Bridge Today - April 2005

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 1 April 2005

♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ Editor: Matthew Granovetter

The Magazine for People Who Love to Play Bridge

Winning Without the Hat

Larry Cohen on his team’s victory in the Vanderbilt — Page 11

Also (click to go to page): 2

Viewpoint: April Fools

3

Kantar’s Korner by Eddie Kantar

6

9

Around the World by Migry Zur Campanile The Gold Coast by Paul Marston

15

Oh, When the Games Come Marching In by Pamela Granovetter

20

Russian Roulette by Matthew Granovetter

27

The Wizards of Aus by Ron Klinger

31

The Switch in Time Forum

To subscribe to Bridge Today, click here!

NOTICE: Please share this issue of Bridge Today eMagazine with you partner. Better still, give him a subscription of his own. He will thank you each month and he will become a better player. Just click here. You’ll be glad you did. Subscriptions are $33 per year for 12 monthly issues or packaged with a Bridgetoday. com $59.95 club membership. Thank you! — Matthew and Pamela Granovetter

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 2

April Fools April 1, 2015...In the News The ACBL reported today another surge in membership among young people. President Emeritus, Robert Q. Lewis said: “Many forty-year-olds are beginning to think about taking up bridge and we’re encouraging them by reducing the entry fees at our novice games to $39 a session.” In a recent decimation of a New York building, the discovery of a time-capsule under the old Mayfair Club has surprised observers. Two convention cards with the words, “Roth-Stone” on top have been attributed to the late Johnny Crawford and Tootsie Ann-Miser. Despite the nomenclature, the notrump range reads 15 to 18. Al Roth, by telephone, admits that they were both “renegades” and “probably started the ball rolling downhill with that light In a recent issue of Bridge Today eMagazine, Migry Zur-Campanile describes how being home in front of the computer is the most relaxing way to play the game. “I’m sick of traveling,” she wrote, “and, besides, I prefer my husband’s home cooking.” Edwin Kantar’s ninth edition of the final version of Roman Keycard Blackwood was given five stars in a recent review in Quebec. The French reviewer especially liked the Yvonne’s “jack-of trump” ask and three-suits agreement amendment. “Je suis enchante, Monsieur Kantar!” Larry King has taken his Prize-Money Bridge Tour to Antartica, where he says “we hope to attract the locals as well, but no penguins, please!” With a sponsor on the horizon King hopes to make bridge into a big time sport. “The pros must be tired by now of playing with sponsors and

15-point requirement.” Today’s players are considering whether to lower the range at favorable from 6-to-8 to 5+-to-8. “It is now possible,” says Larry Cohen, “to use the Law of Total Tricks to judge the number of total trumps for the entire session. It’s all clearly outlined in my new book, ‘The Law for Long KO Matches.’ Experts can be found on both sides of the camp: Some say it works, others say it has no practical use unless you can replay the previous boards. The Granovetters in a recent Partnership Bridge column have agreed not to discuss hands in the bar after the game if the score is less than 52%. Pamela, however, in a “last word,” changed it to 53%. receiving their paychecks under the table,” said King. “After all, it’s been 50 years for some of them.” The Nickell Bulldog Team has done it again, down by 93 imps at the half, they surged to a 3-imp victory after their opponents lost nine consecutive slam swings on the last nine boards. “Amazing,” exclaimed VuGraph commentator Barry Rigal. “If only we had featured that match instead of the finals of the Fast Pairs!” When veteran Bob Hamman was asked how he did it, he said, “We tackled them to the ground and never gave an inch. Just don’t ask how we got behind by 93!” Bridge Today eMagazine is now fully featured with speech, where readers can hear, with a click of the mouse, the players themselves explaining why they went wrong. Enjoy!

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 3

Kantar’s Korner by Eddie Kantar

I was going through my files recently, discarding old hands, when I came across one of my favorites. It was too good to toss, so here it is: North dealer E-W vul

North ♠QJ82 ♥43 ♦ A K 10 5 4 ♣KQ

West (Wolff) ♠ K 10 7 6 5 3 ♥K ♦987 ♣932

East (Hamman) ♠4 ♥ Q 10 9 8 7 6 ♦J32 ♣ A J 10 South ♠A9 ♥AJ52 ♦Q6 ♣87654

West — pass pass

North 1♦ 1♠ 3 NT

East pass pass (all pass)

pened. Wolffy led the ♣9 and Bob won and returned the jack to the king. Declarer continued with the ♠A and a spade, and Wolffy jumped up with the king to lead a club over to Hamman’s hopefully running club suit. Not so fast. Hamman discarded the ♣10 on the ♠K so Wolffy could run his clubs. They were both trying to be so considerate and look what happened. At least they took one club trick. Now that you’ve seen that defense, maybe you won’t won’t feel too bad if you blow this one: South dealer None vul

North ♠Q9 ♥ 10 8 6 2 ♦A763 ♣A82

South 1♥ 2 NT

This one goes back to the days when Hamman and Wolff were winning everything in sight. Passing 1♦ is not the Hamman I remember, but that’s what hap-

Read Kantar’s Korner every Thursday in the Bridge Today Daily Column —exclusively by email—

W

South 1 NT (1)

West pass

N S

E

North 3 NT (2)

East (you) ♠8543 ♥A54 ♦K8 ♣ 10 9 6 3 East (all pass)

(1) 15-17 (2) Stayman is for peasants Opening lead: ♦Q

Dummy plays low and you smartly overtake and return a diamond to partner’s 9 which holds. Partner exits with the ♦10 to the ace and you have to make a discard. What shall it be?

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

At both tables in a major team championship both East players discarded a spade, declarer’s ninth trick. This was the full deal: South dealer None vul

North ♠Q9 ♥ 10 8 6 2 ♦A763 ♣A82

West ♠ J 10 7 ♥973 ♦ Q J 10 9 ♣KJ4

East (you) ♠8543 ♥A54 ♦K8 ♣ 10 9 6 3 South ♠AK62 ♥KQJ ♦542 ♣Q75

South 1 NT

West pass

North 3 NT

North ♠K4 East (you) ♠ A 10 9 8 6 South ♠532

East (all pass)

***** Billy Eisenberg once wrote a Bols Bridge Tip entitled: “Play Low from Dummy.” It dealt with positions where there can be little or no material gain from playing an honor card from dummy, and a trick may be gained by playing low. For example:

Against 3NT, West gets off to the double dummy lead of the ♠Q in an unbid suit, the distribution completely unknown. You capture dummy’s king, Which spade do you return? On opening lead at a suit contract West leads low. West is unlikely to have the K-Q, so there is no point in playing the jack. If you play low, however, East has to play the 9 to save the suit. Some Easts are not up to that play, and it’s not always right. North AQ4 West J 10 3 2

East K95 South 876

Again at a suit contract West leads low (some lead the jack).

North AJ3 East K93 South 765

A few observations. (1) Had North used Stayman, South’s 2♠ rebid would have made a spade discard riskier. (2) Partner exited with the ♦10, not the ♦J, which should have suit-preference overtones. If you read the ♦10 as club strength, it is safe to discard a club. As the cards lie it is also safe to discard a heart, anything but a spade. ***** Sometimes a solid suit can be hard to run.

West ♠Q J7

The easiest one for partner to read is the 8. When declarer plays low, West knows that declarer cannot have the 9 and the 10 so you must have them and it is safe to overtake.

West Q 10 8 2

page 4

If you can afford to finesse later, play low from dummy. Again East has to come up with the 9 to save the suit.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 5

In the following hand, both teams vying for a Bermuda Bowl berth, declarer took Billy’s tip to heart:

Let me end with a defensive problem that I give to friends just to see whether they are alert. Here it is:

South dealer N-S vul

South dealer E-W vul

North ♠2 ♥ J 10 6 3 ♦ 10 6 2 ♣AQ872

West ♠J984 ♥— ♦AKQJ9874 ♣3 South ♠AQ3 ♥AKQ5 ♦3 ♣ K J 10 6 5 South 1♣ double

West 5♦ pass

North pass 6♣

East ♠ K 10 7 6 5 ♥98742 ♦5 ♣94

West (you) ♠J3 ♥97432 ♦A KQ72 ♣5 South 3♠

East pass (all pass)

West went all out for a heart ruff and led the ♦4. Declarer, following Billy’s tip, played the deuce from dummy, East played the 5 and when South followed with the 3, East was on lead! After a moment’s recovery time, East led a heart and West ruffed. There are exceptions to every tip, even a very good tip.

