Adamson vs Stevenson

For this iteration of the league our team has rebranded as Adamson. Two of our pairs (Pinder-Barton and Adamson-Saunders) did well in the recent trials and have been selected for the Scotland team in the Camrose (see here). With that talent in the squad, surely we'd be unstopptable?

Unfortunately, John and I were not picked for the Camrose Team, and didn't even get close to entering the trials. He actually played the first two hands with new baby Xander. I had no such excuse. We had an off night, starting with this very disappointing 6♠ I let through:

I've made a slightly wild 3♥ overcall and propelled them to 6♠. There's no point leading my singleton Diamond (partner can't have the Ace), so I tried a Club, and was pleased when declarer refused the finesse and won the first trick with the ♣A. He took the ♥A, ruffed a Heart, then the King of Spades to my Ace. Crunch time.

I returned a top Heart, forcing him to ruff high in dummy (as he thought from the auction I had seven Hearts so East might be over-ruffing. Then he lead a Spade from dummy and finessed, losing to my bare ♠T. One off.

At least, that's what should have happened. Actually, when in with the ♠A I was worried about giving a ruff and discard so returned a tame Spade, not realising the power of my ♠T. Declarer won this and was able to quickly claim, for 6♠= against 4♠+2 on the other table (where South had only overcalled 2♥). An 11 IMP loss, that could have been a 10 IMP gain.

The first half continued to not go terribly well and at the break we were down by 50 IMPs to 1. In the second half we steadied the ship (but still lost slightly) to finish 53 IMPs behind.

On the upside John and I didn't have any bidding misunderstanding (just lots of poor defence), and I expect we will bounce back with a win in tonight's game against Peden.

How to make extra tricks

Usually when you are declarer you have a stronger hand than dummy, and more trumps. You can therefore view your hand as providing the main source of tricks, with dummy giving a bit of help. Sometimes dummy helps with high cards, sometimes with a shortage that means you can ruff. Sometimes dummy helps with a long side-suit that you can establish, which is a bit harder to spot.

Very often when dummy has shortage (meaning you can ruff), it also has a long side-suit (which you can establish). But it's usually difficult to do both, and you have to decide which to do. For example, take this hand that my Junior teams played in the Inter Schools Trophy.

You are East. Playing 4♥ you have 9 top tricks: 1 Spade, 5 Hearts, 2 Diamonds, 1 Club. You only need one more trick. The easiest way to get it is to ruff a Diamond. Then take the Spade finesse for the overtrick.

But what about if you are playing 6♥? Not so far-fetched, as one Junior Pair bid it. You now need three extra tricks on top of the nine you already have.

• Option 1 is to go for two Diamond ruffs, plus the Spade finesse. If this all works you get 2 Spades, 5 Hearts, 4 Diamonds, 1 Club for 12 tricks.
• Option 2 is to try and set up the Clubs for one loser. If it works you get 1 Spade, 5 Hearts, 1 Diamond, 5 Clubs for 12 tricks.

Although going for the ruffs is the natural thing to do for most players, it's going to be tough. You need the 50/50 Spade finesse, plus a lot more, as getting back to hand each time to ruff, then draw trumps, is going to be tricky. In Option 2 if Clubs behave reasonably you are home, and that's it. So if you need 12 tricks then setting up the long suit is the better option.

On this layout the Spade finesse fails, so Option 1 will never get you 12 tricks. Option 2 will lead to 6♥= unless you get a Spade lead.

In total the hand was played four times. The two more experienced Junior declarers in 4♥ both took a Diamond ruff, and picked up a second Club trick, for 4♥+1 (the Spade finesse failed). One of the less experienced declarers got to 6♥, and got a Diamond lead. Unfortunately the play didn't match the bidding, and perhaps overwhelmed by options and the level of the contract declarer neither ruffed Diamonds or set up Clubs and finished with the 9 tricks he started off with, for 6♥-3.

Summary: if you need lots of tricks consider setting up a long suit in dummy.

How to make a doomed contract

Suppose you are playing 4♠, with four top losers. What are you supposed to do? Claim down one (maybe against top opposition). Better is to try and steal the contrract.

One option is to play off all your trumps, then hope something good happens at the end. Perhaps the opponents will have to throw away so many winners they keep the wrong thing. Or they end up clashing their King and Ace on the same trick. Or one defender wins but ends up having to return something to help you. A few ways to win.

The alternative approach is to try and steal the contract early on by sneaking a trick past the defence. Perhaps you can grab a singleton King, or set-up a suit without the defence get organised.

