Never mind the SQA exams the real test happens every lunch-time on the bridge table. This year the team of NC and JW have been attempting to overcome the incumbent champions AP, TB and ID. At one point NC-JW were losing the series by 13 weeks to 16, before a hot streak took them to 19-16 with five weeks to go. There was talk of a dormie, whatever that is. They were pegged back to 19-18 before clinching the series last week by 20-18.
As NC says, "you've got to have something to look forward to" and I've really enjoyed the bridge this year. I've no doubt they've also benefitted from my experience and accurate use of bridge phrases, such as "Tartan Twos", "Sputnik Doubles", "Swan distribution", "Texas transfers" and "SOS redouble".
Here are some collected highlights taken from throughout the year:
Lunch Bridge - Deal of the Week #1
I've started a new job, and luckily there's a game of bridge at lunch time. It's rubber bridge, which I'm not so familiar with, and it's taking me a little time to learn the local bidding system ...
Slam Down Smackdown - Deal of the Week #3
It's only Monday, but I've already got a hand of the week.
Before this deal NC complained of not having had a good hand since 2008, but he got one here and opened 1♦ as South. There was then a bit of confusion as North-South realised they already had 60 towards a game, and they nearly stopped in 2♦. But with me egging him on and the lunch break nearly over, NC was talked into 6♦.
|
|
AP found the best lead for the defence with a Spade, and with the trump finesse losing (and no way to set up Clubs) NC had to finish in 6♦-1. I hope he doesn't hold it against me.
The decider - Deal of the Week #4
After Monday to Thursday it was all square - this week's lunchtime bridge league all comes down to Friday. With five minutes left, TB and ID needed a game. It's a pressure cooker.
Before picking up his cards, TB sitting checked the score and declares he was going to bid whatever he has. Then he opened 1♦. But wait! It's not his deal. NC sitting West was having none of it and got in first by opening 1♥...
Deal of Last Week - Deal of the Week #6
The Joke of the Week was about a Cheese Factory, but unfortunately none of the bridge this week caught my eye enough to feature in the Blog. The closest was a hand where I coffee-housed NC into bidding an excellent 3NT. I then had to leave the room suddenly, just as his opponents were cashing the first five Club tricks for 3NT-1. I maintain it was a fine contract.
Luckily there's some unresolved business to write about from Last Week. A deal so big it has stretched over the weekend to become this week's featured deal. With NC and JW hundreds of points behind on Friday lunch-time, they needed some magic. It didn't happen the first hand, or the second, but then came this golden opportunity.
|
|
JW immediately opened the South hand 4♠. No time for messing around. No one quite knew the score, but it looked like he needed at least a small slam. I advised North to bid "at least a small slam", and he wisely went for just 6♠.
ID sitting West considered his lead. He was tempted by the ♣A. This would have been the right lead against 7♠, where you only need one trick. But against 6♠, you need two tricks. So the best lead is a high Heart. This will probably lose to the ♥A, but then you'll be poised to get your two tricks. So ID lead the ♥K, which was won by declarer in hand. The lead has worked - declarer now looks like he is facing a loser in Hearts and Clubs. The only way to avoid this is if he can pull off some magic in the Diamond suit, and that's exactly what happened. NC drew trumps then was able to set up the Diamonds to discard his Heart loser, and make a tremendous 6♠=.
There followed some frantic calculations as to the final score. In fact, this continued on to Monday, and I'm still not sure who won the week.
Wee Sleekit Cowran Beastie - Deal of the Week #8
I should have stayed out of it. I tried to, but I couldn't help myself.
In today's lunch time bridge North-South were on their way to a Spade slam when someone asked my advice. I suggested bidding Clubs, an "Italian style cue bid" which confused everyone. NC was then coffeehoused by the opposition into passing, and after playing the hand very nicely finished on an embarrassing 3♠+3.
Criminal - Deal of the Week #10
This week TB and AP crushed the opposition to win the week and recover the lead in the series. But there were some missed opportunities - criminal misses. At least NC had some good jokes.
