Wednesday, 24 February 2016

Watching the spots

Game all
Dealer West
  • K9653
  • AKJ8
  • AQ2
  • Q
N
W
E
S
  • A10
  • 732
  • J84
  • A10964
West
North
East
South
Paul
Simon
Jon
Verity
1Strong
Pass
18-10 bal
Pass
1NT17-19
Pass
3NT
All pass

You find yourself in 3NT having shown 17-19 balanced or nearly so. North leads 2, fourth best in principle, you play low from dummy, South plays 5 with no apparent difficulty, and you win the queen. You try K, which gets the four on your left and the five on your right, both odd length in principle. How do you play at matchpoints? I don't claim there's a clear answer to this question.

LHO seemed to have led from KJxx, suggesting that he didn't have a four-card major. But that didn't tell me which major to play on. Unable to decide, I tried leading Q instead. RHO won this and returned a heart. I thought that was more likely to be from four low than queen to four, so I put the eight in, losing to the nine. LHO returned a diamond, to the nine and my ace. I cashed the ace of hearts, the queen falling on my left, then the jack of hearts, getting a spade from LHO, a club from dummy, and the eight of clubs from RHO. Now what?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Tuesday, 31 March 2015

You can't believe everything you read

I recently acquired a pile of old bridge magazines, and came across this hand in a report by Pietro Forquet on the Italian Team Championships, in The Bridge World for July 1968:
E-W game
Dealer South
  • 106
  • 107
  • AK7654
  • 976
N
W
E
S
  • A5
  • AKQJ2
  • Q
  • QJ1054
West
North
East
South
 
Walter
 
Giorgio
 
 
 
1Roman
1
Xvalues
Pass
2canape
2
Pass
Pass
35 clubs
Pass
4
Pass
45 hearts
All pass


At the other table North cashed his nine top tricks in 3NT, but at this table 4 went off. Forquet notes that "West led the king of spades and Giorgio could not make the contract since the 4-2 trump split didn't give him time to establish the clubs", but that 5 could have been made. 4 is a better contract than Forquet acknowledges, but can't be made because East has four hearts and a diamond singleton — what's the best (but failing) line? And how should 5 be made on the same lead?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Thursday, 12 March 2015

Bad slam

Love all
Dealer West
  • AKQJ106
  • 10985
  • 65
  • 3
N
W
E
S
  • 9854
  • A72
  • AQ
  • AK102
West
North
East
South
Simon
Jon
Verity
Paul
Pass
1
Pass
2NTraise
Pass
4
Pass
6
All pass


You find yourself in 6 on this hand, and thank your partner warmly enough, reflecting that if you were 6241 you'd be taking the diamond finesse for an overtrick instead of in a near-hopeless position, and that while your 4 jump suggested good spades, you might have had a little something outside. The opening lead is 2, right-hand opponent playing the seven. How do you proceed?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Wednesday, 14 January 2015

Camrose double fit 3

Game all
Dealer East
  • AKQ105
  • J5
  • 863
  • J85
  • none
  • A10842
  • A10952
  • Q63
N
W
E
S
  • 974
  • K973
  • KQJ74
  • 9
  • J8632
  • Q6
  • none
  • AK10742
West
North
East
South
John
Jonathan
Tommy
Paul
—
—
Pass
1
2NTreds
3spades
4
4
Pass
Pass
5
5
Pass
Pass
6
Pass
Pass
6
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

Barry
Tom
Sally
Hugh
—
—
Pass
1carrot club
2reds
4
5
All pass

Mike
Helen
John
Tyrone
—
—
Pass
1
2NTreds
3
4
5
Pass
5
All pass

John
Paul
Ian
Gary
—
—
Pass
1
1
1
3reds
4
5
5
All pass

Iain
Ian
John
Robin
—
—
Pass
1
2NTreds
3
4
4
Pass
Pass
5
5
Xspade control
Pass
6
All pass

Hastings
Gerald
Greer
John
—
—
Pass
1
1
1
3
4
All pass

Par on this hand is two off in 6X. It's important for East or West to show both red suits. It's easier for North-South to bid high if South opens 1 and North shows spades, because if South opens 1 he'll be worried later about his weak suit. If South and East do bid the auction up to 6. North has a difficult high-stakes guess, which Jonathan Mestel did well to get right.

Camrose double fit 2

Here's the second of the double-fit hands from the Camrose:

E-W Game
Dealer West
  • K3
  • QJ109432
  • 7
  • J104
  • J4
  • 6
  • AKJ1062
  • Q753
N
W
E
S
  • 62
  • K
  • 98543
  • AK962
  • AQ109875
  • A875
  • Q
  • 8
West
North
East
South
Hastings
Jonathan
Greer
Paul
1
3
4
4
Pass
Pass
X
5
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

Heather
John
Brian
Michael
1
3
4
4
5
Pass
Pass
5
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

John
Gerald
Ian
John
Iain
David
John
Rex
Hugh
Tony
Tom
Patrick
1
3
5
5
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

Mike
Mark
John
Rory
1
3
4
4NT
5
Pass
Pass
5
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

Every table played this one in 5X making: at this vulnerability par is 5. For my part, I understand 4 by East, but if you're going to bid 5 and double 5, I think you should try 4 first, so you can get to a good slam sometimes. I think South should bid 4 if sufficient, because I did, thinking it very unlikely that 4 would buy the contract and that my side would learn something about spades. I made slightly the wrong decision by removing 4, shrug.

