervention - you should allow yourself to be pushed one level higher than normal but not two levels. On this hand North would have rebid Two Hearts if West had passed. So he can bid Three Hearts over a Two Spade overcall, but should pass after a Three Spade overcall.
Back to earth in Four Hearts. If trumps are 3-2, the contract is a simple make by drawing two rounds of trumps and ruffing spades in dummy, but this will fail if trumps are 4-1, which is of course much more likely than normal when the missing spades are known to be 7-1. According to my unreliable arithmetic, the chance of East having four trumps is 35%, and a 3-2 break is still the favourite at 54%.
At the table Chris was worried about a possible bad trump break and started with ace and another diamond, but West held a doubleton diamond and the defenders were able to cross ruff in diamonds and spades for one down. I think a better line is to cash the ace of trumps and then lead a low diamond from hand, covering West's card. Win the return, unblock the ace of diamonds and cross to the king of trumps. If trumps are 3-2 you are home, but if East has four trumps you ruff a diamond, cross to a top club, ruff another diamond and continue clubs, making if the clubs are 3-3. Of course you will look silly if West started with a singleton diamond, but this is much less likely than a singleton trump.
This was the full deal
Monday 1 August 2011
Deauville Debut
After several years of wondering we finally arranged to play in France at the Festival Mondial in Deauville. The food and drink were excellent but the bridge was described by my partner as 'challenging'. There may be some connection between these two statements. After finishing on average after the first of three sessions we slowly slipped down the field to finish near the bottom.
We had been warned about the table etiquette in France but some of the goings on were still a surprise. Convention cards were almost non-existent (although most people played the standard French system of 15-17 no trump and 5-card majors) and our announcement that we were playing a sans-atout faible - 12-14 not 10-12 - provoked a frantic discussion about defensive methods as if we had announced some obscure brown-sticker convention. Asking pointed questions during the auction seemed perfectly acceptable, and when you reached an inferior contract it was common to conduct a heated post-mortem during the play of the hand to encourage the opponents to lose concentration and misdefend.
The 'Patton' teams of four was played as a multiple teams with four board rounds and 16 VP at stake in each round - 8 for point-a-board and 8 on the imp swing. The boards were dealt at the table so there were no hand records, and although most boards had English cards there were occasional boards with French cards to keep you on your toes.
The highlight of the event was undoubtedly the first match on Day 2. Ann and I played against France's most famous player, Paul Chemla, and his partner Alain Levy, both former world champions, while Hilary and Chris faced French internationals Jean-Christophe Quantin and Robert Reiplinger. On the first board both tables played in three spades with nine trumps missing the queen. Levy played for the drop but Chris, warned by a take-out double in the auction, took the winning line of a finesse.
The other three boards were all of interest. This was a tough defence (or at least it was too tough for me).
Ann led the 7 of spades (playing standard English leads) to the ten, queen and ace. Levy played a trump to the king and another trump to Ann's ace. Now Ann played the 5 of spades and declarer played low from dummy. Unclear about the spade position, I went up with the king and that was the end of the defence. At the other table Chris and Hilary bid and made Three Hearts so we lost the board and a 6 imp swing.
To beat the contract I must play the 8 of spades and switch to a diamond. Should I have got this right? Ann's carding is consistent with 9765 or 95 of spades, but the four card holding is more likely (as Ann has only two trumps) and with a doubleton Ann might have gone up with the ace on the first round of trumps. So I think that it's right to play the eight of spades and switch to a minor, but it seems to be a guess which suit to play. Declarer's minor suits could have been ♦ A 10 x x ♣ A Q x, where a club switch is needed.
Next came a marginal slam, bid by Chris and Hilary while Levy and Chemla stopped in Four Spades. How do you play on the queen of diamonds lead?
There are two possible lines. The first is to cross to the king of hearts and take a heart finesse. If it wins you can throw a diamond and hope to ruff the losing diamond. This is how Chemla played at our table but the heart finesse lost and he made 11 tricks.
Hilary played the same way as Chemla (which is some consolation) but that meant an 11 imp loss. The alternative line is to try for clubs 3-3 by playing king, ace and ruffing a club. If East follows to the third round of clubs you have to ruff with the nine to reduce the risk of an over-ruff. This would have worked at the table as the clubs were 3-3.
Which is the best line? Playing on hearts needs more than just a simple finesse - the missing hearts need to be 5-3 or 4-4 (about 80%), and you also need the diamonds 4-3 or 5-2 with the doubleton on your left (about 78%). The combined chance is about 31%. And playing off the red suits increases the chance of the defence being able to promote the 10 of trumps.
The chance of a 3-3 club break is 36% and a 4-2 break will not necessarily be fatal as you will be able to revert to Plan A if you have not suffered an over-ruff. So playing on clubs seems to be the better line.
We repaired the damage on the final hand, Chris and Hilary's finest hour. At our table events unfolded as follows
4 hearts is cold for East-West, but it hardly obvious to bid it with a balanced 11 count opposite a passed hand. Against Four Clubs, Ann led the king and ace of spades. I showed count by playing the three, but on the second round I mistakenly played the jack as suit preference for hearts. Levy ruffed the heart, ruffed his losing spade, ruffed another heart and drew trumps. He can now endplay me by playing a diamond and covering West's card, but he played a diamond to the ace, ruffed a heart to hand and led a diamond up to finish one down. I don't know why he did this, as the animated post-mortem was way beyond the comprehension of my schoolboy French. A diamond switch at trick three would give declarer no chance.