Two weeks in a day - Deal of the Week #11
This Friday for the culmination of the week I sat in for NC. On the first hand I forgot that we already had 40 points towards game and needlessly powered us into 5♣, when 3♣ would have been enough. Luckily, 5♣ still made, so NC and JW were still in prime position to win the week. Then I was foolish again. When TB took a wild gamble on 6♥, knowing he needed a big score to overcome his deficit I played right into his hands and doubled. My partner JW was astonished, and informed me of this. Of course TB redoubled, and it would have been hugely embarrassing if 6♥xx made. To my relief the contract went down so the week belonged to NC-JW.
Later on Friday TB suggested we play another whole week's worth of bridge. "It's only a game" said JW, and agreed to the double or nothing. To add extra spice both BM and SG made their competitive debuts on the bridge table.
Having had a drink or two I can barely remember any of the hands that evening, including the ones I attempted to write down or even photograph. The only one I remember is this one - after some bold bidding JW and NC reach 4♥ with just 19 points between them:
|
|
|
The game proved unbeatable, and that was enough for JW and NC to clinch a second week in one day.
Nearly of the week - Deal of the Week #15
After some ambitious bidding NC and JW reached an unlikely 4♠ on a 4-3 fit (known as a Moysian). It was not to be and NC ultimately finished one off. This was actually not a bad result, especially seeing as he was playing today without any carrots.
At least we didn't redouble - Deal of the Week #16
Here's a bonus Deal of the Week, as requested by JW who bested me in 6♦x. I could have made it too.
|
|
I was sitting South and finished in an excellent 6♦. JW sitting East has all those Diamonds and doubled me, which should have given me a good clue how to play the contract. But I ignored the warning sign and let JW collect two trump tricks for 6♦x-1, which he celebrated enthusiastically. To make things worse, we could have made an easy 7NT.
"That's the kind of deal that can ruin your whole weekend" said JW.
Stealing 3NT - Deal of the Week #20
This week NC and JW handsomely won the week, to draw the series back to 16-16. SG popped in too.
Twice I went two off doubled, in contracts I maybe could have made. But instead of looking at another bodge I'd rather write about one where I did well. Or rather my partner did well, because AP was in 3NT and I was dummy. 3NT is the most common contract at the bridge table, and often makes when it shouldn't. AP robbed 'em today to level the series. Everything to play for.
Tuesday, 17 June 2014
Team Rowan leaving dinner for Jimmy and Audrey
In September last year I wrote about the team dinner for Team Rowan at the start of the season(link here). Since most of that post is about the Multi 2♦ convention, I'll just reprint the summary:
On Tuesday night the whole squad went out for dinner at Cafe Andaluz. After a fine meal, our Team Captain gave a short speech. "Most of all, have fun, and let's try not to get relegated!". I had the beetroot salad, mussels, and paella.
Last week we again went out to Cafe Andaluz. This time I had goats cheese, mussles, and serrano ham, and rather than wishing good luck for the season Jill instead congratulated us for gaining promotion. However, with Division One looming next year, the advice is definitely still to try and avoid relegation.
It was a poignant meal too, as Jimmy and Audrey are moving away from Glasgow to live in England. All the best to them!
Sunday, 8 June 2014
World Simultaneous Pairs
At the weekend me and Anna entered a very exciting event, the World Bridge Federation Simultaneous Pairs. We played a set of boards at the Buchanan Club in Glasgow, and they played the same set of boards in other clubs all over the world. So for every single deal your score is compared to thousands of others. To win the event you'd need a pretty amazing score, at least 70%. That was never likely to happen, but me and Anna did do fairly well.
[Note - I'm writing this before all of the final results are in, but of course won't publish it until every club has played the event]
There's three boards of interest I'm going to show below. Two of them feature 5 of a minor contracts (our speciality) and the other the board I predict to be the flattest of the event.
|
|
This was a great board for us. I opened 1♣, and North doubled. Anna has a six card Spade suit and support for my Clubs so has an easy 1♠ bid. When it came back to me I overbid with 3♣, which is a bit much with a void in partner's suit, but I did it anyway. North now bid 3♦, and Anna with a great fit for Clubs bid 4♣, though could have bid game herself. I had a twinkling that slam might be possible so cuebid 4♦, but Anna told me to settle right down by signing off in 5♣. We actually only have 19 points between us.
