Bridge Today - August 2003

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 1 August 2003 ß ˙ ∂ ç Editor: Matthew Granovetter

The Magazine for People Who Love to Play Bridge

In this issue: Good Bids and Good Luck II Pamela Granovetter tests you with 12 more bidding decisions from the final of the USA Team Trials. Page 2. Features 11

Why I Lose at Bridge (part 3) by Barry Rigal

28

Bridge Yesterday by Paul Zweifel

17

Kantar’s Korner by Eddie Kantar

29

Are You Thinking Logically? by Marshall Miles

24

The Silent Clue by Andrew Robson

30

The Ruffing Air Forum

32

The Switch in Time Forum

34

Hand of the Month

25

The Lite 3NT Forum by Bruce Neiger

ALERT: Please do not e-mail this e-mag to anyone. Much time, energy and money was spent to produce this product, and most people can afford to pay for it. If you would like someone to see an issue, please contact us with his email address (write to [email protected]) and we’ll gladly pass on a sample excerpt. Subscriptions are $33 per year for 12 monthly issues. Thank you!

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 2

Good Bids and Good Luck (part two) by Pamela Granovetter Here are 12 more bidding problems from the USA Team Trials final in June. I’ll present three problems at a time, followed by the real-life results. Good luck!

Problem 2 (Board 53) North dealer N-S vul

Problems 1-3 Problem 1 (Board 42) East dealer All vul

You, North, hold: ß 9 7 5 2 ˙ 10 9 5 3 ∂ A K 9 6 3 ç —

You, North, hold: ß A 10 ˙ 9 2 ∂ A K Q J 10 8 ç A Q 7 West — pass

North — ?

East 2ß

West — 2 ˙* pass

South pass

(a) What is your call? (b) If you double, partner bids 3˙ showing values. Then what?

North pass pass ?

*transfer Do you balance?

Problem 3 (Board 65) North dealer None vul You, South, hold: ßK94 ˙642 ∂A8763 ç73 West — 3˙

North 1ß 3ß

East pass 4∂

What’s going on? What do you call?

South 2ß ?

East 1 NT 2ß

South pass pass

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solutions 1-3 Solution 1 East dealer All vul

West ß3 ˙ A K 10 8 3 ∂62 ç J 10 9 4 3

page 3

North ß A 10 ˙92 ∂ A K Q J 10 8 çAQ7 East ßKQJ876 ˙64 ∂9743 ç6 South ß9542 ˙QJ75 ∂5 çK852

The problem is that the North hand is awfully good-looking. . . . The North for the COHEN team made the rubber-bridge bid of 3NT, making four for +630, but the WELLAND team had an accident when the bidding went: West — pass pass pass pass double

North — double 4∂ 5ß 6∂ (all pass)

East 2ß pass pass pass pass

South pass 3 ˙* 5ç 6ç pass

*values West — pass

North — ?

East 2ß

South pass

This is the type of hand that every rubber bridge worth his salt will get right. “I bid 3NT,” he will say, “What’s the problem?” Solution 2 North dealer N-S vul

ß9752 ˙ 10 9 5 3 ∂AK963 ç—

ß K Q 10 8 3 ˙J ∂J87 ç 10 7 3 2

At the other table, the bidding went: ßA6 ˙AK862 ∂ Q 10 2 çQJ5

North pass pass 2 NT 3∂ pass

East 1 NT 2ß pass double double

If you bid a pedestrian 3NT in pass-out seat, credit yourself with 13 imps. If you doubled, planning to bid 3NT over a constructive 3˙, you can also take 13. Opening lead: ˙ J Result: down three, N-S -800

ßJ4 ˙Q74 ∂54 çAK9864 West — 2˙ pass double pass

Result: down 1, NS -200

West — 2ç 2 ß*

North pass 2∂ (all pass)

East 1 NT 2˙

South pass pass

*This sequence shows five spades with a mildly invitational hand South pass pass 3ç 3˙ (all pass)

Opening lead: ∂K Result: down one, N-S +50

The luck of the draw was that the North for the COHEN team was able to make a noise at a safer level. If you balanced, lose 13.

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solution 3 North dealer None vul

page 4

North ßA87652 ˙J7 ∂5 çAQ92

West ßQJ ˙KQ985 ∂J9 ç K J 10 6

Problems 4-6 Problem 4 (Board 66) East dealer N-S vul East ß 10 3 ˙ A 10 3 ∂ K Q 10 4 2 ç854

South ßK94 ˙642 ∂A8763 ç73 West — 3˙

North 1ß 3ß

East pass 4∂

South 2ß (all pass)

Result: 4∂ by East, down three, NS +150

At the other table, North-South bid to four spades (1ß-2ß; 3ç-4ß), making four for +420. If you passed four diamonds, take a 7-imp loss.

You, North, hold: ß Q J 9 4 ˙ K 7 6 4 ∂ 10 4 2 ç Q 7 West — pass

North — ?

East 2ß

South double

Note: You cannot bid 2NT natural because it’s reverse lebensohl. You can bid three hearts, showing a bad hand, or you can bid two notrump, which forces three clubs from partner, and then you bid three hearts, showing some values. I think this is a very tough hand, because there’s nothing accurate to bid: a) passing is risky; b) 2NT followed by 3˙ with all this junk is an overbid; c) 3˙ directly is an underbid; d) 2NT natural is just right, but you can’t bid it; e) 3NT is an overbid. Well, what’s your poison?

Problem 5 (Board 71) South dealer All vul

Problem 6 (Board 82) East dealer N-S vul

You, South, hold: ß 10 8 5 ˙ K J 2 ∂ Q 5 3 ç 10 5 3 2

You, South, hold: ß 10 8 7 6 4 ˙ K 10 9 3 ∂ K 4 ç Q 3

South pass pass ?

West North — — 3 ∂ (weak) double

West pass pass

North 2 ∂* double

East 3ç pass

East 1∂ 4∂

South pass ?

(Note: Double by you would be takeout.) *Flannery, 4 spades, 5 hearts, 12-15 points

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solutions 4-6 Solution 4 East dealer N-S vul

ß ˙ ∂ ç

page 5 Bobby Wolff (West) gave this one an oldfashioned “I don’t think so” whack. East led a low spade, but declarer was short a couple of tricks anyway.

QJ94 K764 10 4 2 Q7

ß2 ˙AQ83 ∂AKJ5 ç J 10 9 5

ß A 10 8 7 6 5 ˙5 ∂9763 ç64 ßK3 ˙ J 10 9 2 ∂Q8 çAK832

West — pass double

North — 3 NT (all pass)

East 2ß pass

South double pass

Result: 3NTx by North, down 2, NS: -500

Solution 5 South dealer All vul

ß ˙ ∂ ç

KJ94 AQ843 K962 —

ßAQ7 ˙975 ∂J84 ç8764

ß632 ˙ 10 6 ∂ A 10 7 çAKQJ9 ß 10 8 5 ˙KJ2 ∂Q53 ç 10 5 3 2

South pass pass 3˙

West pass pass (all pass)

North 2 ∂ (Flannery) double

If you passed, they make 2ß doubled. If you bid your hearts, the fast or slow way, it’s not too bad. You’ll lose two diamonds, two hearts and a spade, for down one. Wolffie probably won’t double, so you’ll go -100. At the other table, East opened with three spades and bought it there, down one, -50. If you bid 3NT or passed 2ß doubled, lose 11. If you bid hearts (either the fast or slow way), lose 4 (the best you can do on this board). four honors in his partner’s suits. Switch South’s diamond and club honors, and now South’s hand isn’t as good and four hearts goes down. Nevertheless, game is nothing to brag about. At the other table, the bidding went: South pass 2˙ 4˙

East 3ç pass

With the ßQ onside and every suit breaking, 10 tricks were there (just don’t touch trumps). Does that mean South should have bid game? North showed short clubs, so South has

West pass 3ç (all pass)

North 1˙ 3∂

East 2ç pass

Doug Doub (South) barely had enough for a 2˙ free bid after his partner’s thirdseat opening, but on the auction his hand got better and better. Adam Wildavsky ruffed the club lead, led a diamond to the queen, led the ß8, which held, and another spade. He ruffed the club return and led a diamond, ruffed a third club, and drew trumps: a dummy reversal! If you didn’t bid 4˙, lose 10 imps.

