Buchanan Bridge Club

I was standby last Monday, which I do about once a year. This time I got a game, with Harry Connolly. I agreed to his system, including Gemmel discards, which I can find no reference to online. 

We did OK. I made a few bold bids which generally paid off, and only one slip in defence.

Dummy has ♥AQTxx and leads a low one. You have ♥Jxx. What do you play? I instinctively played low. My partner won the trick with the King, and that was the only Heart we got. The whole suit was:

	AQTxx
Kxx		Jxx
	xx

Of course declarer could have finessed earlier, but had got stuck in dummy. So when he lead from table I should have played my Jack, which costs nothing and gains a trick here. 

Overall we finished on 57%, good enough for second in our section (a bit lower when combined with the online games).

This was an amusing deal:

On our table I was North and opened 1♥ (playing five card majors and strong NT). Harry sitting South replied 1NT and played there. West led the King of Clubs, ducked, then switched to a Diamond. East won his King and ran the Hearts. In the end declarer only got his three Aces.

Amazingly, with only 18 high card points between them, East-West can make 3NT, but of course no one bid it. 

Our score of 1NT-4 was worth 8%. I don't think declarer can do any better, expect for perhaps responding 1♠, after which I would have rebid 1NT and had to play the doomed contract instead. 

Buchanan vs Bonnyton

Last night Anna and I played in a Realbridge match against Bonnyton, in Glasgow Division 1. Afterwards, Anna said she thought we might be Division 2 players. We lost the match 15-1 overall, although it was fairly close on our table.

The opponents made several 24 point 3NT games, did better on the distributional hands (we missed the sacrifices), and benefitted when we underbid a couple of hands at the end. Overall it was quite a long evening, with a delayed start and a further delay while one of their team went to look for an iPad charger - turns out he was in Tenerife, hence he was the only one playing in a vest.

But amongst the 24 boards we had at least three or four triumphs. This was the best of them.

Playing our weak NT system I opened the West hand a natural 1C. Anna replied 3C, which for us is 10-12 with Club support. She has a strange hand, and maybe should bid something different, but I'm not sure what. As we tend to do when we have a good minor fit, I bid 3NT.

North lead a small Heart (the 5). I was a bit worried about my lack of a Diamond stop, but dummy has them well covered. In fact Spades are the issue. South won the opening lead with the Ace of Hearts and I dropped my Jack of Hearts. A great ruse. South continued with Hearts. I hastily took the King and 11 more tricks in the minors for 3NT+3.

Afterwards North claimed the Spade switch was obvious, but I like to think my deceptive Jack of Hearts (looking like someone with JT or making KJ) fooled South into continuing Hearts. This was the full hand:

You can see that on the other table our opponents played 5C-1, perhaps a sounder contract but much easier for the defence to take their three tricks. In the other match 5C made when the defence tried three rounds of Spades, and 3NT made on another Heart lead and continuation.

 

Halloween bridge

John and I had an OK game last Tuesday, playing for Team Buchanan against Gilmorehill. The first hand we bid up to 6H, and I'm glad I was dummy as my hands were shaking from all the sugar from trick or treating. The slam made, but not much else did. Through misunderstandings and optimism I kept putting John in hopeless contracts. He played them well for down one, maintaining good concentration while dressed as a Jedi throughout.

In defence I was more alert than usual, and had a full count of declarer's points and shape for most hands. There was one I was proud of; after a disastrous AH lead setting up declarer's King I kept concentration and later ducked twice to cut declarer off from dummy and get the contract one off. That was the highlight. A lowlight was 2S-1 when I guessed trumps wrong with K9x opposite QTxxx. I first lead the Queen, then instead of finessing on the second round made the cowardly play of the King.

Another lowlight was the hand below. 

After a poorly controlled auction I ended as East in 3H, where actually you'd like to be in game. They lead a Spade, and I immediately started on Diamonds. The defence won and played Ace and another Heart. At this point I can virtually claim nine tricks; four Hearts, two Spades, one Diamond and a Club. I just need to ruff a Diamond and return to hand with a Spade to draw trumps.

But I had another plan. Leaving the Jack of Hearts in dummy as a trump policeman I started on the Clubs. If they had of split I would actually get 11 tricks. But they didn't split; someone ruffed the second round of Clubs and now I only had 8 tricks.

This didn't both me too much at the time - I was glad I wasn't in 4H, but I did wake up at 5 am the next day with an uneasy feeling then the correct play on this hand occurred to me. 3H-1 when I should have had 3H=.

In the end we lost the match 4-12. 

Return to Buchanan Club

John and I made a return to face to face bridge on Monday with a most welcome game at the Buchanan. It's been over a year since either of us played a real match, and it was great to be back at the club. It was still light outside and with a cool breeze, perfect conditions for bridge!

As usual, John and I handicapped ourselves by playing his system (or maybe it's oringally his partner's Frazer's system). It's not a bad system, but is fairly unfamiliar to me. I spent much of the week before reading it, and even made a couple of online quizzes to test my understanding. On the second board I bid 3♥ to show a Club singleton, which to my surprise John alerted as a Diamond singleton!

Despite the misunderstanding I ended in a reasonable 6♥. In fact, without the misunderstanding I may well have ended up in 7♥, and six was high enough. The small slam made exactly for 73%, as most people were in it.

In my featured deal below we made a lot of tricks

=	John Danny W N E S - 1♣ - 1♦ - 3♣ - 3♠ - 3NT - - -

I had the big East hand and opened 1♣. John replied 1♦, and I thought about a speculative 3NT but went for the more sensible 3♣. When John rebid 3♠ I went for the NT game.