North lead her ♦K and I had to decide whether to win my ♦A or ruff. I ruffed with the ♣3, and now all of my trumps are high. I ruffed a total of three Diamonds in dummy, crossing back with Spade ruffs, then drew trumps and cashed the ♦A, just losing two Hearts. 5♣ is an excellent contract, to beat it North has to play a trump on the opening lead.
Could anyone do better than our score of +400? I suppose some EW pairs will make 5♣x, and some NS pairs might sacrifice in Diamonds and go for 500. And just maybe some EW pairs will bid a crazy 3NT and make it if the defence set up a ninth trick for declarer. But overall I think 5♣= is a great result, and I predict we will get a global matchpoint score of 89% for this board.
[Update - we actually scored 69% for this board, less than I predicted. Our score of +400 for East-West was the most common result]
My second featured board is one where we decided to play in 3NT instead of 5♦, and lived to regret it. I say we decided to play 3NT, it was me who bid it, as Anna kept pointing out afterwards. She hates to miss a good 5♦ game:
|
|
As Eric Kokish says in his commentary for this event "...the mission for East-West will be to identify the perfect fit and find a route to the unassailable 5♦". We didn't manage this. When Anna rebid 3♦ I thought with my ♦Kx there was every chance the Diamonds would run. Plus I had a good stop in Spades and I knew that our weak suit was probably Hearts which they wouldn't lead after I cunningly bid it. Bidding 3NT seemed a no-brainer. Anna thought for ages over my 3NT, and reluctantly passed.
North lead the ♠K and when dummy came down I felt a guilty flush, as it was clear right away that 5♦ would have just two losers and make easily. In 3NT I'm in trouble. I have just one stop in Spades and one in Hearts. There's two ways to play it. Option One is to duck the Spade lead twice, and hope that they are 5-3 and the person with the ♦A has no more Spades. However, this line isn't as good as it looks, because an alert defence can switch to Hearts. Here after South wins the second Spade, he can see that by playing a low Heart to dummy's Ace he can get two more Heart tricks for himself, along with the ♦A. Option Two is to win the ♠A straight away, which works nicely if Spades are 4-4. I decided that Option Two was more likely, as North didn't overcall 1♠, and duly won the ♠A and went one off.
We finished this round a bit early and Anna spent five minutes lamenting that we weren't in 5♦. I think it's easier for her to bid it than me, as she has only four losers in 5♦, and knows that the Diamonds aren't running in 3NT. In the commentary it suggests that -50 will be a common result for those playing 3NT, but I reckon actually lots of defenders will give away the contract. Plus of course the East-West pairs in 5♦ or in part scores will beat us. So I'm going to say that for 3NT-1 we will get a global score of 24%.
[Update - we actually scored just 6% for this board. The most common result was +150 for East-West, presumably for scores like 3♦+2 or 1NT+2]]
My final featured hand is a simple game:
|
|
I decided to open the West hand 1NT, as if I open 1♥ I have to rebid 2♥, and someone once told me "Only perverts rebid 5 card suits". Anna bid Stayman, and I thought about inventing a 3♥ bid to show five Hearts, but it would have been pretty confusing and totally unnecessary. I'm glad I just bid 2♥. Anna raised me to 4♥ and playing the hand was easy. I lost the Heart finesse and also lost the ♠A for 4♥+1.
I can't see any way you could make more or less tricks in 4♥, so it ought to be very flat. I suppose you might try 6♥ and go off one, or 3NT which will probably get a Spade lead and go down. Or if North leads a low Spade you might lose two Spade tricks and just make ten tricks. So I predict that our 4♥+1 will be worth 55% of the global matchpoints.
