Which discard system do you prefer? Several people at my local club play a system called Dodds, where any discard conveys a message about your holding in another suit, the exact meaning depending on whether the card is high or low, odd or even, red or black, or if it’s Tuesday or Thursday. I ought to make the effort to understand it, but life’s too short at my age.
Instead, I get my own back on the Dodderers by telling them that my discards are ‘KWTL’. When this results in a puzzled look, I explain that KWTL is not a country music radio station in Oklahoma, but stands for ‘keep winners throw losers’. KWTL ought to be a simple system to play, but it’s not always that easy…
In the Torquay Swiss Pairs my right hand opponent is a leading tournament player, though his partner is unknown to me. On the last hand of the match, honours are about even when I pick up
♠ 5 3 2 ♥A K J 10 ♦ 9 5 4 ♣ A J 7
and hear partner open a reverse Benji two diamonds. I relay with two hearts and partner bids two spades to show a hand with eight playing tricks in spades. I set the suit by raising to three spades, and partner makes a cue bid of four diamonds. I am going to bid a slam so I wheel out 4NT, key card Blackwood, getting a response of five diamonds to show three key cards. I make a further enquiry with five hearts and hear six diamonds, showing the queen of trumps and the king of diamonds but no king of clubs.
I could bid six hearts now, to confirm that we have all the key cards and maybe to suggest a grand if partner holds the queen of hearts, but that would take us into uncharted waters and I am going to settle for a small slam. I can count eleven top tricks and the contract will depend on a heart finesse at worst. As it is pairs I go for the maximum and bid 6NT.
West leads the king of clubs and I see
♠ A K Q J 7 6
♥
♦ A K 7
♣ 8 6 5 4
♠ 5 3 2
♥ A K J 10
♦ 9 5 4
♣ A J 7
Rats. I hadn’t thought of that. So much for taking a heart finesse for my twelfth trick. On the opening lead East plays the nine, which could be the start of a peter to show a doubleton, so it looks as if West has four or five clubs to the K Q 10. How do you rate my chances now?
If West has the expected club holding, the contract is odds-on. East is more likely to hold the queen of hearts (he has fewer clubs and more vacant places in his hand for the other suits), and in that case there will be a double squeeze as neither opponent will be able to guard diamonds in the end game. I might even be able to win the last trick with the seven of diamonds and claim a free beer, although it is the first match of the day and I do not normally start drinking at 11.30 am.
I duck the first trick to tighten the position for the squeeze. West switches to a low diamond, so I win in dummy and cash the spades. There is no need to count the opponent’s hands - I just need to keep track of whether they unguard either minor - and I don’t look too closely at their discards. I throw a heart and a diamond, but then I have to discard the jack of clubs. That shouldn’t matter, as if West holds K Q 10 he will still be in sole charge of the suit.
I come to hand with the Ace of clubs. By now East will have been squeezed out of his guard in one of the red suits. If he has unguarded diamonds, two rounds of hearts will now squeeze West in the minors.
I cash the top hearts and the queen falls from East so I claim my slam, only slightly disappointed that I did not take the last trick with the seven of diamonds. All this has taken a while, so there is no time for a post-mortem and we move on to the next match, feeling quite satisfied at having made a slam on a double squeeze.
It is only after the session when I study the hand records that the full deal is revealed as
No squeeze was needed, as after ducking the opening lead I had twelve top tricks. Or I did until I threw the jack of clubs away, an abject failure to follow KWTL. Fortunately East let me off the hook as he also violated KWTL by discarding a third heart rather than a diamond. If he had kept three hearts and three clubs I would have gone down in a cold contract.
A final point about the bidding - I only chose play in no-trumps because we were playing pairs. It occurred to me afterwards that the auction had revealed a lot about partner’s hand but almost nothing about mine, so there was a good reason for my hand to be declarer at any form of scoring. I don’t think that East would have misdefended if my hand had been on the table.
Monday, 6 July 2009
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Year End 2008
After the Tolly I was tempted to give up competitive bridge, but the persuasive Mrs Sharples encouraged me to sit opposite her for the mixed pairs at the London Year End Congress. It seemed a good omen when I forgot the system on Board 1 and we still managed to end in the right contract and get a decent score. The opponents were in charitable mood throughout and Ann played very well so we ended the first session in the lead.
