Sacrifice now? or later!

Study the deal below.



Q1) What will you bid in Prajwal's (akjq) seat?

Q2) Anyone wants bid 5H over West's 5C?

I paused a little long at that moment, then passed. East bid 6 in a flash. I took a little time and decided to sacrifice in 6H.
I lets analyze the various cases that were flashing in my mind that time.
5H is a winning bid

• if we push opponents into a hopeless slam, but this is counting too much on opponents, but we will study this option.
  
• (look at the vul) when 5C makes and 5H is <3>=3 imp save, rite?)

5H is a losing bid

• if we push opponents into slam which otherwise opponents may bid (and make it).
  
• if 5C dosen't have a play.
• if 5H is down more than 3.
  

(Are there any other cases? )
I (rightly?) jugeded that my hand falls into the 3rd category.

Too bad the jerk bid 6 anyways. Passed around to me, time to think again.
This time however, there are not that many possibilities. I quickly bid 6H.
The defence took their tricks. two black aces and a diamond ruff.
Just a 500 as opposed to their 6c which would have given them 1370.
My best save ever! Yippee. ;-)

Wait, there is one more interesting sutiation,
Q3) What will you call in my position with that holding? 4-7-1-1 ? Do you preempt?

PS:
It is not clear to me when and how junta realise that they might be pushing opponents into a game and so refrain from preempting. Most of these are in situations where one has to raise a preempt. Can someone please post about it?

--------------
Khuda Hafiz

Guthi

Vinoths BBO-table presence?

This deal came up on BBO when I was playing Vinoth. We were playing Polsih Club, with 2/1 style over 1M opening. (rebid non-forcing).

Scoring - IMPs; Red on white.

LHO as dealer passed and Vinoth opened 1S. I held
AT87 AK974 87 Kx
I responded 2H.

Q1) Playing 2NT as artificial raise with 4 trumps, do you think that should be used here? Since there is an outside source of tricks in Hearts, is it recommended to bid 2H (establishing a GF, but hiding the support)

Over partners rebid of 2S, I raised to 3S. I hope you will agree its the right bid. (2S; is our catch-all bid, doesn't deny extras, doesn't promise 6 carder) The partnership also agreed on playing 3NT as frivolous and cue bids as serious. The auction went. 1S-2H; 2S-3S; 4C - 4H; 5C* - 5S; 6S - end 4C was a cue bid, showing slam interest. 1st or 2nd round control. 4H is 2 of the top three honours in Hearts, denying 1st or 2nd round control in D. 5C - I understood it (rightly) as voidwood and responded (honestly) two key cards w/o the Q. Q2) Do you think the treatment of 5C as exclusion blackwood is good? Q3) Do you think in response to keycard ask, I should respond 2 with Queen, (lying about the Queen) because partner will expect only 3 card support from me ... etc Vinoth's holding was: KQ943 Q85 KT632 void

Yes, partner doesn't have any extras. infact, I think in terms of high cards he has a minimum. Q4) Do you think he can sort of upgrade, looking at his Q of Hearts? and bid 4C? ( playing serious cue bids) Q5) This is a general question, do you think its a good % to bid slams with one key card and the Q of trumps missing? on 8 and 9 card fits, in MPs and IMPS. Q6) Also, you might ask why opener did not bid 3D over 2H, we were taught to play crossing 2NT as showing extras ( atleast a King more than normal opening) Hence the D suit stayed buried. Do have any suggestions on how to handle these situations generally? ******************************

KQ943 Q85 KT632 void

AT87 AK974 97 K4

Our friendly opponent lead a D. Hearts and spades broke evenly too. so, did not pose a play problem.

******************************
All readers are encouraged share their views on this (blog needs some action?)

My views;

A1) 2NT is not cool. with a good 5 card suit, I prefer to bid it. Reserve 2NT for more balanced hands, 4432 and 4333(?)

A2) 5C as voidwood is cool. (and not 5-5)
A3) I think its cool if we lie about the Queen of trumps in this position.

A4) The 4C I think is not good. but then, had he bid 3NT/ 4S, I would have passed, and never bid the slam. So, it worked.
A5) I don't think in 8 card fits is a good idea at any vulnerability. in 9 card fits, I think slam should bid bid, especially when red. (Waiting for Ashok to give me the numbers associated with it ;) )

A6) Some one needs to detail full fundaes behind crossing 2NT barrier. Vinoth does is all the time with just 13 point hands. As he understands in, only sub minimum openings like this, should not cross 2NT.

Once he bid 3C after I made a 2/1 (1H-2D) holding x JTxxx Kx AKJxx. He wanted to show his good clubs.

(Post your answers as comments, I'll add them into the post later)

Adios
Guthi

******************************

JP said:

1. Personally, I would have made a 2N call to begin with, considering that all my values are controls. A 3C response showing shortness followed by 3H shows your hand quite well (whether you play it as a control bid or a good side suit).

In your particular auction, I agree with 3S. I am ok with 4C, but certainly not with 5C as voidwood. Vinoth is not strong enough to push for slam by himself.

2. I dont like 5C as voidwood as it seems to assume captaincy and does not have the flexibility that cue-bidding has in terms of involving both partners in the decision process. If you had a cue-bidding auction, you would have figured that you have two potential losers in diamonds and stopped short of slam (I think 5S is the right place to be).

3. I agree with 2 without Q. If I had a 5th spade I would have responded with Q. With a 9 card fit, it is less that 50% that you are going to drop the queen.

4. Yes, the Q of H is an awesome card to have.

5. No. Thats precisely why the queen of trumps is included in keycard asking responses. It is anti-percentage to bid slams missing a keycard and the Q of trumps, when you don't have a 10 card fit.

6. I like to play anything more than 2N to show extras (after a 2 over 1 game forcing response), even while playing precision with 11-15 HCP openers. It really helps to limit the hand. Its fine to not show the diamond holding. Going with the philosophy of precision, opener shows his point range as narrowly as possible within the first two bids.

Cheers,
JP.


******************************

Manoj (joemanjo) said:

1) NO. If your suit were say Qxxxx or Kxxxx where your values are primarily outside that suit, then you may employ 2N in lieu of 2H. Here, 2H shows a real source of tricks and concentration of values.


2) Usually, to avoid confusion, direct jumps to 5 level are used as EKCB. What is direct jump to 5C over 3S? What does it mean if partner does not use the direct jump but goes slow? He certainly expected your 4H cue over his 4C (perhaps wanted to hear 4D but you could not oblige), so in effect he has not gained any valuable information after 3S where he could not have employed a direct jump to 5C as RKC. Is it good?

3) When you know with assurance that your partnership has ten trumps, but your partner may not know that, you can lie about the Queen. What is your partnerships expected rebid after 1S-2H with KJTxxx, Qx, AKxxx, - or Kxxxxxx, xx, AKQx, - or KQJxxxx, xx, AQxx, - Would you rebid 2S with both these? If so, then the 5C bid shows a void in partners hand and is more gainfully employed to find out secondary controls needed for GS.

4) Yes and No. Not enough for a serious slam try. Not even enough for courtesy cues from his side.

5) Nope. It is only in 10 card fits.

6) I will question not about 3D but the more obvious 3H. Both of you need to reevaluate your hand after each round of bidding. After 1S-2H, partner can give near full value for his hand. I would reevaluate this hand at about 13 hcp. Still not enough to bid 3D.

Some competitive bidding gadgets.

In preparation for Beijing, our bidding knowledge has improved for sure.
I'm posting here about some of them. There are many minor variations/adjustments made by many partnerships, I'm posting the ones SP and I have agreed upon.

Meckwell transfers.