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solution 6 East dealer N-S vul

ß ˙ ∂ ç

ß5 ˙84 ∂J8763 ç K J 10 8 2

West — 3 ∂ (weak) pass

page 6

AKJ J76 A A97654 ßQ932 ˙AQ52 ∂ Q 10 9 5 2 ç— ß 10 8 7 6 4 ˙ K 10 9 3 ∂K4 çQ3

North — double 5ç

East 1∂ 4∂ (all pass)

South pass double

Problems 7-9 Problem 7 (Board 93) North dealer All vul

North 1 NT

OOPS. The double was too fine a call; it no doubt didn’t occur to the South player for WELLAND that partner might bid clubs! A four-spade bid is the winner, for +620. At the other table, the WELLAND EastWest played in five-diamonds doubled, down two, +300 for North South. If you bid four spades, win 7; if you doubled, lose 12.

Problem 8 (Board 97) North dealer None vul

You, East, hold: ßAQ8542 ˙K ∂— çAQJ862 West —

Result: down 3, NS -300

East ?

South

The possible strategies are: the “walking the dog” strategy, where you’re going to bid slowly, hoping to be “pushed” into a game (bid 2ß); or the blasting strategy, where you leap to game (4ß); or the “put your cards on the table” strategy, where you attempt to describe your two suiter (in this case, with a 2NT bid, showing minors or any big two-suiter). What is your strategy, using any convention you like?

You, North, hold: ßAJ ˙64 ∂K95 ç865432 West — double 5∂

North pass pass ?

East 1∂ 4 NT

South 4ß pass

What is your call? Problem 9 (Board 98) East dealer N-S vul You, North, hold: ß A 10 9 7 2 ˙ A K Q 6 4 ∂ 4 ç J 5 West — 1ß 4˙ pass

North — 2˙ pass ?

East 1∂ 3˙ 6∂

Any ideas? What’s your call?

South pass pass pass

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solutions 7-9 Solution 7 North dealer All vul

page 7 “Walking the dog” didn’t work this time. After the defense took two clubs, the declarer, Howard Weinstein, gained the lead, pulled trump, and made the good play of the ˙5 to the king and ace. The result was down one, -200.

North ßKJ9 ˙QJ5 ∂AKJ86 ç 10 7

West ß 10 7 6 3 ˙ 10 8 4 2 ∂Q5 çK53

East ßAQ8542 ˙K ∂— çAQJ862 South ß— ˙A9763 ∂ 10 9 7 4 3 2 ç94

West — 3ß pass pass

North 1 NT pass 5∂ pass

Solution 8 North dealer None vul

West ß864 ˙ A J 10 8 2 ∂A82 çQJ

West — double 5∂

East 2ß 4ß 5ß double

West — 4ç South 2 NT 4 NT 6∂ (all pass)

North ßAJ ˙64 ∂K95 ç865432 East ß2 ˙93 ∂ Q J 10 7 6 4 ç A K 10 9 South ß K Q 10 9 7 5 3 ˙KQ75 ∂3 ç7

North pass pass ?

East 1∂ 4 NT

At the other table, Bjorn Fallenius for WELLAND bid 2NT over one notrump showing the minors or a big two-suiter. That worked splendidly when the bidding continued:

South 4ß pass

North 1 NT 4˙

East 2 NT 5ç

South 3˙ (all pass)

Result: making 5, NS -600 If you “walked the dog,” lose 9.

At one table, the West player for the COHEN team passed over four spades! South escaped for down one after a trump lead, won in dummy with the ace for a heart lead. Later, West ducked his ace of diamonds. That was 50 to COHEN. Meanwhile, what did you do with the North cards over 5∂? If you bid five spades, as the North player for COHEN did, they double you and lead a trump. You lose three hearts, one diamond and one club, for down three, -500, while five diamonds was going down a trick. Yes, your partner can go down two by winning the trump shift in hand and leading a diamond, but he played the opening bidder for the ˙A instead of responder for the ∂A. If you bid 5ß over 5∂, take a 10-imp loss. If you passed out 5∂, win 3; if you doubled, win 4 (partner better lead a spade).

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solution 9 East dealer N-S vul

West ßKQ84 ˙— ∂ 10 7 3 ç K 10 7 6 4 2

West — 1ß 4˙ pass

page 8

North ß A 10 9 7 2 ˙AKQ64 ∂4 çJ5 East ß— ˙9853 ∂AKQJ82 çAQ9 South ßJ653 ˙ J 10 7 2 ∂965 ç83

North — 2˙ pass double

East 1∂ 3˙ 6∂ (all pass)

South pass pass pass

If you doubled for a spade lead (correctly assuming that no hearts are cashing) as the North player for WELLAND did, take a siximp loss for your score of -1190 against your teammates’ score of +940.

Problems 10-12 Problem 10 (Board 102) East dealer E-W vul You, East, hold: ß Q 8 7 3 2 ˙ K Q 3 ∂ Q 6 3 ç J 10 West — 1∂ 3 NT pass

North — 3ç pass pass

East pass double pass ?

South pass pass 4ç

What do you think your partner’s pass implies, if anything? What do you do now? Problem 11 (Board 106) East dealer All vul You, East, hold: ß — ˙ A K 10 8 5 2 ∂ K Q 9 ç Q J 5 2 West — 2˙ 4ç pass

North — 3ß pass pass

East 1˙ 3 NT* 4˙ ?

South 1ß pass 4ß

*mild slam try Your call. Problem 12 (Board 119) South dealer All vul You, East, hold: ß 9 8 6 ˙ 10 7 5 ∂ K 9 ç A 9 7 5 4 South pass

West 1ß

What is your call?

North 2ç

East ?

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 9

Solutions 10-12 Solution 10 North East dealer ß4 E-W vul ˙J987 ∂ 10 5 çKQ9873 West East ß J 10 6 ßQ8732 ˙A4 ˙KQ3 ∂AKJ972 ∂Q63 çA5 ç J 10 South ßAK95 ˙ 10 6 5 2 ∂84 ç642

Four spades also works (South will probably double again and you’ll lose three spades but that’s it), and a penalty double isn’t bad (+500 for you). Five diamonds, though, goes down a trick. I would have preferred to give you the problem at the other table, but that involved an artificial bid: West — 1 ç* 3 NT 4∂

North — 3ç pass (all pass)

East pass double pass

South pass pass 4ç

*multiway, natural or 16+ any hand West — 1∂ 3 NT pass (all pass)

North — 3ç pass pass

East pass double pass 4 NT

South pass pass 4ç double

Pratap Rajadhyaksha (East) for the COHEN team bid 4NT. Result: making 4, N-S -810

Result: making 4, N-S -130.

West didn’t have a chance to show his diamonds, so he decided to bid four diamonds over four clubs. However, East passed. If you bid four notrump, four spades, or four diamonds (a good partner now bids 4NT) take 12 imps. If you doubled, take 8. If you passed, win one, and if you bid five diamonds, lose 6.