In the second session we made a few mistakes but the opponents were still distributing largesse at regular intervals so that I felt we had a chance going into the last round. A poor bid from me led to a below-average first board and then came this little number, where I was declarer in 1NT at love all
♠ J 7 5 2
♥ 6 4
♦4
♣ J 9 8 7 4 3
♠ Q 3
♥ A 8 3
♦ K Q J 10 7
♣ A Q 10
I opened 1♦ and west's overcall of 1♥ was passed back to me. I bid 1NT to end the auction.
If you are wondering why North did not remove 1NT to 2♣, it was the last hand of a long day and her mind was already focussed on for more important matters, such as whether the large glass that would shortly be in her hand should be filled with Merlot or Cabernet Sauvignon.
I ducked the opening lead and won the third round, West having started with ♥KQJ10xx. When I played on diamonds East took his ace on the third round, while I threw a spade and two clubs from dummy. I was expecting a spade switch which would allow the opponents to cash out for two down, but East played a club, and what had seemed like an auto-pilot hand now required some thought.
If East has the king of clubs, I can play the ten, overtake with dummy’s jack, repeat the club finesse and take eight tricks, but a losing finesse will lead to three down and a near bottom. Or I can go up with the ace of clubs and settle for one off.
Time stood still while I dithered and dummy’s need for a glass of wine grew ever more desperate. Eventually I decided to play the ace, on the grounds that the opponents could make at eight or nine tricks in hearts, so that one off would not be too bad a score. I try to avoid hyperbole, so let’s just say that I was rather pleased when West followed with the king and the contract rolled in with two lucky overtricks.
Making nine tricks on the last hand scored 59 match points out of 68… and we won by 4 (2365 to 2361). It was only when looking back later that I realised that a singleton king was the most likely explanation of the opponents’ caution in passing out 1NT. Another one for the Rabbi’s Rule - the king of clubs is always bare.
A few weeks later, another hand from this event found its way into Zia's column in the Grauniad 
In the second session we made a few mistakes but the opponents were still distributing largesse at regular intervals so that I felt we had a chance going into the last round. A poor bid from me led to a below-average first board and then came this little number, where I was declarer in 1NT at love all
♠ J 7 5 2
♥ 6 4
♦4
♣ J 9 8 7 4 3
♠ Q 3
♥ A 8 3
♦ K Q J 10 7
♣ A Q 10
I opened 1♦ and west's overcall of 1♥ was passed back to me. I bid 1NT to end the auction.
If you are wondering why North did not remove 1NT to 2♣, it was the last hand of a long day and her mind was already focussed on for more important matters, such as whether the large glass that would shortly be in her hand should be filled with Merlot or Cabernet Sauvignon.
I ducked the opening lead and won the third round, West having started with ♥KQJ10xx. When I played on diamonds East took his ace on the third round, while I threw a spade and two clubs from dummy. I was expecting a spade switch which would allow the opponents to cash out for two down, but East played a club, and what had seemed like an auto-pilot hand now required some thought.
If East has the king of clubs, I can play the ten, overtake with dummy’s jack, repeat the club finesse and take eight tricks, but a losing finesse will lead to three down and a near bottom. Or I can go up with the ace of clubs and settle for one off.
Time stood still while I dithered and dummy’s need for a glass of wine grew ever more desperate. Eventually I decided to play the ace, on the grounds that the opponents could make at eight or nine tricks in hearts, so that one off would not be too bad a score. I try to avoid hyperbole, so let’s just say that I was rather pleased when West followed with the king and the contract rolled in with two lucky overtricks.
Making nine tricks on the last hand scored 59 match points out of 68… and we won by 4 (2365 to 2361). It was only when looking back later that I realised that a singleton king was the most likely explanation of the opponents’ caution in passing out 1NT. Another one for the Rabbi’s Rule - the king of clubs is always bare.
A few weeks later, another hand from this event found its way into Zia's column in the Grauniad
The last event of the old year, aptly named the "year end festival" by the English Bridge Union, provided an excellent example of a worthwhile resolution that you all might make for the new year. However hopeless your position may seem at the bridge table, never give up. Love all, dealer North.
South's jump to game was a normal enough move on his cards, but when he was doubled by West and the dummy was displayed, he could barely suppress a groan. Four hearts doubled seemed booked for two down, and it was clear that East-West could not make a game, so minus 300 was bound to be an awful result.