It applies in these situations:
1M -(x) - bid
Yes, only one situation! Lets look in detail in this situation 1S-(X)-bid

• 1NT is transfer to clubs. 5+Cs at least
  
• 2C is transfer to diamonds. 5+Ds at least
  
• 2D is transfer to hearts. 5+Hs at least
  
• 2H is a good 3-card raise. 7-9 points
• 2S is a bad 3 card raise. 4-6 points
• 2NT is a good raise with 4 cards.
  
• 3C, 3D, 3H (all jump shifts and double jump shifts) are fit showing, with 4 card support at least and ability to play at that level.

Some interesting continuations are possible after this convention. Of course the opener can reject the transfer depending on his hand - if he has say a two-suiter or a single suiter. If the 1M bidder completes the transfer into a new suit, return to the M by responder now will be 7-9 points and 3 card support; with 5 cards in the shown suit. Transfer and 3M is same but 10-11 points. This can be treated like a game try bid. This can apply by a passed hand too (Drury of any kind is off on interference) However we cannot play Bergen raises playing fit showing jumps in competition.
Over 1H-(X)-bid, logical changes shall apply, (2S can be used as splinter?) 1S is natural, forcing and tends to show good 5 cards (sitting over the doubler)

There is a variation of this given in WJ2005. In that 2C/D/H are natural, NF. But 1NT is a good raise ( probably giving opener to make game tries) and 2M is a weak raise. Rest are the same as given above.

One additional case where these can be played is when the 1M was over-called naturally and opponent makes a negative double.

This concept can be extended to many other situations. For instance, over opponents 3-level major preempts, say your are playing the common artificial responses, (4m is 5+m and 5+OM and game forcing). They can be applied when partner opens 1C/D (both precision) (not really sure if playing standard it will apply) , making the necessary corrections for playing strength and hcp.

*************************************************************************************
Cheers
Guthi

India vs Italy in China

Date: 10th Oct 2008 - Friday
Venue: Beijing International Conventional center.
Focus: U-26 team swiss round 15 of 17: India vs Italy.
India's aim: To retain the last position.

Players: Guthi and SP in Open Room
Dashu and Arijit in Closed room ( Vinoth & Karan were supposed to play - but we were
misinformed.)

You can find our results here.

I shall post about what happened in the first two deals here, others will follow. Most deals are intersting. A cute Italian girl who was my screen mate. Lets call her - cig and her partner aig (amorphous Italian guy?)


Board-1

Full credit to SP for finding a diamond switch at trick 2. ( little credit to Guthi for not stupidly leading Ace of spades?)

The auction.

P - P - 2S - X
4S* - X - End.

Q1) Do you agree with the first Dbl by West? (2S is a regular weak bid)
Q2) after winning the first heart with the Jack, what do you shift to?
Q3) do you agree with the 4S by north?

A1) Its fine by HCP count, and the rule that there is 3 card support for other suits, such auctions run into trouble w/o 4 cards in the other-M. What say? Another option is a 2NT overcall, especially because others have passed.
My order of preference is this X>2NT>Pass>3D. What is yours?

A2)
Play went: Heart to Jack; low D - Q - Ace - ruff; club A; club Q - discard H; spade A; low spade.
cig had no way of goin to dummy now. ended up losing 1S+1H+2D+1C.
I think declarer can hold the contract to -1 on this defence by cross ruffing the minors suits - losing 2S+2H only.

Full credit to SP for finding a diamond switch at trick 2. ( little credit to Guthi for not stupidly leading Ace of spades? Like in the other table?) removing the entry to the table incase clubs get set up. He did not cash Heart Ace thinking it could get ruffed - placing me with 4Hs - which is the right thing to do.

I can easily imagine what happened at the other table: spade Ace, heart shift, ruff the thrid heart, spade king, club to Q, then Ace, ruff one, ruffing finesse of D gives a total of 10 tricks.

Correction: Vinoth points out that after diamond switch the contract can be made peacefully by crossruffing. So it turns SP has to switch to a spade at trick two - stealing the first 4 tricks. It follows that the contract is cold after the lead of Spade Ace.

A3)
The toughest question? I wonder what is 3C in many juntas agreements ( in 2S-(X)-3C! )
by an unpassed hand its obly forcing, by a passed hand should it be fit showing? as in raise to 3S with values-length in clubs. 4C is surely that by a passed/unpassed hand. This will help partner to decide if its worth a save in 4S - if opps bid 4H of course.

************************************************************************************

Board-2

Bidding was very intersting here.
1D* - 1S - 2C - 2S
P - P - 2NT* - End

1D was precision. 2NT was some kind of scrambling showing minors, denying 4 carder heart(?) with a 4 carder heart I would double. SP passed it to play.
I managed to get 1S+4H+1D+1C for down 1. I don't see any line to make it on low spade lead. Opps will run with 4 spades, 1 club and 1 diamond.


Q1) Do you open Easts hand K9xx;AKxx;J8xx;T

A1) I agree with opening a 2.5 trick hand which has both majors. Yes, even in standard.

************************************************************************************

Cheers
Guthi

I read a relay system over 1NT opening.. It's quite simple and seems efficient. Have a look at it..

http://www.lusobridge.com/main/Noticias/sars.pdf

Relay Primer

Despite not being very popular, relay bidding systems are likely the most accurate bidding systems, especially in the game and slam zones. The idea behind them is that only one hand communicates information about itself while the other hand keeps bidding alive by bidding the next step. This process is called the relay, and it stops when the asker knows enough to place the final contract. Even though you may not want to base your entire bidding structure on relays, it is useful to understand some basic ideas, in my opinion.

I will now prove a fundamental result that helps you gauge what is possible within so much bidding space.

How Much Information?

Suppose the responder (the giver of information) has the job of telling asker which one of k distinct types of hand he has. Also suppose that only n steps remain in the bidding ladder. For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the final contract lies beyond these n steps and that asker must always bid the next step.

Let f(n) denote the maximum number of types of hand that can be distinguished within n steps. f(1) = 1. This is because responder is forced to bid and there is only one bid he can make, so he cannot distinguish at all. f(2) = 2. This is because the second step must necessarily show one type (because no room is left to resolve any ambiguity). The lower step must also show one type only, because asker can do no better than bidding the second step, leaving no room for further bidding.

If n > 2, the the auctions that ensue can be broken into two mutually exclusive and exhaustive sets. One consists of auctions where responder's first bid is the second step or higher, and the other consists of those auctions where responder's first bid is the first step. The number of elements in the first set is obviously f(n − 1). When responder bids the first step, asker bids the second step to continue the relay, leaving responder n − 2 steps (obviously, the first step doesn't pinpoint one hand type). That means f(n − 2) auctions lie in the second set. Therefore, for n > 2, f(n) = f(n − 1) + f(n − 2).

As you can well see, this sets up a Fibonacci series: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, …

What Do I Do With This?

Note first of all that the number of items responder can distinguish between is at least the number indicated in the series. It is possible to design a system where asker has the flexibility to ask other questions, by bidding something other than the next step. Therefore, the series only indicates a minimum efficiency, which can always be achieved. Take, for example, the Ogust responses after a Weak Two in spades (2♠). Responder (to the relay) distinguishes between only four hand types using the four steps that are available to him (3♣ through 3♠), which is one lower than the minimum guaranteed to be achievable.

If you're in the habit of tinkering with your bidding system, you undoubtedly come across ask situations. With the clear mathematical foundation that you have here, you can ensure that your ask–answer structure is “tight”. Don't ever say that there's too little information left to convey. There's always information. I remember SP telling me that in the famed Guthi-SP Precision system, a sequence like 1♣-1♦-2♥ initiates an ask. Responder's replies to 2♥, if I remember correctly, consume more than one complete level. The discussion above tells you that whenever you're using up four or more steps, the structure had better be relay.