I don't think it possible for East-West to defend 5 undoubled. But bidding 6 would be a reasonable attempt to get a plus score, not too costly if it fails.

Tuesday, 13 January 2015

Camrose double fit 1

It's good advice to strain to declarer on double fit hands, but just how mightily? Suppose your side's combined shapes are 10-9-4-3 in some order, with all the honours in your long suits and none in the short ones. Then, barring ruffs by the defence, your side can make between 10 and 13 tricks depends on how the short suits divide, and so can theirs. If your perfect bidding system tells you your side can make 10 tricks, how high should you save? You can't trust the opponents to tell you, even if their bidding system is equally perfect and they are unwilling to bluff, because they may think they're saving too. You just have to go with your feel, preferring to bid too high than too low. (Ed Manfield's BOLS tip doesn't apply to big double fits — The five level belongs to opponents, except when it doesn't.)

I played in the Camrose at the weekend, and had the opportunity to dice with some good players on three hands of this sort. Here's how we all got on.

E-W Game
Dealer South
  • 753
  • 6
  • 98754
  • AKQ7
  • J109864
  • AK753
  • none
  • J3
N
W
E
S
  • KQ
  • QJ10942
  • AJ
  • 1082
  • A2
  • 8
  • KQ10632
  • 9654
West
North
East
South
Paul
Frazer
Jonathan
Philip
—
—
-
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
X
All pass

Iain
Barry
John
Sally
—
—
-
Pass
1
Pass
2
3
3
5
5
6
6
7
X
All pass

David
Tom
Rex
Hugh
—
—
-
1
2majors
4minors
4
5
Pass
Pass
5
6
Pass
Pass
X
All pass

Rory
Helen
Mark
Tyrone
—
—
-
3
3
5
X
Pass
5
Pass
6
Pass
Pass
7
X
All pass

Robin
Mike
Ian
John
—
—
-
3
4majors
5
5
Pass
Pass
6
6
X
All pass

Tony
John
Patrick
Michael
—
—
-
Pass
1
Pass
2
3
3
5
5
All pass

This one is made a bit less dramatic by each side's having an ace in a short suit. The par spot is 5X, going one off as a save against 4 or 4, so none of us played there.

If South opens 3, I strongly prefer 3 to 4 for the majors, mainly because I don't want to play in hearts opposite equal length. Over that I like 5 by North, with the proviso that he has to bid 6 if 5 on his left comes round to him. I sympathize with every East-West's decision to bid at the five level, and with every North-South decision to save over it. I don't like the seven-level saves, especially if you haven't bid clubs. And I agree with 6 only if the bidder is right than North-South will save. (Possibly I'm just agreeing with what I did at the table: Certainly I agree with my 5 rather than 5 — 5 is too likely to get a raise.

The best table result for North-South was achieved by Patrick Jourdain and Tony Ratcliff, when North bid 5 then left his partner to guess to lead clubs, as he did not. The best result East-West was achieved by John Salisbury and Mike Tedd, when South doubled 6, I suppose showing good defence relative to what his bidding so far had suggested.

Wednesday, 26 November 2014

Tricky lead

Love all
Dealer South
  • Q2
  • 875
  • K1075
  • Q983
  • A1084
  • A1094
  • QJ9
  • 54
N
W
E
S
  • K75
  • K62
  • 83
  • AKJ72
  • J963
  • QJ3
  • A642
  • 106
West
North
East
South
 
Jonathan
 
Paul
12+
Pass
2forcing
Pass
2
Pass
3
Pass
3NT
All pass

After the inverted minor suit raise, West bid his hearts, and East, expecting the contract to be 3NT, pretended to have diamonds. That gave North an awkward lead problem - what's your choice?

The hand was played in 3NT in 15 out of 16 tables in the Tollemache qualifier, often on the auction 1NT (upgrading to 12) - 3NT. North usually led a diamond, and the defence cleared the suit. Declarer then took a club finesse and set up his ninth trick in clubs.

But at my table, Jonathan tried an imaginative 2. That looks bad - declarer now has four spade tricks, which with four tricks from clubs gives him an overtrick. But declarer didn't know that. He thought, took the club finesse successfully, and thought again. Both defenders had followed upwards in clubs, suggesting odd count, so he cashed the top clubs. No luck, South threw 2, ostensibly discouraging, and declarer let go a heart. Now he cleared the clubs, South discarding 3 and declarer 4. North switched to 8 to the jack and ace, and declarer, looking for a ninth trick, decided to lead 10, hoping to pin the 9. No luck there, so, too late, he led a diamond off dummy. North won and played another heart, and South claimed one off.

Wednesday, 15 October 2014

Premier League 6S

E-W Game
Dealer South
  • AJ754
  • J6
  • 843
  • A62
N
W
E
S
  • KQ9
  • A1098
  • AK1095
  • K
West
North
East
South
-
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
1
Pass
1
Pass
2
Pass
3
Pass
3
Pass
4
Pass
4NTRKCB
Pass
52 'aces'
Pass
5NTgrand try
Pass
6
All pass


Two expert declarers in the Premier League reached 6 on this hand, but both went off on the lead of 4. South's K won the first trick, and they switched to Q.

First, some thoughts on the opening lead. The auction has been informative: declarer has five spades, three diamonds, the ace of clubs, the ace or king of spades, probably with the jack, and not much more. Dummy has five diamonds to the ace and king, four hearts to the ace, three spades to the ace or king and the queen, and a club. If that's all they've got, a heart lead will beat the contract by setting up a heart trick before declarer concedes a diamond, so long as declarer has two or three hearts. A trump or club lead may beat it too (the latter depends on who's got the spade ten), but only if declarer's got three clubs.