Which of these two approaches you go for I think is partly a question of personality. If you like to leave the washing up to soak, and put off the nasty work, you go for the first approach. Take your 9 winners, then hope something good happens. If you're the sort of person who likes to rip a plaster off quickly, and deal with the problem straight away, you go for the second approach, and try and steal your 10th trick immediately.

Here's an example hand:

You open the South hand 1♠. Your partner makes a slightly dubious 2♠ raise and with your strong hand you raise to game.

West leads a Heart which you win in hand. There are four top losers. One Spade, one Diamond, two Clubs. Claim down one? Not yet.

These are your two options:

• Draw trumps, and if the defence haven't taken their four tricks yet then play off all your trumps and your Hearts. Finally play a Club and hope the defence end up crashing their ♣AK.
• Immediately start on Clubs. If the defence don't get round to playing Diamonds you can discard a losing Diamond on the Clubs in dummy.

The first line is the safest, as it begins by drawing trumps, and is probably the one most declarers will take. At the table declarer chose this (and went one off).

The second line looks like it shouldn't work, but just might do. You know the defence can safely play Diamonds, but they don't. West in particular might be relcutant to lead away from his ♦K. And maybe when East wins his Club honour he'll want to play trumps to cut Heart ruffs (he doesn't know you've got a solid Heart suit), or he might even return Hearts (his partner's suit).

The point is, defence is the hardest part of the game and what's clear to declarer might not always be clear to the defence. So make life as hard as possible for the defence, and they'll get it wrong sometimes.

For this particular hand there is a third option, a bit harder to spot:

• Play four rounds of Hearts, discarding three Clubs from dummy. On the fourth round one opponent will be out of Hearts (even if they split 4-3), but he might have to ruff with the singleton Ace of trumps. You could try and improve your chances by sneaking a round of trumps through first (e.g. leading the ♠J), which increases the chance that later when an opponent ruffs your Heart it's with the Ace.

This gives you a small genuine chance of making it, but risks going down two if the defence ruff a Heart winner then take their other four tricks. So perhaps this is the best line against expert defenders, when you expect them to always take their tricks.

Here's another hand, this time from a Glasgow League Match:

I was East. 4♠ is not a bad contract, but when South found the killing Diamond lead it looks like I've got a certain four losers. I turned to Hearts immediately, before drawing trumps. The logic is that if you're going for the steal-a-trick route, you need to do it as early as possible. Leaving trumps out is fine as there's no risk of a ruff. It also the defence more to think about. Finally drawing trumps would give the defender who runs out first a chance to signal.

In the Heart suit there is the chance of getting a useful discard from dummy, but surely once I touch Hearts it'll be obvious to the defence what's going on. Certianly if I started by leading the King of Hearts then the defence would take their Ace, see the winning ♥QJ in dummy, realise they can only get one Diamond (before dummy ruffs) so turn to Clubs.

I therefore tried leading the ♥9 from hand. This feels awkward, as I've blocked the Heart suit, but that's not actually going to a problem. North took his Ace of Hearts, cashed a Diamond, and went into a think. I could see that there were two Clubs to lose, but he didn't know that. He also didn't know I had the King of Hearts hidden in my hand. The longer he thought, the more my hopes got up. Only a Club will beat me. Finally he played a Diamond, and the contract made.

So here's what I've learned. If you're going for a deceptive play:

• Do it as soon as possible before the defence know what's going on
• Hide the honours in the closed hand

And don't be surprised if some of the time the defenders help you out - it's much harder for them than it is for you.

A final example, from a Glasgow League match in 2020. You are declarer in 5♥. You've overbid, so you better make it:

You get the ♠Q lead. There are three top losers. What's your plan?

Following the rules above (do it quickly and use the closed hand), you cross to dummy to lead a Club towards your singleton Queen. Looking at all four hands it's obvious for North to take the Ace of Clubs (then take two Diamonds for one off), but what if you had a Club void in hand? Then North playing the Ace of Clubs would be a big mistake.

Leading a low Club from the North hand early on makes the defender guess, and at least some of the time they're going to guess wrong.

The benefits of overbidding

My Junior team have been competing in the SBU Bronze League, which has all been online. If I'm the home captain I set up the match on Bridge Base andcan watch the boards.

I've taught my Junior team to "pre-empt to the max" and "bid all games" which combined with their natural attacking instincts makes for some exciting boards. I would say on the whole their aggressive style gains more than it loses, although I do wish they would stop bidding bad slams.