[Update - we actually scored a healthy 70% for this board. The most common result was indeed +450 for East-West, but there were also some +420 (4♥=) and -100 (6♥-1)
Overall me and Anna scored 61% within the club, and in the global comparison 55.55% (though this might still change). Not bad.
Buchanan results here.
Global results on Ecats website here.
Me and Anna results on Ecats website here.
Commentary Booklet here.
Deal analysis here.
Sunday, 18 May 2014
Buchanan Congress Pairs
We didn't do too much wrong, most of the time. But here's a definite blunder that cost us:
|
|
Anna was sitting South and opened 1♠. I was North and replied 2♣. Anna then rebid 2♦, and I bid a natural 2NT. All fairly normal up to now I expect. My 2NT is invitational to game, and of course Anna wants to accept. But she wasn't sure if 3NT or 4♠ was the best contract, so bid 3♠, expecting me to either bid 3NT or raise her to 4♠ with a doubleton. But I surprised her with a Pass. We've not discussed this situation and I assumed the 3♠ was a weak bid. I did consider bidding 4♠ anyway, but I've got weak doubletons in both Anna's suits, and I'd just gone three off on a previous hand and was a bit scared.
Anna started shaking her head as soon as dummy came down, and was still silently tutting as she took her eleven tricks for 3♠+2. For further embarrassment, at the half time break John Faben asked if we'd considered bidding a slam on Board 13, and I had to confess we weren't even in game. Following John's on-the-spot advice we've agreed for future reference that in these situations a bid like 3♠ is indeed weak.
After this disaster we rallied slightly, before finishing with two zeroes against Joan Lees & Michele Gladstone. Overall we scored 44.13%, good enough only for the Consolation Final. On the upside I was sitting North throughout, and operated the Bridge Mate perfectly with no incorrect scores.
The top pairs in qualification were Christine Howe & Trish Matheson (NS) and Grace & James Walker (EW).
In the break I wasted far too much time talking about the hands. "You were very boring" said Anna. I also largely missed out on the sandwiches, and had to make up for that with a plate of cake. The cake was a bit sweet for my liking, and I should know, as I had four slices.
For the consolation final I bought myself a gin and tonic and some iced water for Anna, but unfortunately they got mixed up and Anna had my gin. On the first deal I commented that all my cards were already sorted in suits and Anna chuckled at my stupidity. Apparently everyone knows that since the cards are computer dealt they're always arranged into suits on the first hand.
With the pressure off we did much better now, and everything seemed to go our way. For example, I doubled 6NT, which went off 3. Twice I stumbled into an aggressive 4-3 fit which got a good score. I made some dodgy bids, but they paid off. For example, this was a lucky one:
|
|
I was sitting West and opened 1♠. It was the best hand I'd had in ages, and I was excited. Anna replied 1NT and I pushed the boat out with a 3♦ reply, which is game forcing and shows 18-19. I don't have that, and my singleton ♥K is a bit rubbish, but I felt I was too good to just bid 2♦. Anna has no choice but to bid 3NT. South lead a Heart and I went off to get a whisky and another piece of cake.
When I came back, Anna had got her nine tricks and was just losing the last four. "You're lucky I had the Ten of Spades", she said. With five Spades, three Hearts and a Club there's a routine nine tricks. You need the ♠T as an entry to the Hearts. Without it I guess you'd have to overtake the ♥K and hope for three Heart tricks anyway, if the ♥J falls. Bidding and making 3NT got us an excellent score, as only one other pair in the Consolation Final bid it (Mandy and Ronnie Simpson), and no pairs at all in the Main Final.
On the final board of the event me and Anna both got good hands, and reached an excellent slam:
|
|
West opened with 3♥ and Anna had a think then doubled. The other option is maybe 3NT. Doubling looks better, but not sure what she would have done if I replied in Diamonds. As it is Anna hit the jackpot with her double as I jumped to 4♠, then showed two Aces and no Queen of trumps with 5♥. Without the Queen of Trumps Anna conservatively stopped in 6♠. I think 7♠ has a decent chance: I could have five Spades (with six I would have lied and said I had the Queen); the trumps could be 2-2; or you could find the Queen. As it is they were 2-2 (and in fact East dropped the Queen on the first round), so I duly made 6♠+1.