I got a Heart lead, and immediately looked to the Club suit. If Clubs are 3-2 I just have to lose one Club, and if one defender had exactly Queen-Ten then I can win all the Clubs. Even if they are 4-1 without an honour dropping I still have a good chance of nine tricks (four Spades, three Hearts, two Clubs). Is there any benefit in leading low to the Jack? I couldn't think of any, so played Clubs from the top and waas rewarded with all 13 tricks.

We got 77% as although nearly everyone played 3NT, some made only 12 tricks.

Monday Buchanan Pairs

Last night I played in the Buchanan Pairs tournament with John Di Mambro. It was an 1830 start, and the way things worked out, I was still surrounded by children for the first board. Does that excuse my defense?

I was moderately wise not to bid in the auction, and lead a Spade against 4♥. Declarer at our table lead a Heart to the Ace, then on seeing my ♥J crossed back to dummy and gussed well to duck a Heart to my ♥K. Every other declarer in 4♥ finessed the ♥Q and had to lose two trump tricks. We could still have taken two trump tricks, if I'd lead back a Spade for John to ruff. I knew that the last Spade was the Ace and declarer had it, so it was all there for me. I did ponder for a while, but then played a useless Diamond. Conceding 4♥+2 was worth 0%.

After the first ten boards we had recovered to be on about 50%. Then we had a good run towards the end, and finished on 64%, to finish second overall. My highlight was the board below:

I made a pretty poor 2♥ opening (not sure if my partner would approve or not), then accepted defending 3NT. John dutifully lead a Heart, which I ducked, as taking the trick would just set up two tricks for declarer. When he finessed Clubs it was an easy one to duck, as he is certainly going to be finessing again. When he did finesse again I lead a Diamond, setting up my fourth Diamond. I was then able to get a Club, Heart and Diamond and hold declarer to 3NT+1, where he should always be getting 11 tricks.

My fine effort was worth 40%, as the opposition had done well to get to 3NT, and 4♠ was failing badly.

Trick 1

Last night was the final Buchanan Lockdown Teams, as the club now has proper pair's evenings organised. I played with Ted, and our team won 36-7. Of the seven IMPs we lost, six were on the board below:

I open 1♦ and rebid 2NT showing 18-19. Ted bid Checkback Stayman to check for a fifth Heart, and we finished in 3NT. North lead the ♣5.

I have a certain two stops in Clubs. Given time I have plenty of further tricks, likely four Diamonds, two Hearts and a Spade to get me to nine. The problem is I'm missing three Aces, so the defence have plenty of time to set up their Clubs.

On trick one I played the ♣2 from dummy, South the ♣9 and I won in hand with the ♣J. I've still got one Club stopper, but that's not enough. I forced out the Heart Ace, lost my last Club stopper, forced out the Diamond Ace, then South did well to play a Spade across to North, to cash a few more Clubs. In the end I lost three Clubs and three other Aces.

If I play the ♣Q on the first trick it holds. Now my remaining ♣AJ is worth two more stoppers, if I lose the lead to South. As it happens South has the Aces in both the suits I'm going to play, so I'm still down.

My play of the ♣2 on the first trick would only gain if North had lead away from ♣T9xxx, which is much less likely.

The other table played 2NT and made it.

Failure to alert

Last night Anna and I had our third outing at the Buchanan Saturday tournament. After complaining that she didn't get to play any hands Anna had a run of four in a row. She played the first 4♥ beautifully to give us a lead in the match, and the rest were mostly flat.

I had one rather frustrating outing playing 2♣, where after the opening lead I asked the opponents what carding they play. What is a reasonable amount of time to wait for an answer? After a few minutes I got the reply "varies". I asked for details, got none, and decided to just play on. A couple of hands later when dummy I realised they were playing reverse attitude, both when following suit and when discarding. I wrote this to the table (so Anna could see), and an opponent then confirmed with "low like, high hate".

Anna and I are good at alerting out bids, although there is a quirk on Bridge Base that means sometimes when you're declarer the alert pops up covering the left hand side of dummy. If you click "OK" it disappears for an instant then another alert appears covering the right hand side of dummy, then they both appear. It happened to both me and Anna and neither of us could work out a way to get rid of them. It explains what I have written on the alert on the 2♠ bid below!

The auction is fairly standard, Anna transferring and getting a nice dummmy. With the Spades offisde there are two to lose, plus a Heart and three Clubs. However, I got a Heart lead and return and could throw away one losing Club on the Diamonds for 2♠=. On the other table North was declarer in 2♠, and East found the astonishing lead of the ♣2 to take the contract one off.

In the end we won the match 25-11.

Buchanan Saturday Tournament

After a narrow 19-17 win last week Anna and I returned for another 12 boards of competition.

We started well as the opponent's missed a couple of games (or bid game when slam was there) then came my first go as declarer:

I was pleased to have a fairly normal weak 2♥ opening. South stretched to overcall 3♦ and Anna did not hesitate to bid game. South lead her ♦A.

The contract looks good, with likely two Diamonds and a Heart to lose. But the opponents also have a Diamond ruff coming. To try and avoid this, I made the standard misdirection of dropping my ♦J under the Ace. It felt like I did this smoothly without a pause, but maybe that's not quite true. South didn't fancy leading another Diamond in case declarer ruffed (setting up the ♦Q) so switched suits. Now my two losing Diamonds went away on the Clubs and there were eleven tricks.

I'm not sure what carding they played, but North did play the ♦6 on the first trick. I think Anna and I have agreed in that situation (a doubleton opposite partner's Ace lead) we will play an encouraging card too (in our case the ♦3).

On the other table the defence got the ruff and so it was one down.

Anna then had this tricky 3NT to play;

After her 1♠ opening Anna is too weak to reverse so must rebid 2♠. I make a forcing 3♦ and Anna had a very solid Diamond stop so bid 3NT. Actually, 4♥ is the best contract, but despite the communication problems there should be enough high cards to make 3NT.