Bridge Today • August 2003 Solution 11 East dealer All vul

ß ˙ ∂ ç

page 10

K 10 9 8 Q7 10 6 5 A 10 4 3

ß7542 ˙J93 ∂A3 çK976

ß— ˙ A K 10 8 5 2 ∂KQ9 çQJ52 ßAQJ63 ˙64 ∂J8742 ç8

West — 2˙ 4ç pass

North — 3ß pass pass

East 1˙ 3 NT* 4˙ 5ç

South 1ß pass 4ß (all pass)

The East player for the WELLAND team probably felt encouraged by his partner’s failure to double four spades, so he bid five clubs, hoping to hear a five-diamond cue bid from his partner (on the way to five hearts), in which case he was going to bid slam. He failed to consider that West didn’t know about his sixth heart, and from West’s point of view, the five-club bid might have been expressing doubt about which was the safest strain at the five level. If East has more than five hearts, thinks West (perhaps), he wouldn’t bid 5ç. At the other table, the bidding went: West — 2˙ 5ç

North — 3ß pass

East 1˙ 4ç 5˙

South 1ß 4ß (all pass)

*mild slam try Result: making 5, NS -650 Result: down 1, NS +100

If you bid five clubs, lose 13. If you bid five hearts, take a push. Solution 12 South dealer All vul ßKQJ732 ˙A8 ∂AQ32 ç2

South pass pass redouble pass

ß ˙ ∂ ç

A5 KQ9 J7 K J 10 8 6 3 ß986 ˙ 10 7 5 ∂K9 çA9754 ß 10 4 ˙J6432 ∂ 10 8 6 5 4 çQ

West 1ß double pass 2ß

North 2ç pass 2˙ (all pass)

Result: making five, NS -200

East pass pass pass

This one isn’t really fair because in real life you could recover after passing (although the real-life East did not recover). You have a vulnerable four-spade game your way! Perhaps East felt that he was committed to not raising partner, having passed the first time. At the other table the bidding went: South pass pass

West 1ß 4ß

North 2ç (all pass)

East 2ß

If you passed two clubs, lose ten. If you bid two spades, take a push.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 11

Sports Psychology

Why I Lose at Bridge by Barry Rigal Part three in a three-part guide on how to get the most from your own game and partner’s

Part III: Insufficient application of technique This month, let’s consider the issue of technique. This article does not touch on the question of whether you actually possess sufficient technique to avoid making errors — if you do not, reading this article will not provide the magic solution. Instead, what we’ll be looking at is the problem of how to apply yourself properly. To do this we’ll focus on my more common errors. I hope you can extrapolate the principle to make it relevant to your own situation.

1) Failure to guard against bad breaks until it is too late In introducing this subject, I should warn that it is possible to waste too much energy guarding against impossible and irrelevant bad splits, which goes counter to some of the advice I have previously given. Now take a look at this hand: North ß73 ˙KJ76 ∂ K 10 4 2 çA96 çK South (you) ß K 10 9 6 ˙A9542 ∂AQ8 ç7 South 1˙

West 2ç

North 4˙

East (all pass)

You reach 4˙ from the South seat after West has overcalled two clubs and has led the çK. Your natural reaction is probably that this is a fairly complex hand, but you feel confident of succeeding. A sensible thing to do is to lay down the ace and king of trumps and take it from there. Perhaps you will get some information on how to play the side suits, if someone discards. But this ignores two basic elements of technique. The first is that for many reasons you may find it hard to ruff everything you need in hand unless you ruff a club at trick two. The second point is that your LHO is more likely to be short in hearts. Laying down the ˙A creates an extra loser if the suit is 4-0. Instead, lead up to the ˙K, and if trumps are not 4-0, ruff the last club, lay down the ˙A, and play to ruff the fourth diamond in hand if necessary. You come to 10 tricks without any guesswork, and have a chance to overcome a 4-0 heart split if the ßA is right.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 12

This is the full hand: ß73 ˙KJ76 ∂ K 10 4 2 çA96 ßAJ82 ˙3 ∂76 çKQJ532

ßQ54 ˙ Q 10 8 ∂J953 ç 10 8 4

The message is not to relax if everything seems easy — that is just the moment to retrace your steps before coming to a decision.

ß K 10 9 6 ˙A9542 ∂AQ8 ç7

2) Getting prematurely active on defense This is one of the faults that especially aggravates me whenever I do it, and the opportunity for this error seems very frequent. I wrote this article after having just encountered the following problem at a Nationals, and getting it wrong:

North ßQ7 ˙764 ∂ Q J 10 8 çKQJ9 West ß A K 10 8 2 ˙ K 10 9 ∂73 ç832

East ßJ9543 ˙J853 ∂9 çA64 South ß6 ˙AQ2 ∂AK6542 ç 10 7 5

West — 1ß (all pass)

North pass 2ß

East pass 3ß

South 1∂ 5∂

As West, I led the ßK and received a count-card 3 (no obvious-shift principles being used here). Clearly a second spade was not going to stand up, so I switched to a heart, worried that dummy’s clubs would be a parking spot for declarer’s hearts. Alas, this was the only way to give declarer the contract, since he could win his queen and throw one heart on the clubs. I should have worked out that there was no hurry if my partner held the ˙A. Unless declarer had seven diamonds, he had only 10 tricks from the minor suits. If declarer had seven diamonds, partner held five spades, an ace and a void, with which he would have bid more than three spades. Meanwhile, whenever partner’s assets did not include the ˙A or ˙Q, a heart shift was quite likely to be fatal.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 13

Another very similar error occurs when you are thrown in late in the hand. Consider the following problem. 3) Failure to count declarer’s hand properly Put yourself in the East seat and defend six hearts after an optimistic North has invited slam facing a 16-18 notrump: ß A 10 8 ˙A864 ∂A742 çK6 ß975 ˙ 10 9 7 ∂Q53 çQ972

N W

S

E

ßQJ42 ˙53 ∂ 10 8 ç J 10 8 4 3

ßK63 ˙KQJ2 ∂KJ96 çA5 South 1 NT 2˙ 6˙

North 2ç 5˙ pass

4) Giving in to the tendency to bid one more unilaterally in competitive auctions Everyone knows that it’s more fun to declare hands than to defend. But isn’t it more enjoyable to defeat a contract than to go down yourself? The natural tendency in competitive auctions is to take out insurance. After all, when you bid on you may find that you have taken the right decision if your contract makes, or theirs would have made. Indeed, the mathematics of sacrificing, or bidding on successfully over their sacrifice, tends to work in your favor. A good decision may gain 15 imps (if both contracts would have made) a bad one might lose 7 imps (if both contracts would have been defeated).

Declarer wins the opening lead of the ˙10 and draws trumps in three rounds. Then he plays off the black ace-kings, and throws you in with the ß10, on which everybody follows. What next? Declarer has four hearts and apparently five black-suit cards. So a ruff and discard is irrelevant; and if he has three diamonds and three clubs, a third round of clubs will not yield a ruff and discard. This is not a difficult defense to find, but the idea of giving a ruff and discard is so outrageous to some people that they would rather risk breaking a new suit.

But real life is not quite that simple. What tends to happen is that you get sucked into bidding too much, in the vague hope that something good may happen, or that your sacrifice will be cheap. All too often, however, your irrelevant queens and jacks in their suits are losers when you play the hand, but would have scored tricks on defense. Before you sacrifice, try to take a reasonable inventory of your soft cards in their suits; don’t save if you have more than one of these “half-tricks” and only need partner to come through with the goods in one place to set them. As to planning the sacrifice, frequently you simply have a guess. But it’s not un-

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 14

common for players to create these problems for themselves by failing to plan the auction sufficiently. Sometimes you can give your partner a chance to take an intelligent part in the conversation, rather than hoping things will work out to your liking. Then you will not be faced with an awkward problem on the subsequent rounds of the auction. It is worthwhile to make a mild overbid to leave your partner fully informed. An example of the sort of thought processes you should go through came in the 1994 Generali Individual tournament. You hold as South, with East-West vulnerable: ß 4 ˙ K J 10 8 5 3 ∂ K Q 4 2 ç A 4 South 1˙ ?

