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.