I will soon post a sample application of this: a relay structure after a Jacoby major-suit raise

Another Lead problem?

This deal came up in the finals of Board-a-Match in South zone. Like in most deals, all sorts of random things happened on this deal. Read on to find out.

I picked up

A9xxx
64
-void
AQTxxx

Yes, a 5-2-06 in a hand dealt deal. Its green upon red and RHO as dealer opens 1H.
What do you call. (You are playing open ranged michels )

The bidding went like this
1H - 2H - 3D - P
3H - P - 4H - End

Q1) What do you lead.
Ashok, please dont feed this into GIB and tell me what it is. It may never agree with the winning led I found on the table. ;)

I lead a low spade. hoping to set the contract if partner has Ax of Heart and figures to give me a diamond ruff. Read on what happened.

Dummy comes down

KJx
xx
AQJxxx
Kx

The declarer was confused and put up the king which held. SP signaled with spade 2. (so I know the spades are 5332) Ran a low heat to his Ace. Trick three he played a low D from hand, I ruffed, cashed Ace of spade and returned a spade for SP to ruff, he ruffed with his Queen of hearts. Trick 6 disaster strikes. He returned another D for me to ruff. Like I will have more trumps. Of course the fault is with me, as I should have cashed club Ace before giving him a spade ruff. (even though I played my lowest spade for him to ruff, asking for a club shift )
It has happened in many instances before, if it is the setting trick, its better to cash it, especially if there is danger of a long suit being set up.

I don't remember all the 4 hands, but I remember the result at the other table was 5C-Doubled is only 1 down. and 4H actually makes on correct play. Declarer expected a 3-1 heart break, and was catering to Qxx with SP, thanks to my michels bid announcing a 5-5. We had a 10 card club fit.

Q2) Do you think this hand is work a michels bid if partner is a passed hand. Answer for all the vulnarablitlies. I think there is no reason to bid so high if you are vul and partner is a passed hand. simple 1S overcall will suffice. what say? The downside is, you may not find a sacrifice, like in this case (though we did not anyways)

There is another interseting hand of this kind which came up in Beijing, earned us a top in the pairs event. will post about it next.

Cheers
Guthi

When the Experts Are Wrong

You have to make a lead against 3NT after your RHO dealt at Both Vul and opened 1NT (15–), which was raised on your right to 3NT. You hold ♠ J97643 ♥ J3 ♦ J9862 ♣ —. What do you lead?

I picked this up from page 8 of the second issue of the youth bulletin from Beijing Mind Games. Defenders at both tables in the match discussed had led a diamond and been rewarded (the diamond lead was the only lead that would've succeeded). Why a diamond, you ask? Well:

Recently, I've been trying to train myself to lead better with the guidance of GIB. I have examined a lot of leads recommended by it and, though I can't honestly claim that I can predict reasonably well what GIB would recommend, I have learnt enough to be suspicious in cases like this. So I fed GIB this problem. Guess what? The correct lead is ♥ J.

This is what is wrong with much bridge writing: denial of human fallibility. Ridiculous explanations are frequently concocted to justify opening leads. Do these people really not have doubts, or will expression of doubt hurt sales (or readership)? I don't want to go into too many details, but suffice it to say that I'm utterly convinced that a bulk of the theory of opening leads we learn is nonsense.

Let me give one example of the ridiculous explanations that I mentioned earlier. Matthew Granovetter in Murder at the Bridge Table strongly chastises the lead of the unsupported ace against suit contracts. In one example, he criticizes the lead of the ace from a doubleton in partner's bid suit (though partner is known to be weak) against a game contract. In the actual layout, the game is made purely because of the lead. Though is auction is a bit involved, I wanted to see what GIB had to say. Not surprisingly to me, GIB said that the lead of the ace was second-best, the best lead being a neutral trump lead from three small. Anyway, Granovetter then says that the lead of the unsupported ace against trump slams is in fact attractive, because—want to guess? Because when you have found one trick, it's easy to find another. It's the most ridiculous explanation I've ever heard, even if the thing recommended has merit (I don't know).

For the hand given here, GIB in fact thinks that the diamond lead is considerably worse than the lead of the jack of hearts. A small spade is the second-best choice, it says.

I wouldn't say that GIB is always right about leads. GIB does not do deception, and GIB does not do concealment of high-card strength and distribution from declarer. It also cannot understand many auctions. But for cases like this one, I think it would be foolish to disagree with it.

Off to Beijing

We are leaving for the World Mind Sports games at Beijing tomorrow... there are 3 IITM players: Guthi, Vinoth and myself. In all there are 12 Junior players (U-26, which we are in, and U-28 teams), plus the Women's team and the Open team (the Formidables of course). There will be an additional two non-playing staff per team, and there is also a Chess contingent, so there will be plenty of Indian company there!

I will put up some short daily updates here if possible... perhaps even some interesting deals if I have the time :)

Wish us luck.

Cheers,
Prashanth.

Bidding Toughie

You're sitting fourth-seat, playing matchpoints, with ♠ KQ92 ♥ A2 ♦ KQJ92 ♣ 32, neither side vulnerable. Dealer opens with 3♣, which is passed around to you. What do you bid?

If you're thinking double, forget it. You don't have four hearts. That leaves pass, 3 ♦, and 3NT. What are the pros and cons of each bid?

I Hate GIB

You hold ♠ 7 ♥ AJ8532 ♦ K432 ♣ 62. Playing matchpoints, you make the indiscreet overcall of 2♥ after RHO opens 1♠ at both non-vulnerable. LHO makes a single raise, partner passes, and LHO bids game, which is passed out.

What do you lead? This is the situation Vinoth was in (spots approximated) in last week's Mylapore game. Think about it before reading the answer below.

GIB recommends ♥ A at both IMPs and MPs, with the following analysis.

At MPs:
HA: -311.24 -> 0.44
C6: -315.38 -> 0.41
S7: -338.42 -> 0.31
D4: -340.90 -> 0.28
C2: -315.38 -> 0.16
H5: -350.84 -> 0.15
H3: -350.84 -> 0.15
H8: -352.66 -> 0.15
HJ: -354.20 -> 0.12
DK: -363.06 -> -0.17
I play HA (187.67 sec)

At IMPs:
HA: -311.24 -> 1.11
C6: -315.38 -> 0.99
C2: -315.38 -> 0.69
S7: -338.42 -> 0.43
D4: -340.80 -> 0.36
H5: -356.40 -> -0.08
H3: -356.40 -> -0.08
H8: -358.28 -> -0.12
HJ: -359.82 -> -0.17
DK: -370.96 -> -0.74

Yes, you guessed it. Vinoth got it right. The contract goes down on a club lead or on a club switch at the second trick. Vinoth didn't make the switch, and the contract was made.

I hate GIB. Do you too?

Eight Never, Nine Ever?

You have to play this combination (the trump suit) for no loss:

AKJ76
5432

The rule “eight never, nine ever” asks you to eschew the finesse against the queen holding nine cards in the suit. You surely know that the correct play is to cash Ace and King, hoping to fell the queen, rather than to finesse against the queen on the second round.

But do you know how close the percentages are? Say you cash Ace, then lead low toward the KJ, and LHO produces a low club. At this point, the correct guess will lead to no loss in the suit. The chances of LHO holding the queen are about 48 %, which makes the two lines so close that the correct conclusion is not “nine ever”, but “other considerations rule”.