North lead a Club which Anna ducked, winning the second Club. There are seven top tricks, so at least one suit needs to be developed. Anna went for the Diamonds, but also took a successful Spade finesse of the ♠8, and when South discarded too many Spades actually made 3NT+2. You can see with everything working (both Spade honours onside, Diamond 3-3), everything works. I'm not sure what the best line is, but I would also have gone for the Diamonds.

On the other table they took the misfit too seriously and finished in 3♥+1.

We had established a healthy lead so on the final board when Anna opened 2♣ opposite my 11 count I thought I would fully investigate the grand slam. I judged extremely poorly to put Anna in a perilous 7♣ on a 5-2 fit. She brought it home though, and we won the match 71-17.

Buchanan Saturday night tournament

Anna and I haven't played any competitve bridge since last August when we were on holiday on Southwold (read here). We have played a little online since and last night finally found a tournament that suits us. 730 pm start and only twelve boards.

I was quite excited, and put together a system file for us. It was based on the last convention card we did (from 2014), which I found on an email that included the phrase "I wrote it mostly on my own, and I'm not sure Anna has actually agreed everything". In that same spirit I added some intereresting singleton game tries to the system, and we were ready to go.

On the very first board I put Anna under pressure, as I doubled the opponents after a strange auction:

The 1NT opening is 13-15. After the 2♦ bid I asked "are we alerting our own bids?" really meaning "Is that actually a transfer?". It turns out it was indeed a natural bid, though still seems an odd choice. When 2♦ came round to me I felt the points were likely divided about 20-20 so doubled for takeout. They weren't of course, the opponents were resting in 2♦ with 25 points between them, and Anna was stuffed. She passed out 2♦x, which I think is the least bad choice.

On the Spade lead declarer has eight tricks (just losing two Clubs and three Diamonds), and after cashing the Ace of Diamonds could have made an overtrick by discarding three clubs. As it is 2♦x= gave them +180. Not too much of a disaster for us, especially as 3NT is making their way (sadly our other table only made 2NT+2, so the board was flat). It could have been nasty though if South had found a redouble.

As we played it slowly became apparent our opponents were playing quite an unusual system. As far as I could tell overcalls were treated like opening bids, so for example they doubled with any shape, and overcalled 1NT with any 15-17 hand. Responses to overcalls were made as if partner had opened the bidding at the one level. Looked strange but seemed to work for them.

We edged ahead when the other table went down in game, and extended that lead when I made this 3NT.

When Anna overcalls 3♣ I know there's a good chance of six club tricks plus two Spades, and "where there's eight, there's nine". South duly lead a Spade. Dummy has only five Clubs but with the ♥A I have eight tricks. With a second Spade stopper I had time to finesse twice in Hearts. I was worried when both finesses lost, but thankfully North had no Spades left to return, so I did get my two Heart tricks. It's bad luck for South, as any lead other than a Spade leaves me a trick short.

In the other room the 3♠ opener was passed out, and went two off.

With two boards to go the opponents did well to bid to a light 4♥, leaving us a narrow one IMP lead going into the final board. Could we hold them off?

I had several tough bidding decisions here. Firstly, when Anna opens 1♦ I could repond naturally in Clubs, but instead went for 1♥, reasoning that if Anna is weak then when she rebids 2♦ I can bid 3♣ and show five Hearts. But to my surprise Anna rebid 2♣, and now we're in business.

I thought about a bold jump to 6♣, but that could look foolish if Anna has all her points in Diamonds, and so has weak Spades or four small trumps. I made the technically correct but more boring bid of 4♣, which sets Clubs as trumps and is forcing as it takes us past 3NT. Anna signed off with 5♣, and I now felt obliged to respect that. Anna couldn't know how useful her Spade honours were (if she cuebids 4♠ I would jump to 6♣), so the slam was missed.

On a Spade lead then trump switch Anna ruffed all her Heart losers in dummy for a comfortable 12 tricks. This beat the 5♣= in the other room for a one IMP gain and 19-17 win!

Connections Cup #2

Phil Moon and I were back at the Buchanan for an online game yesterday.

We made a promising start, when Phil made an excellent 4♥ overcall, causing them to miss their Diamond slam. Unfortunately the same thing happened at the other table so it was flat.

In fact, over 16 boards there was only one game swing. And it was against us, caused by my dubious bidding:

Phil opened 1♥ and it was over to me. We play four card majors and weak NT. We've not discussed what suit to open with a four card minor and a four card major, but I do know that Phil either has five Hearts or 15+ points.

I made the unusual response of 2♥. As it happens, my wife was walking past at that time and after my bid I asked what she would have done. "1NT" she said straight away. I wish I had. 2♥ could have worked well, if for example we end up playing 2♥ instead of 1NT. I've a singleton Spade and partner is likely short of Spades. If Phil does bid on, it's very likely he has five Hearts.

As it is, Phil has a balanced 19 count with only four Hearts (and four good Spades). At least his Hearts are good, and 4♥ has some play.

On the ♣Q lead Phil let it run round to his ♣A, leaving the finesse for later. He now has plenty of tricks, the only problem is trump losers. Phil found a good line of ducking a Heart, leading small from hand. Unfortunately the defence pounced on this, and found a way to beat the contract. South won the ♥Q and lead a Diamond through, North won ♦AQ then a fourth Diamond puts declarer in big trouble. He's already lost three tricks so ruffs high with the ♥K and can no longer make it.

The other table had a more usual auction to 3NT. This has eight top tricks, and chances for a ninth (and tenth) in Hearts, Clubs and Diamonds. When it made exactly that was 10 IMPs away.

