Chew the Fat! > Sleight of Hand
iac versus acol, second round, board 3
kenberg:
Declarer's hand at the bottom
!S 8762
!H K643
!D K75
!C AJ
!S K943
!H ----
!D QJ642
!C KQT6
Non-vul against vul, imps
The contract is 4 !S, played by the hand with the !H void. The opening lead is the !H J: J-small-small-ruff.
Ok, not a great contract. We need to hold the losers to two spades and one diamond. Obviously we need the !S A to be on the right and we need the !S to be 3-2. And we need a bit more.
So we ruff the !H lead at T1, go to the board with a !C, lead a small !S, Rho hops up with the A (from AQ it turns out so this hopping up seems natural enough) and Rho leads a !C.
It's been a while, maybe fifty years, since I saw Sesame Street but I think Bert and Ernie used to play What Happens Next? The idea was that the answer was predictable and so care was needed.
What I did. I one the !C, drew a round of trump, led a !D. Predictably, the !D lead went to Lho's A, he cashed the third trump leaving me with no more trump in hand, and led a !H. Oops.
That was both predictable and avoidable. back to Rho's C return at T4. We are already playing on the assumption that trumps are 3-2. If !C are 4-3, and they are, the hand is on ice.
Win the !C on the board, ruff a !H in hand, lay down the !S K, cash a !C throwing a !H. When this third round of !C is not ruffed we can claim the hand.
Play another !C throwing a !H
!S 87
!H
!D K75
!C
!S
!H ----
!D QJ642
!C
Was that fourth !C ruffed? Who cares? Sooner or later he gets his high trump, sooner or later he gets his !D A. But that's it. They get no !H tricks.
After 60 years of playing bridge I still forget Bert and Ernie's advice to ask What Happens Next. This is a lucky hand, everything has to be just so. But it is not a hard hand.
Part of the idea of this match was that it was acol versus American-style bidding. Sure, But I find that on most hands, it doesn't much matter what system you are playing. Probably we should stay out of 4 !S here, it requires luck to make it, but luck was being a lady last night and we just needed to think it all through.
wackojack:
OK lets consider first the bidding:
!S K943
!H -
!D QJ642
!C KQ106
!S AQ !S J105
!H AQ92 !H J10754
!D 983 !D A10
!C 9543 !C 872
!S 8762
!H K863
!D K75
!C AJ
At my table:
S W N E
p 1♣ 1♦ 1♥
3♦ p p p
Sitting West with a min opener I would like to have competed to 3♥ but that would be showing a much stronger hand. When 3♦ was passed out I was wondering if the opps had talked us out of a part score contract.
So over to Ken’s table where Ken was sitting North.
S W N E
1♦ p 1♠ p
2♠ p 4♠ p
As Ken says it is not the best of contracts. Ken’s partner Carl decided to open this balanced 11 points with 1♦. Was this wise? Well with 4-4 in the majors there is a case for opening 1m. (Andrew Robson and Gavin Wolpert have opened with 11 and 4-4 in the majors in their New tricks challenge matches) However I am not sure this would qualify because there is too much strength in the minors and not enough in the majors. The “raison d’etre” for opening on 11 and 4-4 in the majors is that you are odds on to find partner with 4 cards in one of the majors and thus boss the contract. In particular the cards in the boss suit spades are only 8 high and so not good enough.
So when Carl raised Ken’s 1♠ response to 2♠, Ken with 11HCP and a void worth in theory an extra 5 it was natural to raise to 4♠. Ken eloquently describes how 4♠ could be made but was not.
So a loss of 5 imps instead of a poential gain of 7 imps.
The OCP bidding of this hand was interesting. It went:
S W N E
p 1♦ (11-15 not 13-15 bal no 5CM) p 1♥ (8-10 just points)
p 1NT (11-12 balanced) p p
So they get into a 1NT contract that should go down missing a 5-4 heart fit that makes. East's pass with a 5 card heart suit seems inexplicable. This bad contract eventually made maybe because the Acol pair were decieved (and you might say unfairly) by the outlandish bidding.