West 1ß

North 2˙

East 3ß

decided to bid five hearts, doubled and down one, for about 7 matchpoints out of 24. Had he guessed to double four spades, he would have registered 17 matchpoints, but it would clearly have been a random action. I suggest that the player concerned might have guessed that he was going to be faced with exactly this sort of problem, and he could have involved his partner by bidding four diamonds at his second turn. You can argue that this hand is not worth a bid of this sort, but I believe that a bid of a new suit in sequences such as this merely implies a desire to consult partner on the final decision, without setting up forcing passes. As it happens, our hero’s partner, with club honors, would have found it easy to double four spades (in fact, the opponents might not have bid 4ß after 4∂).

One player in this position bid the normal four hearts, and his LHO bid four spades. When this came back to him he

One hand does not prove anything. It is more the general theme that you should try to make any decision a joint one rather than a unilateral one.

5) Do not search for perfect cards — your partner never has them

hand, because sometimes partner’s semiperfect hand looks good enough to him.

Different players have different dislikes at the table. Personally I hate going minus when I should be plus, but I used to play with someone who hated to miss slams or games. This led to a balanced partnership: one overbidder and one underbidder. But beware of the line of reasoning that starts “give partner as little as . . .”

Let’s take an example. You pick up:

In the first place it always produces a contrived example: the hand with perfect cards opposite. And because it is a unique hand, your partner never has it. It’s even rather dangerous to explore for the perfect

ß K 6 ˙ A J 9 8 6 4 ∂ A J 4 2 ç 4.

You open 1˙ and hear your partner make a limit raise to 3˙. It’s easy to construct perfect hands opposite this hand where slam is laydown (e.g., ß A 7 3 2 ˙ 10 5 3 2 ∂ K 5 ç A 6 3), but it is not so obvious that making one slam try on the hand may get your side into trouble. If you play (as you should) that cuebids in this sequence are help-suit tries, your partner may get carried away when he has a good hand. If you cue-bid 4∂ and he has:

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 15

ß 9 7 ˙ K Q 10 7 ∂ K Q 10 3 ç J 8 3,

he may move beyond the 4˙ level, because of his great holding in diamonds and hearts (in case you have something like ß A Q ˙ A x x x x ∂ A x x x x ç x). With your actual hand: ß K 6 ˙ A J 9 8 6 4 ∂ A J 4 2 ç 4,

if the ßA is

offside, you’re in 5˙ down one. Perhaps there is one side issue to bear in mind: When your partner makes a slam try and you have all the top trumps, you

should take an aggressive position in cuebidding. The reason is obvious when you think about it: If one hand has very bad trumps, he is normally very reluctant to cue-bid, because one weakness in the hand’s combined holdings is already predictable. So if your partner makes an effort when you hold great trumps, the assumption should be that he has compensating values. And it is also relevant that you know your partner is unlikely to make more than one effort with bad trumps, so it is up to you to pick up the slack.

6) Do not ignore the opponents; the more they bid, the less likely suits will behave for you Bidding slams on 3-2 splits is clearly a winning bet, in a vacuum, but no one bids in a vacuum. One of our Pyrrhic victories from a Nationals in Phoenix was to bid the following North-South hands accurately to six diamonds: Teams South dealer N-S vul

North ßKQ4 ˙3 ∂QJ72 çAK983

West ß963 ˙ A Q 10 9 5 ∂8 çQJ64

East ßJ752 ˙J86 ∂ 10 9 6 4 ç 10 5 South ß A 10 8 ˙K742 ∂AK53 ç72

South 1 NT (1) 3ç 3ß

West 2 ç (2) pass pass

(1) 12-15 (2) hearts plus minor (3) clubs

North 2 NT (3) 3∂ 6∂

East pass pass (all pass)

Six diamonds is a fine contract (without a particularly obvious way to play it though). But that was not the point. During the auction West had shown a two-suiter with hearts and a minor, which made any slam our way virtually hopeless. Whenever the opponents show a twosuiter or preempt, the odds on the side suits splitting change dramatically. It is very easy in these sorts of positions to make a blanket assumption along the lines, “I only need trumps to split.” But you tend to forget that you also need to avoid a side suit splitting 61 or there will be a defensive ruff. If you posit one opponent with a seven-card suit, for example, the chance that he has two or more trumps and no singleton in a side-suit is probably no more than 50%. If you give him nine or more cards in two suits, what’s the chance of 2-2 in the side suits?

Bridge Today • August 2003 7) Doubling too much — and not doubling enough Part of the problem with playing pairs is that you do need to double contracts that you think are going down, in case the contract is normal and has been doubled at other tables. There are a series of caveats to be borne in mind, whether the hand in question comes up in a pairs or teams event. First of all, any double that may put declarer on his guard, and thus allow him to make his contract, is dangerous. Second, if the contract seems so unusual that the field (or your teammates, as the case may be) will be in another contract, the double may gain very little. And even if declarer cannot make his contract, the double based on bad splits will normally put an alert declarer on his guard, so that he plays the hand a trick better than he would otherwise have done. One down doubled scores the same as two down undoubled. The auctions on which you should be looking for any excuse to double are the ones where both opponents’ hands are

page 16 limited. In such cases, any excuse is acceptable. And the fact that you are not telegraphing a specific holding means that you are not giving declarer the additional information as to how to play the hand. By contrast, where one or both hands are unlimited, be very careful with your doubles. Say you hold as East: ß K Q 9 7 3 ˙ A 5 2 ∂ 10 2 ç 7 4 2

You might be faced with one of these two auctions: West — pass pass

North 1ß 2ß 3 NT

East pass pass ?

South 1 NT (F) 2 NT

West — pass pass

North 1ß 2ß 3 NT

East pass pass ?

South 2∂ 2 NT

It’s much more attractive to double in the first auction for a spade lead. In the second auction you might easily find that one of your opponents had a 15 count, and a confident redouble!

But do not double just because you know the cards are lying badly for declarer. An intelligent declarer can draw the same deductions as you and can take advantage of the information you have given him. This was an example of what seemed like a safe double backfiring on me:

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 17

North ßK7 ˙A4 ∂ 10 4 2 çAJ9843 West (Rigal) ßJ9654 ˙ K 10 9 7 ∂A853 ç—

West — pass pass double East ß 10 8 3 2 ˙Q3 ∂KJ7 çQ652

South ßAQ ˙J8652 ∂Q96 ç K 10 7

North 1ç 2ç 3 NT (all pass)

East pass pass pass

South 1˙ 2 NT pass

I thought that I had a fairly safe double of 3NT, but South worked out that my double was based on short clubs. After a spade lead, he won the king and tackled the club suit by running the jack from dummy. Without the double declarer would certainly have gone down. [The End]

Kantar’s Korner by Eddie Kantar

Let’s start by trying to ruin your whole day: DAY SPOILER North ßK932 ˙AJ4 ∂AKQ2 ç32 South (you)  ß A Q 10 4 ˙ K 10 ∂543 çAKQJ

Your contract is 7NT and the lead is the ç10.  Question:  Can you claim? Answer at end of article, but you do have a three-day time limit.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 18

Here’s a confidence builder.  (Solution is under the hand, so keep your eyes “up”! )  North  (dummy) ßAKJ32 ˙ 10 8 ∂62 çQJ85

I do get e-mails.  This one was from a Samuel Maya all the way from Turkey. He said that a 2NT response to a strong, artificial 2ç opening should have some meaning. (Most don’t like to respond 2NT because it steals the notrump from the 2ç bidder.) He suggests: 

∂Q South (you again) ß654 ˙AKQJ93 ∂A3 ç76  South 1˙ 3˙

West  Pass    Pass

North 1ß 4˙

East Pass All Pass

Opening lead:  ∂Q  

Hearts are 3-2. Plan the play. Solution:   Win the opening lead and play a club at trick two. If you draw trump before playing a club and the club honors are split, East wins the club, leads a diamond to West who exits with spade from a doubleton. You are now stuck in dummy and cannot get back to your hand to lead up to the second club honor. You wind up losing two clubs, a spade and a diamond.     If the defense proceeds similarly before you have drawn trump, win the spade exit in dummy, return to your hand drawing trump, and then lead a second club . If the club honors are split, you have 10 tricks. If East has both club honors, there is always the spade finesse. The full hand was:

Overheard Dept. Heard from declarer while walking down an aisle of a Swiss Teams event where dummy has raised 1NT (15-17) to 3NT holding ß K x x x  ˙ x x  ∂ A Q x x  ç J x x.  “Just because the man is dead doesn’t mean we can’t play his convention.”  

