Tollemache 2014

A better Dorset performance this year, finishing 5th out of 9 teams in our group - mid-table respectability rather than our usual position near the bottom of the pile.

Ann and I had our ups and downs, especially a set of 7 boards against Berks and Bucks where we managed to let through four game contracts, with two gratuitous errors and two unlucky (meaning ill-judged) opening leads. Here are two more hands where we could have done better.

West led a spade and declarer ruffed and made what looked like the normal play of a top trump. West showed out and although the heart finesse worked, the contract could no longer be made when hearts broke 4-1.

It is better to play the ace of clubs and ruff a club before playing a trump. Even then, the winning line is not obvious - click on Next to follow the play.

This was a simple bidding problem. Should I protect when a weak 2 spades is passed round to me?

At the table I passed and conceded 110 after a misdefence. Even against best defence, we were only getting +50, poor compensation for the +600 that was available in 3NT and made at both the opposing tables, when the full hand was

At the table I thought that I was a bit too weak to bid 2NT, and that partner would expect a stronger hand and often raise me to a no-play 3NT. Was that too wimpish or was I just unlucky? To find out I ran a computer simulation of the hand. Out of 20 deals, you could make 3NT on nine. When partner was weak you were often in a hopeless 2NT or 3NT, sometimes doubled for -500 or -800, but on balance it was probably right to bid.

Silver Plate

Our luck finally ran out in another tight match against a team from Sussex, when we lost by 5 imp. After a close loss there are numerous hands where all of us could have done something different and reversed the result, but the potential for the largest swing was on this hand where we lost 9 imp but might have gained 8.

I can see three ways to bid the West hand, given that the auction will be at the 4 level for your second bid.
(1) Bid 2♦ and then 5♣
(2) bid 2NT and pass
(3) bid 2NT and then double to show extra values.

Nothing is ideal. The first option is a bit too unilateral for my taste, the second is rather feeble on a 4-loser hand, and the third may give partner a choice of losing options (as here).

At our table Ann chose the first option and ended in 5♦ doubled. The opponents started with a heart and then South mysteriously playing three rounds of spades, so that Ann escaped for -300. A heart continuation would be a much stronger defence; declarer can escape for 3 down by playing just one round of trumps and switching to clubs, but is likely to lose control and go for 800.

In the other room West bid 2NT and left South to declare 4♥.  West cashed two clubs and then switched to a diamond.  The play is not easy as at least one of the major suits is going to break badly. At the table declarer started with two top hearts. This would have worked if West held a singleton spade and a doubleton heart, as declarer can now cash ♠A, ruff a club and lead a spade towards the K 9. When the trumps were unkind, he could still have succeeded by playing West for ♠10 x, but he tried to drop a doubleton queen and went one down.

The winning line is to run the ♥10 at trick 4, leading to an easy make (and an overtrick if you guess spades).

Is it being wise after the event to suggest that it is right to run the ♥10? We know that West has at least 10 cards in the minors and can assume that East has at least 5. (If he has fewer, West has at least 12 cards in the minors and would surely bid again.) In that case the odds on the major suit distributions are
          3-2      6%
          2-3      36%
          1-4      46%
          0-5      12%
A big difference from the a priori numbers! So cashing two top hearts has a 36% chance for the 2-3 break, plus about 9% for a singleton J, a total of 45%. 

What about the finesse for  ♥J? West has 3 'vacant spaces' and East has 8, so the chance of the finesse is 8/11 or about 73%. You probably wont be making if the trumps are 5-0, but that still leaves over 60%.

Is it possible to work this out in the heat of battle? Maybe. The vacant spaces calculation is easy enough so I think that you could estimate that the finesse is about 70%. The calculation of suit distributions is much more complicated (I used an Excel spreadsheet) but I think you should realise that bad breaks are much more likely after a 2-suited overcall, so that the finesse is a better play.

Silver Plate

We have been leading a bit of a charmed life in the Silver Plate. In the round of 32, our captain was prepared to concede with 8 boards to go, but we persuaded him to play on and turned round a deficit of over 30 imps. In the round of 16 against the Smiths from Bristol, our luck seemed to have turned - the opponents had a bidding mix-up to finish in 6♦ on a 4-3 fit which had about a 9% chance but was unbeatable as the cards lay. Then Ann and I bit to 5♦, which needed a trump suit of A J x x opposite  9 x x x x to play for one loser - about a 52% chance. The trumps were 4-0 offside and I was doubled for 500. All this meant we were 24 imps down after 8 boards.

We clawed the deficit back over the next two sets. This was a lucky gain where I got away with an inferior play.

West led what looked like a 4th highest spade to East's jack, and the defence then played a spade back to the ace and a third round to dummy's king. I ran the hearts and when nothing much happened in the discards, tried a diamond to the 9. This drew East's king and I had nine tricks.

That was not the best line. In dummy at trick 4, I should have run the ♦Q. If this lost to the king, I could take a diamond finesse when in dummy with ♥Q.

In the final set things were not going well at our table. Ann's 4♥ opening was doubled for 1100, we went down in 3NT after wrongsiding the contract, and the opponents made two close games. We had indeed conceded two game swings, but the minus 1100 was worth 14 imp after a triumph from Chris.

In our room the auction started in the same way but South passed the double. Chris was more ambitious, and justified his bidding with accurate play - ruff the opening lead, a trump to the king and then a finesse of the jack, four rounds of spades ruffing the last in dummy, ruff a heart to hand, draw the last trump and pick up the clubs.

