Regional

Some more hands from the regional. These two were against a pair that were just too timid.

N-S Game, dlr N

            ♠ A Q 10 9
            ♥ 10 6 4 2
            ♦ Q 4
            ♣ 6 5 4
♠ 8                    ♠ J 5
♥ A 8 5 3     [ ]      ♥ J 9
♦ 7 6                  ♦ A K 10 9 5 3 2
♣ A 10 9 8 3 2         ♣ K Q
            ♠ K 7 6 4 3 2
            ♥ K Q 7
            ♦ J 8
            ♣ J 7

N     E     S     W
Pass  1♦    2♠    3♣
pass  3♦    all pass

I just don’t understand North’s pass in the second round. Partner is pre-empting, you have a strong fit and no defence. You can’t find even a single raise? In a sense, inaction is correct, because however high N-S go, we are likely to bid one more than that and make the contract. In actuality, South decided that the ♦J looked like a good lead, and I soon wrapped up thirteen tricks: twelve tricks are available against any lead.

So how should we bid the hand (assuming N-S shut up)? Reaching even game seems to involve an optimistic view.

E-W game, dlr E

            ♠ K 8 7 2
            ♥ K 7 5 3
            ♦ A J 9 7
            ♣ 2
♠ 4                     ♠ Q J 5
♥ A 2         [ ]       ♥ Q
♦ Q 6 5 3               ♦ K 10 8 4 2
♣ A K J 10 7 4          ♣ Q 9 6 5
            ♠ A 10 9 6 3
            ♥ J 10 9 8 6 4
            ♦ -
            ♣ 8 3

E     S     W     N
Pass  pass  1♣    dble
1♦    2♦    3♦    3♠
4♣    4♠    5♣    all pass

With such prime controls and a double fit in evidence, Agent 99 didn’t have much hesitation going to 5♣. I just don’t know how either North or South could feel that it was reasonable to leave us there undoubled. Of course, if you double, North has to find a diamond lead (not difficult on the bidding). In practice, she led a spade to South’s ♠A, which killed the defence and 5♣ made. So as the old saying goes, it was only one mistake: if she was going to defend like that, failure to double was not an error. But then, knowing she was capable of such defence, South should certainly have bid 5♠. Perhaps her dummy play is equally as bad.

Now here’s a bidding problem. You hold
♠Q J 10 5 ♥6 ♦10 ♣A J 9 8 7 4 3
Nobody vulnerable, you hear 1♥ on your left and 2NT (Jacoby) on your right. Doesn’t it sound like they have at least a game, and 5♣ might well be a good sacrifice? I thought so. And yet neither side has a game double-dummy, while both sides may make game at the table.

Love all, dlr S

           ♠ 7 3
           ♥ K Q 8 7 2
           ♦ K J 4
           ♣ K 10 2
♠ 8 6 4 2             ♠ Q J 10 5
♥ A 4        [ ]      ♥ 6
♦ A 9 5 3 2           ♦ 10
♣ Q 6                 ♣ A J 9 8 7 4 3
           ♠ A K 9
           ♥ J 10 9 5 3
           ♦ Q 8 7 6
           ♣ 5

S     W     N     E
1♥    pass  2NT   5♣
pass  pass  dble  all pass

It should not be too difficult for E-W to find the diamond ruff to beat 4♥, but it’s not a sure thing. If the bidding hasn’t given too much away, and if West leads the Q♣, South may be smart enough to not cover, and that makes it very difficult. You would expect some, perhaps even most, N-S pairs to make game.

Even more so, the spade ruff to beat 5♣ looks simple. And yet our opponents, who were not idiots, had a mix-up over signals. After one top spade, South switched. I had asked about the bidding, and South could have made a penalty double. Since he clearly must have had a minimum opening, I played North for all the trumps and made 5♣ for most of the matchpoints.

The analysis software points out that 3NT is cold E-W, but it doesn’t suggest how we bid it.

Regional

OK, I’m back from my second event of the regional, a Swiss Teams. I was playing with my other decent partner, a 2/1 Game Forcing aficionado that I’ll call Elwood, and a decent pair that included one of the directors from the Manhattan. Actually, they were probably more than decent, because we won seven out of eight matches, and I wasn’t defending too well. But we fitted into the B/C Swiss, and I guess that was enough of an edge.