West pass

North ♠A64 ♥AQ5 ♦ J 10 5 ♣ K Q J 10

W

N S

E

North 4♠

East (all pass)

You lead a high diamond and partner encourages, showing a doubleton. You continue with two more high diamonds. On the third diamond your partner discards the ace of clubs! What now? Before giving you the solution (below), this is what two of my friends said when given this problem: Judy Seger said, “My partner would never discard the ace of clubs.” Susan Ross said, “Did my partner think I led a club?”

Solution

Eddie Kantar invites you to visit his website at:

kantarbridge.com

Lead a fourth diamond. Partner has the stiff king of spades and wants a trump promotion. This was East’s hand: ♠ K ♥ 10 8 ♦ 9 4 ♣ A 9 8 7 6 4 3 2 Ciao.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 6

Around the world with 52 cards by Migry Zur Campanile

A mild winter is one of the great plusses that come with living in sun-soaked Tel Aviv, and it is often quite a shock to realize how much more severe the climate can get elsewhere in months like January or February, especially for someone like me who puts on a woolly jumper whenever the temperature drops below 25 Celsius. That is why just before traveling to Utrecht, Holland, where I was invited to take part in the White House teams tournament, I found myself scanning nervously the weather forecasts predicting below-zero temperatures, and I resolved to take drastic steps. After a thorough search in the local telephone directory I finally located what I was looking for: a shop specializing in outfitting travelers to destinations with extreme weather conditions. I easily found the shop and a very helpful sales assistant with whom I soon became quite friendly, so much so that when I got to the cash till to pay for my purchases she offered to lend me guides from the well stocked shop library and to assist me with whatever extra info I needed for my expedition: Did I plan to tour the Siberian outback or was I part of an Arctic expedition? When I told her my real destination, she looked at me in disbelief and then turned away repressing an illconcealed giggle. No matter, I knew that I was now fully equipped to brave the worse that mid-February Dutch weather could throw at me.

When we arrived in Holland, I quickly put on my weather battle gear only to find out that it seemed to be very, very…warm! The temperature was a sweltering +8 Celsius, which felt to me like +38 and forced me back to the hotel for a quick change of clothes among the merriment of my teammates, who had been traveling light with wind-jackets and jeans. Still the nice weather meant that we could take full advantage of our first day off in Utrecht. I love Holland with its beautiful and varied architecture, its canals, and its peacefully multicultural heritage. Utrecht is a great show-case of everything that makes this country so appealing without the massive crowds of Amsterdam. Utrecht is much smaller and more compact than the Dutch capital, and walking its streets is sheer delight. The main pedestrian area is about a square mile, a maze of twisty paved brick roads that encircle the Oudegracht, a charming canal, lined with shops at street level, while the restaurants are situated several meters below along the quays. Utrecht’s main tourist hotspot is the Dom Plein and its colorful outdoor cafes, dominated by the huge presence of the Dom Tower at the northern edge of the Museum Quarter, which might as well be called “Museum Half,” because it makes up half the city.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

After a pause at a nice outdoor café, we went on to explore some of the outer districts, finding a few interesting points along the way. The one I liked the most is the Lombok district, just a few hundred yards northwest of the train station. Lombok is where much of Utrecht’s ethnic diversity can be found in the shape of stores and restaurants featuring cuisines and goods from as far away as Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey, and Suriname. That is where we finished our day, sampling our first “Rijstaffel” (literally “Rice table” in Dutch), a dish that originates from Indonesia (once the Dutch East Indies) and has eventually become as popular in Holland as Indian Curry is in England. The real Rijstafel consists of up to 30 dishes and the idea is to slowly move up on the spicy scale — from bland satay to hellishly hot curries with a lot in between, served buffet style at the table. Painfully aware of our bridge commitments the following day and unwilling to risk taking on the full Rijstaffel, we opted for a mini version, called Nasi Rames, which to us seemed just as tasty. It started with a small dish of raw vegetables, marinated in rice vinegar, followed by a number of other dishes. The following morning we made our way to the tournament venue along streets blanketed by the heavy overnight snow-fall. It was my turn now to smile at my woefully under-dressed teammates and to generously offer to share some of my Arctic gear. The White House tournament is a very compact event, which matches a very high level of play with an extremely friendly atmosphere. The 32 teams taking part are divided in four groups of eight, playing each other in matches of eight boards with the top four qualifying to the final A and the rest di-

page 7

vided in two consolation finals. We finished third in our group and in the match against another top ranked Dutch team this interesting board came up: North dealer All vul

North

♠AK74 ♥— ♦532 ♣986532

West ♠ J 10 8 3 2 ♥ K 10 5 4 2 ♦A8 ♣K

East ♠95 ♥J983 ♦ 10 7 4 ♣ A Q 10 4 South ♠Q6 ♥AQ76 ♦KQJ96 ♣J7

West Doron Y. — 2♦ 4♥

North East Wintermans Israel Y. pass pass 3♦ 3♥ 5♦ double

South Tammens 1♦ 4♦ (all pass)

At our table, against Michael Barel and me, the contract was 3♥ making East-West. Our teammates, the Yadlin brothers, were in for a much wilder ride, and when the Dutch North decided not to take chances over 4♥ and pushed on to 5♦, Israel Yadlin put out the red card and Doron did well to lead his stiff ♣K. Israel overtook that with the ace, cashed the ♣Q and continued with a third club. Tammens ruffed with the ♦J while West pitched a heart. Declarer continued with the ♥A, ruffed a heart, played a spade to the queen, ruffed another heart, cashed the ♠A and tabled the ♠K. Israel inserted his trump ten, and South overruffed with the ♦Q reaching this position:

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

♠7 ♥— ♦5 ♣98 ♠J ♥K ♦A8 ♣—

W

N S

E

♠— ♥J ♦74 ♣ 10

♠— ♥Q ♦K96 ♣— Next a fourth heart was played, which was ruffed with dummy’s last trump. Now The board is rotated for easy reading: South dealer All vul

North ♠Q6 ♥AQ76 ♦KQJ96 ♣J7

West ♠95 ♥J983 ♦ 10 7 4 ♣ A Q 10 4

East ♠ J 10 8 3 2 ♥ K 10 5 4 2 ♦A8 ♣K South ♠AK74 ♥— ♦532 ♣986532

Jansma South pass 2♣ 2♠

West pass pass (all pass)

Nystrom North 1 NT 2♥

East pass pass

Opening lead: ♠9

The one-night-stand partnership of Jansma-Nystrom looked to have hit the rocks when, after an off-shape 1NT opening

page 8

declarer played the last spade from dummy and Israel ruffed with the ♦7. Tammens overruffed with the ♦9 and played the ♦K hoping to squash the ♦8 under the ace. No such luck, two down and a fine +500. Would you have ever guessed at the start that West’s ♦8 would eventually be promoted as the second undertrick? As Jan van Cleef wrote in the event’s Bulletin: “This filial defensive cooperation led to a trump promotion – rather a trump slomotion!” This very hand was the scene for some more interesting action in another match:

by Nystrom, they stopped vulnerable in the 4-2 spade fit, a blatant infraction of David Burn’s Law of Total Trumps: “When you are declarer, the total number of trumps held by your side should be greater than the total number of trumps held by your opponents.” However, as the unforgettable Alfred Sheinwold used to say: “One advantage of awful bidding is that you get very good practice at playing hopeless contracts.” Jansma must clearly have had his share of misfortunes during his successful international career and was not about to give up so early on this one! West was soon off to the normal lead of a trump taken by the queen in dummy. Next came the ♦K to East’s ace. East continued with the ♣K and then another trump to Jansma’s ace. Declarer now cashed ♠K (West pitching the ♣A), crossed to dummy with a diamond and made the ingenious sneaky play of a low heart. When East hopped up with the king, Jansma ruffed, played another diamond and claimed nine tricks. A case of “the play is mightier than the law”?