Opener   2ç 3ç

Responder 2 NT (forces opener to bid three clubs) ? 3 ∂  5-5  majors 3 NT 5-5  minors 3 ˙, 3ß  Three-card suits with  5-4 minors. These responses show 8+ HCP. 

In general, I think there is merit to the idea, but the 3∂ rebid seems wasted. You can always respond 2ß and then bid 3˙ with those hands.

West ß 10 8 ˙754 ∂QJ98 ç A 10 3 2

North  (dummy) ßAKJ32 ˙ 10 8 ∂62 çQJ85 East ßQ97 ˙62 ∂ K 10 7 5 4 çK94 South ß654 ˙AKQJ93 ∂A3 ç76 

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 19

I received another e:mail a while back telling me about a player named  Primo Levi, who passed away in 1996. I had never heard of this man, and have not been able to track down his origin, but after looking at the three hands I was sent, it’s pretty obvious what kind of a bridge player Primo was.   Primo wound up in 5ß after West had shown the minors and the opponents had competed to 5∂.  West led the çK and East shifted to a spade at trick two. Looking at all four hands, do you see how Primo made his contract?

Exhibit #1 North ßQ9 ˙K86432 ∂A96 ç83  West ß— ˙ Q 10 9 ∂ Q 10 7 5 3 ç K Q J 10 6

 East   ß86543 ˙J5 ∂KJ842 çA

Primo played the ß7 at trick two captured by dummy’s 9.  He continued with the A-K and a heart, ruffed with the ß10, cashed the ßAKJ, squashing dummy’s queen, and exited with the ß2, which East was forced to win. East had to return a diamond and Primo was able to discard all of his remaining clubs, one on the ∂A and the other three on established hearts.

South ß A K J 10 7 2 ˙A7 ∂— ç97542

  West dealer East-West  vul

Exhibit #2 Try it first without seeing the East-West hands, to see if you can match Primo’s play.

North ßAQJ9 ˙AK64  ∂ 5  ç A 5 4 2

∂K  South (Primo) ß K 10 8 4  ˙ Q 10 3 ∂J764  ç J 7   West   1∂ 2ç Pass

North double 3ç 6ß

 East   Pass   Pass (all pass)

South 1ß 4ß

Opening lead: ∂K

East plays the ∂2, and at trick two West shifts to the çK. Plan the play.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 20

West dealer East-West  vul

North ßAQJ9 ˙AK64  ∂ 5  ç A 5 4 2

West   1∂ 2ç Pass

 West ß5 ˙92  ∂ A K 10 9 8 3 ç K Q 10 3

 East ß7632  ˙ J 8 7 5 ∂Q2  ç 9 8 6    South (Primo) ß K 10 8 4  ˙ Q 10 3 ∂J764  ç J 7  

Opening lead:  ∂K  

Exhibit #3  Primo on  defense. South dealer Both vul

West  ß K 8 6 ˙862  ∂ 10 8 7 2 çAK5

South   1ß  4 ß

  N orth ßA542  ˙ K J 7 3  ∂ J 6  ç J 7 2  East  (Primo)  ß —  ˙ Q 10 9 5 ∂KQ943 ç9643

South ß Q J 10 9 7 3  ˙ A 4 ∂A5  ç Q 10 8   West   North   Pass 3ß  (all pass)

East   Pass

 Opening lead:  çA  (ace from ace-king)

North double 3ç 6ß

 East   Pass   Pass (all pass)

South 1ß 4ß

Primo won the çA, cashed the ßA, led a heart to the 10, which held, and then three more rounds of hearts discarding a club. He then crossruffed clubs and diamonds to bring in 12 tricks. Bridge is such an easy game. 

West cashed two clubs and Primo knew his partner didn’t have a doubleton because he didn’t lead the king. At trick three West shifted to the ∂2 to the queen and ace. Declarer now tried to give himself two chances in the play. His plan was to play ace-king and ruff a heart. If the queen dropped, he was going to forgo the spade finesse, cross to the ace, and discard a diamond on the ˙J, losing but one trick to the ßK. If the ˙Q didn’t appear, he was going to take the spade finesse. Somehow Primo worked out declarer’s problem and when declarer played the ˙A-K and ruffed a heart, Primo played the queen! Declarer, taken in by this, (who wouldn’t be?) led the ßQ to the ace and could no longer make the hand. When he played the ˙J and discarded a diamond, West ruffed low and the ßK was the setting trick.  

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 21

Speaking of defenses, take a look at this one. It was defended in the Olympiad by  Steen Moeller (West) and Stig Werdelin (East) of  Denmark. North dealer N-S vul

 West ßJ53  ˙ 7 4 2  ∂ A 9 5  ç K 9 5 2

West — pass pass

North ßK92 ˙ J 10 9 8 5 3 ∂763  ç A East ßQ864  ˙6  ∂ Q J 10 8 4  ç Q 8 3 South  ß A 10 7  ˙ A K Q  ∂ K 2  ç J 10 7 6 4

North pass 2 ∂ (transfer) 4˙

East pass pass (all pass)

South 1 NT 3˙

the closed hand for his tenth trick. At trick two declarer crossed to the çA and led a diamond to the king and ace, Werderlin playing the queen (the same card he would have led had he been on lead). Moeller exited with a second trump. Declarer, back in his hand, ruffed a club and led a diamond. Werderlin ducked! It was the winning play.* Now Moeller was able to win the ∂9 and play a third trump. With no diamond ruff available, declarer ruffed a second club in dummy and cashed dummy’s last trump. ßK92 ˙— ∂7  ç — ßJ53  ˙ —  ∂ —  ç K

N W

S

E

ßQ8   ˙—  ∂ J 10  ç —

 ß A 10 7  ˙ —  ∂ —  ç J

Opening lead:  ˙4

For openers, Moeller got off to the only lead that gave him any chance at all to defeat the contract. With any other lead declarer can arrange to ruff a diamond in

At this point dummy has three spades and a diamond and declarer has three spades and a club. It still isn’t over. The defense has to save properly. If East saves one high diamond and three spades, he can be thrown in with a diamond and forced to break spades. Seeing all this, Werderlin hung on to two spades and kept two diamonds. West hung on to three spades and the çK. Now declarer could take only two more tricks and went down one. Forty-two pairs played this hand at four hearts and only two pairs defeated the contract. *It was also the winning play on the first round of diamonds. Declarer could have played low when East played the queen! Then declarer gets his diamond ruff. — editor

Bridge Today • August 2003 Time to show off some sparkling declarer play on my part. First a prelude. I am playing with an old friend, John Szeps, in a local Sectional and we decide to play next to nothing. We are playing Strong Twos even though I have forgotten the responses! One comes up and we survive, but John sees how uncomfortable I am and agrees to switch to Weak Twos and Flannery. Note: John loathes Flannery. I reassure him nothing terrible will happen. Sure enough playing against two pleasant women John opens the North hand, vulnerable against not, with 2∂, good old Flannery. I smile inwardly and respond 2˙ ending the auction. The opening lead is the ∂10 and these are the two hands:  North  (Flannery hater, John)    ß A 7 5 ˙ A J 10 5 4 ∂K5  ç 7   South (Me)  ß Q ˙87 ∂AJ  ç Q 9 5 4 3 2  