West began with the two top diamonds and, confused by East's signal in the suit, continued with a third round. That at least gave South the chance to dispose of his losing spade on dummy's queen
of diamonds, but prospects still looked bleak . Declarer called for dummy's low spade (it would not help to lead the king and ruff away East's ace, since that would not resolve the problem of trump losers), and East followed with the nine. South ruff ed, led the queen of hearts to the king and ace, watched East show out, and almost resigned himself to his fate – surely West was bound to make two of his three remaining trumps.
South ruffed a spade – not caring whether East played the ace, for this did not matter – cashed three rounds of clubs ending in dummy, ruffed another spade and led a fourth round of clubs. West, down to 10 8 6 of hearts , had to ruff this trick and lead into South's remaining hearts, which were J 9.
"Sorry", said West. "I thought you might be ruffing the third round of diamonds, and in any case I was certain I had two trump tricks, so my defence did not matter." "No, " said East, " I should have sacrificed in four spades." And I promise you – for I was there – that the words "but only if you were going to defend like that" never passed his lips.
When we played this hand the final contract was also 4♥ doubled after North had opened 1♣ and Ann overcalled 1♠. I cashed my top diamonds and led a spade to Ann’s Ace. A club would now lead to two down, but Ann made the natural looking return of diamond and South erred by discarding a club and coming to hand with a club. (He need to start on the trump reduction either by ruffing the diamond or ruffing a spade to hand).
Declarer then led the Queen of trumps which I ducked. When the four-nil break came to light he tried for a trump reduction and end play by ruffing two spades, but in the end game he held ♥ J 9 7, I had K 10 8 and dummy had A 5. I had to come to two tricks. If I had covered the Queen of hearts, in the end game declarer would have J 9 7 and I would have been end-played with 10 8 6. Plus 300 was worth 62 out of 68. One down would still have got us 42, but we needed those extra 20 points.
Monday, 3 December 2007
A Dorset Coup
We are nearing the end of the first session of the Tollemache qualifier for county teams of eight, and the afternoon has been pretty disastrous for my partner and me, with a large number of imps in the out column due to our mistakes. I am looking forward to dinner, always the highlight of a Tollemache weekend, when I pick up as dealer at unfavourable vulnerability
♠ - ♥ A K Q J 9 6 5 ♦ K 7 ♣ K 8 6 3
We are playing reverse Benjy Acol and I decide to open two diamonds, with the aim of eventually showing eight playing tricks in hearts. It’s a poor call, as the hand is not quite strong enough and the bidding is likely to escalate to a high level before I can describe my hand. Sure enough, West overcalls with two spades, my partner doubles to show some values, and East makes a pre-emptive raise to four spades. I have endplayed myself by my choice of opening bid and I am going to have to show my suit for the first time at the five level. If most of partner’s values are in spades I shall look foolish, though not for the first time this afternoon. Anyway, I bid five hearts, which rather surprisingly ends the bidding. It has been a brisk auction:
West leads the four of spades and partner tables a better dummy than I have any right to expect:
♠A J
♥10 8 3
♦Q J 8 6
♣ J 10 7 4
♠ 4 led
♠
♥A K Q J 9 6 5
♦ K 7
♣ K 8 6 3
We seem to have landed on our feet as five hearts has some play and the opponents may well be making four spades. I can discard two clubs on the ace of spades and a diamond, so it looks as if I will need to find a club honour with East and guess correctly.
I am about to play dummy’s ace of spades when I realise that it cannot cost to play low. It’s unlikely that West has underled the king-queen, but stranger things have happened so I try the jack but East covers with the queen and I ruff. When I cash the ace of trumps West discards a spade. In a way this is good news as it is now more likely that the opponents could have made four spades, but I cannot finish drawing trumps as the ten and eight are my only sure entries to dummy and I suspect that I may require at least one of them later.
I need to develop the diamonds and I notice that I hold the seven – the beer card. If I can use it to win the last trick, partner must buy me a pint. To maximise my chances of a free drink, I normally avoid playing the seven of diamonds for as long as possible but it can hardly win a trick here so I may as well lead it now. West has a little think but plays low and dummy’s jack wins. Now I see why it was a good idea to keep the ace of spades at trick one, as I can draw trumps ending in dummy, discard the king of diamonds on the ace of spades and play on clubs. The clubs break three-two so I make the contract, losing just two club tricks. These manoeuvres turn out to be necessary as the full hand was
Post-mortem
After the hand, West apologised to her partner for not playing the ace of diamonds, but in fact there was no defence. If West goes up with the ace, declarer can win the return, unblock the king of diamonds, draw trumps ending in dummy and throw three clubs on the queen-jack of diamonds and the ace of spades.