At the other table the auction was more exciting
Three Clubs showed an invitational hand with long clubs. Reiplinger's double was intended to show a solid suit somewhere, but his partner thought that it just showed a good holding in clubs and led a low heart, so that Hilary could wrap up 9 tricks for + 750. The 13 imp swing meant that we won the board and the match ended with an 8-8 draw. But if we had defeated 4 hearts and made the slam it would have been 16-0. That would have been a tale to tell.
We had been warned about the table etiquette in France but some of the goings on were still a surprise. Convention cards were almost non-existent (although most people played the standard French system of 15-17 no trump and 5-card majors) and our announcement that we were playing a sans-atout faible - 12-14 not 10-12 - provoked a frantic discussion about defensive methods as if we had announced some obscure brown-sticker convention. Asking pointed questions during the auction seemed perfectly acceptable, and when you reached an inferior contract it was common to conduct a heated post-mortem during the play of the hand to encourage the opponents to lose concentration and misdefend.
The 'Patton' teams of four was played as a multiple teams with four board rounds and 16 VP at stake in each round - 8 for point-a-board and 8 on the imp swing. The boards were dealt at the table so there were no hand records, and although most boards had English cards there were occasional boards with French cards to keep you on your toes.
The highlight of the event was undoubtedly the first match on Day 2. Ann and I played against France's most famous player, Paul Chemla, and his partner Alain Levy, both former world champions, while Hilary and Chris faced French internationals Jean-Christophe Quantin and Robert Reiplinger. On the first board both tables played in three spades with nine trumps missing the queen. Levy played for the drop but Chris, warned by a take-out double in the auction, took the winning line of a finesse.
The other three boards were all of interest. This was a tough defence (or at least it was too tough for me).
Ann led the 7 of spades (playing standard English leads) to the ten, queen and ace. Levy played a trump to the king and another trump to Ann's ace. Now Ann played the 5 of spades and declarer played low from dummy. Unclear about the spade position, I went up with the king and that was the end of the defence. At the other table Chris and Hilary bid and made Three Hearts so we lost the board and a 6 imp swing.
To beat the contract I must play the 8 of spades and switch to a diamond. Should I have got this right? Ann's carding is consistent with 9765 or 95 of spades, but the four card holding is more likely (as Ann has only two trumps) and with a doubleton Ann might have gone up with the ace on the first round of trumps. So I think that it's right to play the eight of spades and switch to a minor, but it seems to be a guess which suit to play. Declarer's minor suits could have been ♦ A 10 x x ♣ A Q x, where a club switch is needed.
Next came a marginal slam, bid by Chris and Hilary while Levy and Chemla stopped in Four Spades. How do you play on the queen of diamonds lead?
There are two possible lines. The first is to cross to the king of hearts and take a heart finesse. If it wins you can throw a diamond and hope to ruff the losing diamond. This is how Chemla played at our table but the heart finesse lost and he made 11 tricks.
Hilary played the same way as Chemla (which is some consolation) but that meant an 11 imp loss. The alternative line is to try for clubs 3-3 by playing king, ace and ruffing a club. If East follows to the third round of clubs you have to ruff with the nine to reduce the risk of an over-ruff. This would have worked at the table as the clubs were 3-3.
Which is the best line? Playing on hearts needs more than just a simple finesse - the missing hearts need to be 5-3 or 4-4 (about 80%), and you also need the diamonds 4-3 or 5-2 with the doubleton on your left (about 78%). The combined chance is about 31%. And playing off the red suits increases the chance of the defence being able to promote the 10 of trumps.
The chance of a 3-3 club break is 36% and a 4-2 break will not necessarily be fatal as you will be able to revert to Plan A if you have not suffered an over-ruff. So playing on clubs seems to be the better line.
We repaired the damage on the final hand, Chris and Hilary's finest hour. At our table events unfolded as follows
4 hearts is cold for East-West, but it hardly obvious to bid it with a balanced 11 count opposite a passed hand. Against Four Clubs, Ann led the king and ace of spades. I showed count by playing the three, but on the second round I mistakenly played the jack as suit preference for hearts. Levy ruffed the heart, ruffed his losing spade, ruffed another heart and drew trumps. He can now endplay me by playing a diamond and covering West's card, but he played a diamond to the ace, ruffed a heart to hand and led a diamond up to finish one down. I don't know why he did this, as the animated post-mortem was way beyond the comprehension of my schoolboy French. A diamond switch at trick three would give declarer no chance.
At the other table the auction was more exciting
Three Clubs showed an invitational hand with long clubs. Reiplinger's double was intended to show a solid suit somewhere, but his partner thought that it just showed a good holding in clubs and led a low heart, so that Hilary could wrap up 9 tricks for + 750. The 13 imp swing meant that we won the board and the match ended with an 8-8 draw. But if we had defeated 4 hearts and made the slam it would have been 16-0. That would have been a tale to tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)