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 9

The Gold Coast by Paul Marston, Australia

The Gold Coast congress, played in Surfers from February 19 to 26, continues to go from strength to strength. There were 234 teams in the Open, 44 in the Restricted and 62 in the Seniors. The big stars were Michelle Brunner and John Holland of Manchester, England. They first won the open pairs, then they joined with John Armstrong and Howard Melbourne of England and your columnist to win the teams. Brunner is a former world women’s champion. Try these two matchpoint problems:

Deal one East deals Both vul

Deal two North ♠K ♥J95 ♦9643 ♣AJ865

South deals N-S vul

♥7

♣A South (you) ♠AQJ875 ♥A32 ♦KJ7 ♣ 10

West — (all pass)

North

♠ K J 10 3 ♥K ♦ A Q 10 ♣ J 10 9 4 2

North —

East 2♥

South (you) ♠6 ♥ A Q 10 9 7 6 3 ♦K92 ♣Q5 South 2♠

South 1♥ 4♥

West 1♠ (all pass)

North 3 NT

East pass

Opening lead: ♥7

Opening lead: ♣A

Dummy’s 9 is covered by the 10. What is your plan?

West shifted to a low spade to the king and ace. East returned a club to the king and West exited with the ♠Q. Plan the play.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

Deal one comes from the Open Pairs. John Holland and John Armstrong both found a very neat play to make nine tricks in spades at their tables. ♠K ♥J95 ♦9643 ♣AJ865

East deals Both vul

♠643 ♥7 ♦ A Q 10 8 5 ♣K973

W

N S

E

♠ 10 9 2 ♥ K Q 10 8 6 4 ♦2 ♣Q42

♠AQJ875 ♥A32 ♦KJ7 ♣ 10 West — (all pass)

North —

East 2♥

South 2 ♠/3 ♠

♠ K J 10 3 ♥K ♦ A Q 10 ♣ J 10 9 4 2

Deal two South deals N-S vul

♠Q98742 ♥5 ♦J87 ♣A K3

W

N S

E

♠A5 ♥J842 ♦6543 ♣876

♠6 ♥ A Q 10 9 7 6 3 ♦K92 ♣Q5 South 1♥ 4♥

West 1♠ (all pass)

North 3 NT

East pass

Deal two features Brunner overcoming a bad trump break by way of a trump coup. This was an important result because it occurred in the pairs final against the eventual runners up, Mike Cornell and Ryszard Jedrychowski.

page 10

East opened with a weak two in hearts. Holland bid two spades, Armstrong bid three spades and the other three players said pass. Both Wests led the singleton heart to the ten and ace. Eight tricks are easy by way of six trumps and two outside aces. There appears to be no way of making a ninth because West is sitting over the diamonds, but wait. The two Johns set about stripping West’s exit cards before putting him on lead in diamonds. They played a club to the ace and trumped a club. Next came a spade to the king and another club ruff. Then trumps were drawn before exiting with the ♦K. The Wests took their ♦A and played their last club, the king, but the Johns discarded a heart. That left the Wests on play with only diamonds. The forced diamond return set up declarer’s jack for the ninth trick. West led the ♣A before shifting to a low spade to the king and ace. East returned a club to the king and West exited with the ♠Q. Brunner trumped and crossed to the bare ♥K and made the key play of trumping a spade instead of returning to the ♦K. Thanks to this play she was able to deny East a trump trick. When West showed out on the ace of trumps she crossed to the ♦Q and trumped a club. Next it was a diamond to the ace and a black winner off dummy. East could not prevent her from making the rest of the tricks for a total of ten. In Depth The defense can prevent the trump coup if West shifts to a trump at trick two. Then after a club is led to the queen and king, West leads a spade to East, who shifts to diamonds.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 11

Winning Without the Hat by Larry Cohen

A year ago at the Spring Nationals in Reno, after years of broken promises to Matthew Granovetter, I finally joined him for a Friday night Sabbath candle-lighting service (his room was next to mine in the hotel). After that religious experience (my first), David Berkowitz and I ended up winning the pairs event. Hmm. I told Matthew I’d be back in his room the following Friday night for services. That second Friday, our team was at halftime in our semifinal Vanderbilt match. We trailed the powerful Nickell team by a huge margin. As Matthew lit the candles, I couldn’t help but think that maybe there would be another miracle in the cards. There were no more Friday-night promises

Vanderbilt Winners Left to Right: Mike Becker Larry Cohen Richie Schwartz Andrea Buratti David Berkowitz Massimo Lanzarotti

to make (this being the last weekend of the tournament), so instead, I vowed to Matthew: “If we come back and win this match, I will wear your big black Chassidic hat tomorrow during the finals!” Sure enough, we won the match, so I went to get the hat from Matthew to wear (on VuGraph with cameras!). My team captain thought it a bad idea. He didn’t want any religious symbols or omens to ruin our team karma. (Little did he know, that it was my trip to Matthew’s room that had us on this great roll). He forbade the hat, and we lost the match. A year later, I found myself back in the Vanderbilt final in Pittsburgh. Matthew was 7,000 miles away in Jerusalem, so we’d have to try to win again without the hat.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

Before I get to two deals from the final, here are two interesting hands from our semifinal match. On the first, David and I reached 6NT on these North-South cards: North ♠ A K 10 6 5 ♥94 ♦AKJ43 ♣A South ♠Q7 ♥AK3 ♦Q6 ♣ Q 10 8 4 3 2

If spades and diamonds behave, you have 13 easy tricks. I received a heart lead, so I tested the diamonds first and saw everyone follow to two rounds. Now I could afford a safety play in spades (this was imps) to guard against RHO holding a low singleton. I played the ♠Q and a spade towards dumThe other semifinal deal of note was: West deals E-W vul

North ♠J6 ♥72 ♦Q5 ♣AK97542 West East ♠ A K Q 10 4 3 ♠98 ♥53 ♥J94 ♦976 ♦KJ84 ♣J6 ♣ Q 10 8 3 South ♠752 ♥ A K Q 10 8 6 ♦ A 10 3 2 ♣—

At both tables, after West opened with a weak two-bid in spades, South reach 4♥.

page 12

my, but on the first round RHO had played the 8 (some sort of signal) and on the second round, LHO played the 9, so I no longer needed a safety play. I played spades from the top and when they split 3-3 I claimed 13 tricks for +1020. I assumed this would be a push board (they wouldn’t bid seven at the other table, would they?). No. The other table played a small slam, but in clubs! Declarer won the heart lead and played a club. LHO followed with the 9. What would you do now? It turns out that when the ♣9 dropped, declarer could have played LHO for J-9 doubleton (his actual holding) but didn’t. After the ♣A wins, declarer can come to hand and play the ♣Q to pin the now-bare jack and make his slam. In retrospect, a better play by West was to falsecard with the jack on the first round of the suit. Then declarer has to guess if it is J-9 or K-J doubleton and could more easily go wrong. West led the top three spades, RHO playing high-low. What should declarer do on the third round of spades? When faced with this problem, my table opponent, Mike Passell, found the solution. He discarded a diamond from dummy. Now the defense could do nothing. Even on a trump shift, declarer can ruff a diamond, take his discards on the clubs, ruff a club with the ♥10 and draw trumps to make 420. Our team lost 10 imps when, surprisingly, my expert teammate failed to find the winning line. He ruffed the third spade in dummy and East overruffed and the contract had to fail by two tricks on a trump return. I can’t give my teammate all the blame. Had I led a trump at trick one, two or three, we could have defeated four hearts.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

The Final Our team grabbed a huge half-time lead in the match. The knock-out punch (from my point of view) was these back-to-back deals. First... With both vulnerable, I held: ♠ 3 2 ♥ K 9 5 ♦ A Q J 10 9 6 4 ♣ 7 David opened 1♦, Precision. This showed 11-15 HCP and at least two diamonds. RHO passed and I bid 2♦ (inverted raise). LHO doubled for takeout. David passed (typically indicating a weak notrump hand 11-13) and RHO jumped to 3♥. What now?

♠QJ5 ♥ 10 8 7 3 ♦85 ♣AK52

♠32 ♥K95 ♦ A Q J 10 9 6 4 ♣7 ♠ 10 9 7 4 N ♥AQ4 W E S ♦2 ♣ Q 10 6 4 3 ♠AK86 ♥J62 ♦K73 ♣J98

We can all see that East’s ♥Q lead wasn’t such a good idea, but it’s easier in hindsight. This deal turned out to be a problem for the defenders at the other table as well. South started with a standard 1♣. North responded 1♦, South rebid 1NT and North raised to 3NT. West led the ♥3, a fourthbest heart, and declarer (in desperation) put up dummy’s ♥K. How should the defenders figure out that they have the first seven tricks?