Making dummy a bit stronger: the contract is almost always making if dummy's got K (unless diamonds are 4-1). But if instead dummy's got K or declarer has Q, a heart still succeeds. And the heart usually wins if dummy's got Q with the king over it.

So, unless diamonds are 4-1, the heart lead is indicated from most holdings, and not much can be deduced from it.

Now how do you play?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Monday, 13 October 2014

Two hard defences in one

Love all
Dealer South
  • K6
  • none
  • AJ53
  • A865432
  • AQ10983
  • AJ107
  • 10
  • K7
N
W
E
S
  • J5
  • K54
  • Q9762
  • J109
  • 742
  • Q98632
  • K84
  • Q
West
North
East
South
Rob
Jonathan
John
Paul
-
-
-
2Multi
2
3
Pass
Pass
3
All pass

This hand comes from the very friendly annual 'varsity alumni match. But it wasn't entirely out of amity that we got the defence wrong. Ace of clubs lead, club ruff, heart ruff, ace of diamonds, diamond to the queen, king and ruff, and now declarer had no choice but to drop the king of spades. Of course we gave suit preference with our choice of club and heart spot cards, but I failed to signal for the diamond underlead which would have put me in to give a second heart ruff. (And I could have given declarer a chance to go wrong by not covering the queen of diamonds.)

It doesn't help for North to signal at trick two for a diamond return - ace of diamonds, club ruffed to kill the discard, but declarer can simply play ace and another spade and South will be squeezed in the reds. So South has to work out when returning a heart that the best chance is to play North for ace of diamonds and a heart void. Is that possible?

At the time I thought 3NT was a lucky make, but the hand records say not. Can you see the winning defence?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Wednesday, 24 September 2014

A simple pleasure

N-S Game
Dealer North
  • 963
  • Q874
  • 73
  • K1094
N
W
E
S
  • 10542
  • 103
  • AK108
  • 872
West
North
East
South
Paul
Richard
Jon
Charlie
-
1NT12-14
X
All pass
I think I'm making some slight progress at the game, and I find I'm enjoying getting simple but missable things right more than the occasional fancy play. Here's an example from a matchpoint game. Partner doubles 1NT, perhaps aggressively, and leads the ace of hearts, asking for attitude. You encourage, and he continues with the king, then the six to your queen. Declarer plays the two, nine, and jack from hand and discards a club from dummy. What's your plan?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Thursday, 5 June 2014

Easy to play, too hard to defend

Love all
Dealer West
  • KQ86
  • 104
  • Q95
  • Q976
  • J32
  • K6
  • KJ1062
  • 854
N
W
E
S
  • A95
  • 972
  • A873
  • A102
  • 1074
  • AQJ853
  • 4
  • KJ3
West
North
East
South
Paul
Ken
Jonathan
Colin
Pass
Pass
1NT1
2
32
All pass
  1. 12-14
  2. To play (forcing hands go through 2NT)
North led the ten of hearts against 3, and my partner put down a suitable dummy. At matchpoints, declarer's first task is to decide if 2 might go off with diamonds 2-2 - if it will, then that's the distribution it's most important to make 3 against. But here, the defence would need to attack spades early and establish two tricks in the suit, which at best is possible only on an unlikely misguess by declarer. So in 3 one should simply aim for as many tricks as possible.

With hearts apparently 6-2, the finesse is better odds than the drop, so after winning the king of hearts at trick two I played the king of diamonds then the jack. I was probably going to run it, so North covered and I won the ace and came back to the ten. I'd have liked to be in dummy to ruff the third heart, but that didn't really matter. I ran the eight of clubs to the jack, ruffed the heart return, and played ace and another club. With this very fortunate spade layout, the suit is frozen once North has taken one honour, so when I let him win the spade switch he was forced to lead into my tenace.

There was not much in the play, but what about the defence? North having failed to lead a club, South has to switch to the suit at trick two. Then North has to cover West's jack or ten of diamonds lead, so that the third round of diamonds can't be won in dummy to ruff the third heart. I don't see how South can know to make that switch.

Wednesday, 28 May 2014

8765 opposite AKJ2

My phone buzzed at 1:20 am on Monday morning: it was Tom Townsend asking "How do you play 8765 in hand opposite AKJ2 in dummy for four tricks?". Not because he wanted to be told the answer, which he'd already worked out (and checked with SuitPlay), but because I was the only conscious person he could find who might be interested in such esoterica.

First, suppose you lead to the ace, LHO follows small, and RHO plays the nine. Then you come back to hand and lead the six, LHO playing small again. The queen and ten are still out, and there are three options: play the king, succeeding against RHO's Q9; play the jack, succeeding against 109; or play the three, succeeding against singleton 9. Q9 or Q10 are two distributions, so are 9 or 10, 109 is one distribution. So apparently one shouldn't finesse the jack, but it's roughly a toss-up between playing for the drop and playing the deep finesse. (It's relevant that RHO can't afford to play the Q from Q9 even if he knows you need four tricks from the suit, because he doesn't know you've got the spots for the deep finesse.)

Second, on any other combination of cards (unless the queen has dropped or someone has discarded), the normal and sensible line is to finesse the jack on the second round (detailed analysis, of the sort I've laid out here before, shows that some unlikely defensive strategies can make a different approach better, but they can't make this approach worse).