Let me give you an example. Suppose you and dummy have 24 HCP between you, and you landed in this contract after East had passed as dealer. If you simulate this situation, giving you and dummy a total of any 24 HCP and making sure East does not have 12 or more HCP, you find that the chances of the finesse succeeding are now up to 51 %, making it the better line.

The constraint imposed on the opposing cards was very mild. Of the 16 outstanding HCP, RHO could not hold 12 or more (which limit is 4 more than his average of 8), and that was enough to tip the scales in West's favour. In actual play, there are countless factors that tip the scales by similar amounts.

Hugh Kelsey states in some book that one must not despise the 3 % margin because gambling houses have grown fat on margins much smaller. His idea is preposterous. Gambling houses have the same slim margin (never higher) every single time someone bets, and they do despise 0.01 % margins (e.g. the dirtying of cards leading to an imperfect shuffle). The bridge player is typically dealing with percentages much higher than that through the bidding and play. I don't blame Kelsey, however, because no doubt that was marketing for the 4-volume treatise he was planning, Miscellaneous Throw-In Squeezes Against Both Opponents Involving Three Suits without an Entry To the Hand with Two Menaces

[Update: I just realized that the rule goes “eight ever, nine never”. In other words, it seeks to answer the question, Should I finesse against the queen. The way I've used it, it answers the question, Should I play for the drop?]

Suit Play problems - elementary?

Suit play problems are fun to solve when reading blog posts like this, but can be quite a nuisance at the table.

(1)
Take this for instance.

AK56

J97

What do you think the safety play for 3 tricks is?
The chances are about 83% for 3 tricks on one line (according to suitplay)

(2)
How do you play this combination for 4 tricks (safe play for 4 tricks)

A83

KJ954

Your aim should be to handle QTxx with either opponent. This appeared in one AR's column, and according to suit play his solution was wrong, in fact you don't have to consult suitplay to realise that he is wrong.

Hint: the case is close to playing

K854

AQ932

ok, not so close to that.

(3)

Another one which Ashok and Prajwal were arguing about is this

AKJ9543

5

is it the standard "5 never; 4 ever" ( with Q is outside, play for drop always when 4 cards and finesse when 5 cards are out side?)

Answers:

(1) - Cash the Ace and play low towards 9. cover if your RHO plays T. If he plays Q, you have your 3 tricks. If the 9 loses to Ten - now what? Should play for the suit to be 3-3 even if you have the other intermediate, like AK8x -opp- J9x

its similar to AK9x -opp- Jxx; at trick two if the jack loses to queen, don't finesse the 9. play for the drop.

(2) simple one - play King then low towards 8

(3) Yes, you have to finesse.


Adios,
guthi

Another entry puzzle

This hand from Positive Declarer Play by Reese and Pottage caught my eye. Like the last post, the key lies in finding a second entry to dummy, but thats where the similarity stops.


West opens 2H and you end up in 6S. The D6 is led. Plan your play.


Given the 2H opening, the D6 looks very suspiciously like a singleton. Not that ducking the lead would help you. It looks like your best bet is to pitch all your diamond losers on the hearts, conceding only the heart ace. Problem is, there is only one entry to dummy: the CQ. How to work around this pesky stumbling block?

I bet you were thinking, if only I could switch the CQ with one of the other club honours, then I can finesse the ten for an extra entry; if the diamond is indeed a singleton lead, it is probable that west has the CJ. But alas, the club is a queen.

Keep thinking on those lines. You're very close to the solution.

Have you got it yet? Win the DA, draw trumps, cash a high club and finesse the club ten. Now play a high heart jetissoning the remaining club honour. That leaves two top hearts and one top club in dummy for the diamond pitches. When west wins his heart ace, he has to return a heart or a club to dummy, providing you with that elusive entry!

Cheers
Prashanth.

Ottlik's Entry Squeeze

If you've read Adventures in Card Play by Geza Ottlik and Hugh Kelsey, you would be as awed by Ottlik's bridge outlook as I am. Here is an Ottlik hand demonstrating the "Entry Squeeze".


The contract is 6NT and the SJ is led. Can you think of a legitimate way (not based on deception or defensive error) to make 6, assuming you can read the opponents' card position correctly? The title is a huge hint.


The main problem appears to be a lack of entries to dummy to finesse the hearts twice. Assuming split honours, if the opponents are forced to discard in the heart suit, you may end up needing only one entry. For example, if RHO comes down to Hx, you can enter dummy, finesse once and cash the ace dropping the honour and getting an extra trick. If LHO comes down to Hx, then you lead low to the T. If he goes up, you need only one entry to finesse the J. If he ducks, you lose this trick but cash the ace dropping the honour next time. Either way, you need only one entry; so both opponents have to hold on to Hxx in hearts.

Ottlik won the lead with the SK and ran his clubs. On the last club he reached this position: (dummy pitches a heart)

We have already established that both opponents cannot afford to pitch any more hearts. East clearly cannot part with a diamond. But what about west? If he pitches a diamond, he will be exposed to an elimination play: cash diamonds and spades ending in dummy, then finesse the heart; west will have nothing but hearts to return. So he, too, must hang on to three carder diamond. Hence, both opponents pitch spades, which looks safe - superficially. But in reality the spade discards have generated an extra entry to dummy: overtake Q with A, finesse the hearts, then overtake 3 with 6, finesse again in hearts. They have been entry squeezed! Awesome!

Cheers,
Prashanth.

From The Desk of GIB

You reach a non-vulnerable 3NT in an uncontested auction (better not disclosed) after partner opens the bidding and are greeted by the lead of ♣ T. You discard a heart and your RHO plays ♣ Q. Plan the play.

Dummy
♠ Q94
♥ K9743
♦ A8753
♣ —

You
♠ A87532
♥ Q
♦ KQJ
♣ KJ3

GIB wins the first trick, cashes two top diamonds from hand, and, noticing the 3–2 break, overtakes the last diamond with ♦ A. Then GIB cashes the two good diamonds. LHO discards two clubs, while RHO discards two hearts and then a club. Now what?

The right play, according to GIB, is now to lead ♠ Q and run it, which—witnesses to this deal might remember—is what I did. I had in mind an avoidance play against RHO, which ultimately aims at setting up a spade trick.

In the actual layout, LHO wins with his singleton ♠ K and returns a heart to put the contract one down (double-dummy best defence).

Double-dummy 10 tricks are available at notrump if declarer plays a low spade to his ace after cashing all his diamonds, so GIB would go down (as did I). So go celebrate, all you double-dummy junkies.

(LHO's cards are ♠ K ♥ A65 ♦ T64 ♣ AT9642. RHO's cards are: ♠ JT6 ♥ JT82 ♦ Q875 ♣ 92.)

Xridge - Men

Scott Prashanth Summers (Cyclops) was trying to fight his distraction and concentrate on development of his mutant powers. He has been distracted by telepathic interaction with Jean X Gray. Cyclops looked at his partner Guthi Logan (Wolverine) his cards with his adamantium claws. The bidding was brisk until this point.

Cyclops held:

-Void-
AKT9xx
K8xx
Qxx

Bidding so far uncontested was (all non-vul)
1D-1H
2c-?

Cyclops was thinking, thought was his mentor Professor X would do at this situation. Then his thoughts wandered to Jean X Gray. Then he saw his partner wolverine's claws sharp edges. They were aching for some action. As though that was an inspiration, he called 6D. All said pass.

Analysis: The mutant pair is playing modified precision club. 1D opening promises no diamonds at all. But the 2C rebid confirms at least 9 cards in minors. If partner had 4Ds and 5Cs , its better to play in a 4-4D with the 5-3 as a potential source of tricks. If partner has 5Ds and 4Cs, there should be entries to cash those juicy hearts, which look rather easy to establish - entries being the only question. there could be two key cards missing, but is there a convenient way to ask for them?