South 1♦ pass

page 13 West pass 3♥

North 2♦ ?

East double

I had hearts stopped and the most likely game was 3NT, so I just bid it. What does partner rate to have? Probably a balanced hand with four spades and a doubleton heart. If he doesn’t have clubs stopped, so be it — they will then have to find the right lead. Sure enough, that was the case. David’s hand was: ♠AK86 ♥J62 ♦K73 ♣J98 Opposite that hand, there is no game, but I received a heart lead, the queen, and when my king won the first trick I tabled my hand and scored +630. This was the full deal....

East should be suspicious (usually declarer won’t play high from dummy at trick one in such situations). Probably declarer is afraid of a black-suit switch, but which one? East cashed the ♥Q at trick two. Can West signal suit-preference? Would the lowest remaining card, the ♥7, suggest a club switch? Or should West play the ♥10 to deny the jack and make sure West at least shifts to something? Or maybe you prefer a high club lead at trick one from West? That would make things easy but leading the king of the opening bid suit is a rare lead. This has all the makings of a Switch-inTime column. I hope the editors give their view.* Our teammates guessed wrong. West signaled with the ♥8 and East shifted to spades, so the board was pushed at 630. The next deal did produce a gain (and it stretched our lead to 60 imps): *See page 31 for further analysis.

Bridge Today • April 2005 North dealer Both vul

To subscribe, click here!

North ♠J972 ♥K87 ♦J82 ♣A43

West ♠86 ♥ A Q 10 ♦ 10 9 7 5 ♣J762

East ♠AK4 ♥6543 ♦63 ♣ Q 10 9 5 South ♠ Q 10 5 3 ♥J92 ♦AKQ4 ♣K8 Larry South — 1 NT (14-16) 3 NT

David North pass 2 NT pass

page 14

able games at imps. Again, we had no legitimate play (best defense also beats 4♠), but opening leads and defense aren’t always perfect. West led the ♦9 (promising the 10 and maybe a higher honor). I won dummy’s jack and played the ♠J to trick two. East won and did not have an easy decision. Should he return his partner’s diamond suit? This would be necessary on many layouts (for example, suppose that West holds: ♦A-10-9-x-x or ♦K-10-9-x-x and a side entry). East guessed wrong and continued diamonds. That was all the help I needed.* I drove out the other spade and when the ♥A was right, I had the timing for nine tricks and +600. Our counterparts rested sensibly in a spade partial making nine tricks for 140 and we won 10 lucky imps. This built our lead to nearly 60 imps and the match never got close.

We both pushed a bit, but you know what they say about bidding close vulner-

*A reverse Smith echo by West would have worked. The ♠8 says: “I don’t like my suit.” — editor

The entire first half went this way — we kept bidding pushy vulnerable games and they kept on making. David likes to go with the flow. If he sees that the games are not making, he gets conservative. Here, however, he saw that everything was making and he became aggressive. This may not sound so scientific, and maybe we should all follow

the formula that works so well for Meckwell: Bid every close game, period. I recall reading in Bridge Today about the standards for 3NT declining each year. On the above two deals we had 22 and then 24 HCP, which seems about the norm these days. As long as they keep making, we’d better keep bidding them, hat or no hat.

Vanderbilt Runners-Up Back row (l to r): Samuel Cohen Jim Krekorian Drew Casen Bottom (l to r): John Onstott Chris Compton Jim Robison

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 15

Oh, when the games come marching in, oh when the games come marching in!

by Pamela Granovetter Matthew and I like to bid games so much that we have almost no invitational sequences in our system. We’ve written much about aggressive game bidding, but never have I witnessed a match that started off with so many game-bidding swings as this year’s Vanderbilt final! Let’s look at the first five boards. Board 1 North dealer None vul

North ♠972 ♥Q854 ♦Q954 ♣94

West ♠K653 ♥A972 ♦J8 ♣Q87

At the other table, the bidding went: East ♠ Q 10 8 4 ♥J ♦632 ♣ A K J 10 3

South ♠AJ ♥ K 10 6 3 ♦ A K 10 7 ♣652 West Buratti — 2 ♦ (2) 4♠

North Compton pass pass (all pass)

East Lanzarotti 2 ♣ (1) 2♠

(1) natural (2) asking for further description

Lanzarotti opened 2♣, natural. Buratti bid 2♦, Stayman, and when Lanzarotti showed four spades, Buratti jumped to game. This decision had nothing to do with point-counting or trump-counting; it was simply a matter of giving the ♣Q her full due. Of course, this 21-point game (note that three of the points, the jacks, weren’t even needed!) was far from cold, but it wasn’t terrible either (my definition of a terrible game is a game that’s down off the top, but even these make on occasion).

South Sam Cohen pass pass

West Robison — double double

North L. Cohen pass 3♦ pass

East Onstott 1♣ pass 3♠

South Berkowitz 1♦ pass (all pass)

John Onstott opened 1♣ with the East hand and David Berkowitz decided to bid 1♦ with the South cards. Jim Robison, West, made a negative double and Larry Cohen preempted to 3♦, preventing East from showing his spades at a comfortable level (mind you, although East’s hand was light in high-card points, it was getting better and better on the auction). Thus the thin game was missed. First blood might have gone to the conservative pair had the black-suit deuces been switched, but aggressive bidding paid off and the game swing went to the Schwartz team, ahead 6-0.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

On the next board, the Italians bid a robust 26-point 3NT game, but this one was more difficult to play: Board 2 East dealer N-S vul

North ♠ 10 9 7 3 ♥J3 ♦Q8 ♣ Q 10 8 4 2

West ♠86 ♥AQ965 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣K73

East ♠AQ542 ♥K2 ♦AKJ5 ♣65 South ♠KJ ♥ 10 8 7 4 ♦9763 ♣AJ9

West Buratti — 1 NT 2 ♦ (2) 2 NT 3♥ 3 NT

North Compton — pass pass pass pass (all pass)

East Lanzarotti 1♠ 2 ♣ (1) 2 ♥ (3) 3♦ 3♠

South Sam Cohen pass pass pass pass pass

(1) 15+ high-card points (2) 8+ HCP (3) any side four-card suit

♠86 ♥AQ965 ♦ 10 4 2 ♣K73

♠AQ542 ♥K2 ♦AKJ5 ♣65

West

North

East

South

Robison — 1 NT 2♠

L. Cohen — pass (all pass)

Onstott 1♠ 2♦

Berkowitz pass pass

page 16

North led the ♣4, and South put in the jack, a cute play, maintaining communication with partner. West won the king and thought about the hand for a long time. Looking at all four hands, it’s easy enough to play a diamond to the jack at trick two, careful not to waste the ten, then cash a high diamond. When the queen falls, declarer has four diamonds, three hearts and one trick in each black suit, with easy cashing transportation. Declarer, however, wouldn’t play that way in real life, but he did begin with diamonds — a low diamond to the ace. You might think he would now test the hearts, but he didn’t. He did something better. He played a club from dummy, because North’s fourth-best lead suggested that clubs were either 4-4 or 5-3, so the defense wouldn’t cash five clubs. This proved to be a very exciting line of play, because on the fourth and fifth rounds of clubs, South was squeezed in three suits! Sam Cohen went up with the ♣A and returned the ♣9. On the fourth club, Cohen tried his best by throwing the ♠J (baring the king as early as possible), and on the fifth club, a low diamond. North exited with a heart, but declarer won the king in dummy and cashed the ♠A. When the king fell, he played the ♠Q and South was finito even if he held the ♦Q!

At the other table, Onstott and Robison bid to 2♠. Again declarer took nine tricks, but this time it was for +140 instead of +400 and another 6 imps went to the Schwartz team, now ahead 12-0. Perhaps East should rebid 2NT over 2♠.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 17

On Board 3 it was the Schwartz team’s turn to make a dainty stop in a partscore, this time with 24 HCP:

The opening lead was the ♥10 and declarer had nine tricks: two spades, two hearts and five clubs.

Board 3 South dealer E-W vul

In the other room, Sam Cohen (South) and Chris Compton (North) bid:

North ♠ 10 8 7 ♥K753 ♦2 ♣AKJ63

West ♠932 ♥ A 10 9 8 4 ♦KQ6 ♣ 10 7

East ♠QJ64 ♥2 ♦ A 10 5 3 ♣8542 South ♠AK5 ♥QJ6 ♦J9874 ♣Q9

South Berkowitz 1 ♦* 2 NT

West Robison 1♥ (all pass)

North L. Cohen 2♣

East Onstott pass

*Precision, 2+ diamonds

Suppose partner opens a 14-16 notrump in fourth seat. What would you do with: ♠ K 10 9 7 ♥654 ♦J962 ♣ A 10

West pass pass

you North pass ?