However, if one chooses to play for the drop in the first case, there's a problem: LHO can deflect you from this line into a losing finesse by playing high on the second round with 1043 (or 943). So the right thing to do is to take the deep finesse.

This does have some practical relevance: almost the exact combination came up on board 118 of the 120-board US teams trials final. At the time Diamond was leading Nickell by 5 IMPs, and the last two boards were to be flat, so this hand decided the match.

NS Game
Dealer East
  • A983
  • 8763
  • Q1084
  • 9
  • K7
  • KJ4
  • AJ53
  • AKJ3
N
W
E
S
  • QJ62
  • AQ
  • K96
  • 8765
  • 1054
  • 10952
  • 72
  • Q1042
West
North
East
South
Weinstein
Greco
Levin
Hampson
—
—
11
Pass
22
Pass
33
Pass
44
Pass
45
Pass
46
Pass
57
All pass
  1. Three or more clubs
  2. Natural and forcing
  3. Minimum, three or four clubs
  4. RKCB for clubs
  5. One ace
  6. Queen of clubs?
  7. No
In the closed room, Levin-Weinstein were playing strong no trump, 5-card majors, and three-card minors. When Levin opened one club, Weinstein chose to agree clubs: Levin showed a minimum then one ace and no queen of clubs, so Weinstein gave up in five clubs. The trouble with that was that Levin could easily have had only three clubs (unless the system is no longer as described here). But he had four this time, and five clubs made easily enough, losing the ace of spades and a club.
West
North
East
South
Moss
Meckstroth
Bathurst
Rodwell
—
—
11
Pass
22
Pass
23
Pass
44
Pass
5NT5
Pass
66
Pass
6NT
All pass
  1. Precision: 11-15, no 5-card major
  2. Usually denies a 4-card major
  3. 11-13 balanced
  4. Intended as a slam invitation with 4-4 in the minors
  5. Pick a slam - Bathurst didn't know what 4 meant, but he was a bit better than minimum, so...
  6. Moss knows what he intended by this

In the open room, Bathurst and Moss had a murky auction to a poor 6NT, and Rodwell led the ten of hearts. Bathurst won with the ace and led a spade to the four, king and ace. Meckstroth returned the three of spades to the queen and five. Now declarer led the five of clubs to the two, ace and nine, came back to the queen of hearts, and led the six of clubs. Rodwell played the four, and Bathurst was looking at the situation as discussed above. (I'm sparing you my thoughts on the difference between AKJ2 and AKJ3.)

So, giving expert consideration to the arguments, he ran the six? No he did not, he played the jack, and with good reason. Suppose you run the six and it holds. Now you have eleven tricks, and the best chance for a twelfth seems to be the diamond finesse. But if you're going to take the diamond finesse anyway, putting the jack in may well not cost even when clubs are 4-1: If South has three diamonds you've got four tricks in the suit once the finesse succeeds, if he has four or more he'll get squeezed in the minors, and if he's got two North may get squeezed in the pointed suits.

North discarded a heart on the jack of clubs, so declarer cashed the king of hearts throwing his club, and the king of clubs, crossed to the king of diamonds, and cashed the jack of spades throwing dummy's club. Evidently there had been no squeeze, but the diamonds could still be 3-3. Declarer led a diamond towards dummy's AJ5, and North, holding a spade winner and Q8 of diamonds, claimed two off. That was 13 IMPs and the match to Nickell.

That's a reasonable line, but Bathurst could have made his contract by running the six of clubs, then squeezing North in spades and diamonds - worth considering once South shows four clubs and probably some heart length. South, on the other hand, could have prevented this by covering the six of clubs: it's unimaginable that he would do that since he can't know that declarer needs to do more than make four clubs tricks (QJ9x of spades would be enough). East, on the third hand, could have made by cashing a top club at trick two then playing the king of spades from dummy, saving an entry, before getting everything else right. And South, on the fourth hand, could have beaten to contract at trick one by leading a diamond to break up the squeeze. "It's poor that they're still playing single dummy in such a big event", as my correspondent remarked.

Wednesday, 12 March 2014

Alarm clock

E-W Game
Dealer East
  • Q4
  • J73
  • AQ1075
  • J76
  • 103
  • AK85
  • K832
  • A83
N
W
E
S
  • A2
  • Q10642
  • 6
  • 109542
  • KJ98765
  • 9
  • J94
  • KQ
West
North
East
South
Paul
Tony
Jon
Peter
—
—
Pass
1
X
2
3
3
Pass
Pass
4
4
X
All pass
I played in the EBU simultaneous last night, and very much enjoyed the defence on this deal.  The bidding was aggressive by both sides - South may have reasoned that with both opponents suggesting spade shortage, his partner was likely to have a little something to help.

I led the king of hearts, and, as the competition booklet points out, needed to switch to a diamond at trick two to secure four tricks for the defence.  There are good reasons to get this right after the revealing auction, and many Easts would have played the ten of hearts, explaining to West after he'd done the wrong thing that this was an obvious suit preference for diamonds.  Not so Jon, who played the queen.

The traveller showed spade contracts making eleven tricks once, ten tricks four times, and nine tricks once.

Friday, 27 September 2013

Intrafinesse - this time with the eight

But what, I hear you ask apropos of my previous post, if the suit is A852 opposite J943, also to be played for one loser.  The odds are a bit different, because declarer can succeed against either 107 or 106 in front of the J9.

As before, let's suppose that when declarer leads from his Axxx, the next hand plays the king from K10 with probability p, similarly from Q10; he plays the 10 from 107 or 106 with probability q, and the king from KQ with probability half.