East returned a spade, West ruffed low and played a diamond, East ruffing low.  East cashed the çA and led a third spade. The way I had things figured out, if West had the ˙9,  I would be better off discarding my ace of diamonds. Then when a third diamond came through, West would have to ruff with an honor and I could hold my trump losses to five! I discarded the ∂A, “a kibitzer discard.” West ruffed low and led a third diamond, East ruffing with the 9. At this point I had lost four trump tricks and the kibitzer was counting. When East led a fourth spade, West ruffed with the king

page 22  North  (Flannery hater, John)    ß A 7 5 3 ˙ A J 10 5 4 ∂KQ5  ç 7 ∂ 10   South (Me)  ß Q 2 ˙87 ∂AJ6  ç Q 9 5 4 3 2  

Before I reveal my sparkling play which brought the kibitzer to his feet, decide how you would start and then read on. How does winning in dummy and leading a low spade grab you? If you agree, nod. Did you nod?  Good. and returned a fourth diamond promoting East’s now lone queen for my sixth trump loser! I had lost eight consectutive tricks and John seemed annoyed for some reason. At this point my RHO announces to her partner that she has no more trump. Her partner happily replies: “And I don’t have any more either.” The last four tricks are conceded to the A-J-10-x of trump in dummy. I wait for the reprecussions. They weren’t long in coming. John was born in Argentina and, of course, speaks Spanish perfectly. What I heard, however, to describe what he had just witnessed, would not have made any Spanish grammar book. My “gutter Spanish” just wasn’t good enough. Aside from a “Flannery” or two, which I thought I heard, it more or less went by me, but I definitely got the drift.  For those of you who would like to see the whole deal and commiserate, here it is:

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 23

 ß A 7 5 3 ˙ A J 10 5 4 ∂KQ5  ç 7 ß— ˙K62 ∂ 10 9 8 7 3 2 ç K 10 8 6

N W

S

E

Only against me would East pass throughout.

ß K J 10 9 8 6 4 ˙Q93 ∂4 çAJ

 ß Q 2 ˙87 ∂AJ6  ç Q 9 5 4 3 2  

Solution to DAY SPOILER Your contract is 7NT and the lead is the ç10.  Question:  Can you claim? North ßK932 ˙AJ4 ∂AKQ2 ç32 ç 10 South (you)  ß A Q 10 4 ˙ K 10 ∂543 çAKQJ

Win the opening lead (nice play) and cash the ∂A-K-Q. Obviously they aren’t going to break 3-3 on a “DAY SPOILER.” A.  If West has the diamond length, play the ace-king of spades. If West shows out, you have a marked finesse against East’s jack for trick 13. If East shows out, you can arrange to squeeze West in diamonds and spades. Play your remaining clubs, discarding a heart and a spade from the table and then play the king-ace of hearts, reducing all hands to two cards. Dummy has a spade and a diamond and you have the ßQ-10. If West hangs on to a diamond, he must

discard a spade and now your two spades are high. If West discards a diamond, dummy’s diamond is high. B. If East has the diamond length, play four rounds of clubs discarding  two hearts from dummy, cash the ˙A, return to your hand with the ßA and play the ˙K, discarding a diamond. At this point you have a count on East’s clubs and diamonds and you will always be able to work out who has the spade length. Say East has four diamonds and three clubs and throws a heart on the fourth club. When you cash two more hearts, If East follows, meaning East had at least three hearts, he cannot have four spades. Therefore, your play is to cash the ßQ, playing West, the only defender who can have four spades, for the length. If East shows out on the second heart (after having discarded one), indicating he started with two hearts, then East must have four spades. So cross to the ßK and lead a spade to the 10. Ciao. P.S  If this hand gave you a headache, get even with the world and give it to some poor fool who doesn’t subscribe to Bridge Today. 

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 24

The Silent Clue by Andrew Robson

Excellent bidding saw North-South reach a 6ç contract that was well with the odds. But after a setback in trumps, declarer was faced with an agonizing decision that decided the fate of his slam. South dealer N-S vul

North ß A 10 9 6 2 ˙Q4 ∂ A J 10 ç983

West ßJ53 ˙KJ762 ∂86 çQ52

East ß874 ˙ 10 9 8 5 3 ∂K972 ç4 South ßKQ ˙A ∂Q543 ç A K J 10 7 6

South 1ç 2∂ 6ç

West pass pass (all pass)

North 1ß 4ç

East pass pass

West led the ˙6 and declarer played low from dummy and won the ˙A. He cashed the çA-K, discovering the disappointing news that West had a trump trick. He then cashed the ßK-Q before giving West his çQ. West led the ˙K, which declarer

trumped, and now came the moment of truth. Should declarer cross to the ∂A and cash the ßA, relying on the ßJ to fall? In that case dummy’s three spades would provide discards for his three losing diamonds. Or should he play to dummy’s ∂10, taking the diamond finesse? Eventually he led the ∂3 to the 10. Wrong! East grabbed ∂K to set the contract and declarer was disappointed to learn that the spades were splitting evenly, so the alternative line would have been successful. Was there any evidence that should have pointed declarer to the winning option? The bridge detective inputs any clue into his decision-making process, and it would not have escaped his notice that East-West have 10 hearts. This means that West is likely to have heart length — headed by at least the ˙K — and he has also turned up with the çQ. He is unlikely to hold the ∂K in addition or he would probably have overcalled 1˙ over 1ç. Furthermore the lack of any opposition bidding points to their hand-patterns being relatively balanced, making the probability of the spades splitting 3-3 slightly more likely. Speculative logic, yes, but if it is good enough for Conan Doyle’s hero then it is good enough at the bridge table.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 25

The Lite 3NT Forum Victor Mollo’s Spirit Lives On by Bruce Neiger, Merrick NY

This story feels a lot like a Victor Mollo Menagerie story. It took place at a regional Swiss Teams.

East dealer None vul

North ß86 ˙5 ∂8642 çKQJ954

West ßQ43 ˙A62 ∂A753 ç 10 8 2

East ß A K 10 5 ˙QJ43 ∂QJ9 ç63 South ßJ972 ˙ K 10 9 8 7 ∂ K 10 çA7

West — 1∂ 1 NT

North — pass (all pass)

*alerted, could be short Opening lead: çK

East 1 ç* 1˙

South pass pass

At my table, I am any one of the nameless Griffins: just good enough a player to appreciate what is happening to me, and well versed in accepting my fate when one of the storied characters is in his groove. Only this time, however, I get to win imps on the board, since I was teamed with one fellow invoking the spirits of both the Hideous Hog and the Rabbit at the other table. Kudos at my table go to the West player, surely invoking the spirit of Karapet, the Unlucky Free Armenian. West played the hand well to go plus, yet received an unfair result. As South, I overtook the club lead and returned the suit, allowing North to reel off six rounds. Declarer pitched well on the first five rounds, shedding two hearts and a diamond from dummy. I reduced myself to dummy’s shape, echoing in hearts. On the last club, this was the position....