In the end we lost 19-24.

Connections Cup #1

With the big lockdown the Buchanan Bridge Club have responded quickly and set up online matches on Monday and Wednesday. These will hopefully become tournaments at some point, but for now are a series of Teams Matches, organised by Ron Hounsell. The winner of the Connections Cup will be those who have the highest five IMP scores across the whole time that the club is closed (maybe three months, maybe six months?)

It is of course a fun and friendly tournament, and I think most people are glad just to have a bit of bridge and some sort of socialising. But I've been thinking about the scoring system, and it means you are rewarded for being in high scoring matches. A flat board is no use to either team. That's perfect for myself and my partner of last night, Phil Moon. Like me, Phil is an optimistic bidder, and he rarely misses either a slam or a sacrifice.

Our best result was on the final board, where I had a really nice hand for my pre-empt and didn't mind being doubled:

West opened 1♣ and East correctly bid 1♠, showing the major. I had the big South hand. I have the strength for 2♥ but opposite a passed partner bid an immediate 4♥. West has an easy 4♠ bid. Phil then found the winning bid of 5♥. East doubled this pretty quickly, although actually she knows about double fit and might have thought about bidding on. West thought for much longer then 5♥x was passed out.

The defence took two Spades then lead a Club ruffed in hand. From my perspective as declarer, if I can avoid any trump losers I'll make the contract. If either hand has a singleton King then laying down the ♥A works, but if it's specifically West with a singleton Jack then I need to lead the ♥Q from dummy. I considered that was more likely, so crossed to dummy to lead the Queen. You can see that on this layout it still didn't work, but still saved a trick compared to starting with the ♥A.

5♥x-1 felt like a good score. In 4♠ the defence have only two Diamond tricks, plus perhaps a Club ruff. Indeed 4♠ was left in at the other table and made, so we gained 11 IMPs.

Our other high level adventures both involved us bidding on to slam after one partner had made a natural 3NT bid. This is always tricky - is 4NT Blackwood, quantitative, or to play? In the end our 6♦ went down and our 6♠ made, for more IMPs exchanged.

The final score was a narrow win by 43 to 34.

Dave Jolley Pairs

Last night I played with Ted Black in a Matchpoint event at the Buchanan Bridge Club. It was a handicap pairs event, which meant that after the usual scoring each pair would be adjusted based on their previously accumulated masterpoints. In fact this time the handicapping didn't make any difference, as the winning pair won by nearly 20%. ]

It wasn't us, far from it, and in fact my featured board involves scoring 0% and a call to the director:

W N E S Ted Danny 1♣ 1♦ x 2♦ - - 2♠ - 3♣ 3♦ 4♣ - - x - - -

East opened 1♣ and I had no trouble overcalling 1♦ with the South hand. West had a think then doubled showing the majors, and Ted made the obvious raise to 2♦. At this point East thought for a long time and then passed. I suppose he was thinking about either bidding Hearts or rebidding his strong Clubs. At this point I should bid 3♦ as South, to buy the contract. At the time I was well aware that I should bid 3♦, but tried to buy it on the cheap and passed. As we will see, this strategy backfired badly.

West kept going with 2♠, which East corrected back to 3♣. Now I bid the 3♦ I should have bid the round before, and West bid 4♣. I doubled, for various reasons none of which is particularly good.

I lead my Club and was briefly hopeful, but there are exactly three tricks for the defence leading to 4♣x=. The director was called at this point as East's long pause before passing 2♦ may have lead West to bid on. Is it obvious for West to compete to the four level opposite a partner who passed 2♦ with nothing to think about?

The director said he'd think about it but was later relieved of this duty as we withdrew our claim; it's a bit woolly for anything definite, though still annoying. Though perhaps it's mostly annoying as I doubled a making contract.

My second featured hand is against the runaway winners, Neil Wylie and Iain Liddell:

W N E S Danny Ted - - - 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ - 3♣ - 3NT - - -

I sat North as dealer with a poor eleven count. I decided to be prudent and pass, but then felt the need to catch up and overcall West's opening bid of 1♦. The opposition quickly got to 3NT and Ted dutifully lead my suit, kicking off with the ♥J. Needless to say, my suit was the very worst one to lead.

Dummy covered the ♥K and I took my ♥A and rapidly reassessed. It has been an evening of opponents running long suits in NT and I fully expected all six Diamonds to run - either declarer had the ♦Q or it would be finessed. Declarer also seemed to have at least three Heart tricks, bringing his total to at least nine.

So I found the bold switch of the ♠2. Declarer did the natural thing of playing the ♠J, so Ted took his Queen and returned a Spade to my Ace. It was now time for another rethink. Declarer still had all of his Diamonds and Hearts, plus maybe a Spade, so our only hope was a Club. I switched to Clubs and Ted took his Ace for the fourth and final defensive trick.

I had defended boldly and all of my assumption has been correct. For this we got another 0%.

The reason for the poor score was that the one other table in 3NT had gone down , and everywhere else East-West were playing in a part score. In fact with only 22 points between them East-West need a bit of help to make 3NT, so although we did well to take four tricks after the Heart lead, we were already doomed.

I think perhaps we were unlucky to get 0% there, but I can't really complain, as the unluckiest pair were surely Laurence & Sandy, the only ones to bid to this excellent 7♥, when everyone else, including us, stopped in 6♥:

Although seven can be made, it requires an inspired Club finesse.

In our auction I opened 1♥ and Ted splintered with 3♠. Although I later found out we had all the keycards I was cautious and stopped in 6♥, as I was worried that with all the high trumps in dummy I wouldn't be able to ruff Spades and draw trumps (which turned out to be roughly true). I was also cautious as I was a bit too tired to investigate a grand slam, and the two-board Howell movement meant we always seemed to be running late and I felt quite pressed for time.