The wild distributions were notable. There were a couple of 7-6 hands, one or two 7-5s, and it seemed like endless 5-5s and 6-5s, and these were all hand-dealt, at the table! That’s a lot of stuff in 56 boards.

Anyway, the bottom line is it seems I won five and a half gold points for Friday’s effort, and eight and a half gold for Sunday’s effort. So my two days of work has taken me more than halfway to the requirement for Life Master. Not a bad deal at all, although it might make you wonder whether the Life Master rank means much.

Regional

This weekend is the Edgar Kaplan Winter Regional in New York City. I decided to try and get a little more serious about winning some gold points, and so I'm playing in a couple of events. Friday was the Jim Becker Open Pairs, and Agent 99 and I were in as a C pair. This is a fairly prestigious event, and I didn't expect to be in the running overall, but I was sure we could be as good as any other C pair around. And so it proved. It's a two-session event, and we rang up 58% in the first session to actually stand tied for 7th overall at the halfway mark, well clear of the rest of the C crowd. The later session was something of a let-down, unfortunately, and we dropped off the overall leader-board. But approximately 50% in the second session was enough to stay at the top of the Cs, and so we gained our first gold points.

I'd prefer not to dwell too much on the second session. But there were some magic results in the first half.

Game all, dlr W

           ♠ 10 6 4 2
           ♥ 6 5
           ♦ J 10 8 4 3
           ♣ 10 5
♠ Q J 9 5 3            ♠ A
♥ A K J 8    [ ]       ♥ 10 9 2
♦ Q                    ♦ A K 9 6
♣ J 7 4                ♣ A K Q 9 6
           ♠ K 8 7
           ♥ Q 7 4 3
           ♦ 7 5 2
           ♣ 8 3 2

W     N     E     S
1♠    pass  2♣    pass
2♥    pass  3♦    pass
4♣    pass  4♦    pass
4♥    pass  5♦    pass
5♥    pass  7♣    all pass

Agent 99 bid out her shape, and I went through Redwood 1430, taking it all the way to the grand slam. It's perhaps a bit of a stretch, but I could count twelve tricks as long as the distribution was reasonable, and I thought there was bound to be play for thirteen.

In fact, you can make all the tricks in clubs, hearts or no-trump, because the heart finesse works. But playing in clubs is best, as it gives you multiple chances. The trump opening lead didn’t hurt anything, so I had choices to make. A diamond ruff in dummy would make the twelfth trick, and then you could try the heart finesse, a ruffing spade finesse, or a spade-heart squeeze for thirteen. Or you could ruff a couple of spades (if the trumps are 3-2) hoping to drop the ♠K. The main issue is how to combine the most chances.

The best I can come up with is:
1: ♣6 (North didn’t want to waste his ♣10)
2: ♦Q
3: ♠A
4: ♦9 ruffed in dummy
5: ♠ ruffed in hand
6+7: ♣AK, drawing trumps, discarding ♠9 (if trumps turn out to be 4-1, you have to ditch the spades and rely on the heart finesse)
8: ♥A
9: ♠ ruffed in hand
Now if the ♠K fell, you have thirteen tricks. If everybody has followed to the spades but the ♠K hasn’t appeared, you now cash the ♦AK, discarding the ♥8 and the ♠Q from dummy (unless South discards the ♠K). If South holds the ♠K, he has been squeezed, and you can play for the drop in hearts, making even against a doubleton ♥Q in North. And if you think North had the ♠K all along, there is still the heart finesse to fall back on.

In practice, you aren’t tested since the ♠K does fall. The main lines that don’t work are ones involving the ruffing finesse in spades.

We were the only ones to bid a grand – most tables rang up 1470 (for 6NT+1).