How about a 4th suit force? If you are looking for a 3 carder heart, its not so useful as this partnership raises with three cards on unbalanced hands and tends to rebid 1NT with all balanced hands. 9 cards in the minors implies its not a balanced hand - so unlikely opener has 3 hearts. there is no point trying for a 6H, the short trump hand can't take the spade ruffs. So 4th suit force should be with an intention of setting diamonds as trump and investigating slam. Ok-a?

If you are a regular partner ship, and have agreements on void wood, its the best. I expect the auction to go like this: 1D-1H; 2C-2S; 2NT-3D; 3S* - showing spade king and (no heart honour?). Will you still push for a slam with that hand? Will 4S still be void wood? Confusing-a?


Q1) Do you agree with Cyclops's bid - the blast to 6D?
Q2) after 4sf and setting Ds as trump, in that sequence with 3-1-5-4 and spades and hearts being KJx and Q what will you respond over 3D ?
Q3) will 4S be void wood in that sequence? 1D-1H; 2C-2S; 2NT-3D; 3S*

The play:

-Void-
AKT9xx
K8xx
Qxx


KJx
x
AJTxx
A9xx

Lead: small Spade.

Quick analysis: Do not discard anything from dummy - you are in danger of losing a trump trick. just ruff the spade in dummy. Establishing hearts seems to be the best plan.
If hearts break 3-3 and trumps break 2-2; there are tricks all over the place. 5 trumps, two spade ruffs, 5 hearts and a club - 13 tricks.
If hearts break 3-3 and trumps break 3-1; you can still make 12 tricks and may be even 13 if the Q dropped and RHO has the 3 carder trump.
If hearts break-4-2 and trumps break 2-2; can make only 12 tricks; 5trumps + 2 spade ruffs + 4 hearts + 1 club. (don't consider Ace of spade dropping/being played on J)
If hearts break 4-2 and trumps break 3-1; most interesting case: Now the heart spots become important. The analysis of that will call for another post I think. So I leave it you junta!

Opener's hand - choice of rebid

Note the choice of rebid - there is a close call between 1NT and 2C. So far - Vinoth and Prajwal answered that they will rebid 1NT; SP, Ashok and I say 2C.
I think if you the rebid is 1NT, there should be methods to make sure partner doesn't push to heart game thinking there is at least a 2 carder with the opener.
Playing 2-way checkback there is a lot of advantage but can it address this problem?

PS: I hope you all got the references to X-Men characters.

What Do You Lead?

Holding ♠ KT2 ♥ QT82 ♦ 874 ♣ AJ9, you find yourself on lead, after your LHO raised your RHO's vulnerable opening (standard) 2 NT to 3 NT. What do you lead?

Assuming that the play after the lead is made will be double-dummy, it's possible to determine by simulations the best lead. Make your choice before reading on.

The average IMPs scored per deal for various leads(compared with the other table, where the opening lead too was double-dummy) are, with 500 hands sampled: ♦ 7/♦ 8 = −1.28; ♦ 4 = −1.30; ♥ T = −1.60; ♥ 8 = −1.77; ♥ 2 = −1.78; ♥ Q = −1.88; ♠ T = −2.02; ♠ 2 = −2.19; ♣ J = −2.54; ♣ 9 = −2.62; ♠ K = −2.89; ♣ A = −3.01.

I'd say the results are somewhat surprising. Noteworthy is the fact that even with the best lead, you're giving away an expectation 1.28 IMPs. The hand given is from Frank Stewart's column for yesterday.

I hope to analyse “perfect leads” of this sort in a more systematic way and blog about it.

Prajwal's Flamboyance?

Prajwal bid to a grand slam in clubs after Vinoth (his partner) had shown a balanced hand in the range 22–23 HCP, holding ♠ xxx ♥ xx ♦ Ax ♣ Axxxxx. At the table, the consensus seemed to be that it was an overbid. But was it?

The auction had revealed that all keycards and the ♣ Q were there (which gives Vinoth ♠ A, ♥ A, and ♣ KQ). Vinoth had also denied the ♥ K. Question: Knowing just this much, with no possibility of knowing anything else, is 7 ♣ the right bid for responder?

I ran a simulation with 500 hands (where Vinoth, in addition to the conditions mentioned here, is forced to hold at least 7 controls, which is the average for a 20-point balanced hand). The frequency table for tricks was: 13 - 56.4 %, 12 - 39.8 %, 11 - 3.4 %, 10 - 0.4 %.

You need slightly more than 60 % chances to bid the grand. That suggests that it was an overbid, but close enough. Remembering that this is double-dummy analysis, perhaps one can make the case that, at single-dummy play, it is in fact the right bid?

And just in case you're wondering what happens if Vinoth is the type of guy not to care whether he has 7 controls, the simulation with 6+ controls reduces the chances only slightly.

DKC in action

Take a look at this slam hand from yesterday.




Bidding commentary:

1H: 11-15, 5 carder

Sapan made a disciplined pass. Not strong enough for a diamond overcall. Not long enough for a diamond preempt.

2C: Natural, game force

It's interesting that Guthi chose to bid 2C rather than Jacoby 2NT. I would have chosen the latter.

3C: 4 card support, does not promise extras

3H: Showing heart support

3S: Showing a better than minimum hand and a 3 card spade fragment (question: how do I bid holding 4504?)

I love these shape-showing bids as compared to control-showing cue bids. One can always cuebid controls later.

4NT: Forget about cue bidding controls. Show me keycards. In hearts and clubs both!

We are playing double suit RKC (DKC for short) in double agreement situations. Guthi's hand is much improved by my 3514 shape (likely I have no values in diamonds, in effect we are playing with a thirty point deck). He bid 4NT intending to:
1) If I bid 5C showing 4 of 6 keycards, bid 6H
2) If I bid 5D showing 3 of 6 keycards, stop in 5H
3) If I bid 5S showing 2 of 6 keycards and the club queen, go and bang his head on the wall. Or my head.

5C: 4 of 6 keycards

Now Guthi knows my entire hand. Literally. My shape, my honours. There is space left for one more major jack somewhere which is anyway inconsequential.

6H: Only needs the club suit to come through, a good enough percentage to bid slam.


Play commentary:

Opponents led and continued diamonds for me to ruff. I pulled trumps and cashed the top spades to get an idea of opponent distribution. Sapan came up with one heart and two spades, so assuming he does not have a 7 carder diamond he must have a 4 carder club.

Here I made a mistake and forgot to unblock the 9 of hearts in dummy. So when the time came to play on clubs the situation was:


If Vinoth's club is not Q or 10 I am in trouble thanks to my lack of forethought. Fortunately the cards were friendly and we made the slam.

Do you:
1) Think slam should be bid on these cards?
2) Like/Dislike the bidding sequence?
3) Have any ideas on how I should bid holding 4504 shape?

Cheers,
SP.

Use of scientific bidding

Quite often you play a board where some of your bidding gadgets actually serve their purpose. You end up playing in the right contract, getting a yummy swing. One such thing happened recently on BBO. It was One of the regular BBO nights for me, with an irregular partner (as usual).

It’s good to use bidding space available to communicate with your partner and find the right spot to play in. The bidding on the table went like this.

2♣- various strong hand

2♦- waiting bid ( 2♥ would be double negative)

2♥- Kokish relay

2♠- Forced bid

2NT- 24-25 balanced hand

3♣- Puppet stayman

3♦- Denies 4 carder ♥

3♥- Check for 4 carder ♠

3♠- Shows 4 carder ♠

Amazing! All the bids from 2♣ to 3♠ were utilized and N can almost write down the various hands that S could have. Time to check for Key cards! SP bids 4NT RKC (1430); 5♣ is the response. Now what? which is the playing spot? 6♠... 6NT...