The critical holdings for second hand are KQ, K10, Q10, 107, 106, and 1076.

Declarer's options are:

a) LHO plays the king or queen.  (a0) declarer tries to pin the ten: for every six times there's a critical layout this succeeds 2p times. (a1) declarer tries to drop the other top honour: this succeeds 1 time.

b) LHO plays the ten, and the jack loses to the queen or king.  (b0) declarer finesses against the remaining honour: this succeeds 2q times.  (b1) declarer tries to drop the other honour: this succeeds 2(1-p) times.

c) LHO plays low, and the nine loses to the queen or king.  (c0) declarer tries to pin the ten: this succeeds 2(1-q) times.  (c1) declarer tries to drop the other honour: this succeeds 1 time.

So the combined successes per six critical layouts are:
a0b0c0: 2 + 2p
a0b0c1: 1 + 2p + 2q
a0b1c0: 4 - 2q
a0b1c1: 3
a1b0c0: 3
a1b0c1: 2 + 2q
a1b1c0: 5 - 2p - 2q
a1b1c1: 4 - 2p

If the defender adopts p = q = 0.5, each of these combinations succeeds three times.  If he adopts some other strategy, declarer can do better than that by making the appropriate choice.  If the declarer wants to save his energies for something other than divining the defender's habits, he can lock in three chances of success by adopting a0b1c1 or a1b0c0.

In my previous post, with the defence holding the eight, I recommended rising with K10 or Q10 at least half the time.  Since the defender cannot tell whether declarer has the eight, he should in practice rise exactly half the time.

How do you make this sort of choice?  It's easy to come up with ways to do it: my method is to look at the sum of dummy's spot cards in the suit and the board number; I rise if the sum is even.  But now I've told you all, I'll have to change it to something else.


Monday, 23 September 2013

Intrafinesse

How do you play A752 opposite J943 for one loser?

The technician will advise you to take an intrafinesse by leading towards dummy's jack.  If LHO has K10 he will win the trick with the king, and you can subsequently run the jack, pinning his ten.  Similarly if he has Q10.  Or if he has 108, you can cover his eight (or ten) and subsequently pin his ten (or eight).  (There is no winning line if he has 106, this is different from a combination where declarer or dummy has the eight.)

However, against expert opponents life is harder.  They may play the ten from K10 or Q10 or 108 or 1086. and they may play the eight from 108 or 1086.  So what is the correct combination of plays?

I'll attempt a game-theoretic analysis.   Assuming that declarer starts with a low card towards the jack, there are five, equally likely, holdings for LHO where a successful play is available but might not be found - the four I listed above, plus KQ.  Let's suppose that the defender follows a mixed strategy: he plays the king from K10 with probability p, similarly from Q10; he plays the ten from 108 with probability q; and the ten from 1086 with probability r (and otherwise the eight: it's a mistake to play the six, which gives declarer no losing option).  And he plays the king from KQ with probability half (other approaches may be as good, but symmetry considerations say they can't be better).

To start with, let's assume that the values p, q, r are all known to declarer, who follows a pure strategy - this assumption is unjustified, but it's a useful starting point.

a) LHO plays the king or queen.  (a0) declarer tries to pin the ten: for every five times there's a critical layout this succeeds 2p times. (a1) declarer tries to drop the other top honour: this succeeds 1 time.

b) LHO plays the ten, and the jack loses to the queen or king.  (b0) declarer tries to pin the eight: this succeeds q times.  (b1) declarer tries to drop the other honour: this succeeds 2(1-p) + r times.

c) LHO plays the eight, and the nine loses to the queen or king.  (c0) declarer tries to pin the ten: this succeeds (1-q) times.  (c1) declarer tries to drop the other honour: this succeeds (1-r) times.

So the combined successes per five critical layouts are:
a0b0c0: 1 + 2p
a0b0c1: 1 + 2p + q - r
a0b1c0: 3 - q + r
a0b1c1: 3
a1b0c0: 2
a1b0c1: 2 + q - r
a1b1c0: 4 - 2p - q + r
a1b1c1: 4 - 2p

We can simplify this somewhat by putting s = q - r, getting:
a0b0c0: 1 + 2p
a0b0c1: 1 + 2p + s
a0b1c0: 3 - s
a0b1c1: 3
a1b0c0: 2
a1b0c1: 2 + s
a1b1c0: 4 - 2p - s
a1b1c1: 4 - 2p

We note that by making the appropriate choice from each pair, declarer can make the value of s irrelevant, and that it can't help the defender to choose a value other than 0, but may hurt him.

Putting s = 0, we see that a0b1c1 succeeds 3 times,  but a1b1c1 will be better if p < 1/2 .   So overall a sound strategy for the defender is to rise with K10 or Q10 at least half the time, and to choose between the ten and the eight on the same basis with either 108 or 1086.   If the defender follows this strategy, a sound strategy for declarer is to play for the pin if LHO plays the king or queen, but for the drop if LHO plays the ten or eight.
___

This morning I was watching the final round of the World Championship round robin stage on BBO, when the following deal came up:

Board 4         ♠ K 10 9 5
Game All        ♥ 4 2                
Dealer West     ♦ Q 9 8 7
                ♣ Q 8 6
♠ Q J 4                         ♠ A 8 2
♥ K J 8 3                       ♥ A Q 10 6
♦ 6 3                           ♦ A 10
♣ J 9 4 3                       ♣ A 7 5 2
                ♠ 7 6 3
                ♥ 9 7 5
                ♦ K J 5 4 2
                ♣ K 10

Robson          Fritsche        Forrester       Rohowsky       
West            North           East            South
Pass            Pass            1♣              Pass
1♦ (hearts)     Pass            4♥              All pass
                                         
Rohowsky for Germany led a diamond to the queen and ace. Forrester drew trumps and exited with a diamond, won by South who played a spade. Three rounds of spades put North on lead to concede a ruff and discard, which did the defence no harm. Declarer now needed to play clubs for one loser, so he led towards dummy, South playing the ten, and North beating dummy's jack with the queen. North returned a low club. The Vugraph commentators thought declarer would have to get it right, apparently not seeing the possibility of playing South for 108.  But Forrester got it wrong.

