Three Beers

To show my juvenile side, I often play the game of trying to win the last trick with the beer card - the ♦ 7 - when partner is supposed to buy you a beer. There are two other conditions, diamonds must not be trumps (then it is too easy) and you must make the contract (as declarer) or defeat it (as defender).

In our BBO practice match last night I set a personal best with three beer cards in one session. One of these is worth recording, as a holding of  ♦ A 7 2 would not seem to have much potential for a beer, but you never know...

Click next to follow the play. When I played the ♥9 at trick 9, declarer has no easy discard, but he would have succeeded if he had thrown his club winner instead of a diamond.

From a lowly 1NT to something more exciting.

What do you think North should open on that 3 loser hand? Ann's Acol-style 2♣ made life very easy, but I suspect that I would have started with 1♠. The problem with 2♣ is that partner will expect much more in high cards, and the bidding may escalate to a high level before you have had a chance to show either of your suits.

In last week's Times, Andrew Robson describes a hand where a player held

♠ A Q 10 7 6 4
♥ A K Q 7 5 4
♦
♣ 4

and says that 'the hand easily has the playing strength for 2♣, but it is far better for South to start showing his suits right away'.

At the other table, North had obviously read Robson's article and opened 1♠. East made a frisky 2♥ overcall and South passed, scenting blood. North jumped to 4♦, South tried RKCB and bid 6♦ when North showed two key cards. That was unduly pessimistic; South should bid 5NT, asking for kings and confirming that the partnership holds four aces and the king and queen of diamonds, and North has an easy bid of 7NT or 7♠.

This hand had some interesting bidding decisions that I managed to get wrong.

The first choice was whether to double or overcall - I think it's close. The next few bids were fine, but I should have bid 3NT instead of 4♥ to offer partner a choice of contracts. 4♥ was a reasonable contract - and better than letting opponents play in 3♣ undoubled, as happened at the other table - but 3NT would have been easy.

Western League

Ann and I had a rare outing in the Western League match against Wiltshire, and although we had a good card this was more due to the generosity of our opponents than any great competence on our part. This is the sort of thing that happens when you are having a lucky day, a hand where most of the green cards seemed to have gone missing from the bidding box.

We were East-West. My 4♥ was certainly not a good idea, shifting the opponents from a non-making contract to a cold game, but my partner was there to save the day. You may think that she had mis-sorted her hand when she bid 5♠ but I couldn't possible comment, and you cannot argue with success.

The bridge was a bit less random on this hand

West found the most challenging lead of ♠9, and now declarer will go down if he tries to draw two rounds of trumps, as the defence can engineer a spade ruff and then switch to a club. I think the best line is to win in dummy and immediately play ♦A (discarding a club) and run the ♦Q, setting up a second diamond winner if East has the king.  I took a slightly inferior line by playing one round of trumps, won by West won who continued spades. I won this in dummy and now played on diamonds, which was good enough on the actual lie of the cards, and worth a 12 imp swing when one of the opposing declarers went down.

An Elopement that Eloped

The National Pairs qualifier was one of those sessions where we kept on getting poor scores without doing too much wrong, and we finished well down the field. But this was a missed opportunity for a neat play.

I should have had a sixth heart for my 3♥ bid, but it seemed very likely that the opponents could make 2♠ or 3♣ and I wanted to make life difficult for them. On the actual hand this was the wrong thing to do, as 3♥ should go down and the only making contract for East-West is 2NT, which they were never going to find.

West started with top clubs; I ruffed and advanced ♦J, covered by the queen, king and ace. East returned the ♦9 which I won to play a third round. West ruffed this and erred by playing a spade to the king and ace. (A trump exit would have given me no chance.)

This was now the position

I had already lost three tricks and still appear to have a trump and a spade to lose. But I should play king and ace of hearts, ruff a club, cash the ♠Q and ruff the last diamond. Now a club from dummy allows me to score the last trump en passant. The losing spade and trump both fall on the last trick, and two losers are condensed into one - a trump elopement.

Sad to say, I omitted to ruff a club when I was in dummy with the ace of trumps. The elopement had eloped and only resurfaced in the pub afterwards. Could've, should've.