Stop guessing! N bids 7♠. A 75% slam converted to a 25% Grand slam. (apologies for the crude evaluation of percentages). 17 imps down the drain.

“Partner you had a lousy 24-25 hand!” SP declared.

Postmortem revealed that even with the best hand that South could possibly have (as per the bidding), 7♠ is just about 75% (may be a little lesser).

Don’t worry about the 17 imps! With the use of a scientific approach you are bound to get back the imps lost (provided you make use the information from the bidding).

Know your Zia-isms

The following hand happened on BBO yesterday:


Srini bid a psychic 3H (or semi-psychic considering it was 3rd hand) and left me stuck for a bid. Double would be for takeout, and if I pass it is unlikely that partner will balance at this high bidding level and vulnerability. So I looked again at the vulnerability and bid a brave 3NT. Or foolish, depending upon whether it makes or goes down.

"Nice dummy," commented Hamiko.
"I am a World Class dummy," declared Vinoth.

Hamiko led the 9 of hearts covered by the jack and the ace. Srini backed a low diamond, which I ducked around to the jack. A diamond went back to the ace and a low diamond was returned.

Long Pause #1.

Srini has preempted with A8xxxx so I reckon he must have some redeeming distributional feature, like a side 4 carder in diamonds. If that is the case, Hamiko has Jxx or QJx. The former looks more likely on this defense so I insert the 10. It loses and Hamiko exits passively with the final diamond.

Long Pause #2

So he didn't have a side 4 carder after all. Perhaps he did it because of spade shortness, trying to stop us from finding our 4S contract, in which case it worked, but I can still make 3NT by taking the spade finesse. But for now let me bide my time and try to get a better idea of the distribution.

So I play AK of clubs and run the hearts. Srini plays the ten and jack on the clubs. On the hearts Hamiko discards two clubs and a spade. The queen of clubs hasn't shown itself so I pitch the club from dummy arriving at this position:


If Srini had started with JT of clubs and xx of spades, the SQ will pop up from Hamiko's hand (it's a show-up squeeze) so I play SK and a low spade. Unfortunately the SQ doesn't appear.

Long Pause #3

There are now only two possibilities: Srini started with QJT of clubs and a small spade; or JT of clubs and Qx of spades. Which is more likely?

At this point I get reminded of a paragraph I read in Zia's book. Zia suggests that whenever you are considering a semi-psychic weak two or preempt (from lack of high cards in the suit, too few points, too many points, one fewer card, whatever), the scales should tip in favour of making the bid when you hold Qx (or even Qxx) in a key suit. The opponent will invariably finesse into your hand, as opposed to finesse through your hand, or play for a drop if you'd made a simple overcall. Srini is an expert player who knows his Zia-isms; also x A8xxxx Axx QJT has too much offense to be psyching 3H, so I decide to play him for Qx in spades.

I put up the spade ace and sure enough, the queen drops. 3NT made.

"I don't know why you were thinking so much. It was a simple enough show-up squeeze, no problem for a player at your level," commented Vinoth.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

The next time I made a tough contract, I threatened him into saying "wdp".

Cheers,
SP.

Amazing Deal

Declarer play is completely about planning and execution. By execution, i mean which card to play at which trick (order of play). We all sense the importance of planning because it is required in each and every deal but the execution part is not required in every deal. This deal shows the importance of execution part.
I was kibitzing this deal on BBO.

South is declarer

x x x x
x
Q 9 8 7 x
A x x

K x
A Q x x x x
A 10 x x
x

East is dealer

opens precision 1D

Bidding :
1D-1H-x-P
1S-2D-2S-4D
P-5D-x-ALL PASS

West doubled 5D

Lead was !S by West

small spade and E took it with Ace

and returned a !D, now plan the play
by yourself before seeing the solution.

Assume West to be having K J x of Diamonds for his double.
Losers: Spade Ace, Diamond King. You need to ruff 4 losers from dummy, but if u ruff 4 losers, you have to give two Diamonds losers to K and J. So, this is not a feasible line. The alternative line is dummy reversal in which u need to set up Hearts. Playing for !H to be 4-2 is much better option because East opened precision 1D and is most likely known to have a singleton in Diamonds. So shape of his hand is 4-4-4-1. You can ruff at most one two hearts in dummy due to communication problem, so best line is to finnese in Hearts. So, duck the Diamond, West takes it with Diamond K and returns a !S. Take it with King and play a club to Ace, Heart finnese, then Ace and ruff a Heart. Now play Diamond to the Ace, ruff another Heart, draw the last trump and enter the hand in Diamonds and cash ur Hearts to make the contract.
Here planning was very important. You could also ruff a club instead of playing Diamond to the Ace, ruff a Heart, then draw trumps by first playing Diamond Queen and then Ace ending in hand and cash ur Hearts.

Now lets see the scenario of a Club lead (the best for defence). Lets see what happens if we follow the same line of play. Take Club Ace. Heart finnese and cash Heart Ace. Now ruff a Heart. Low Spade to the King , but East will go up with Ace and return a low club which u have to ruff in hand. Ruff another Heart. Current Position is:

x x
-
Q 9 x (Dummy)
x


K
x x
A 10 x (Hand)
-


U r in dummy now and cant cash your Hearts. When declarer ruffed two Hearts, West discarded his two Spades and he is now void in Spades. Try to enter hand with D Ace. Now u can cash ur Hearts and West is unable to ruff, if he ruffs dummy will overruff. But this line fails if West started with K x in Diamonds and East with J x in Diamonds because East will ruff when u play Hearts.
Instead of playing spade after first heart ruff, if declarer tries for second Heart ruff by going to hand via Club ruff, then he will always be down because he will be short-trumped and wont be able to enjoy his Hearts.

Alternative line of play is :
After taking Club Ace, take Heart finnese, cash the Heart Ace, ruff one Heart and play a Spade.
Suppose East takes Spade Ace and returns a club, ruff it in hand. Now don't ruff one more Heart (the reason will be given later). Play low Diamond to Queen.
Various Scenarios:
1) Suppose West ducks Diamond King, then take it with Queen and return to hand with Diamond Ace.
Now u can cash Hearts. When he ruffs with master trump, u have still 2 more entries to cash the Heart.
2)Suppose West goes up with Diamond King, and returns a Club, ruff it in hand cash Diamond Ace. Now there is one more Diamond outside and two more in dummy.
Now can u see why not ruff the second Heart earlier? So that, u can enter the dummy by ruffing second Heart and draw the last trump. Now enter hand with Spade King and cash your Hearts.

The most important thing in this hand was delaying the second Heart ruff to make the contract cold.
This hand shows why u should not neglect the execution part of dummy play.

Squeezing the Dummy

Squeeze plays are fun.

But why should declarers have all the fun?

I have read about defenders squeezing the dummy (easier to do than squeezing the declarer, as you can see all the cards!), for example this NYTimes article and this post by the Korbels. But for once, I was in the middle of it. Well, nearly all the current readers of this blog were, but I'm putting this up for posterity's sake anyway :)


After a modern preempt by Prajwal and a balancing double by Guthi, we ended up defending 3CX and I led a low heart. Guthi won and shifted to a trump. Prajwal inserted the jack, I won and returned my lone spade.

Prajwal read me for a three carder spade and hoped to pull trumps and cash the (hypothetical) thirteenth spade in his hand, so he won and played two rounds of trumps, leaving me with the master trump and then exited with a spade. Guthi won as I signaled a diamond, and as he cashed two more spades I sat back and waited for the diamond through for -3.