At the other table South OCP had the opportunity to use a secret weapon of a mini (10-12)
S W N E
1NT 10-12 p 2NT Xfer to ♦ p
3♦ p p p
It is not clear what the bid of 3 !C would mean after the 2NT transfer, and OCP got into a good contract. So the OCP pair gained 6 imps on this deal perhaps because the Acol pair had not prepared a defence to the OCP's dubios 1 !D opening bid.
2 other IAC pairs bid to 4 !S and neither of them found the winning line.
Just one more to comment on:
Another OCP pair bid like this:
S W N E
1NT p 2 !C p
2 !H p 3NT p
p p
Too lazy to find the 4-4 spade fit? So this went 2 off
At the other table the Acol pair easily brushed aside the East-West OCP bidding.
S W N E
p 1 !D p 1 !H
p 2 !H x p
2 !S p p p
The modest contract of 2 !S made with an overtrick to give another 6imps to the Acol team
kenberg:
!S K943
!H -
!D QJ642
!C KQ106
!S AQ !S J105
!H AQ92 !H J10754
!D 983 !D A10
!C 9543 !C 872
!S 8762
!H K863
!D K75
!C AJ
I had not previously talked pf the bidding. I am N, Carl is . Carl opened 1 !D. Borderline. My view of borderline bids is that we accept the choice pard made. Would I open that 1 !d? Maybe. Probably not. But maybe.
1 !D 1 !S
2 !S ?
If I want to take back a bid I think I take back my 4 !S. Yes, voids are worth 5 points in a 4-4 fit. But, for one thing, pard is allowed to raise 1 !S on a 3 card holding. Edgar Kaplan (I think it was Kaplan, maybe Sheiwold) once summarized it as "You are allowed to raise on 3 but you do not go out of your way to do so". I like that. I think 3 !D is perfectly reasonable and, when pard bids 3 !S, I quit.
But here I am in 4 !S. I have been in worse contracts. Heart lead ruffed, over to the board with a !C, small !S, Rho hops up with te A and returns a !C. There is a reason why a void is worth 5 points in a 4-4 fit and all I have to do is make use of that reason. Ruff a second heart, cash the !S K, run the !C suit.
It's a luck hand, but the play seems clear enough.
Oddly, my rho can cause trouble by playing the Q instead of the A when I lead the !S from the board. I take my K and then? If I lead another !S it goes to the A, now Rho can play a !D to the A, Lho cashes a high !H, I am now out of trump in my hand and they take their hearts. I can cope, but care is needed.
We have a 4-4 !s fit and a 5-3 !D fit. When we end in !S at some level, I don't think we should overhaul the system so that we end in our 5-3 !D fit instead of our 4-4 !S fit. But I do think we would not be in 4. And that was due to choice, not system.
wackojack:
"
--- Quote ---We have a 4-4 !s fit and a 5-3 !D fit. When we end in !S at some level, I don't think we should overhaul the system so that we end in our 5-3 !D fit instead of our 4-4 !S fit. But I do think we would not be in 4. And that was due to choice, not system".
--- End quote ---
Yes I agree Ken. The operative word is choice. Choice here means using all information availble to make the best judgement. Ulimately it is the team that makes the best judgement that wins in the long run.
blubayou:
bedtime mar2...I am here but can't replicate just now how i messed this "DARE" hand up.. only remember that I myself started diamonds too early , and at the last moment one opp gave the other a !D -ruff with the final trump that i was eager to draw :-[ :-X :( :( :( :(
hi; the shank of the evening march 4th, here...and I have just been wandering the iac forum areas i seldom click on. Noticed one very elegant post from summer 2018 [ie: JUST! before my time] by BillHiggins, in the IAC-Tourneys department. Please one of you long-timers tell me about him, if possible. He was to literate to have just swooped in and left us with no hoofprints to follow.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version