Here's an example from a match against Razputin. You are vulnerable against not, and your right-hand opponent opens 1♦. Your bid?

I'm pleased to say our South went all-out with 4♠. Jumping to game-level is very effective, as the opponents can't tell if you are pre-empting with a weak hand or bidding with a good hand that expects to make. So there's a very good chance you won't get doubled.

If the opponets play a lot of takeout doubles it might be hard for either of them to double you. Here though, 4♠ did get doubled. and was heading for three off, vulnerable. Is this an argument against such bold overbidding? Maybe not. The defence isn't always perfect and declarer escaped for down two:

The defence took one Club then played three rounds of Hearts (setting up dummy's Jack). Then declarer drew trumps, corrrectly by leading the King of Spades. West won and guessed to play on Diamonds. That meant declarer could ruff the second round of Diamonds then cross to the winning ♠8 to take a winning Heart and discard the other Club. So he escaped for only two off, doubled.

At this vulnerability that was still -500, more than letting East-West make a game. But perhaps East-West can make a slam? If both the minors split there are 13 top tricks, and even with Diamonds 4-1 there are 12. It's hard to bid though. Our other pair made 5♦+1 (after South only overcalled 2♠), so overall a small loss on the board.

So perhaps pre-empting all the way to 4♠ on this board only makes sense if you are playing really good opponents who might get to the slam.

Here's another hand from the same match where we overbid:

East made a weak two opening and our South overcalled 2♠. West has an easy 4♥ bid and its over to North. On the one hand you have a weak hand with only two card trump-support. On the other hand it's favourable vulnerability, and when you bid 4♠ it's very hard for them to double. West has a likely three tricks in his hand, but possibly no more than three, so just passed. He may also have been put off by the fact he'd doubled North in a making contract on the previous hand.

As it happens 4♠ hits the jackpot here, as your partner has strong Spades. And, crucially, little enough defence so that 4♥ would have made.

Playing 4♠ isn't too bad, and only has three top losers. Here the defence played trumps and declarer ended up losing two Hearts, one Spade and one Diamond for one off. A good result.

In conclusion (based on these two boards and three seasons in the SBU Bronze League) overbidding is often effective. It works especially well when the defence are in the dark. That means you need to bid high quickly, especially with jumps to game level. Then it'll be much harder for them to double you.

Glasgow Division 1: Rowan vs Buchanan

For our second match in Division 1 it was a sort of derby between two teams based at the Buchanan Bridge Club.

Anna and I had an unusually solid game, and as Anna said afterwards "I still felt sharp at the end". I couldn't see any full mistakes that we made, just this board that we could have done better on:

I have the East hand. Although the hand isn't ideal for a weak three (or even good) the fact I was second-in-hand vulnerable convinced me it was worth opening. In this position and vulnerability you want to have a decent hand, which I felt I had.

The hand did indeed belong to us, and Anna has a nice hand. You can see that 4♥ would go very well. I have three very useful cards for Anna; the ♠K, ♥K and ♦J none of which she is expecting. With only a Club singleton she felt she had to pass, and I was stuck in 3♣.

South lead the ♠J covered by the Queen and Ace. To stop a Spade ruff North returned a trump, to my Ten and Ace. At that point south switched to a low Diamond. I have a choice of taking a simple finesse in Diamonds or a ruffing finesse. I guessed right to take the ruffing finesse. With Clubs 3-1 I then just made it.

However, I was well aware that 4♥ would have made (especially with the ♥QJ coming down).

On the other table in our match the auction was the same. Against 3♣ the defence never returned a trump so declarer could ruff a Spade and make it without guessing Diamonds.

In the other match both Easts also opened 3♣ but the Wests responded 3♥ and they got to game (4♥+1). Maybe those pairs had more precise agreements about opening a Weak Three (so East guaranteed some strength) or maybe just more optimistic Wests.

Overall then a flat board for Team Rowan.

The rest of the match was typically close. Anna and I stole a couple of games on our table (and caught them in 3♣x-4), but our team-mates were unlucky in bidding two slams on a finesse that both failed. At the end of 24 boards on 4 tables we lost by just 80 points. That meant a loss by 8.5-7.5, but (mainly by virtue of having played more matches) we are currently top of the league!

Glasgow Division 1: Rowan vs Metropole

Last night we began a new season with Team Rowan in Division 1, having just got promoted. As our captain said, there are some very good teams in this division, but the worst that can happen is we get relegated again. Our first match was against Metropole, who recently got promoted too, and we narrowly lost to last time Anna and I played against them (see here).