Bridge Today • August 2003 ç4 led

ßQ43 ˙A6 ∂A75 ç—

page 26

ß86 ˙5 ∂8642 ç4 N W

S

E

ß A K 10 5 ˙QJ ∂QJ ç—

ßJ972 ˙ K 10 ∂ K 10 ç—

Dummy released the ˙J and I was triplesqueezed. A spade pitch sets up dummy’s

I thought this was an interesting hand, since triple squeezes don’t often show up in a 1NT contract. The result, however, turned out to be a pale shadow of what happened at the other table. I know you’re supposed to bid games aggressively at imps, but this was a bit much. Later I was told that West, invoking the Rabbit, thought they were playing 1NT as 14-16, so really each player had his bid in an amusing way. Besides, when the Hog starts adding all his low-card points, his long-suit points, and his “bad defense expected” points, there’s rarely too few to bid a game. With the normal (standard) lead of a heart coming from the South hand, declarer won the ˙J in hand, temporarily relieved at having avoided the immediately fatal club. Even so, he recognized that there were precious few tricks to be had. With a flair, the Hog-like declarer led a club to the 10 at trick two, hoping for something good to happen. Not surprisingly, South ducked without much thought, and the Hog had

fourth round, and a heart sets up declarer’s ˙6. While a diamond does not immediately give away a trick, declarer will win the (presumed) heart exit, then cross to a spade in dummy to finesse the diamond and lead another diamond. Dummy’s second diamond winner would squeeze me in the majors. I elected to bare the ˙K, hoping that partner and declarer started with a doubleton heart. It was not to be. North exited a heart. Declarer tested spades, then took the diamond finesse. East’s ß5 was discarded on the ˙6.

East dealer None vul

North ß86 ˙5 ∂8642 çKQJ954

West ßQ43 ˙A62 ∂A753 ç¡82

East ßAK¡5 ˙QJ43 ∂QJ9 ç63 South ßJ972 ˙K¡987 ∂K¡ çA7

West — 2 NT

North — pass

East 1 NT* 3 NT

South pass (all pass)

*12-14 Opening lead: ˙¡

his blocked suit. North won with the çJ, returned the king, and South fumed as he won the now-bare ace.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 27

ß86 ˙— ∂8642 çQ954 ßQ43 ˙A6 ∂A753 ç8

N W

S

E

ß— ˙— ∂8642 çQ9 ß A K 10 5 ˙Q43 ∂QJ9 ç—

ßJ972 ˙K987 ∂ K 10 ç—

ß86 ˙— ∂8642 çQ954 N W

S

E

ßJ972 ˙K987 ∂K¡ ç—

N W

S

E

ß— ˙Q43 ∂QJ9 ç—

ß— ˙K987 ∂ K 10 ç—

Well, since neither hearts nor diamonds appealed very much, South exited with a spade, yielding a fourth trick there, and declarer took four rounds in that suit, leaving the position on the right:

ßQ43 ˙A6 ∂A753 ç8

ß— ˙A6 ∂A753 ç—

ßAK¡5 ˙Q43 ∂QJ9 ç—

What should South return?

The Hog was fairly confident of South’s shape (four spades and two clubs proven, likely longer hearts to have led one. He led the ∂Q to the king and ace, and played back another diamond, inserting the 9. North was twice as likely to hold the ∂10 as South (4 diamonds to 2), and, if the ∂9 held, declarer would have his ninth trick. Losing to the now-bare ∂10, however, was just as good. With nothing else to play, South was forced to return a heart to the queen, and the Hog claimed with four tricks in spades, three in hearts and two in diamonds.

It wouldn’t have helped South to return a diamond after winning the çA, since East could have stripped him of his exit in that suit, and end-played him with the fourth round of spades to make three tricks in spades, hearts and diamonds. His best return after winning the çA was actually another heart! [Editor’s note: Now declarer can still make the hand, but only by guessing the diamond position.] What a hand, and absolutely true, except that Mollo’s characters appeared only in spirit, a much safer place to keep them than the flesh, don’t you think?

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 28

Bridge Yesterday by Paul Zweifel A Vienna Coup I frequently go over to visit my friend (and sometime partner) Lewis Barnett to thumb through his huge collection of old bridge magazines, including Bridge World back to year one. On a recent browsing expedition I was struck by the relative lack of sophistication of the analyses of yesteryear compared to those of today. Here is a good example, but it’s not from Lewis’s collection. Rather it’s a hand I played in a sectional tournament in Amsterdam, New York, back in 1954. The tournament director (I believe his name was Ed Cheronnet) liked the hand so much that he passed it on to Florence Osborn, bridge editor of the New York Herald Tribune, who used it in her daily column.

South dealer N-S vul

difficult for us). Over the actual 3˙ call, I bid 4∂, partner cued 4˙, and I put it in 6ç.

North ßA53 ˙ K Q 10 ∂762 çKJ63

West ß 10 9 6 2 ˙75 ∂ J 10 9 3 ç752

East ßKQ84 ˙AJ8643 ∂85 ç 10 South ßJ7 ˙92 ∂AKQ4 çAQ984

South 1ç 4∂ 6ç

West pass pass (all pass)

North 3ç 4˙

East 3˙ pass

Sitting South I opened one club, which my partner raised to three — a 1954 bid, but certainly effective in this case! East chanced a 3˙ overcall (today she might have tried a non-vulnerable 4˙, which would have made the auction much more

West led the ˙7; East topped the king with her ace and shifted to a diamond. The cards looked right for a spade-heart squeeze against East, although there’s also that fourth diamond to worry about. After the ace and king of clubs revealed the 3-1 break, I played off three rounds of diamonds and was happy to see West (who held the last trump) follow suit. After ruffing the fourth diamond in dummy, I cashed the ßA and returned to my hand with a trump. The last trump then squeezed East. A nicely played hand, if I do say so myself. The unblocking play of the ßA is known as the “Vienna Coup” in bridge literature; it converts a positional squeeze, which would work only against West, to an “automatic squeeze,” i.e., one that works against either opponent. But it’s crucial to play the diamonds before drawing the third round of trumps; otherwise there’s no entry

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 29

ßA53 ˙ K Q 10 ∂762 çKJ63 ß 10 9 6 2 ˙75 ∂ J 10 9 3 ç752

ßKQ84 ˙AJ8643 ∂85 ç 10 ßJ7 ˙92 ∂AKQ4 çAQ984

back to the closed hand to play the last club, the squeeze card. I was so pleased with Florence Osborn’s accolades on my play that it was some time before I realized that East had blown the defense at trick one by not ducking! Usually (but not always) a squeeze works only if declarer can take all but one of the remaining tricks; losing a trick or tricks to arrive at such a position is called “rectifying the count.” Frequently defenders can defend against a squeeze position by refusing to help declarer rectify, and this was just such

a case. There’s just no play for the contract if East ducks the heart lead. Since “MUD” leads were popular in those days (middle from three), East may have been worried that I had a singleton heart and six clubs. Today most players lead third best from three, so there would be no problem reading the lead as a doubleton (or singleton). But if declarer held three hearts, he was dead unless the South hand contained the ∂A-K-Q-J (to pitch a heart from dummy). Why didn’t East double the slam, telling partner not to lead a heart? And why didn’t West lead a spade anyway when East failed to double the four-heart cue bid? In modern bridge magazines the declarer play would be considered so routine as not to merit comment. The ducking play in hearts would probably be discussed at length, and there might be some dispute as to the proper way for East to coax a spade lead from partner. This is simply a reflection of how much bridge play has improved in the past 50 years.

Are You Thinking Logically? by Marshall Miles The bidding by your opponents has gone:

You hold: ß K 9 5 4 ˙ K 10 9 4 ∂ J 3 ç 10 9 8

South 1 NT 3˙ 4 NT 6˙

North 2∂ 4ç 5˙ pass

The way your opponents play, 3˙ was a super acceptance, not just showing four hearts.