It was essential to play the jack of spades at trick one, as declarer needs to delay the discard on the ace of spades until after the diamond lead through West.
Subsequent reference to the Encyclopaedia revealed that the play on this hand is called a Morton's Fork coup. Cardinal John Morton, a local lad from Milborne St Andrew, was Chancellor of England in the 15th century and, more importantly, is the only person born in Dorset to have a bridge coup named after them. Morton’s main claim to fame is a cunning tax collection policy that predated today’s stealth taxes by over 500 years; if the subject lived in luxury he obviously had sufficient income to spare for the king, while if he lived frugally he must have substantial savings and could also afford to give some of them to the king. Either way he was caught on ‘Morton's Fork’.
On this hand the lead of the seven of diamonds caught West on the fork. Is this what is meant by a Dorset Coup?
♠ - ♥ A K Q J 9 6 5 ♦ K 7 ♣ K 8 6 3
We are playing reverse Benjy Acol and I decide to open two diamonds, with the aim of eventually showing eight playing tricks in hearts. It’s a poor call, as the hand is not quite strong enough and the bidding is likely to escalate to a high level before I can describe my hand. Sure enough, West overcalls with two spades, my partner doubles to show some values, and East makes a pre-emptive raise to four spades. I have endplayed myself by my choice of opening bid and I am going to have to show my suit for the first time at the five level. If most of partner’s values are in spades I shall look foolish, though not for the first time this afternoon. Anyway, I bid five hearts, which rather surprisingly ends the bidding. It has been a brisk auction:
| South | West | North | East |
| RockH | Rev | ||
| 2♦ | 2♠ | double | 4♠ |
| 5♥ | |||
West leads the four of spades and partner tables a better dummy than I have any right to expect:
♠A J
♥10 8 3
♦Q J 8 6
♣ J 10 7 4
♠ 4 led
♠
♥A K Q J 9 6 5
♦ K 7
♣ K 8 6 3
We seem to have landed on our feet as five hearts has some play and the opponents may well be making four spades. I can discard two clubs on the ace of spades and a diamond, so it looks as if I will need to find a club honour with East and guess correctly.
I am about to play dummy’s ace of spades when I realise that it cannot cost to play low. It’s unlikely that West has underled the king-queen, but stranger things have happened so I try the jack but East covers with the queen and I ruff. When I cash the ace of trumps West discards a spade. In a way this is good news as it is now more likely that the opponents could have made four spades, but I cannot finish drawing trumps as the ten and eight are my only sure entries to dummy and I suspect that I may require at least one of them later.
I need to develop the diamonds and I notice that I hold the seven – the beer card. If I can use it to win the last trick, partner must buy me a pint. To maximise my chances of a free drink, I normally avoid playing the seven of diamonds for as long as possible but it can hardly win a trick here so I may as well lead it now. West has a little think but plays low and dummy’s jack wins. Now I see why it was a good idea to keep the ace of spades at trick one, as I can draw trumps ending in dummy, discard the king of diamonds on the ace of spades and play on clubs. The clubs break three-two so I make the contract, losing just two club tricks. These manoeuvres turn out to be necessary as the full hand was
| ||||||||||||||||||
|  |
| ||||||||||||||||
|
Post-mortem
After the hand, West apologised to her partner for not playing the ace of diamonds, but in fact there was no defence. If West goes up with the ace, declarer can win the return, unblock the king of diamonds, draw trumps ending in dummy and throw three clubs on the queen-jack of diamonds and the ace of spades.
It was essential to play the jack of spades at trick one, as declarer needs to delay the discard on the ace of spades until after the diamond lead through West.
Subsequent reference to the Encyclopaedia revealed that the play on this hand is called a Morton's Fork coup. Cardinal John Morton, a local lad from Milborne St Andrew, was Chancellor of England in the 15th century and, more importantly, is the only person born in Dorset to have a bridge coup named after them. Morton’s main claim to fame is a cunning tax collection policy that predated today’s stealth taxes by over 500 years; if the subject lived in luxury he obviously had sufficient income to spare for the king, while if he lived frugally he must have substantial savings and could also afford to give some of them to the king. Either way he was caught on ‘Morton's Fork’.
On this hand the lead of the seven of diamonds caught West on the fork. Is this what is meant by a Dorset Coup?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)