After the deal Anna asked if she should have bid the Grand Slam. I said that it would probably have made virtually no difference to our matchpoint score, but would have been glorious. I was proved right; 6♠+1 was worth a massive 93% as only one other pair in the Consolation Final bid the slam (Ricky Finlayson and Horst Kopleck). In the main final three out of eight pairs bid it.
We finished on a comfortable 63%, enough to win the Consolation Final. According to Anna, who took the envelope, the prize was only £1 each, but she did take me out to dinner afterwards.
In the main event the runaway winners were John Faben and Norman McGeagh. Second equal were Grace & James Walker and Jim McLaughin & Peter Cairns. There were supposed to be some tankards for the winners, I'll have to ask John about that.
Full results on the Buchanan website here here.
Saturday, 3 May 2014
IMPs to VPs
This is a summary of the 2014 update to the World Bridge Federation suggested scoring for Teams matches.
In a Teams Tournament each match is scored in IMPs, then based on the IMPs each team is awarded some Victory Points (VPs). This is done to level off the effect of a big IMPs win, and make every match in the tournament worth roughly the same. Although no one thinks of it this way, this is also what happens in football matches when the margin in goals is converted to a number of points. In football this is done in a very extreme way, and the margin of victory is basically ignored and you get 100% of the possible points if you have any positive margin of goals. In Bridge it's done more smoothly, and big IMP wins do translate into bigger VP wins.
The reason I'm mentioning this is because recently the WBF have adopted a new IMPs to VPs conversion table, which differs in two ways. Firstly, every different IMP win now scores a different number of VPs, which leads to some decimal VP scores. Secondly. there is a bigger reward for small wins, as noticed by Paul Gipson noticed this in his blog post:Changing Tactics.
The graph below shows how IMPs are converted to VPs, on the old and new scales. The vertical axis measures the winning margin as a percentage of the maximum win.
Sources: New Scale and
Old scale
You can see the new scoring system is much smoother, and is 'higher' on the left hand side, meaning small IMP wins now have a bigger effect than before. The new scale also flattens off a bit sooner, meaning (for a 16 board match), you get a 100% win at 60 IMPs.
Note (October 2015): Following some interest from a Swedish bridge forum (in Swedish) I've had another look at this. My graph is correct, although the situation is slightly blurred by the fact that the old scale was out of between 25 and 30 (a whitewash was 25-0, a draw 15-15) and the new scale is always out of 20. Because of this I've had to use 'VPs gained over loser as % of max' as my measure. This slightly exaggerates the effect of the new scale, where a narrow win like 11-9 on the new scale is counted as more significant than a narrow win like 16-14 on the old scale.
Friday, 2 May 2014
Stealing 3NT - Deal of the Week #20
This week NC and JW handsomely won the week, to draw the series back to 16-16. Twice I went two off doubled, in contracts I maybe could have made. But instead of looking at another bodge I'd rather write about one where I did well. Or rather my partner did well, because I was dummy. This deal from Friday features AP stealing a 3NT which never should have made:
|
|
I dealt and passed. Then we realised I shouldn't have dealt. I didn't think anyone would mind too much but NC and JW reacted furiously, claiming any future result was invalid and moving the box of carrots away. I didn't dare ask for one now anyway. Andrew was North and opened 1♦ (ignoring the more obvious 1NT) and I replied with 1♠. I used to pass hands like this because I didn't have 6 points, but actually with a Diamond fit it's quite safe to bid. North bid 2♥ and I corrected back to 3♦. AP had a go for game with 3NT. I passed this even though we had a good Diamond fit. "It's easier to make a bad 3NT than a bad 5♦".