What do you lead? Solution on next page.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 30

Solution to Are You Thinking Logically? by Marshall Miles (from previous page) North ß732 ˙AJ862 ∂KQ92 çA West ßK954 ˙ K 10 9 4 ∂J3 ç 10 9 8

East ß J 10 8 6 ˙— ∂876 çJ75432 South ßAQ ˙Q753 ∂ A 10 5 4 çKQ6

When this hand was played in 6˙, West led his top club. Dummy won and led the ˙2 to the queen. When East showed out, declarer was able to hold his trump losers to one. But West should have led the ∂J (from his shortest suit) as an anti-safety play. Declarer would then be nervous about a possible diamond ruff  and would probably lead a heart to the ˙A and another heart. This is a different type of safety play. It avoids losing a diamond ruff, which appears to be a more likely danger than West holding four hearts.

The Ruffing Air Forum In which the question is asked: Should you “ruff air”? North dealer None vul

N W

West — 3ç pass

You are East. Partner leads the çK and continues clubs at trick two. Declarer ruffs the second club, cashes the ∂A, plays a spade to dummy’s ace, and plays a diamond toward hand. Do you discard or ruff air?

North ßAJ863 ˙Q72 ∂ 10 8 ç 10 6 5

North pass pass pass

S

E

East 2 ç* 4ç double

*Precision, natural 11-15 Opening lead: çK

East (you) ßK74 ˙AJ6 ∂2 çAJ9432 South 2∂ 4˙ (all pass)

[Solution on next page]

Bridge Today • August 2003 North dealer None vul

page 31

North ßAJ863 ˙Q72 ∂ 10 8 ç 10 6 5

West ßQ952 ˙ 10 3 ∂J976 çKQ8

East ßK74 ˙AJ6 ∂2 çAJ9432 South ß 10 ˙K9854 ∂AKQ543 ç7

West — 3ç pass

North pass pass pass

East 2 ç* 4ç double

South 2∂ 4˙ (all pass)

This hand was played on OKbridge. Suppose East discards when the second round of diamonds is led from dummy. Declarer ruffs and now ruffs a low diamond with dummy’s queen of trump. If East overruffs and plays another club, declarer plays king and a trump (declarer is left with one trump and good diamonds). If East discards again, declarer plays a trump toward the king and a second round (after East pulls a third round of trump, declarer is again left with one trump and good diamonds). You didn’t ruff air? You lose 9.91 imps! On this hand, East must ruff air! When declarer plays a diamond off dummy at trick four, East must ruff in, and return another club, leaving the position (bottom left)....

*Precision, natural 11-15 Opening lead: çK

North ßJ863 ˙Q72 ∂— ç— West ßQ95 ˙ 10 3 ∂J9 ç—

N W

S

E

South ß— ˙K98 ∂KQ54 ç—

East ßK7 ˙AJ ∂— çJ94

Suppose South plays a heart to dummy’s queen. East wins and returns yet another club, creating another heart trick for the defense, for a one-trick set. If South plays the ˙K out of his hand, a fourth round of clubs will again promote the setting trick.

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 32

The Switch in Time Forum Where we look at questions on defensive signaling.

Behind screens, the following hand took place near the end of a world championship.

In real life, West led the çQ but we are going to examine what would happen if West chose the ∂A.

East dealer E-W vul

In one case, partner follows with the ∂2. In another case, partner plays the ∂9. Does it matter? What would you play at trick two?

North ßAKJ962 ˙K73 ∂KQ3 ç8

West (you) ß74 ˙6 ∂ A J 10 8 çQJ7643

We invite you to submit hands to

N W

S

Bridge Today Forums

E

The Switch in Time Forum West — pass pass pass pass

North — 2 NT (1) 4 NT (3) 6ß

East pass pass pass pass

South 1ß 3 ß (2) 5 ∂ (4) pass

(1) game force with spades (2) North tells you it’s a trump asking bid; South tells you it’s a minimum hand. (3) North says it shows the ßA-K; South says it’s Blackwood. (4) North says it’s a cuebid. South says it shows one ace. Opening lead: ∂A

The Redouble For Fun and Profit Forum The True Confessions Forum The Lite 3NT Forum The Ruffing Air Forum The Frozen Suit Forum Ask Dr. Roth Send by e-mail to: [email protected]

Bridge Today • August 2003 East dealer E-W vul

West (you) ß74 ˙6 ∂ A J 10 8 çQJ7643

West — pass pass pass pass

page 33

North ßAKJ962 ˙K73 ∂KQ3 ç8 East ß— ˙ Q 10 9 8 2 ∂97642 çA95 South ß Q 10 8 5 3 ˙AJ54 ∂5 ç K 10 2

North — 2 NT (1) 4 NT (3) 6ß

East pass pass pass pass

South 1ß 3 ß (2) 5 ∂ (4) pass

(1) game force with spades (2) North tells you it’s a trump asking bid; South tells you it’s a minimum hand. (3) North says it shows the A-K of spades; South says it’s Blackwood. (4) North says it’s a cuebid. South says it shows one ace. Opening lead: ∂A

Quote of the Month

If West does not shift to clubs, declarer can make the hand by cashing the diamonds and all the trumps, squeezing East in hearts and clubs. The meaning of East’s signal in the diamond suit depends on partnership agreement. Without an agreement, probably it’s suit-preference. Playing “obvious-shift” carding, the signal is always attitude toward the obvious shift. In that case, East must play the ∂9 asking for a club shift, since a low diamond would ask for the obvious shift (hearts, three to an honor). One of the “problems” with obvious shift carding is that sometimes a simple suitpreference would be easier. But if you play the method, don’t deviate! Once you start making exceptions, your signals will become confusing. It’s just a matter of sticking to “the system.” Logic Works Too If West isn’t sure, he may solve the hand by using logic. If partner has the ˙A, it’s not likely to go anywhere. Declarer has five spades. If declarer has only three red cards, he would hold five clubs and would not have made a minimum 3ß rebid. In real life, after the çQ lead, East won the ace and the ∂A could not go away. Down one. At the other table, the contract was 5ß making five.

Reported in a Daily Bulletin of the ACBL Summer Nationals in Long Beach, CA: For the first time in 44 years, Bobby Wolff was not a competitor in the Spingold Teams. After playing in the event every year from 1959 to 2002, he made other plans this time, opting to play in the Senior Swiss Teams. “There were tears in my eyes as I watched the Spingolders sit down to play,” he said. “I really didn’t think it would bother me. But now I regret my decision and I’m upset with myself.”

Bridge Today • August 2003

page 34

Hand of the Month by Bjorn Fallenius

The editors asked me for an interesting hand from the Spingold teams, which my team was fortunate to win last week at the summer nationals in Long Beach, California. This was my most memorable hand, the scariest moment for me during the final. I picked up 7-5 distribution, vul against not: ß Q J 9 6 5 3 2 ˙ K 10 8 6 3 ∂ K ç —

I have to admit that the vulnerability was the only thing that kept me from taking another bid. The full hand was:

My RHO (Alan Sontag) opened a 14-17 notrump. I bid two clubs, asking my partner if he had a 4-card major. This bid can be made with a four-card major and a longer minor, so it didn’t describe my hand at all.* Peter Weichsel, my LHO, jumped to three notrump. And now two passes came back to me. What would you do?

So we went minus 430 intstead of minus 1400. At the other table, the auction was:

South dealer E-W vul

North ß A 10 4 ˙J5 ∂ J 10 9 7 çA952

West ßQJ96532 ˙ K 10 8 6 3 ∂K ç—

East ß— ˙74 ∂Q8653 çQJ8763 South ßK87 ˙AQ92 ∂A42 ç K 10 4

South 1 NT

West 2ç

North 3 NT

East (all pass)

South Zia 1ç 2 NT 3 NT

West Stansby 1ß 3˙ (all pass)

North Rosenberg 1 NT 3ß

East Martel pass pass

The result was a push.

*Fallenius-Welland play the following after the opponent’s 1NT opening: double = penalty 2ç = Stayman 2∂, 2˙ , 2ß = natural 2NT = minors or a strong two-suiter (AKxxx and AKxxx) — close to game forcing 3 any = natural