Tony Forrester and Andy Robson - it's an old and successful partnership, but the two were selected primarily to play with David Gold and Alexander Allfrey respectively - have been England's leading pair in the Butler rankings, so Tony won't mind my saying that I think he was wrong in theory as well as in practice on this one - strategies including b0 are never best.

One interesting aspect of this is that the same hand was played 22 times in the Bermuda Bowl, 22 times in the Venice Cup (for women), and 22 times in the d'Orsi Trophy (for over-60s).  In the Bermuda Bowl, 4♥ was played 21 times: four declarers went off; it was played all 22 times in the Venice Cup where five declarers went off; in the Seniors only 18 pairs reached 4♥ and six of them went off.  Perhaps it matters which hand is dummy: in the Bermuda Bowl all twelve West declarers, with A752 in dummy, made the contract, but only four out of nine Easts.  In the Venice Cup, fourteen out of seventeen West declarers made the contract, and three out of five Easts.  But in the d'Orsi Trophy four out of eight Wests succeeded, eight out of ten Easts.  Overall, West was 30/37 (81%), East 15/24 (63%).

BBO's vugraph archive (in the future you may need this link) records the play at fourteen tables, including the one above: alternatively one can find a record of the play at the same matches by following links from the results tables I linked to above (apparently play is recorded in seven of the 33 matches in each round).

This lets us see how two other declarers went off.  Multiple world-champion Lorenzo Lauria played the hand as East on a trump lead,  He drew trumps in three rounds and played ace and another diamond.   North overtook his partner's jack to switch to the ten of spades, won in dummy.  Declarer now unexpectedly played ace and another club and went off.  However, this surprising line is not much worse than the recommended intrafinesse strategy - it makes against KQ doubleton in either hand and K or Q singleton with North.  And perhaps there's some chance of success if North has king doubleton.

Furuta Kazuo played the hand as East for Japan on a spade lead to the nine and ace.  He drew trumps, knocked out the king of spades, won the diamond exit, and led a club towards dummy.  South rose with the king, cashed the king of diamonds, and exited with a spade.  Declarer now played for the drop in clubs.  This might be right in theory if South would play the ten from K10 sufficiently often, but having gone off I wouldn't want to advance that argument too loudly in the post mortem.

We have the play in 4♥ at nine other tables (both pairs in the Seniors match on record went off in 3NT).  Interestingly, whereas all three East declarers above went off, the nine declarers who played the hand as West all made it.  Usually the play involved leading a club off dummy in the middle of the play, won by South's king, and later leading the jack to pin the ten.  One notable exception was in Netherlands v Monaco: Verhees ducked the diamond lead, won the continuation, and immediately led a club off dummy.  Geir Helgemo, arguably the world's best player of the cards, won with the king and continued with the ten of clubs.  Two other Souths also continued clubs when in with the king, but much later in the play.  Paul Thurston, South for Canada, put the ten in when a club was played off dummy at trick ten, but Kevin Bathurst for USA1 dropped his king.  And the play went wrong when France declared against England in the Venice Cup: North led a spade to declarer's queen, declarer drew trumps and played ace and a diamond, won by South who played a second spade to dummy's ace.  Declarer now cashed dummy's ace of clubs, apparently a horrible line since unlike Lauria she didn't have the entries to take advantage of a singleton honour with North, but in practice an easy way to succeed because South dropped the king.

Most of the declarers fiddled about in diamonds and spades, hoping to learn something, but it seems to me that all they achieved was making it easier for the defence to read the position - a couple induced North to switch to a club, but that didn't help.  I like Verhees' line.

Tuesday, 25 June 2013

1850

Game all
Dealer West
N
W
E
S
  • QJ2
  • J6
  • AQ8732
  • A4
West
North
East
South
Paul
 
Jonathan
 
Julian
 
Cath
3
Pass
Pass
3NT
Pass
Pass
X
?

My team guessed much better than our opponents on this board from the Pachabo (where the scoring is an unusual mixture of aggregate and point-a-board).

Holding the South cards, you view to try 3NT when left-hand opponent's pre-empt is passed round to you. This gets doubled on your right, now what?

Click here to show (or hide) the answer

Sunday, 23 June 2013

Simply but difficult to see

E-W Game
Dealer East
  • AQ6
  • AQ8
  • QJ8765
  • 8
  • 1053
  • 42
  • 103
  • AJ10643
N
W
E
S
  • 74
  • K109765
  • A92
  • Q7
  • KJ982
  • J3
  • K4
  • K952
West
North
East
South
Jonathan
 
Paul
 
-
-
2Multi
2
Pass
4
All pass


 
Cath
 
Julian
-
-
2Weak
Pass
Pass
3
Pass
3
Pass
4
All pass
This weekend I played in the Pachabo - a competition for the winners of English county teams-of-four events. The format is all-play-all with three-board matches, using an unusual mixture of point-a-board and aggregate scoring (the aggregate uses a rather rum ratio method to convert to Victory Points).  The scoring method contributes to the fun, and the dealing computer helped with a lot of interesting hands.  I got several of them wrong, and so did my team-mates, so I was surprised when we took the lead at about noon on Sunday and held on to win.