East pass

partner South 1 NT

Does it matter if you missed a game on the previous board?

South S. Cohen 1♦ 2♦ 3 NT

West Buratti 1♥ pass (all pass)

North Compton 2♣ 2 NT

East Lanzarotti pass pass

East led the ♥2 to the queen and low from West. At trick two, declarer called for the ♥6 and West went in with the ace, to play the ♦K and a low diamond to East’s ace. East switched to a spade, so that was ten tricks and +430 for the Onstott team, a gain of 7 imps. Who should have bid game at the Cohen-Berkowitz table? (I would have bid game with both of their hands. Alternatively, if 2NT is forcing, like I like to play, your system helps you avoid the trap of playing the partscore!)

At the first table, Larry Cohen passed. “To thine own self be true” I suppose, and it’s perfectly reasonable, since his maximum combined count would be 24. The whole deal was . . .

Bridge Today • April 2005 Board 4 West dealer All vul

To subscribe, click here!

Berkowitz received a spade lead to the 7, 8 and jack. He played a spade back, and West went up with the ace to return a heart. Berkowitz now had ten tricks, for +180.

North ♠ K 10 9 7 ♥654 ♦J962 ♣ A 10

West ♠AQ632 ♥972 ♦Q84 ♣62

East ♠84 ♥Q83 ♦ K 10 3 ♣K8753 South ♠J5 ♥ A K J 10 ♦A75 ♣QJ94

West pass (all pass)

North pass

East pass

page 18

South 1 NT

Opening lead: ♠3

At the other table the bidding went: West Buratti pass pass pass (all pass)

North Compton pass 2♣ 2 NT

East Lanzarotti pass pass pass

South Sam Cohen 1NT (15-17) 2♥ 3 NT

Obviously, it was easier for North to make a game try opposite the 15-17 range. West led the ♣6 and declarer took nine tricks, for +600 and a gain of 9 imps. The Onstott team was in the lead by a score of 16 to 12, the first and only time they held the lead in the match.

Puzzle Corner 1. What’s the smallest number of trumps your side can hold to make a slam against best defense? 2. What’s the most number of “passes” possible in one auction? 3. What convention spelled backwards shows a long solid major suit? 4. Assuming best declarer play, what’s the most number of tricks the defenders can take against a suit contract, when they (the defenders) hold zero highcard points? Solutions on page 29. Click here.

On the very next board, the difference in range between 14-16 and 15-17 again had an effect on the auction. Suppose you hold in second seat, at favorable vulnerability: ♠876 ♥ A K J 10 3 ♦ K 10 6 2 ♣2 It goes 1NT on your right. What do you do if the notrump range was 14-16? What if it’s 15-17? At the Cohen-Berkowitz table, where the 1NT opening bid was 14-16, John Onstott overcalled 2♥....

Bridge Today • April 2005 Board 5 North dealer N-S vul

To subscribe, click here!

North ♠543 ♥Q65 ♦AQ9 ♣ A K 10 7

West ♠ Q J 10 ♥9742 ♦853 ♣843

At the other table, where the opening notrump range was 15-17, East was silent:

East ♠876 ♥ A K J 10 3 ♦ K 10 6 2 ♣2 South ♠AK92 ♥8 ♦J74 ♣QJ965

West Robison — pass (all pass)

North L. Cohen 1 NT 2 NT

East Onstott 2♥ pass

South Berkowitz double (cards) 3 NT

With the ♥A-K in one hand, the contract was unbeatable. This hand has nothing to do with gameversus-partscore bidding, but the corollary of aggressive game bidding is “bulldog bidding.” Bulldog bidding means bidding to the most likely contract, and it seems to be a more successful philosophy than “needlethreading” bidding, where you try to reach the most perfect contract on every hand.

West — pass

Bulldog 1 North 1 NT 2♦

East pass pass

page 19

Bulldog 2 South 2♣ 3 NT ?

West Buratti — pass pass pass (all pass)

North Compton 1 NT 2♦ 3♦ 4♣

East Lanzarotti pass pass pass pass

South Sam Cohen 2♣ 3♣ 3♠ 5♣

After the heart lead, 5♣ needed basically the ♦K-10 onside or the ♦K onside plus three spade tricks to get rid of dummy’s ♦9. If East shows up with three trump, however, declarer may play East for a doubleton spade and doubleton diamond. He can then be stripped in spades and endplayed in diamonds; alternatively, declarer may play West for king-fifth of diamonds and four spades, squeezing him. As the cards were, there was no chance, so the Schwartz team had 12 imps and the lead.

Most bulldogs would bid 3NT over 2♦, but here South was worried about hearts and opted for the needle-threading approach. He was right in theory. The heart singleton is a legitimate worry; put North’s ♥Q in with his spades and North-South would have reached a beautiful and laydown 5♣ contract while 3NT is usually doomed. This assuming East leads hearts. (Of course, when bulldogs bid 3NT with three small opposite a singleton, or two small opposite two small, the heart suit sometimes blocks). After this hand, it seems to me that Berkowitz and Cohen became more bulldog in their philosophy and, by going with the flow — the close games were making — they helped their team to build up a strong lead

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 20

Russian Roulette by Matthew Granovetter

The Final of the Women’s Olympiad Teams Score at the two-thirds point: Russia 193, USA 164

Russia was ahead by 29 imps. There were 32 boards left to decide the world championships. In the Open Room Lebedeva and Galaktionova came in for the Russians, squaring off against Steiner and Letizia. In the Closed Room, the USA fielded Montin and Meyers against Ponomareva and Gromova.

After the USA gained 2 imps on overtricks, the first big swing came on board 67. Montin had to declare 3NT against silent opponents. Interestingly, it’s always more difficult to declare against silent opposition....

South dealer E-W vul

and tried a spade to the queen. It lost to the king. West returned a heart. Montin won in hand and played ♠A (diamond discard on her right) and a spade to West’s jack. West cleared hearts (they were 4-3-3-3). Montin cashed two spade winners and led a club to her jack for her contract. It lost to the queen (doubleton queen, ouch). West cashed the defenders’ fourth trick and led a low diamond. Montin went up with the king, losing to the ace, and back came a diamond to the queen. Down two.

North ♠ 10 8 7 6 3 ♥A92 ♦KJ6 ♣A8

♥3 South (Montin) ♠AQ4 ♥ Q J 10 ♦85 ♣ K J 10 5 4 South Montin 1♣ 1 NT

West North Ponomareva Meyers pass 1♠ pass 3 NT

East Gromova pass (all pass)

Opening lead: ♥3

There is a school of bridge that professes a raise to 2♠ promises four trump. Perhaps this explains the 1NT rebid. Montin won the heart in hand, led a club to dummy

Declarer may have missed an interesting inference. Once West showed up with K-J-x-x and K-x-x-x in both majors, she was unlikely to hold the ♦A, because she had passed over 1♣. If declarer places East with the ♦A, she can safely go up with the ♣K rather than finesse, because it protects against West holding a doubleton queen and loses nothing when East holds Q-x-x-x. At the other table:

Bridge Today • April 2005 South dealer E-W vul

To subscribe, click here!

Here East led a diamond against 3NT, which appears to put declarer at more risk than a heart lead, right?

North ♠ 10 8 7 6 3 ♥A92 ♦KJ6 ♣A8

West ♠KJ52 ♥K853 ♦Q43 ♣Q7

East ♠9 ♥764 ♦ A 10 9 7 2 ♣9632 South ♠AQ4 ♥ Q J 10 ♦85 ♣ K J 10 5 4

Open Room South West Lebedeva Steiner 1 ♣* double pass pass

page 21

But the East-West bidding helped declarer to place the cards. North won the queen with the king and played for four club tricks and three heart tricks, leading the ♣A and a club to the king to keep West off lead. Hello, Dolly — 10 easy tricks, 11 imps to Russia, leading now by 38. After an overtrick to the USA on the fourth board of the set, the USA gained 6 imps on Board 69 when Lebedeva played Russian Roulette....