But wait! Guthi played his fifth spade instead of the diamond, landing me in trouble. If I overruffed this one, I would be endplayed for sure at this position:

I would have a choice of underleading the HK or the DK, both options leading to the loss of a trick. So, with the instinct of seeing a punch being aimed at my face, I ducked and threw a heart. Dummy naturally threw a heart as well.

Now Prajwal led a trump to endplay me but ran into a little snag: what could he discard from dummy? If he threw a heart, I could safely exit with my HK. If he threw a diamond, I could exit with a low diamond. Dummy was squeezed!

He saw it an instant before I did, and drew the unhappy face in the chat window to collect -3.

Cheers!
SP.

P.S. Read the two squeezing-the-dummy articles I linked above, they are quite entertaining!

Think Ahead!

I was playing a team match on BBO when the following hand came up:

2D: Strange idea of a vulnerable weak 2, even for a 3rd hand opening
3H: Transfer
4S: I expect partner to have some points on this bidding, and I have a great hand in support of spades.

A club lead and a club continuation on winning the spade ace easily beats the contract, but the lead at my table was the spade ace followed by the spade jack.

What you should be thinking as declarer:
We appear to be a trick short. The only hope seems to be to eliminate the diamonds and throw an opp in with the third heart, hoping that whoever wins has to underlead the CA or give a ruff-sluff.

What you should be thinking as defender:
If I win the third heart I am going to be endplayed... unblock! unblock!

Declarer has to make it as hard as possible for the defender to find the unblock. When playing the hearts, play low to the Ace first and then low to the King. Since defender doesn't know what's in the closed hand, it may not occur to him to play second hand high to unblock. It's all too easy for him to figure it out if you play King then Ace of hearts.

Is that all? No, there is something else you can do. Play the top hearts first (in the mentioned order) before eliminating the diamonds! Not so easy for the defender to see what's coming at trick 4 itself. A decent defender will think 2-3 tricks in advance, but it takes a pretty good defender to think several tricks ahead.

For the record, I eliminated the diamonds, cashed Ace then King of hearts and the defender forgot to unblock his HQ. Game made. Funnily enough, game was made at the other table as well, with a similar lack of unblock (on a different auction and a diamond lead). Both guilty defenders called themselves experts.

Cheers,
SP.

The best claim I've heard of

I was reading Terence Reese's book Play these hands with me, and I highly recommend it. The book helps you to get inside an expert declarer's head and think the way he does. This makes all the difference between simply reading about expert plays and figuring out all 52 cards in order to make those plays correctly.

The following hand had me smiling and shaking my head for a full minute after I read it.
The contract is 7NT and the 10 of diamonds is led. Reese won in dummy and led a club to his ace and east showed out. At this point Reese claimed all.

Can you figure out the line?

Here is his explanation: first test the spades by cashing AKQ.

If the spades break 3-3, then the marked club finesse provides the thirteenth trick.

If west has the long spades, then cash all the red suit winners, squeezing him in the black suits for the thirteenth trick.

If east has the long spades, then cash the king of clubs and the diamond winners, arriving at this position:
At this point, west has to hang on to three clubs so he can have at most one heart. Now pitch the club, take the club finesse and cash the CQ, squeezing east in the majors.

From reading Kelsey I can put a name to this squeeze: it is a positional double squeeze in the inverted form (yeah yeah I know all the theory :P).

Quite a claim! It would probably have been faster to just play the hand. But you must admit it makes for a highly entertaining read.

Cheers,
SP.

Junior teams for Beijing announced

The U-26 and U-28 teams for the World Mind Games at Beijing later this year have been announced.

U-28: Aniket, Sapan, Prashanth, Guthi, Sandip, Pravin. 7th man: Prasenjit.

U-26: Anurag, Ayan, Dashu, Rishabh, Vinoth, Karan.

The U-28 team looks in decent shape; although we have only two world-class players in Sapan and Aniket, there are three pairs, not six players, which is good. Compare that to the U-26 team in which apart from Ayan and Dashu, nobody has played with anyone else. Add to that the fact that Karan is fourteen years old and needs plenty of training.

The Bridge Federation of India, though, has reason to be concerned about the teams given the quality (or rather, the lack of it) of play at the trials. None of us played to our potential; we are all far better players than how it must have appeared that weekend. The defense in particular looked very shoddy, even from the relatively better players.

Consider the following two deals from a set Guthi and I played against Aniket and Sandip. Keep in mind that all of us are supposed to be among the top six junior players in India.

(I don't remember the exact bidding or spots, but they are not relevant to the moral of the story)

I started with three top spades, Guthi pitching the D6 and the C2 in that order. We were playing upside down carding with odd/even first discard, so this sequence discourages diamonds and encourages clubs. Obediently I shifted to a club.

Declarer won with the ace, cashed DA and ran trumps. Placing partner with Qxxx of clubs and declarer with DQ, I discarded all my clubs, hanging on to a top spade (over the 9 in dummy) and a top diamond (over the imagined Q in hand). Declarer now made all his clubs for the contract. Note that even if I had read the diamond position correctly, I was caught in a positional spade-club squeeze and there was no defense.

The organizers and I were both quick to criticize Guthi, but it was Aniket who pointed out that I could have solved all problems by leading a fourth spade and killing the menace in dummy. Now no true squeeze can develop, and by the time I come down to JT9 of clubs and K of diamonds partner would have found a way to undo his mistake and make the position clear to me (by pitching the queen of clubs or queen of diamonds or both).

On the following hand I was declarer and the misdefense was from them. (Hands rotated, EW hands approximate)


Needing little more than a spade honour from partner, I bid the vulnerable game but dummy came up with all the wrong honours. West led the D8 and I won with dummy's queen. Hoping that east will have a stiff spade honour, I led a trump but east played low and west won. Now a return through any of dummy's honours will ensure an immediate one-trick set but Aniket returned a trump, doubtless to prevent diamond ruffs. This works, too, as if I ruff a diamond with the third trump in dummy I will be stuck in the wrong hand. Sandip won with SK and returned the DT. I won, and with nothing better to do, ran the trumps and willed east to discard a diamond. Sandip obliged and I ran all the trumps and diamonds to catch him in a strip-squeeze.

Dummy: - / K 9 / - / Q 8
Declarer: - / 3 / 7 / A 5

The D7 is led and the H9 pitched. What does Sandip do on this trick? If he bares his ace of hearts, I can throw him in with the heart and force him to lead away from his CK. If he bares his CK, I can cash two club tricks. His hesitation on this trick was telling, and when he pitched a club I cashed the ace of clubs dropping his king.

I am not sure if Aniket's trump return was a mistake, but Sandip definitely made two errors. He must not pitch any diamonds (they lead low from three small cards in a suit bid by partner so he had the count) on the run of the trumps. Having made the mistake of pitching a diamond, he can see the strip-squeeze coming and must do his thinking early, baring the king of clubs well before the ninth trick. Since I can't be sure of the count in clubs and hearts I may play to throw him in with the ace of hearts.

Hopefully we will all get into shape before Beijing. The World Mind Games begin on October 3rd.

Cheers,
SP.

Put On Your Simulation Specs

It's your call after your partner bid 2NT (20–21 HCP) as dealer and your RHO passed. What do you do with ♠ 98 ♥ T6 ♦ AT962 ♣ 8743? (That was the Level 1 bidding question on BridgeClues on 14 June.)