E-W game, dlr E

            ♠ 10 9 7
            ♥ 9 3
            ♦ A K 5
            ♣ J 9 5 3 2
♠ A 5 3                ♠ K Q 8 6
♥ J 10 7 5    [ ]      ♥ Q 8 6
♦ J 9 8                ♦ Q 6 4 2
♣ Q 7 4                ♣ K 8
            ♠ J 4 2
            ♥ A K 4 2
            ♦ 10 7 3
            ♣ A 10 6

E     S     W     N
1NT   dble  pass  pass
redbl all pass

West has an awkward hand for our methods. It's the sort of hand that you would really like to just leave at 1NT doubled and see what happens. While you can be reasonably optimistic about our chances, because the points seem to be split more or less 20-20 between the two sides, it really looks thin for a business redouble. But running is distinctly unattractive, and we can only stand with a redouble – so that's what Agent 99 did.

South started with the ♥2, which went to the ♥9 and ♥Q, and I returned the ♥7 to his ♥K. A diamond switch put the danger hand in, but North's return of the ♠10 didn't help their side any. I won and played a third heart, and South persisted with diamonds. When the smoke cleared, I finished up with an overtrick. +1160 isn't bad on a hand that should be held to down two, double-dummy.

The Bucket List

When you are a beginning student of this game, everything is new and it can seem difficult to impose order on all the things that you have to try to remember. There comes a point, when you are an intermediate player, where some level of basic knowledge has been absorbed, and you start to become acquainted with more advanced matters of technique. And somewhere about there, you find that you are reading about a particular type of play and looking for a chance to use it at the table. Probably, the throw-in and the simple squeeze are the simplest “advanced” techniques, and the time when you learn about them is around about the time I mean. If you are a keen student, you may work on a number of techniques before the proper occasion at the table crops up (or is recognized, anyway). And that means you have a list, of sorts, of plays that you are waiting for.

Now, throw-ins and simple squeezes are pretty common, so they don’t stay on the list too long. Elopement plays and coup en passant variations I had played before I knew they had a name, so they actually by-passed my list. Some items get onto the list for sentimental or whimsical reasons, rather than any special technical element. I haven’t put “the beer card” on my list of things to do, but I might, just for fun. A weird one was the really deep finesse. I did play a suit contract (5♦ doubled, it was), and on the first round of trumps I led the ♦5 from dummy and ran it, winning the trick with all players following suit. I didn’t make the contract, but I didn’t care since that deep finesse worked. (It sounds ridiculous when you first think of it, but it’s actually not that bad. RHO was the doubler, of course, so I knew he had a trump stack, and LHO was either singleton or void. So then it’s a matter of waiting a few years or a few thousand hands to find LHO with the right singleton.) 

As time goes by, and your studies get more esoteric, the items that stay on the list tend to be things that are intrinsically rare and unlikely. Top of my list for now (and for the foreseeable future, truthfully) is a backwash squeeze. But there are some easier items still there. And the other day, one of the more recent additions actually got knocked off.

A technique I hadn’t heard of before came to my attention on BBO, within the last year (actually, probably within the last six months). Watching Vu-graph matches at BBO on-line, I saw described and executed what is known these days as an intra-finesse. With a holding like
A 8 x x x opposite Q 9 x,
if you have to play the suit for one loser, you have some fairly limited options. The king being singleton would do, but you aren’t going to play for it (too rare). If the suit is breaking 3-2, leading low to the queen will work half the time. But what if the bidding and play leads you to think that the king is sitting over the queen? You can play for the king being doubleton (ace and duck). Or you can play for either the knave or ten to be doubleton in front of the queen. You do that by playing small to the nine (the intra-finesse). That loses to the jack or ten, but when you get back in, the lead of the queen pins the doubleton honor in the other hand.

Now, I haven’t tried to calculate the odds of different configurations. But I’ve had my fill of hands with KJx sitting over my queen, and the chance to strike back with a winning line definitely got on my list.

N-S game, dlr E

            ♠ J 7
            ♥ 7 4 3
            ♦ Q 7 6 2
            ♣ A 8 6 5
♠ A 9 6 3 2             ♠ Q 8 4
♥ A J 9 6 5   [ ]       ♥ K 10 2
♦ -                     ♦ J 9 5 3
♣ Q 7 2                 ♣ K J 10
            ♠ K 10 5
            ♥ Q 8
            ♦ A K 10 8 4
            ♣ 9 4 3

E    S    W    N
Pass 1♦   2♦   3♦
3♥   Pass 4♥   All pass

At trick one there was an infraction. South led ♦A, dummy ruffed with the ♥5, and North played ♥3 to a chorus of queries. This became a penalty card, so to try and take advantage, I played a club to the ♣K to get to hand for a trump finesse that would definitely win. So trick three was hearts – 2, 8, 9, 3.