North Galaktionova redouble 3 NT

East Letizia 1♦ (all pass)

*Polish style — weak notrump or strong hand

Board 69 North dealer N-S vul

North ♠ 10 ♥K754 ♦A82 ♣ K J 10 9 3

West ♠KQ9862 ♥93 ♦ J 10 9 ♣64

East ♠AJ543 ♥AJ2 ♦5 ♣AQ82 South

♠7 ♥ Q 10 8 6 ♦KQ7643 ♣75

Open Room West North East Steiner Galaktionova Letizia — 2♣ 2♠ 4♠ pass pass (all pass)

South Lebedeva double double

Two clubs was natural and limited to 15 points and the double of 2♠ was a negative double. South’s final double was an example of the “suicide is painless” convention, offering partner the choice of minus 800 or minus 690. North chose the latter. At the other table, the Russian East-West played 4♠ undoubled, so the USA was now down by 29.

Bridge Today • April 2005 Board 70 East dealer E-W vul

To subscribe, click here!

the Americans collected 50 a trick, down three.

North ♠ 10 9 3 ♥AK742 ♦K32 ♣K8

West ♠KQ765 ♥83 ♦A75 ♣J42

East ♠2 ♥QJ65 ♦Q6 ♣ A Q 10 7 5 3

East Letizia 2♣ 3♣ (all pass)

East Gromova 2♣ pass

South Montin pass pass

South Lebedeva pass pass

The 2♣ bid was natural and the 2♠ bid was forcing one round. When North balanced with 3♥, the auction died out and

West (dealer) ♠AK ♥ J 10 7 ♦A54 ♣ A K 10 7 5

East (responder) ♠7 ♥A95 ♦KQ987 ♣J862

West 1♣ 3 NT

East 3♣/3♦

North 2♠

Closed Room West North Ponomareva Meyers — — 2♠ 3♥ double (all pass)

Here 2♠ was not forcing, and Meyers came in immediately. Ponomareva then surprised everyone with her own Russian Roulette double and Gromova happily converted. When this was set three tricks, the Russians gained 8 imps and their lead went back up to 37.

South ♠AJ84 ♥ 10 9 ♦ J 10 9 8 4 ♣96 Open Room West North Steiner Galaktionova — — 2♠ pass pass 3♥

page 22

South pass

After a 1♣ opening by West, North jumps to 2♠. East must now underbid with 3♣ or overbid with 3♦. In either case, West may be seduced into bidding 3NT with the double spade stopper.

On the next board, both teams missed a nice minor-suit slam and the USA gained 2 imps for playing in 3NT rather than 5♣. In Standard American, consider how you would bid it....

Here’s one possible solution: West upgrades that control-rich 19-count to a 2NT opening. West 2 NT 4♣

North pass pass

East 3♠ 4♥

South pass

East can then make a 3♠ bid for the minors and West will show clubs. When East cuebids the ♥A, West can force to slam.

Bridge Today • April 2005 Board 72 West dealer None vul

To subscribe, click here!

North ♠Q9643 ♥ 10 5 2 ♦A ♣AKQ2

West ♠ A J 10 7 ♥4 ♦ Q 10 8 5 3 2 ♣94

page 23

West are cold for 130 in diamonds. Closed Room West North Ponomareva Meyers pass 1♠ pass double pass 3♥ (all pass)

East ♠K5 ♥AJ986 ♦KJ97 ♣86 South ♠82 ♥KQ73 ♦64 ♣ J 10 7 5 3

East Gromova 2♥ pass pass

South Montin pass 3 ♣* 3 NT

*constructive response to the double

Here Gromova (East) overcalled 2♥, which would be set if everyone passed. But it was Meyers’ turn to try Russian Roulette! She balanced with a double on a hand better placed to double a diamond overcall than hearts. Luckily, Montin (South) bid 3♣ rather than 3♦.

Open Room West North East South Steiner Galaktionova Letizia Lebedeva pass 1♠ (all pass)

In the Open Room, Letizia (East) refrained from a light 2♥ overcall, facing a passed partner, and Lebedeva (South) decided to let the limited 1♠ opening go. Steiner (West) did not care to join the affair with her strong spades and weak one-suit hand, so 1♠ became the final contract. After a lot of zig-zagging, Galaktionova finished with seven tricks for +80, a nice result, since East-

Meyers was not satisfied. She decided to press her luck with a 3♥ cuebid, a try for 3NT. (Were there extra tricks up her sleeve?) Montin was pleased to bid 3NT with her double heart stopper and five-card club suit. Ponomareva (West) mercifully refrained from doubling, but did lead her diamond suit for down three. So that was six imps to Russia, leading at the halfway point of the set: 218 to 175.

Open Room Olga Galaktionova

Marinesa Letizia

Carlyn Steiner

Maria Lebedeva

photos by Ron Tacchi

Bridge Today • April 2005 Board 73 North dealer E-W vul

To subscribe, click here!

North ♠54 ♥AQJ5 ♦Q762 ♣ A 10 8

West ♠9 ♥ 10 7 ♦ K J 10 8 5 4 3 ♣642

East ♠ K Q 10 8 6 2 ♥98 ♦9 ♣Q973 South ♠AJ73 ♥K6432 ♦A ♣KJ5

Open Room West North East Steiner Galaktionova Letizia — 1♣ 2♠ pass 3♥ pass pass 4♥ pass pass 5♥ pass (all pass)

page 24

trump to the ace and a diamond to ruff, but Letizia ruffed in ahead of her. Galaktionova overruffed with the king, drew the last trump, and led a spade, ducking Letizia’s queen. It was now a simple matter of finessing when a spade was returned, the ♠A was used to discard a club and there were still two trumps in the South hand to handle the two last diamonds in the North hand. Closed Room West North Ponomareva Meyers — 1♦ pass 3♥ pass 4♥

South Lebedeva double 3♠ 4 NT 6♥

After the Polish 1♣ opening, Letizia made a jump overcall and Lebedeva made a negative double, since a 3♥ bid would be nonforcing in their system. The 3♠ bid was an all-purpose cuebid, tell-me-more sort of thing, though she learned very little more before Blackwooding into slam. Letizia (East) led her singleton diamond. Declarer led a

East Gromova 2♠ pass (all pass)

South Montin double 3♠

Here Montin also doubled 2♠, though 3♥ was available, and Meyers also bid 3♥. In this case, however, Montin’s cuebid of 3♠ was meant as a slam try in hearts. Maybe Meyers didn’t think so, because she rebid 4♥. Montin passed, since her partner might hold ♠ x x ♥ Q x x x ♦ K Q x x ♣ A Q x. Facing this hand she could be down one at the five level. If North interprets 3ß as a slam try, she should cuebid 4ç, because: (1) it’s under game; (2) she has a strong trump holding; and (3) she has limited her hand with a non-forcing 3˙ bid. She didn’t and that meant 11 imps to Russia, with a lead of 54.

Closed Room

Jill Meyers

Victoria Gromova

Tanya Ponomareva Randi Montin

photos by Ron Tacchi

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

On board 75, one player from each team had a blind spot on defense to 3NT, but Russia gained 2 imps on overtricks to lead by 56. On the next board the USA gained back 10 imps when another Russian on defense to 4♥ had a blind spot. I believe the players were getting tired or there were a lot of blind spots floating around. On the board thereafter, Russia got back the 10 imps by bidding to a lucky 20-point vulnerable 4♠: Dummy ♠ K 10 7 ♥62 ♦AQ9753 ♣J8 Declarer ♠AQ853 ♥ 10 9 ♦6 ♣A9654

On the last board of the set, the most dramatic blind spot occurred, but first let’s look at the Open Room, where Steiner did everything right: Board 80 West dealer E-W vul