A few small gains meant that we were 4 imp behind with two boards to play. This was the decisive hand.

In the other room Chris and Barrie ended in the best contract of 4♠ after West had overcalled 2♥. How do you play after a heart lead? I think the best line is to draw three rounds of trumps, then a diamond to the ace and run the queen, throwing a heart if West doesn't cover. This ensures the contract on a 3-3 trump break and will make most of the time on a 4-2 break. It's much easier to see this after the event, and at the table declarer went down after trying for a heart ruff in dummy.

At our table the opponents finished in an inferior 3NT and Ann led a heart to my queen. The contract is a trivial make if declarer ducks this but for some reason he won the ace. Now he crossed to the ♠A, played a diamond to the queen and cashed the ace, on which Ann threw a spade. Unwilling to believe that the spades were 3-3 (maybe Ann's Smith peter confused him?), he then tried a low club from hand, but Ann was able to win and cash out for three down. Plus 300 gained us 5 imps and after a 2 imp gain on the last board we had won by 3. Phew!

Eights and Nines

Here are two hands from last weekend with a similar theme. In Zia's book Bridge my Way, he gives this tip 'In defence, every time you have a nine, think about playing it at the first opportunity.' The first hand from the Western League match against Wiltshire was a good one for Zia's theory.

I cashed two top diamonds before switching to the ♥8. Declarer cashed the king of trumps and I played the 9. Now if the 9 is a true card, it can only be from singleton 9 or Q 9. As he cannot pick up Q x x x with East, Declarer played the ace next. It would be nice to report that I had played a Zia-esque 9 from 9 x and fooled declarer into going down in an easy contract, but I only had the 9. You can't false-card with a singleton.

A former world champion was sitting dummy, and as she pointed out in the nicest possible way, declarer misplayed the hand. He should have taken a first round finesse in trumps. This loses if I have a singleton queen of trumps, but gains when I have a small singleton, which is four times as likely.

The second hand came up the following day in the National Pairs regional final. By strange coincidence, the world champion was again sitting on my left.

Declarer ducked the opening spade lead, won the second round in dummy and led a club on which East played the 8 (playing normal count signals). Now what? One option is to the finesse the 10, but that is putting all your eggs in one basket and so declarer played the queen. West won and cleared the spades. Trusting my ♣8 as an honest card, declarer now cashed the ♣K, hoping that I held J 8 doubleton. This was not a success and the contract drifted two off.

So why did I find that devious ♣8 that led declarer astray? I have to admit that it was an auto-pilot Smith peter to confirm interest in spades - totally unnecessary of course as the spade position was an open book. It's better to be lucky than good.

Deceptive defences

In the National Point a Board teams we made too many silly errors to qualify for the final, but I enjoyed these two defences, where my innocent-looking partner managed to pull the wool over declarer's eyes. The first hand was particularly satisfying as it was against Jeremy Dhondy and Brian Callaghan, half of team that won the event.

East was declarer in 3♠ after West had opened a fashionable 1♣ on his balanced 11 count. Ann led a heart to my ace and I returned a heart to declarer's king. Now came a trump to the queen, and a trump back to the king and ace. Ann exited with a low club and declarer was conned into playing low, so I could win and play back a heart to promote Ann's nine of trumps. One down, and the only plus score on the North-South cards. Not that it did us much good as we lost the other three boards in the match...

The auction had marked declarer with short hearts, and Ann had not doubled the fourth-suit 2♦, so I tried leading ♥8. A couple of weeks ago in the Knight Cup, I tried a heart lead after a similar auction and blew two tricks when declarer had 10 x. This time it was more successful.

Declarer played the queen from dummy, which was allowed to win. Now declarer came to hand with a diamond and took a slightly anti-percentage play in clubs by leading low to the 10 and Ann's queen. Ann returned a heart to my ace and I continued with the 10. Thinking that I must have started with ♥ A K 10 8, declarer made the mistake of covering so that Ann was able to make all her hearts and the contract was two down.

Would declarer have got this right if Ann had covered with the king at trick 1? He should do - we were playing fourth highest leads and I would not have led the 8 from ♥ A 10 9 8, so he should be able to sniff out the actual position.

Knight Cup 2014

In the Knight Cup we were leading at half time but slipped away in the second half to finish just above half way. We were unfortunate in that the opponents held most of the cards for the second half, but there were also some self-inflicted wounds. Against the eventual winners we had the chance for two tops but managed to turn them into two bottoms - this was my contribution to the debacle.

4♣ and 4NT were explained as Gerber with 4♥ showing one ace and 5♦ showing one king.  Partner led ♥6 (second highest from bad suits) which declarer won in hand and played on clubs. In with the ace, I naively assumed that declarer would have the ace of spades (otherwise, why bother to ask for kings?) and returned a heart, letting through an overtrick instead of taking it two off.

Subsequent analysis in the cold light of day showed that a spade return is the only chance to defeat the contract, but it will concede an overtrick (this was a pairs event) if declarer's hand is something like

♠Ax  ♥AKJ  ♦KJxx  ♣Q10xx

C'est la vie. At least I have a new hand for my collection of loony Gerber auctions, which has grown to a considerable size over the years.

Writing up this hand reminded me of an article in the EBU magazine a few years ago, which reported on a tour by the Australian expert Ron Klinger where he visited various English bridge clubs. One of the locals asked him for his views on Gerber, and Ron suggested that he try giving up Gerber for a time to see if his slam bidding improved. "How long would you suggest for this experiment", asked the punter. "About 30 years."