Let's say your choices are limited to raising to 3NT and passing. What is the expectation gain (in IMPs) for bidding 3NT over passing, assuming whatever you do will end the auction? Estimate the two numbers, one for each vulnerability, before seeing the answer in the next paragraph. Let me make the question precise now. Your agreement is to open 2NT if and only if the hand has 20 or 21 high-card points, is balanced, and has no 5-card major. Play, starting with the opening lead, should be assumed to be double-dummy perfect. Put on your simulation specs and guess two numbers.

When vulnerable, bidding 3NT is two point two six IMPs better than passing, and when not vulnerable, bidding 3NT is zero point eight five better than passing. Now a different question. How useful are the diamond intermediates? What're the two numbers if you change ♦ T9 to ♦ 87?

When vulnerable, 3NT is zero point six nine better than passing; not vulnerable, 3NT is zero point two worse than passing (figures based on 500 random hands). Drastic change, don't you think?

A Question of Odds

First, how do you play this hand in 6 ♥ after the lead of ♠ K? Read ahead only after deciding on your line of play.

♠ 10 6 4
♥ A 6
♦ K Q J 10 3
♣ A 6 4

♠ A 8 7
♥ K J 10 7 5 3
♦ A 6
♣ K 5

Well, the correct line is to win the first trick in hand, then cash the two top hearts. If the queen hasn't appeared (but hearts are 3-2), you hope that the defender with long trumps also holds at least three diamonds, because then you can get rid of the losing spades from your hand.

But do you know why this is better than finessing the ♥ J after cashing ♥ A? Do you analyse these situations correctly?

Whenever you have an 8-card trump fit including A, K, and J, and the jack is finessable, give a thought to cashing honours from the top. Given that trumps are 3–2, the probability that the queen is doubleton to that that it's trebleton is 2:3. That means a difference of just over thirteen per cent (a fifth of 68 %, the probability that hearts will be 3–2). The finesse will win only half the time. So if you can “recover&rdquo the 7 % through a second chance not available when you finesse, you must reject the finesse.

How do we do here? The second leg of your plan comes into picture when the queen is trebleton. How often will it accompany three or more diamonds? Think of it this way: the long-trump hand can have 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 diamonds, and the probabilities of these should be roughly symmetrical about the half mark, 3.5. Since 3+ diamonds is favourable to you, the chances of you succeeding in your second leg are over 50 %. More than half of what? Well, the three-fifths chunk of 68 % when the queen is trebleton, i.e. more than half of around forty per cent. (It turns out that this “backup” plan actually adds about 25.4 % to you chance of success, while it costs only about 7 % to have the backup available. So the correct line is markedly better.

It's surprising how well you can do with simple approximations if you remember a few basic odds. Sometime in the future, I'll list some common odds that I think it is useful to remember

Impress Your Palooka

Your regular partner is busy and you're reduced to playing with a particularly uncouth palooka at the club. At unfavourable vulnerability, you pick up ♠ Q7 ♥ AJT7 ♦ 42 ♣ AKT85 and open 1 ♣ as dealer, with some misgivings about your rebid. Upon hearing 1 ♦ from your palooka partner, you bid the automatic 1 ♥. At your next turn—a crashboombang later—you can only pass the palooka's 7 ♣ “rebid”. Your fears are somewhat allayed when dummy hits the table:

♠ AKT
♥ 5
♦ AK873
♣ Q972

♠ Q7
♥ AJT7
♦ 42
♣ AKT85

Lead: ♠ 5

Your uncouth partner is sure to give it to you unabashedly if you go down. Avoid this sorry fate.

Second, assume your partner bid only 6 ♣. Now how do you take insurance against a volley of abuse?

Pick-a-Double-Squeeze

This interesting hand popped up at the Alumni Club pairs game last sunday.

Playing SAYC, sitting South (hands rotated) you open 2C and LHO bids 2S. You end up in 6C and dummy tables:

LHO leads a top spade and shifts to a trump. You can count 11 tricks off the top. The two best options available to you for the twelfth trick are:

Double Squeeze #1:

If east alone holds the diamond guard, you can run trumps (pitching a spade, a diamond and two hearts), cash DA and DK arriving at this position with the lead in dummy:
West has to hang on to the high spade, and east has to hang on to a diamond honour, so neither can hold three hearts. Cash the AK of hearts and watch the lowly 3 of hearts fetch your twelfth trick.

Double Squeeze #2:

If east holds a five card or longer heart suit, you can pull trumps, cash the ace of diamonds and the top two hearts, and run the trumps (pitching a spade, a diamond and a heart) arriving at this position on the play of the last trump:
West has to hang on to his top spade, so you pitch the SQ. Watch for east's discard. I hope you have been counting the hearts, for either the H3 has to cash, else east still has a heart. In that case, you can cross to the DK and the small diamond has to win.


Which double squeeze to choose? You have seven cards outstanding in either red suit, but the presence of good intermediates in diamonds makes Squeeze #1 look more attractive; it will work when east holds any five card or longer diamond, as well as QJx or QJxx.

If west had shifted to a heart at trick 2, though, you can only play for Squeeze #2.

In reality the actual layout was quite boring. East turned up with BOTH a five card heart suit AND QJxx in diamonds, so not only did either squeeze work, even a simple automatic squeeze on diamonds and hearts is enough to secure the slam.

Worse still, at our table, Guthi settled for a conservative 3NT, so his squeeze skills were not tested; I became declarer and after the opponents cashed their top two spades I claimed. How boring.

Cheers
Prashanth.

Smith Echo for Dummies

I was explaining Smith Echo to Guthi, and figured I might as well put up a post. I don't have too much experience with Smith Echo myself so this is just an introductory, for-dummies level post.

Smith Echo is used in defense against NT contracts. It applies only when your side leads low and the declarer wins the first trick. It allows both defenders to communicate some information (i.e. attitude signal) regarding the led suit. Whatever suit the declarer plays on trick two, both defenders play high-low to encourage the originally led suit or low-high to say he holds nothing extra beyond what has already been played/promised. It is extremely useful when you need to figure out whether to continue the suit or shift when you get in, no matter which defender you are. Let me elucidate with a couple of examples:























Defending 3NT. Partner leads the spade 3, 5, J, K. Declarer plays the DK out of his hand, which you win. What do you do now? If partner started with AQ or AT of spades with five cards, a spade return immediately scuttles the contract. If he started with four cards, you may need to play a spade through declarer and get a heart back for another spade through. But what if partner does not hold the ace at all? Then a shift is in order. How do you know what the situation is? Smith Echo provides the solution. Watch partner's carding on the diamond play. If he echoes, he is indicating that a spade return will do the trick; else you have to try something else. On this hand, he plays the 3 of diamonds to your ace to indicate that he is not interested in spades (he knows you don't have the ace of spades).

Now, can you figure out what is the correct return to break the contract? Think on it...


Yes, the only winning return is the HJ, known as the "surrounding play". If declarer covers, partner wins and sends a heart through dummy's Tx; if he doesn't cover, simply play another low heart.

Remember that both defenders should be signaling in Smith Echo. Let's try a variation of the same hand, in which it is the other defender who gets back in.























You lead the spade 3, 5, J, K. Declarer plays DK out of his hand, which you win and stop to consider. If partner started with QJx of spades, you need to return a spade. Otherwise, you must shift to a low heart and hope to find partner with the king. Again, if you were watching partner's diamond cards, on this hand he would have played low to your DA, and you must switch to a heart. Remember to cash the ace of spades before switching, as you were unable to show the smith echo yourself, so he might place you with ATxxx of spades and try to return a spade through declarer instead of the heart!

There are situations in which both defenders get to show Smith Echo on Trick 2. The information communicated this way may be vital in setting the contract.

Cheers,
Prashanth.