West (Steiner) ♠A98764 ♥2 ♦AK764 ♣2

North (Galaktionova) ♠Q53 ♥ J 10 8 ♦ 10 9 2 ♣ A 10 6 3 East (Letizia) ♠— ♥A743 ♦QJ85 ♣KQJ84 South (Lebedeva) ♠ K J 10 2 ♥KQ965 ♦3 ♣975

page 25

At one table, Meyers opened 2♠ (5-11, five spades and five or a minor). LHO doubled and Montin raised to 3♠, all pass. At the other table, Galaktionova opened 1♠ and Lebedeva raised to 4♠! The defenders cashed two hearts and switched to clubs. I won’t ask you how you play it, though I think playing to set up clubs might be best. Well, the clubs were 3-3 and the diamonds were 3-3 with the king onside and the spades were 3-2, so all roads led to 10 tricks. What fun ... for the one who bid it! On the next one, Gromova and Ponomareva bid to a hopeless 24-point 3NT and actually went one down, so the USA gained 5 imps, but still trailed 193 to 141 with two boards left to the set. On Board 79, Steiner reached a close 3NT contract that was defeated with accurate defense, while the Russians stayed low in 2♦ at the other table making 110. So 4 more imps to Russia. Open Room West North East Steiner Galaktionova Letizia 1♠ pass 2♣ 2♦ pass 3♦ 4♦ pass 5♦ 6♦ (all pass)

South Lebedeva pass pass pass

Steiner and Letizia began with their two longest suits but then bid their diamonds from here to Canarsie. If you know where Canarsie is, you are on my wavelength. Steiner won the ♥J lead in dummy, ruffed a heart in hand and led a club. Galaktionova ducked, a nice try, since if she goes up, declarer has 12 tricks on power. But Steiner countered by crossruffing. She ruffed a heart and cashed the ♠A, throwing dummy’s last heart. Then came a spade ruff, club ruff, spade ruff. There were still four top diamond honors to complete the crossruff — 12 tricks. Well done!

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

Board 80 West dealer E-W vul

North (Meyers) ♠Q53 ♥ J 10 8 ♦ 10 9 2 ♣ A 10 6 3 West (Ponomareva) East (Gromova) ♠A98764 ♠— ♥2 ♥A743 ♦AK764 ♦QJ85 ♣2 ♣KQJ84 South (Montin) ♠ K J 10 2 ♥KQ965 ♦3 ♣975 Closed Room West North Ponomareva Meyers 1♠ pass 2♦ pass 3♥ pass 4♦ pass pass pass 4♠ pass 5♦ pass

East Gromova 2♣ 3♦ 4♣ 4♥ redouble 4 NT 6♦

South Montin pass pass pass double pass pass (all pass)

In the closed room, Ponomareva and Gromova made twice as many calls to the same 6♦, with six or seven cuebids along the way plus a Keycard Blackwood bid, wearing out everyone including the kibitzers and the recorder. Luckily for the USA,

page 26

Ponomareva, the West player for Russia, was included among the fatigued. Ponomareva, who had put on a great performance for the Russian team, playing every board of the final with her partner Gromova, had the kind of blind spot we’ve all had on occasion. My guess is that she saw a card that wasn’t there. See what you think. She received the ♥J lead from Meyers (North). She won the ace and drew three rounds of trump. It’s my guess that she thought she had the ♣10 in dummy along with her other nice club honors; otherwise how could she have drawn three rounds of trump? She then led her ♣2. Meyers carefully ducked and the jack won. The crossruff was gone, so declarer played the ♣K and let it ride to the ace. The hand was over and she had to settle for 10 tricks, down two, and a huge 17 imps to the USA.

There were 16 hands left for the world championships and the Russia women still led by 35 imps. Could the USA use the momentum from Board 80 to make a great comeback? Read all about the incredible finale’ in our May issue.

Visit our new homepage:

Bridgetoday.com. You will be delighted to see lots of new columns and news stories, some free, some for Bridgetoday.com Club Members only.* Enter the new weekly contest, with a prize awarded every week! *Upgrade to Club Membership for a few dollars more. Write to [email protected].

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 27

The Wizards of Aus Hands from Australian Tournaments

by Ron Klinger

— Long suits and swindles —

Problem One You are West at favorable vul with: ♠ A 10 8 5 3 2 ♥ 6 2 ♦ K J 10 5 ♣ 5 You West — 2♠

North — 7♣

East — (all pass)

South 2 ♣*

Problem Two You are West at favorable vul with: ♠ 5 2 ♥ 10 5 2 ♦ A K Q 7 6 ♣ 6 5 4 You West pass pass (all pass)

North 2 ♥ (1) 5 NT (4)

East 4 ♣ (2) pass

South 5 ♦ (3) 6♠

*artificial, very strong

What is your opening lead?

(1) 5-5 majors, weak (2) Preemptive (3) Exclusion Keycard Blackwood, asking for keycards outside of diamonds (4) Two of the six keycards (aces and major-suit kings)

What is your opening lead?

Problem Three You are South, all vul, with: ♠A ♥6 ♦A9 ♣AKJ987542 RHO opens a Multi 2♦ (weak two-bid in either major). What is your call?

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

The chance of picking up a nine-card suit is about 3-in-10,000. The Summer Festival of Bridge usually throws up more than its fair share, last year three in the 496 deals in play. This article features two of them. On the first Avi Kanetkar pulled off a giant swindle in the National Open Teams Round-of-16. South dealer N-S vul

West ♠ A 10 8 5 3 2 ♥62 ♦ K J 10 5 ♣5

South 2 ♣ (1)

West 2♠

North (Kanetkar) ♠76 ♥5 ♦4 ♣AKQJ98432 East ♠94 ♥ K 10 8 3 ♦9732 ♣ 10 7 6 South (Bagchi) ♠KQJ ♥AQJ974 ♦AQ86 ♣— North 7 ♣ (2)

East (all pass)

(1) artificial, very strong (2) one of Canberra’s nine-card suits

West naturally thought that Kanetkar had to be void in spades and so he did not start with the ♠A. Declarer made 7♣. How did that come about? At first glance it was reasonable for West to shun the spade lead. You have to assume the 7♣ bid is rational. But deeper thought would tell you that the 7♣ bid cannot possibly be rational, regardless of what North holds. He can’t hold

page 28

solid clubs and first-round control in every suit, can he? What was not reasonable was the choice of lead, a diamond. Khokan Bagchi (South) was now able to pitch one spade loser on the extra diamond winner, draw trumps and later finesse in hearts. If you elect not to try the ♠A, you should lead the ♣5. That is likely to be the safest start and now the grand slam should fail … unless East makes a helpful discard (trying to help partner but helping declarer instead) of the ♠9! For example, suppose declarer leads out seven trumps, coming down to two trump and four other cards: ♠76 ♥5 ♦4 ♣32 ♠ A 10 ♥— ♦ K J 10 5 ♣—

W

N S

E

♠— ♥ K 10 8 3 ♦97 ♣—

♠— ♥AQJ9 ♦AQ ♣— East should keep four hearts and two spades. But what if East throws the ♠9 and ♠4 along the way to help partner with the spade count? Declarer finesses hearts, cashes the ace, throwing a spade, and ruffs a heart. Then on the last trump South throws his heart and West is squeezed in spades and diamonds. East must keep the ♠9 to prevent partner from being squeezed. Another piece of larceny bore fruit for Valerie Cummings on this deal from Stage 2 of the National Women’s Teams:

Bridge Today • April 2005 West dealer N-S vul

West ♠52 ♥ 10 5 2 ♦AKQ76 ♣654

West pass pass (all pass)

To subscribe, click here!

North (Feitelson) ♠ K 10 9 4 3 ♥KJ964 ♦J43 ♣— East ♠J8 ♥7 ♦985 ♣ Q J 10 8 7 3 2 South (Cummings) ♠AQ76 ♥AQ83 ♦ 10 2 ♣AK9

North 2 ♥ (1) 5 NT (4)

East 4 ♣ (2) pass

South 5 ♦ (3) 6♠

(1) 5-5 majors, weak (2) Preemptive. Usually a jump over a preempt is strong, but in this case it makes sense that it’s preemptive. (3) Exclusion Keycard Blackwood, asking for keycards outside of diamonds (1) Two of the six keycards (aces and major-suit kings)

After 2♥-4♣ Valerie Cummings produced the psychic 5♦ Exclusion Keycard ask. You can see her reasoning. With 5-5 at least in the majors, North has at most three minor-suit cards. If you can avoid a diamond lead, slam will be there if partner has the two major-suit kings. The match was played with screens. West and North (Candice Feitelson) were on the same side of the screen. At the end of the auction, West asked, “What does 5♦ mean?” Reply: “Exclusion Blackwood. Void in diamonds and asking for key cards outside diamonds.” West: “Really?” North: “That’s what it shows. I don’t care. Go ahead and lead a diamond.” After some thought West led a club, +1430 to North-South. It could hardly hurt to lead a top diamond. That would not set up any tricks for declarer. On seeing dummy, a second diamond winner would be obvious. With North 5-5 in the majors, if South were void in diamonds, East would have five diamonds. That is improbable in view of the pre-emptive jump to 4♣. In addition, it was obvious that South was prepared for a club lead. You can fool some of the people all of the time....