Not long after this I hit a low point by revoking to produce a minor penalty card (the ♥5). This allowed declarer to sneak a Heart past my known King and win unjustly with his ♥Q in dummy. It was painful to see, and a good reminder of the importance of always following suit when you can.

Our score of 51% was good enough for 4th before the handicap and 6th after it.

No coffee

My favourite game with our children is to lie on the floor and pretend to be asleep. Sometimes I'm waiting for Santa to arrive, sometimes I'm just lying there. Once I actually did have a micro-nap on the playroom floor. Unfortunately, their favourite game is now to jump on top of me while I'm pretending to sleep.

Yesterday I was feeling very tired and spent a lot of the afternoon lying on the floor, getting jumped on. I knew I had bridge in the evening and was saving my energy. On previous Monday night bridge I've had a half-time Coke or strong coffee, but I've found that the caffeine, along with a good memory for all the hands I got wrong, has meant it takes hours for me to go to sleep. So this time I had no coffee, and I think the fatigue may have lead me to some odd decisions. The featured boards below show me passing out a Blackwood inquiry and claiming when I'd miscounted trumps.

W N E S Danny John 2♥ 2NT 3♥ 3♠ - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT* - - -

North opened a weak 2♥ and John made a natural 2NT overcall, showing 15-19 and a Heart stop. South raised to 3♥, which I would never do with a singleton Heart but certainly worked here. I was sitting West, and had a problem. All of Pass, double, 3♠ and 3NT are options. I decided on 3♠, slightly worried it would look strong (as I was an unpassed hand) as I've forced us to game.

In fact John liked his Spades so much, along with my suspected singleton or void Heart, he tried a 4♥ cuebid. I tried to put the brakes on by signing off in 4♠ but this was met with a 4NT bid. I was pretty sure this was Blackwood, but passed anyway. There's no way we were making eleven tricks but might have a chance at ten, especially with my good Heart stop, I thought.

As it happens 3NT (or 4NT) was doomed, for various reasons, but actually not the lack of Heart stops. 4NT-3 did not score well. Bidding on to 5♠ would also not have scored well either, and would probably be doubled.

Never mind, on to the next one. Nearly the end of the evening and I'm flagging slightly.

W N E S Danny John 2♥ 2♠ - 2NT - 4♠ - - -

South opened, another weak 2♥ with 6-5 shape. This one I might even have opened 3♥, at favourable vulnerability. I was sat Weat and over 2♥ I went for a modest 2♠. John replied 2NT. I considered if 3NT would have play, and thought it probably would, as there'd be time to set up my Spades. But then I came to my senses, saw my seven card Spade suit and bid 4♠. North hesitated and passed it out.

She lead the ♣A and I was glad I wasn't in 3NT, with lots of Club losers. in 4♠ I can see ten tricks: seven Spades, two Hearts and a Diamond or even two if the finesse works. I ruffed the third club, unblocked the ♠A (South threw a Diamond) and ruffed a Club back to hand. I then did what I thought was drawing trumps with the ♠KQJ, before crossing to dummy to finesse the Diamonds for an 'overtrick'. When the ♦Q held I showed my last two cards, the ♦A and ♠7.

Quick as a flash North rejected my claim, showing her ♠T and a winning Club.

At this point I actually have either nine or ten tricks. Ten if I play the ♦A first, nine if I play my Spade first. It feels normal to me to always play the ♦A first, just in case, but obviously that's not good enough and by the laws I don't have a leg to stand on. I offered to call a director, but North-South graciously refused and allowed me ten tricks.

In fact North has already gotten herself a good score by not doubling as a couple of tables played 4♠x=.

Overall we finished on 55%, which was just good enough to be the top East-West pair.

Timidity

An enjoyable night last night at the Buchanan with John Di Mambro. We finished 3rd with about 60%. We had a strong start then fell away a bit as I demonstrated a mixture of under and overbidding. Here's one where I was too shy:

W N E S John Danny 1NT - - -

East opened with a maximum weak NT. I have the South hand with seven Spades. I can bid 2♦ showing a single-suited hand, which will be fine if I get to play 2♠, but I fear it will get us overboard if the auction becomes competitive, so select a meek pass. This works out poorly as declarer is able to win my opening Spade lead then rattle off five Heart tricks and finish with 1NT+1, getting us 34%. Playing and making 2♠ would have been 84%. In retrospect, my seventh Spade makes up for the weakness of the hand and it's worth an overcall.

In the second hand I was a defender, and made a bold defensive play, which looks foolish, and may well have been.

W N E S John Danny - - - 1♦ 1♥ - 2♦* x 3♥ - 4♥ - - -

I liked my East hand and opened 1♦. South overcalled 1♥ and I was all set to make a takeout double when North made an unassuming cue bid of 2♦. I decided to treat this like a Heart raise and still double for takeout. John was on the same wavelength, recognising my double as takeout, but of course had no bid, and the opposition soon got to 4♥.

John lead a Diamond to my Ace and I went into a think. It looks to me like South has got all the missing Hearts, and either has the Q♣ or can finesse it. So there's every chance she has 12 tricks now - five hearts, two Diamonds (the King and a ruff), and five Clubs. I could see any losing Spades going away on the Clubs in dummy, so cashed my ♠A, which felt totally wrong with the ♠AQ over the ♠KJ.

In a sense my analysis was correct. If I don't take my Ace of Spades at that point declarer can take 12 tricks. However, in a more practical sense it was not right at all as by letting 4♥ make we scored only 18% on the board. Most declarers made only nine tricks. It takes some working out to see how this is possible, but it can be done if you cash the ♣AK and ruff a Club low back to hand, or perhaps go for leading Spades up to dummy twice. The best line I think is for declarer to finesse Clubs immediately, as even if this fails you still have ten tricks (even though you expect the Club finesse to fail).