Against 3NT West lead the expected Club. East won his Ace and returned a Club, declarer winning the ♣K. Now it's time to count tricks. Assuming you can bring all the Diamonds in, you've got one Club already, four Diamonds, one Heart and two Spades. The best chance for a ninth trick is in Spades, so declarer played the ♠K and ♠J, both ducked. West could have bagged his ♠A and taken two more Clubs for four defensive tricks, but held off. Declarer then successfully finessed the ♦Q and took his four Diamonds, giving the defence some tough discards. This was then the position in the Heart suit, with the lead in hand, and declarer needing to get two tricks in this suit:
| ♥ x | ||
| ♥ T 9 |  | ♥ K Q 6 5 |
| ♥ A J 8 7 |
It needs to be just right, and AP rose to the challenge. He lead the ♥J from hand, which East won. He had only Hearts to return, so returned a low one. Declarer won the ♥A and played the ♥8, finally forcing a second Heart trick with the ♥7, and make a very bad 3NT.
Thursday, 1 May 2014
Glasgow Summer cup: Team Rowan vs Maccabi
After finishing second in Glasgow Division Two (see here), we fancied our chances in the Summer Cup, which is only open to teams from Division Two to Division Four. From our original Team Rowan me and Anna joined David and Heather Merriman to form Team Merriman.
In the first round we drew a team whose name I sadly can't quite remember [someone help me out?]. Me and Anna arrived at the Maccabi centre early, and snuck into the empty hall and turned the lights on. I covertly had my dinner and Anna helped herself to a honeycomb Club.
In the first half the Boards were pretty flat. Maybe we didn't shuffle enough. But the quality of the bridge was good and the match was tight. After 12 boards the score was just 15-20, meaning we trailed by 5 IMPs. In the hand before the mid-session interval I was dummy and pre ordered two teas, like I was at the theatre. This was the deal, a small gain for Team Merriman. East-West are vulnerable, and West is the dealer.
|
I was sitting North and opened 1♠. East overcalled 2♣. Since they were vulnerable, I guess he didn't fancy 3♣. West could have passed this (in which case I would have reopened with a double), but instead he bid 2♥. I passed and it was up to Anna as South. She decided to come back in with 3♦. I probably wouldn't have bid this, scared the whole hand was a misfit and defending was best. But Anna went for it, and it is a nice bold bid.
Against 3♦ West lead a club. Anna ducked this, won the next Club then played one more Club, West throwing a Spade and allowing her to ruff in dummy. She then played the ♠A and ♠Q, covered by the ♠K and ruffed in hand. When she played trumps West won and returned a Heart. Anna won and lead her winning Spade from the dummy, throwing a losing Heart and letting West ruff. So in the end the defence came to three Diamonds and a Club, for 3♦= and +110.
The hand diagram above is generated by a program called Bridgify, which is free to download (see www.bridgify.net). The numbers under the West cards show how many tricks the defence gets, depending on his lead. You can see that on the actual Club lead, the defence get only 3 tricks, meaning declarer could have made 3♦+1. This is from playing the Spades early on to establish a long Spade, but 3♦= was still a good result and we gained 4 IMPs on the hand.
I enjoyed my half time tea tremendously. For the second half we swapped opponents, and sat down with [?name] and his Mum. As they bid a series of games against us, I had a few tricky decisions. Once partner opened Spades, the next hand doubled, and I had a weak hand with five Spades. I think now it's all about tactics, and choosing the most cunning bid. My current maxim is always to pre-empt to the max so I went for a not very cunning immediate 4♠, prompting the next hand to bid and make 5♥. I wonder if I could have kept them out their game by shrewdly only bidding 2♠, or even passing.
There was one big swing hand, when our opponents accidentally got to 6NT after failing to stop in 4NT or 5NT. They played it very nicely and made it. This all confused me and when we bid to 6♣ on the next hand I was seriously on the tilt, playing a very straight-forward contract needlessly slowly. My chat plummeted at this point, and I commented that I was wearing a jumper and Anna wasn't.
After a tight first half we also narrowly lost the second half, 15-30. That lead to a final loss of 30-50, probably the right result against opponents' who made very few mistakes. Congratulations to them, and I hope they now go on to win the cup!