Puzzle Corner (from page 18 - click here) 1. Four, the AKQJ in one hand. 2. 214 3. Stayman 4. Nine. See the diagram to the right. West leads a heart against South’s 6♠ contract. East returns a diamond. Declarer scores four tricks. But exchange East-West’s red deuces and there are no ruffs, so the hand would match puzzle question #1, where South scores a slam in spades with only four cards in trumps.

page 29

♠— ♥AKQ ♦ A K Q 10 ♣ A K Q J 10 9 ♠ 10 9 8 7 ♥65432 ♦— ♣8765

W

N S

E

♠AKQJ ♥ J 10 9 8 7 ♦J987 ♣—

♠65432 ♥— ♦65432 ♣432

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

In our third problem what did you bid with your nine-card club suit? East dealer Both vul

♠Q86 ♥AK7 ♦Q763 ♣Q63

♠972 ♥J5432 ♦KJ52 ♣ 10

♠ K J 10 5 4 3 ♥ Q 10 9 8 ♦ 10 8 4 ♣— ♠A ♥6 ♦A9 ♣AKJ987542

West — 3♥ pass

Lorentz North — 3 NT 7♣

East 2 ♦* pass (all pass)

Lester South double 6♣

page 30

What should South do over 2♦? [See box below.] As you would not expect a trump loser, South needs only a little more than an ace and a useful king from partner’s hand to make 13 tricks. To jump to 6♣ gives up a fair chance for a grand slam. John Lester’s start looks more attractive. At this vulnerability East-West might not be too eager to sacrifice. Once North offered 3NT over 3♥, what was the rush to jump to 6♣? Gabi Lorentz did well to push to 7♣. Some might simply pass 6♣. If 4NT over 3NT would be Blackwood, that would be fine. If not, South should bid 4♣ (forcing). He would receive a 4♥ cuebid. At this point he could bid 4♠ (cue), and after North’s 5♥ cue, bid 7♣ or 7NT without any guesswork. Guesswork: Partner’s standard approach to bidding.

*Multi 2♦

Anti-editor’s box This reminds me of the hand of Ralph Cohen from a Vanderbilt match in Pittsburgh, which was published last week in our daily email column. His son, Jordan, held eight solid spades after a weak 2♥ opening: West dealer None vul

West ♠6 ♥KQ9765 ♦J75432 ♣—

North (Jordan) ♠ A K Q J 10 8 5 2 ♥ J 10 ♦A ♣AK East ♠7 ♥32 ♦98 ♣ Q 10 7 6 5 4 3 2 South (Ralph) ♠943 ♥A84 ♦ K Q 10 6 ♣ J98

West 2♥ pass pass

North double 3♥ 6 NT

East pass pass (all pass)

South 3♦ 3 NT

Opening lead: ♥K

This was the Cohens’ auction for a push board, but I prefer a simple 4NT Blackwood for this hand, then an oldfashioned 5NT for kings. In the Austrailian hand, I think Blackwood works even better! — Pamela G.

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 31

Switch in Time Forum

West (Schwartz) ♠QJ5 ♥ 10 8 7 3 ♦85 ♣AK52

South 1♣ 1 NT

West pass pass

North (Krekorian) ♠32 ♥K95 ♦ A Q J 10 9 6 4 ♣7 East (Becker) ♠ 10 9 7 4 ♥AQ4 ♦2 ♣ Q 10 6 4 3 South (Casen) ♠AK86 ♥J62 ♦K73 ♣J98 North 1♦ 3 NT

East pass (all pass)

Opening lead: ♥3 (fourth best)

In his article (page 11) about the second quarter of the Vanderbilt final, Larry Cohen poses the question: How can East find the club shift after a heart is led to the king and ace? At the table, Casen (South) called for the ♥K at trick one, and Becker won the ace. He next cashed the ♥Q and Schwartz followed with the 8. Becker then switched to the ♠10 and declarer claimed. We asked Mike Becker what his thoughts were.... Becker: “Declarer has played the ♥K, suggesting, because I have the ♥Q, that we may have five fast tricks to cash if we know where they are.”

This point is important. If declarer held, for example, the ♠A and ♣K, he probably would have played low from dummy at trick one. Becker: “Assuming declarer has not erred, that marks partner with either the: 1) ♠A-Q-J and I must lead spades immediately; 2) ♣A-K doubleton and I must shift to clubs right away; 3) ♠A-Q-J-x and I can cash the ♥Q, look at his spot and shift to spades; or 4) ♣A-K-x-(x) or ♣A-J-x-(x) and I can cash the ♥Q and then lead the ♣10 or ♣Q. “Partner would lead a higher heart than the deuce if he had the ♠A-Q-J-x. So he cannot have the ♠A-Q-J-x. “Playing partner for the ♠A-Q-J is remote compared to the possibilities in clubs. Therefore, the correct play at trick two is the ♣10. It is wrong to lead the queen, because partner may overtake with A-K-x, not knowing I have the ♥Q, or partner could have the ♣A-K tight. “On this hand, it goes: ♣10-jack-king. Partner may not be sure whether to continue clubs or revert back to hearts, but no matter, I have him covered either way. And if partner has ♣A-K tight (and declarer has: ♠ A K Q ♥ J x x ♦ K x ♣ J 9 x x x), partner should cash the ♣A and revert back to hearts. “If I cash the ♥Q, I give up on beating the hand when partner has the ♠A-Q-J or

Bridge Today • April 2005

To subscribe, click here!

page 32

♣A-K tight. For what it’s worth (it ain’t of the ♥K at trick one! Partner cannot have worth much), cashing the ♥Q alerts partner ♥J-8-7-3 in hearts and an unsupported ace, that we have a chance to take three more fast tricks. Partner will know I have only a point or two more in my hand, because the declarer, Casen, is a sound opening bidder.”

West (Schwartz) ♠QJ5 ♥ 10 8 7 3

North (Krekorian) ♠32 ♥K95 ♦ A Q J 10 9 6 4 ♣7 East (Becker) ♠ 10 9 7 4 ♥AQ4

♦85 ♣AK52

♦2 ♣ Q 10 6 4 3 South (Casen) ♠AK86 ♥J62 ♦K73 ♣J98

South 1♣ 1 NT

West pass pass

North 1♦ 3 NT

East pass (all pass)

Opening lead: ♥3 (fourth best)

Having failed to shift to clubs at trick two, Becker did the next best thing by cashing the ♥Q. Schwartz’s 8 was not clear to Becker. Schwartz meant it as discouraging. They play upside-down attitude, and Schwartz viewed the 7 as encouraging a heart continuation. Becker did not.... Becker: “What should partner play on my ♥Q? There is no obvious shift, as both spades and clubs look equally possible. Therefore, it appears that partner should give suit-preference (what I need to know), to tell me what suit to play. Partner will know that I know we have three winners outside of hearts, because of declarer’s play

because declarer would not rise with the ♥K. But if I am right that partner would not lead a low heart with the ♠A-Q-J-x, I can actually close my eyes and lead the ♣10 regardless of what he plays on my queen! “The bad news is that my return of the spade ten was wrong, especially when partner played the ♥8 rather than the 10. The good news is that we won the Vanderbilt anyway, and my error created some interesting discussions in bridge magazines.” Switch-in-Time Wavelengths Becker’s analysis is unique, because it includes the assumption of why declarer went up with the ♥K. Playing Switch-in-Time signals, however, may make life easier, on the theory that your signal will be the same regardless of what declarer is doing. Here are our thoughts. (1) We would have led the ♠Q to begin with and so much for beating 3NT! (2) If we chose a heart lead, we’d probably lead the ♥8 from the poor suit, and now East must play two rounds to get his signal (the 3, suit-preference). (3) After the ♥3 lead, Becker’s analysis is perfect, but even if he chose to cash the ♥Q, we would signal with the ♥7 as a suitpreference for clubs. (4) The problem from West’s angle was: What card should he play at trick two if he held ♥J-8-7 remaining? Normally you follow up the line and expect partner to continue. Playing Switch-in-Time methods, however, you must play suit-preference regardless and stay on the same wavelength with partner. This is a good lesson!