This deal was an early play problem.  If I've remembered the auction at our table correctly, South's overcall was aggressive but North gave her some latitude (he may have been unclear about what slam tries were available - note to self: discuss this with partners).

But it's a play problem.  At both tables, West led the four of hearts to East's king and East returned the ten of hearts, suit preference for diamonds, won in dummy (one day I'll play in a game where East gives false suit preference, reasoning that West can't be ruffing the trick or declarer wouldn't have ducked.  But not yet.) Once you've placed the ace of diamonds, the ace of clubs has to be with West, so you know the hand is pretty much as in the diagram.  How do you play?  If you like this sort of problem, think about it before reading on.

At my table, declarer, fearing club forces if she played on diamonds, cashed one trump then tried the effect of playing a club herself.  I didn't cover, so Jonathan won the trick with the ten of clubs.  He read me for the ace of diamonds, but could see no fourth trick for the defence if he played a diamond - declarer could afford to ruff a heart return high - so he defended well by returning a trump.  Declarer won in hand and played the king of diamonds, which I ducked, and a second diamond to the jack and my ace.  I knew enough about the hand now to lead the queen of clubs: in desperation declarer tried covering it and went two off.

At team-mates' table, declarer played a diamond off dummy at trick two.  East rose with the ace, so declarer unblocked the king, ruffed the heart return high, drew trumps and made eleven tricks.

Well played, but what if East ducks the diamond?  You continue the suit, knocking out the ace, but East switches to a club (it needn't be the queen) and again you can't enjoy dummy's red cards. So what's the right line?

It's strangely difficult to see, but when the king of diamonds holds, declarer should change tack by playing a trump to dummy and discarding his remaining diamond on the ace of hearts.  If West ruffs, declarer has two trump entries to dummy to ruff down the ace of diamonds and run the suit (or one trump entry and a club ruff, if he's carelessly blocked the spades).  If West discards a diamond instead of ruffing, he'll have the same losing option when declarer next runs the queen of diamonds.  And if he declines that one too, declarer ruffs out the ace of diamonds, draws trumps ending in dummy, and makes an overtrick.

Friday, 21 June 2013

Too safe?

N-S Game
Dealer West
  • 97
  • Q6
  • AKQJ106
  • K104
West
North
East
South
Pass
Pass
1
2Multi
3fit jump
Pass
Pass (!)
?
You are South. Your call?

Love all
Dealer West
  • KJ6542
  • 4
  • A75
  • Q53
West
North
East
South
1
Pass
1
Pass
2
Pass
2
?
You are South. Would you have bid 2 directly over 1 if that were natural? Would you bid 2 now?

These hands come from last Saturday's Garden Cities Trophy Final.  On the first one, either East has passed by mistake, or, much more likely, his opening bid was a misrepresentation.  Partner is therefore likely to have a few high cards, making double a reasonable call.  But no one has much experience of this position, and the player at the table elected to pass, scoring +150 instead of the +500 or +600 (in 3NT) which were available, and losing 11 imps.

On the second, there's no particular reason to suspect anything afoot, but as it happens East, the redoubtable Gunnar Hallberg, has introduced a diversion on a 3325 5-count, and found his partner with 1543.  Each side can make nine tricks in its major suit fit.  But the spade spots were too few for me, so I lost 6 imps.

It's unusual to see two outright psyches like this in one afternoon: they're rather rare nowadays because they're more dangerous than the once were - the modern partner will often compete to what he thinks is the level of the fit.  Norberto Bocchi, the Italian world champion, wrote an article recently decrying a different sort of psyche - a safer and therefore more common one - in which a player asks a question in the bidding without having any real interest in the answer, in order to deceive his opponents about the nature of his hand: Bocchi's example is a long-suit game try on a hand which is always going to bid game anyway and hence need not have the long suit it represents.  In Bocchi's opinion, this sort of "controlled psych" should be banned.  I respectfully disagree; there's no need to ban anything, all we need is full disclosure: if a bid is simply an asking bid then it should be explained as such.  If it shows something - the game try presumably promises at least game-invitational values, and partner can double on that basis if opponents bid - then that should be explained also.  Players have got used to saying whether a Stayman enquiry promises a 4-card major, then can cope just as well with specifying whether a long-suit game try actually promises a holding in the suit bid, or if, more precisely, it asks partner to evaluate his hand opposite an invitational hand with such a holding.

I'm against banning things, and in favour of fair play.

Incidentally, the 1 psyche above is a bit safer if you're playing fit jumps.  Does anyone object to fit jumps on that basis?

Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Look for a better move

Love all
Dealer North
  • A954
  • K86
  • Q109
  • A86
  • QJ62
  • J4
  • J76
  • Q1094
N
W
E
S
  • 108
  • 109752
  • K853
  • K3
  • K73
  • AQ3
  • A42
  • J752
West
North
East
South
 
Jon
 
Paul
-
1~11-15
Pass
2art. force
Pass
24 spades
Pass
3NT
All pass
This was an instructive hand for me at the local club.  North, playing a strong-club system, opened one spade, I enquired and discovered only four spades opposite (possibly with a longer minor) and bid the inevitable 3NT. West led the four of clubs, which went to the king, and a club came back won by dummy's ace.  East had shown more than the usual interest in partner's diamond bid, so I ran the queen of diamonds, winning the trick, before ducking a spade, won by East, who switched to a small heart.