So a disappointing result but at least I erred by being too bold this time.

Muddled

At my now semi-regular Monday night game this week I played with Ted Black, another member of John Di Mambro's Wanderer's team. In the ten minutes before starting we found out that we both prefer weak NT and four card majors. Checkback Stayman was agreed, but we didn't discuss if it was game forcing, and on the first board I found myself in a doomed 3NT. I could have collected eight tricks for a 30% score, but took a ridiculous line and got seven tricks for a 0% score.

At the end of the evening Ted was berating himself for not finessing for a missing Queen (with a nine-card fit), as he thought in retrospect there were clues from the cards played. He won't be too worried about that (possible) minor slip-up when I reveal my horrendous declarer play on the board below. I have to admit I was feeling a bit muddled all night, struggling even to count trumps, and the board below is something of a low point:

W N E S Ted Danny - - - 1♣ - 1♠ - 3♣ - - -

I was getting all the hands tonight and had the nice 17 count as East. After three passes I opened 1♣ and partner replied 1♠. I think my only sensible option is 3♣, so I bid it. This puts Ted into a difficult spot, but I think he is right to pass. As it happens if he risks 3♥ we end up in a good 3♠, but 3♣ should be fine too.

I got a lovely lead of the 7♥ from South, gratefully won by the ♥T. I plan to play Spades to discard a Diamond. At this point I was thinking clearly and realised that I couldn't take the Club finesse and safely play three rounds of Spades, so just cashed the ♣A. This also meant that if someone ruffed the third Spade it might be with the ♣K. Anyway I went ahead and cashed the three Spades, discarding a Diamond, and leaving me in dummy. If at this point I simply lead a trump up now I've got eleven tricks, just losing one Diamond and one trump.

Instead I lead another Spade from dummy. This was great news for the defence, and North swiftly discarded his last Heart, and now the defence is getting a Heart ruff. I've just blown one trick and could now limit the damage by throwing my other Diamond, but instead uselessly ruff the Spade low. South overruffs and plays a Heart and I end up with four losers. 3♣= was worth 11%. 3♣+1 would be 40% and 3♣+2 would be 60%.

After this hand I was slightly on the tilt, and on the next board third in hand opened ♠AQJT64 ♥4 ♦T654 ♣K7 with 3♠. I got lucky when this was doubled and made.

My second featured hand is a bidding problem with no solution. Or at least, no solution to us, most other pairs were fine.

W N E S Ted Danny - 1♠ - 2♣ - 3♠ - 4♠ - 4NT* - 5♣* - 5♦ - 5♥* - 6♠ - - -

Now I've got the 21 point East hand. I go for a conservative 1♠ opening, and thank goodness Ted has enough to respond (next time I'll open it 2♣).. Over Ted's 2♣ I bid 3♠, which is surely forcing and shows good Spades. Ted is in a quandary here, and as he's thinking I decide that whatever he bids I'll try 6NT. But he makes a surprise raise to 4♠, so I try Blackwood, even going so far as to check for the Queen of trumps. Ted doesn't have it, or in fact any Spades at all.

As dummy goes down Ted quickly informs me that his raise with no Spades is reasonable, and I think he's probably right. If you're going to play in slam 6♠ isn't too bad. It comes down to hoping for one Spade loser, which means they must be 4-3 and you guess if the hand with only three has the Queen or the Ten. Perhaps there's better psychological plays, maybe the ♠9 early on, hoping an opponent with ♠Txxx or even ♠Qxxx might covers it.

I decided to play someone for ♠Qxx and things begin well when I win ♠AK. On the third round it all goes round as North shows out, though oddly South lets my ♠9 hold so I've only two Spade losers and collect 6♠-1.

A few other pairs are also failing in slam so we get 28%. If South had of doubled 6♠ I would have happily bid 6NT, which can make here with the minors all breaking (there is one defence to beat 6NT but it takes a while to find double dummy so unlikely to be found at the table!).

That board took such a long time that on the next one Ted and I didn't mess around and quickly got ourselves to 3NT on a combined 19 count. Ted (wisely) escaped to 4♦ which went off one for a good result.

Overall, we had some good boards, but also had a few mishaps and some poor declarer play by me, and so finished on 52%.

The claim game

At the Buchanan bridge club last Monday I played with John Faben. We had a 56% game, finishing 9th.

The only outright blunder I made was defending 3NT, when I cashed my ♦A to take the contract two off and didn't even look at partner's signal. As it happened he had the ♦K and we could have taken one more trick, but as you would expect there wasn't much between +200 and +300 so it didn't matter much.

On the board below I was guilty of being rather meek. I didn't really have a bid, but should have bid anyway:

W N E S Danny John F 1♥ x 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♥ - - -

I have the 20 point West hand and am agonising over whether to open 1♠ or 2NT when South gets an opening bid ready. I'm expecting a weak pre-empt (perhaps 2♦) but she opens 1♥. I decide to begin with a double. North replies 1♠, and South bids on with 2♣. I'm stuck for a bid and pass, then pass again when North corrects to 2♥. I considered 2♠ and 2NT, which would both have made with comfort.

Although the double-dummy analysis says we can beat 2♥ that's unrealistic as it relies on me starting with a low Spade. In reality I lead the ♠A and we only get one Spade, one Diamond, one Heart and two Clubs; for 2♥= and -110. This is worth just 6%, tying with the three other Wests who suffered the same fate. Most common was East-West playing in Spades, some even getting to game.

