Modest intervention - big consequence

This was a less than stellar performance from the local imp-league in January.

Kxxx
AK9x
Txx
Tx

Imps/all vul. The bidding started with two passes and a 1D-opening to me and I felt like overcalling 1H. This isn't my normal style, but sometimes one's got to try new things to widen the horizon. The complete auction:

(pass) - pass - (1D) - 1H;
(2C) - 3H - (4H) - pass;
(4S) - pass - (6C) all pass

Full deal:

_______A984
_______T6532
_______Q2
_______J3
T____________QJ32
QJ84___________
853__________AKJ96
AQ975________K864
_______K765
_______AK97
_______T74
_______T2

Easy make for +1370 and -15 imps. The 1H-overcall was the difference between a partscore and a making slam! The board were played across the room at 12 tables resulting in 1 slam, 3 games and 8 partscores. Our team-mates had the following auction:

pass - 1D;
1H - 1S;
1NT - pass

Not really close ;-)

As for my overcall, I probably deserved some punishment...

Down memory lane - part 2

My first US trip was in May 1990. I went to New York and Atlantic City with Magnus Lindkvist. On the agenda were the classic Cavendish Invitational Pairs and the Omar Sharif Individual (which Zia won and writes about in his autobiography).

Magnus and I were staying with the late Edgar Kaplan in his combined living quarters and Bridge World office. Quite an experience. No memorable finishes in either event but this deal against Paul Soloway in the Cavendish is hard to forget.

Q
Qxxxx
ATx
xxxx

This was Paul's hand and the auction started with a Swedish 2-way 1C (11-13 bal / any 16+) to his right. After a positive reply showing 5+ spades by LHO (that would be me) and a relay sequence, opener having a strong hand, the auction eventually came to a halt in 6S and he had to lead.

There seemed to be some confusion about the later parts of the bidding; probably a wheel or two had come off. Dummy had shown 55 in blacks but declarer seemed to believe something else and the ensuing ace-asking mechanism probably had misfired as well (as a consequence).

A lone, young, female kibitzer leaned over to see Paul's hand as he led the obvious ace of diamonds to check dummy. This was the view (Paul and dummy screen-mates):

_______KT9xx
_______x
_______xx
_______KQJxx
Q
Qxxxx
ATx
xxxx

Partner discouraged and Paul shifted to a heart as this was the most likely trick to disappear if the defence had another ace. About 10 seconds later, declarer claimed.

______KT9xx
______x
______xx
______KQJxx
Q___________xxx
Qxxxx_______Txxx
ATx_________Jxx
xxxx_________Ax
______AJxx
______AKJ
______KQxxx
______x

This was some contract. It required the ace of diamonds lead, suit breaking 3-3, a heart away from the queen (unless finesse working) and a non-club continuation. Not to forget that the trumps queen had to be neutralized, one way or the other. Now all the clubs in dummy went away on red cards for +1430, cross-imped.

Paul didn't say anything. Sabine Zenkel (Auken), the kibitzer, left the table.

I love this game...

Road sign

What would you do with:
AK9x
9
T97xx
98x

...playing imps (none vul) when your partner opens 1H (11-16, 5+suit) and your RHO doubles?

My guess is that a lot of players would bid 1S, just as if there had been no double. My experience is that in this type of situation, you should pass with shortness in partners suit without 6+ suit or genuine 2-suiter (55+) even with values for bidding.

Being short in partner's suit is road sign for 'danger' and passing *always* leads to better results than bidding. What's most likely to happen is that you go down in a partscore instead of going plus on defence. With a better hand you can/should XX of course.

Here's the hand (from the archives), played in the Swedish top division:

________
______AQJT65
______J85
______AT72
J8753________QT42
432__________K87
KQ6__________A3
J5___________KQ64
______AK96
______9
______T9742
______983

The auction went:

1H - (X) - pass - (2S);
3H - (4S) - X all pass

Ace of H was led but when partner continued with the queen (instead of J/T), I misstakenly shifted to a diamond instead of a club and the defence lost a trick. +300 was a still good for +9 imps then teammates went +100 defending a heart partscore.

As always, a single deal proves nothing. But you can take my word for that passing is the percentage call.

Or don't - the choice is yours.

'Being Ulf' - part 2

On all 3 deals I was a defender and succeded in diverting the declarer from making the contract by playing 2nd hand high. This is not really a difficult play, just something that you should keep in mind and be able to do 'in tempo' or you ruin the 'illusion'.

Deal 1

______AQT62
______AT
______K76
______654
KJ9_________543
KQ954_______J7632
Q___________984
QJ93________T2
______87
______8
______AJT532
______AK87

Playing 6D, declarer won the K of H, ruffed a heart to hand and led a spade up. I inserted the K and that convinced declarer that spades weren't breaking, so he turned his attention to the club suit instead, playing 3 rounds without touching trumps. A 4th round saw him ruff high in dummy and finesse in diamonds...