At this point I had eight top tricks, with a 3-3 spade break the only simple chance for a ninth.  However, I saw that if West was 4324 I could strip the hand and exit with the fourth round of spades, making the jack of clubs at trick 13.  So I tried the spades, then cashed my red winners ending in dummy.  The last of these was a heart, perforce, on which West discarded the jack of diamonds instead of a club as he should have done, so I did indeed make the jack of clubs at the end.

West, the dominant member of the opposing partnership, told his partner she should have covered the queen of diamonds. But it was I who was in need of instruction: obviously I should have cashed the hearts before the spades.  At this stage, West can't afford to throw a club, and does have to discard a diamond.  (There are other ways to squeeze West, but this is the simplest.)

The standard was quite mixed, and there was instruction of a different sort available on other hands also:

Game all
Dealer North
  • 9
  • AK65
  • Q84
  • QJ1053
  • J8732
  • 10972
  • J75
  • K
N
W
E
S
  • KQ106
  • J3
  • A932
  • 962
  • A54
  • Q84
  • K106
  • A874
West
North
East
South
Paul
 
Jon
 
-
1
Pass
3NT
All pass

I led a spade, and declarer, a very inexperienced player bravely stepping into the lions' den, won the third round. I was feeling confident until something about declarer's demeanour disturbed me. Perhaps she didn't know enough to take the club finesse...

-600.

N-S Game
Dealer East
  • AJ86
  • none
  • KJ10762
  • J98
  • 1093
  • 1062
  • none
  • KQ107653
N
W
E
S
  • K
  • KQ83
  • A8543
  • A42
  • Q7542
  • AJ9754
  • Q9
  • none
West
North
East
South
Jon
 
Paul
 
-
-
1strong club
2*
Pass
2
Pass
2
4
5
All pass

There was no attractive downgrade available for my 16-count, so I opened a club despite the singleton king of spades. South bid two clubs, alerted by North.  Jon enquired, and was told that two clubs showed a strong hand.  North ought to have known that we were playing a strong club system since we'd had a long strong-club auction to five clubs on the previous hand, but something made him remind her of our system, and she corrected the explanation to "clubs".  After one more round of bidding it was obvious to him that South had nothing of the sort, so he clarified matters by bidding four clubs.  It now seemed likely to us both that South too had forgotten our system and ignored our alert, and attempted to make a Michaels cue-bid.  Some Norths might have worked that out also, but this one passed and I bid the obvious game.  South led the ace of hearts, so we were swiftly one off.  Which gave us a fair matchpoint score, since four spades is easy to make.

Subsequent conversation revealed that North in this long-standing partnership had no notion that they might be playing Michaels, whatever the meaning of the one club opening.

Thursday, 23 May 2013

Play or defend

Game all
Dealer East
  • Q9732
  • A75
  • A7
  • KJ8
  • none
  • J9863
  • KJ98
  • A543
N
W
E
S
  • A8654
  • K2
  • 1064
  • 976
  • KJ10
  • Q104
  • Q532
  • A102
West
North
East
South
-
-
Pass
Pass
1
1
Pass
2spade raise
Pass
2NT
Pass
4
All pass
West
North
East
South
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
1
Pass
2
X
Pass
3
X
All pass

The team I was on came fourth in the Crockfords final: we should have played better.  Especially, we should have defended better.  On this hand, we won the board in the auction and lost it in the defence at both tables.

At the first table, our West opened in third seat - not my choice with that poor suit - and opponents bid to 4♠, an unlikely contract even without the 5-0 break.  However, East naturally led the king of hearts.  Declarer has a chance now - he needs to draw trumps, knock out the ace of clubs, and end-play West in the red suits.  However, with the bad spade break entries are a problem.  He started, far-sightedly, with a club to the ten.  West ought to duck this - necessary if Declarer's spades are one spot stronger - a difficult but not impossible play.  At the table, West won and returned a club.  Declarer won that and played on spades: East now needs to do the right thing.  Because East has got the eight of spades, declarer needs two entries to hand, one to play the fourth round of trumps and one to play the fifth.  But he can't afford to use the ace of diamonds because that would break up his strip-squeeze.  So, to beat the contract East must duck three rounds of spades.  I think he ought to see this, but it's not easy.

At the second table, I tried a heavy raise to 2♠, and was lucky to hit the right layout for my action.  East helped us in the auction by radiating uncertainty before bidding 3♣.  I led the jack of spades - perhaps a trump is better.  East won, and has two reasonable ways to play the contract for two off.  One is to ruff a spade, play a heart to the king, ruff another spade, play another heart, and come to a heart ruff, the ace of clubs, and a late diamond trick.  The other is to play on diamonds.  However, if you choose the diamond play, you should lead a low one.  Our declarer selected the ten, a card he should have saved so that he could take two more finesses later.  The ten of diamonds ran to the ace, and North should now switch to trumps.  Instead, he tried a low heart, on which declarer strangely played low, again booking himself for three off.  I won the queen and switched to a trump.  Declarer took the second round and played a heart off dummy: North unaccountably ducked, giving declarer two tricks - the king of hearts and a heart ruff - to leave him one off.  So perhaps declarer knew what he was doing after all.

Of course there were other hands, on at least one of which I perpetrated a misdefence at least as horrible as this.  But the rest of the play on it was less interesting...