And there I was, in dummy, and there was still work to do. I would have to bring in the spade suit. I placed the ♣A with North since the ♣K held, so that meant there was an excellent chance that the ♠K was in the South hand. They can still force dummy with diamonds, so I need trumps 3-2, and I need spades 3-2 to keep down the losers and avoid a ruff. The bidding suggests diamonds 5-4, so there’s no great reason to think South might be short in spades. So the stage is set for the intra-finesse – trick 4 was spades, 2, 7, 8, 10. South exited with the ♥Q, won in hand so I could lead the ♠Q. And then it’s just mopping up: draw the last trump and the last spade, concede a trick to the ♣A, and claim 5-odd. No problem!
   

Bidding over opponent’s 1NT response

When the opponents start the auction 1D – 1NT, in Standard American auctions it is pretty much a given that the 1NT bidder will have a club suit. This observation leads to a couple of neat overcalling possibilities.

First, consider how you are placed when in the “sandwich” position, after (1D) – pass – (1NT) - ?
The BobbyBridge page about Multi-Landy observes that it works here. Since we won’t want to make a simple minor-suit overcall in this position, we can play that 2C shows both majors and 2D shows a weakish overcall in an unspecified major. That lets us specify that the 2H and 2S overcalls are full-value – opening bid strength – so we can intervene relatively cleanly in either (or both) major.

Second, consider where you stand in the re-opening position, after
(1D) – pass – (1NT) – pass; (pass) - ?
On Eddie Kantar’s website, he notes that a re-opening 2D here should be natural, because you may have been silenced by the opening bid (which might only be a 3-card suit). However, it is still true that you won’t want to reopen in clubs with a known suit behind you. So we can (again) use 2C as showing both majors, in this case not strong and possibly only 4-4.

Third, Kantar also remarks on
(1C) – pass – (1NT) – pass; (pass) - ?
He notes that a re-opening 2C here should be natural, because you may have been silenced by the opening bid (which might only be a 3-card suit). However, it is also true that a natural re-opening 2D bid is very unlikely, since any such hand would almost certainly have overcalled 1D in the first place. So we can use 2D, this time, as showing both majors, again in this case not strong and possibly only 4-4.

These may seem like little things to clutter-up your memory, possibly causing more trouble than they are worth. That remains to be seen. Being able to fight for part-scores at the two-level is important at any form of scoring. Allowing the opponents to settle in 1NT too easily is faulty strategy.

I hate Mondays

I skipped a game with Agent 99 to cover for a director that had jury duty. Big mistake. The Monday afternoon crowd is awful, and just about everything that could go wrong, did go wrong. All in all, a thoroughly unpleasant experience. Paying me twice as much wouldn't be enough.

There was one of those nasty hesitation rulings included. Bidding: 1C - 4H - 5C - (pause)pass - pass - 5H - director. At one level, this is a straightforward case - at least everyone agreed on the events (it was a very long pause), and the rule of thumb is reasonably clear. If pass was a logical alternative for North (rather than 5H), even if only a minority of players would likely choose it, then if East-West don't like their result I should order the hand scored at 5C. But here's North's hand.

S: A 7, H: A K 10 8 5 4 3 2, D: A J, C: 4

You can argue that pass is a logical alternative, but I can't honestly think of anyone I know who wouldn't bid 5H at that point in the auction with this hand. Speaking with another (more experienced) director, he said that if North had bid better in the first place (say, double first and then bid 4H), he would be more inclined to believe her claim that she would always bid 5H. But to me, that logic seems backwards. If you have already shown a really strong hand, pass becomes a much more viable alternative. If you have committed the gross underbid of the direct 4H, the undisclosed strength pushes you towards 5H. I suppose he meant that if she would underbid so badly once, she would do it twice. I don't know.

Anyway, hearts makes 11 tricks, clubs makes 10 tricks the other way. Big swing!