Most of our good results came from overbidding. I chanced a speculative slam - dummy was most unhelpful but I got lucky on the lead and made it. Then John did more or less the same thing, playing me for some useful cards I didn't have but scraping home our second 6♠. The slam below was also a very poor contract that made, but this time it was bid against us:

W N E S Danny John F - 1♣ 2♠ 3♥ - 3NT - 6NT - - -

South opened 1♣ and I made a weak jump overcall as West. It's not really a suitable hand, vulnerable, but I did it anyway. North bid a natural 3♥ and South the obvious 3NT. North thought for a while and came out with 6NT. I lead the ♥J.

There are 12 easy tricks with the Hearts all coming in, but of course declarer doesn't know that. Since you already have an Ace to lose you can't afford to establish the Hearts, meaning that most likely you have only 2 Spades, 4 Diamonds, 3 Hearts. That means you need 3 Clubs without losing the lead, which is barely possible. There are squeeze chances but it all gets a bit tricky. In the end declarer gratefully took the Hearts and made twelve tricks.

On the very next board we conceded 2♥x for a pair of poor boards. Then I played 3NT+1 and twenty minutes later was convinced I'd actually made the last trick with the ♥7 in dummy so it should have been 3NT+2. I was wrong though, as West pointed out he still had the ♥T98. Oops.

One more Matchpoint Monday

For the third week in a row I've been at the Buchanan with John Di Mambro. The first week I was too timid; the second week too bold; this week about right. "Not too many regrets", I said to John afterwards. Having said that, the board below was full of rue:

W N E S Danny John - 1♦ 1♥ 2♣ 2♥ 2♠ - 4♠ - - -

I opened the West hand 1♦, North overcalled 1♥ and John bid a natural 2♣. South bid 2♥ and it was back to me. I was starting to like my hand a lot, with Kx in partner's suit and a Heart void. Rather than rebid my seven card Diamond suit I tried 2♠. John raised this to 4♠ and there I played. "Could be a Moysian fit" he warned as dummy came down, and indeed it was.

I got a trump lead from North. My plan was to play on Diamonds and hope trumps were 3-3, so I should have begun by ducking this Spade. But I didn't. Anyway with trumps 5-1 it was doomed, and while I didn't quite suffer the ignominy of having the defence draw my trumps I lost control and went three down. I think actually on this layout to make as many tricks as possible you need to ruff everything in hand, and eschew the Diamond finesse. But down one, two, or three is always going to be a bad score and so it turned out, as we collected 0% on the board.

If I bid a more normal 3♦ on the second round, or John doesn't raise Spades, it still seems likely we're going to end up in 3NT. This makes if they lead Spades (as happened on some tables) but on our table with the Heart overcall 3NT also fails. Well done to all the pairs who made it to 5♦ (eight tables out of twenty-five), making eleven or twelve tricks.

My other featured hand is the classic scenario when you've got a great hand but before you bid partner pre-empts:

W N E S Danny John - 2♦* 2♥ 3♥* - 4♦ - - -

John opened the East hand with a Weak Two, in what must be a minimum for suit quality standards. I can see nine tricks (six Diamonds and three Clubs) so just need some sort of stopper in the other suits. When South overcalled 2♥ I bid 3♥ asking for a Heart stopper (I hope). John's King is actually enough, and he might have counted it, but perhaps wisely settled for 4♦. I'm now thinking if 5♦ will have play. It will if John has the ♠A, but I decide he's not likely to have that card and pass 4♦.

South went for a slight surprise Spade lead and hit the jackpot as the defence took the first four tricks. In 3NT they would take the first five tricks, also for one off. Our 4♦-1 is worth 48%. We beat those East-West pairs making a Heart contract but lost to those East-West pairs allowed to make extra tricks in Diamonds.

Despite those setbacks we scored well on other boards and finished on 66.4%.

More Matchpoint Monday

After finishing second by a single matchpoint last week, we returned to the Buchanan Club for the Monday Matchpoint.

John was just back from playing in the National League at the weekend, and was perhaps used to a partner with slightly sharper defence. A few times he was waiting for me to give him a ruff, and is still waiting. I don't think it cost too much though, and as is often the way with matchpoints things don't always turn out like you expect. You can stumble into a bad 4♦-2, apologise to partner, then realise it's a good score as they should be making 4♠.

In the hand below John dealt and opened the North hand 1♠. East passed and I responded 2♦. All normal so far. Then West came in with 2NT. This was not alerted, but was clearly meant to be some sort of Unusual 2NT, showing 5-5 in the other suits. John bid 3♠, which must be showing a pretty good suit, so I raised to game.

W N E S John Danny - 1♠ - 2♦ 2NT* 3♠ - 4♠ - - -

East had the rare opportunity to defend game with six trumps, and wisely didn't double. If he had of doubled I would have bid 5♦ on my own as South, and made it with an overtrick.

The 6-0 trump split is unfortunate, but careful play limited the losses to minus two, scoring 28% (five of ten North-South pairs found the Diamond game).

Here is the first hand of the evening that I declared, a tricky 3NT. It was a psychological battle, as I was aware that despite a combined 27 count I ought to go down unless I can dupe the defence.

|

W N E S John Danny 1♣ - 1♠ - 2NT - 3NT - - -

We play five card majors so I opened 1♣, and we quickly got to 3NT (as did all but one table, who suffered in 4♠). West lead a Heart and I had a think.

There are six top tricks, and two more can be developed in Clubs. But if the defence duck Clubs twice then they could take an extra trick there (or two). I also have the potential of a long trick in Spades. Diamonds could give me one or two extra tricks, but could also be the best suit for the defence.