The only other table in slam (imp-league match, same boards all matches) made an overtrick.


Deal 2

______K2
______A654
______KJ872
______J5
T984________Q76
Q2__________K3
A65_________QT43
AQ96________8732
______AJ53
______JT987
______9
______KT4

4H with spade T lead, 2nd round East played the queen. Declarer now abandoned spades and played heart to the ace and another one. Down 1, a bit unluckily, when I could win and push a club through and there were no winning choice.

Deal 3

______87
______AJ
______QJT42
______K653
653__________KJ4
KT72_________983
8____________97653
QT742________J8
______AQT92
______Q654
______AK
______A9

6S on a diamond lead, heart finesse and spade to the king and ace. Declarer went for the 5-1 trump break by leading a low to dummy, which I won the the J to give partner a ruff for the setting trick.

Be on the lookout for '2nd hand high' plays.

'Being Ulf' - part 1

The January 2006 issue of Bridge Today contained an article by friend (and former teammate) Anders Wirgren, entitled 'Being Ulf'. It contained 3 declarer play problems (imp scoring), all of which I was a part of. Here they are:

Deal 1

AQT62
AT
K76
654

87
8
AJT532
AK87

You play 6D after a 1S - 2D start. West leads the K of hearts. You win and ruff the remaining heart in hand to lead a spade up. West follows with the K and you win the ace. How would you continue?

Deal 2

K2
A654
KJ872
J5

AJ53
JT987
9
KT4

Contract is 4H after the 1D - 1H; 2H - 2S; 4H. LHO leads the T of spades, showing 0/2 higher. With the intent to discard a club on the 3rd spade (queen is onside, we know that from the lead), you win the K at trick 1 and continues with another. On this trick RHO plays the Q and you win in hand. Plan?

Deal 3

87
AJ
QJT42
K653

AQT92
Q654
AK
A9

On this deal, from the Swedish top division, you opened a strong 1C, got a gameforcing 2D response and differing views about supporting partner later with a weak doubleton got you to the optimistic contract of 6S. West leads the 8 of diamonds. You need to clear trumps and hooking the queen is a good start, so you enter dummy with heart so the J and lead a spade. On this trick East plays the K and you win. Now what?

Continued tomorrow.

Missing data or divine guidance?

Going through the Vugraph archive from the recent Vanderbilt in St Louis, this lead problem came up in the quarter-final between Nickell and Tuszynski. Hamman had (all white):

Q6432
QT
54
QT63

Kowalski opened a Polish 1C, Hamman passed, Tuszynski bid 1D (0-6), Soloway passed and the bidding continued 1NT (19-20) - 2NT; 3NT all pass.

What would you lead?

At the other table, Wojewoda led a low spade against Meckwell's 2NT - 3NT auction; wouldn't we all? Something tells me that the Vugraph operator forgot to fullfill his duties at the featured table as Hamman tabled the queen of hearts!! Full deal:

______T7
______J86432
______A86
______A2
K85__________AJ9
95___________AK7
Q972_________KJT3
J875_________K94
______Q6432
______QT
______54
______QT63

How's that for a hit? 3 down and +11 imps compared to the +430 Rodwell brought back. Soloway must have overcalled 1H in real life or that Bob Hamman looks like a man with divine connections...

Anyone who saw this 'live' on BBO?

Italian preempts

Is this title an oxymoron? In the Australian OzOne forum, Hans Sartaj wrote about the Italian's, having just lost to them again in Yeh Bros Cup. He states "Italians hardly ever open a 3-level preempt" among other interesting observations (I could add an item or two from my own experience).

Let's go to St Louis NABC, a couple of weeks ago, for the Vanderbilt semi-final between Henner-Welland (event winners) and Cayne. Sartaj's statement was substantiated already on board 1.

N/none

_______QT65432
_______864
________
_______Q53
K987__________
3____________AKQJ5
KQ652________T984
AT6__________J987
_______AJ
_______T972
_______AJ73
_______K42

Open room auction (action):

----3S - X - 4S
6D - p - p - X all pass

Henner-Welland made the typical preempt with 3S as North. This is normal to most people (I believe), although there are some who hate prempting with a void. East (Cayne) got in a small jam; you will find players voting for pass, double and 4H. Cayne chose the flexible take-out double, which probably would be a majority choice.

After Sementa raised to 4S, Seamon took a practical stab at 6D (infering the spade void from the bidding), doubled on the way out by Sementa. Probably more worried about missing a grand than going down in a small slam moments earlier, Seamon had to concede down 1.

In the closed room Nunes held the North hand and passed (surprise ;-). After Balicki-Zmudzinski started 1H - 2D, he tried a modest 2S and the bidding continued 3D - 3NT, just making for -11 imps.

"...worry of generating a random result impacts their bidding style. It makes them conservative on preempting (avoid going for 800) and aggressive on bidding game (avoid game-swing)."

Food for thought.