The matches start at 7pm, which is quite early for us, and Anna was still reading bedtime stories at 6:59. This may have contributed to our slow start, as we missed a chance to beat 3NT then both underbid here:

I decided to make a Weak Two despite having four Spades as they were so weak. Anna bid Ogust and I showed what I thought I had, a weak hand with good trumps. Anna settled for 3♥. I thought about bidding on anyway but made a disciplined pass. On reflection I have exactly the sort of hand that could easily make game so should have bid 4♥, and maybe should have replied to Ogust differently too. I thought we judged hand strength by high card points (in which case I am weak), Anna thought by losers (in which case I'm strong). I think her way is probably better. This hand also shows why I don't like Ogust, as it doesn't really tell you anything useful (unless perhaps you play very wide ranging Weak Twos).

Against 3♥ the defence led a Spade, and took the first two tricks before East returned a third Spade for West to ruff and me to overruff. At this point the play in 4♥ would be tricky, as if the Diamond finesse fails I might lose a Spade as well (if I draw trumps first) or a Heart (if I ruff with dummy's Ace of Hearts). I think the best line would be to ruff a Spade high, and hope that you can still draw trumps without a loser.

In 3♥ I could just draw trumps, and when the Diamond finesse was on I made 11 tricks. 3♥+2.

Our team-mates Jill and Barbara also played in 3♥, and it was only one Metropole pair who got to 4♥, on the auction 2♥-4♥.

After this we settled down a bit, and had a few good boards making 6♠, then 4♥x+1.

Our daughter has just got her own clock and is allowed to stay up until 8pm, so during the first hour of the match I heard her chatting away to herself. Then she ran in to tell me it was "a very unsusual time, eight-ninety!", which was actually 8:09. I tried not to get distracted, but did then forget to bid Checkback Stayman and Anna made a comfortable 2NT+1 (missing 4♥=). Then there was one more slam board:

I had to count my points twice to believe it was really 20, as it didn't feel good enough. Perhaps I should have gone with my instinct and downgraded it. After I did open 2NT Anna bid Stayman then wasn't sure what to do when I hit her suit with 3♠. We play that an immediate 4NT here would be quantitative, so to set Spades as trumps she needs to bid the other major (here 4♥). But we don't play much together and I suppose Anna didn't want to risk a mix up so bid an immediate 6♠.

West led a Club. Dummy was a disappointment, and it looks pretty hopeless. We have good trumps but otherwise the hands don't fit well together. Move my Queen of Clubs to the Queen of Hearts and it would be an easy 12 tricks. As it is I need to play Hearts for one loser.

I thought for a long time how best to do this. Then apologised to the opposition and had another think. It needs some imagination to find any winning layouts. I decided the best chance was to lead low from dummy hoping to get either a singleton Queen or Ace-Queen doubleton onside. You can see this didn't happen and in fact I went two off.

When I was dummy on the next hand I looked it up on Suitplay and was pleased to see my line was best, giving me about a 7% chance of success.

Our team-mates and one opposition pair also played the board in 6♠ (all going down), with one opposition pair getting to the making 4♥. So not a good board for Team Rowan.

After this we finished with a few good games bid at all the tables. The final result was a loss of 180 at our table, but +1460 at the other for a 10-6 win overall. A winning start to the season!

Partscore battle

With the Glasgow League starting again soon (and our Team Rowan promoted to Division One) Anna I thought we should get some practice. The EBU Matchpoint evening isn't ideal, its not IMPs, but it's short and starts at a good time (1930). In general we don't have too many bidding misunderstandings, the main thing I think is defence.

Here's a matchpoint battle:

We play a weak NT and prefer to open the lower of four card suits, hence my 1♦ opening. Having passed, West then made a takeout double and Anna made a very light Diamond raise. This is the one time she can bypass a four card major. I stretched a bit with my 3♦ bid, and when they bid 4♣ I was very happy to double. I have a couple of Ace-Kings, a likely Diamond trick, and partner may well have something in trumps. At IMPS I might still have doubled 4♣, as I was expecting at least two down.

I led my Ace of Spades and Anna discouraged, and also discouraged in Hearts and Diamonds. As it turned out we had just four tricks. 4♣x-1 was worth +100 and 82%. If I don't double then we get +50 for 74%, not much difference.

Any positive score is good for North-South here, as most pairs were in 1NT-1, or defending a lower level Club contract.

We got a few gifts (6NT-2) and finished on 64% for 5th overall. Bring on the league!