I won the opening Heart lead in hand and lead a Club to the Jack. East won her Ace and played a Diamond to my Jack and West's Queen. West didn't want to continue Diamonds so seemed likely to also have the Ace, and be waiting for another Diamond through from partner. I was hoping he'd cash his Ace anyway (and present me with a ninth trick) but he wisely held off and played another Heart. My only hope for another trick now is Spades, which involves giving up one first. But I can't let East have the lead, as she can put another Diamond through (meaning I lose three Diamonds, one Club and one Spade). So I snuck a Spade through East. Thankfully, she played low and my 8 forced West to win.

I'm happy now. Even if Spade's aren't 3-3 I still have chances with a Spade endplay, if West has four. As it happened they were 3-3 and I got nine tricks. Almost every other declarer also made nine tricks (one made eight, one ten), so it was an average score, but a pleasing hand.

After that burst of concentration my head got rather cloudy, and I didn't know if I needed more coffee or less. Thankfully I was only declarer once more in the evening, and we finished on a better-than-expected 60.2%.

Matchpoint Monday

Last night I played the Buchanan Monday night Matchpoints with John Di Mambro. We did OK, finishing on 58%, just one matchpoint behind the North-South winners, Martin Bateman and Ted Black.

I was dummy a lot, but didn't mind as John was squeezing every possible trick out of NT contracts. He has admirable match-point savvy, and once even managed to steer himself into 3NT while 6-6 in the minors (and make it - Martin and ted got an overtrick). But on the hand below we both knew it was going to be a bad score:

W N E S John Danny - - 1♠ x 3♠ - 4♠ - - -

When East opened 1♠ I made a take-out double, West bid a natural 3♠ and East raised to game. I lead the ♣Q with high hopes. But declarer won the lead in hand and played the ♠A, dropping my King! Although the contract always makes, this vital overtrick gave her most of the matchpoints (one other table also somehow made 4♠+1). After the hand I asked declarer why they had played trumps that way - had I given something away with my body language? Declarer told me it was because I was known to have most of the points (true) and there weren't many entries to dummy (false).

Martin and Ted held it to 4♠ for 67%.

Soon after, I got to play my first hand of the evening, as we navigated to a dicy 6♥. At the end of the auction West thought for a while, doubled, then cashed his two aces. I carefully took the rest of the tricks for 0% anyway.

In the next one I may have overbid slightly:

W N E S John Danny - 1♣ 1♠ 2♣ x - 3♥ - - -

East opened 1♣ and I overcalled 1♠, planning to double later. West supported Clubs and John doubled, perhaps afraid 2♣ would be passed out. I have a good hand now. I'd like to bid 3♣, letting John choose the contract, but was too afraid he'd bid 3NT so just jumped to 3♥. Everyone was happy to let me play this and passed.

On the lead of a low Club I tried the ♣J which lost to the ♣Q and I ruffed. Things look bleak. I don't have many losers but am destined to quickly lose trump control. A cross-ruff would only get me to seven tricks, but being vulnerable, two off is no good. I need more tricks, but there's no way I can draw trump and make anything out of the Diamonds.

I did a bit of ruffing, drew trumps keeping one master, and set up the Diamonds. When I played winning Diamonds through East he was reluctant to ruff, and I started accumulating more tricks than expected. I now had a cunning plan to endplay him to lead away from the ♣A and give me my eighth trick. At the end I sighed "one off" but apparently I had nine tricks for 3♥=. A lot of work and some luck for 50%. A Diamond contract is much easier, and of course Martin and Ted made 5♦.

W N E S John Danny 2♠ - 2NT* - 3♦ - 4♠ - - -

This last one shows how tough Matchpoint can be. I opened a Weak Two and John bid a 2NT enquiry. I bid 3♦ showing a singleton or void and he leapt to 4♠. I'm not sure what he would have bid if I'd have given a different response (perhaps 3NT?).

There are three top losers and the defence duly took them. Because East knew I had a singleton Diamond it was easy for him to cash the ♦A, without waiting to try and get a Diamond through from partner.

Our par score of 4♠= was worth just 8%, as nearly all the other declarers got overticks. Martin and Ted managed a remarkable 4♠+2, on a low Diamond lead from West. I can only assume that East was allowed to win the ♦J, then tried to cash the ♦A and declarer had the rest.

Matchpoints with Martin

As a warm up to next week's ur league match Martin Bateman and I played Matchpoint Monday at the Buchanan Bridge Club. It was a good night and we finished on about 56%.

I've two regrets. The first was not entering the score for the last two boards, which were therefore recorded as 'not played' and both pairs got 40%. This is particularly harsh on our opponents, for which they were two good boards. The three previous boards, which I did remember to score, were good for us. In my defence it was the end of the evening and I was tired.

My other regret is letting through this doubled contract. This is one of those where from declarer's perspective you can't believe your luck as you sit there and the defence do everything they can to help you. It was a debacle:

W N E S Martin Danny - 1♠ 3♣ 3♠ 4♣ - - x - 4♠ - - 5♣ x - - - -

South took a conservative view and passed her 12 count. West was less conservative and opened 1♠. I was sat East trying to remember the Bergen responses when North saved me by bidding a textbook 3♣. I settled for 3♠ and when 4♣ came back to me decided to double, based on my partner's opening bid and my ♥AK. Martin put us back to 4♠ but when they ended up in 5♣x I thought we'd done very well.

I was expecting us to take at least two Hearts and a Spade. I lead the ♥A for attitude, then immediately wished I'd lead the ♥K for count, as I didn't know whether another Heart was cashing. I switched to Spades, and here comes my second blunder. I boldly lead the ♠Q, to make it easier for partner if he had the suspected ♠AJ. Of course declarer covered with the King, promoting the Jack in his hand, and Martin then returned a Spade suspecting it was me who had lead from ♠QJ. A ruffing finesse in Diamonds later and declarer had 11 tricks and 100% of the matchpoints.