National Pairs (not)-Qualifying

Last Wednesday at the Buchanan Phil and I attempted to build on our 38.5% of the previous week and qualify for the National Pairs Final. The good news is that we did 10% better, the bad news that we didn't quite make the 50% required to get to the next round.

We were within a board of qualifying, and it could have been any of many. There were some wild hands, wild bidding and wild defence.

Looking for a nice calm start I picked up the hand below.

♠ AQJT842 ♥ AK9542 ♦ - ♣ -

I couldn't believe it when I started sorting my cards and realised they were all Spades and Hearts. I went for a cautious 1♠ opening, reasoning that surely it won't get passed out, and this way I've a better chance of getting doubled at the end.

W N E S Phil Danny 1♠ x 2♦ - 3♥ - 3NT - 4♥ - 4♠ - - -

When Phil gave false preference to Spades at the four level I thought about jumping to 6♠, figuring I'm probably going to lose one Spade and can ruff out the Hearts. Looking back, I wish I had bid the slam. When am I even going to get a hand like that again?

As it is, I underplayed the hand as well as underbidding it. After a Club lead I decided to ruff a Heart, but for no good reason played the ♥A and ♥K before taking a ruff. This got over-ruffed, as did the next Heart, so even though I dropped the singleton ♠K I lost two Heart tricks for 4♠+1. This turned out to be slightly above average when only one pair bid and made the slam, and a couple had a horrible time in 6NT.

The standard was high, and I didn't mind when our borderline contracts got beaten by good defence. But it did mean we got a succession of rather poor scores. Our defence was not so tight, and one declarer embarrassed us by collecting four tricks from this suit:

	♣ A Q 7 4
♣ K 6 5 3		♣ T 8 2
	♣ J 9

So I was slightly on the tilt when I made a very poor two-level overcall on the hand below:

W N E S Phil Danny 1♥ 2♦ x - 2♠ - 3NT x - - 4♣ - 4♥ - - -

The opponents landed in 3NT, a decent contract with South's seven running Clubs. But Phil doubled it, right in theory as we beat 3NT so long as he leads a Diamond. In practice though, they removed to 4♥, which is very hard to beat (and we couldn't do it). Conceding 4♥= was worth 19%.

I persisted with dodgy overcalls, and it paid off on this one:

W N E S Phil Danny - - 1♥ 3♣ - - -

After North opens 1♥ it's the perfect time to pre-empt, with favourable vulnerability and partner having passed. I bid a bold 3♣. Phil thought about removing this to 3♦ but I think rightly passed, and I was left to play it. It did not go well, and after a brief discussion about whether the defence had made eight or nine tricks we agreed 3♣-4. However, while playing the hand it become clear to me the opponents could make a lot of tricks in Spades, and so we scored 85% for the board.

In another wild hand I opened 2NT and Phil leapt to 6♣, which made all 13 tricks. There were higher scoring slams, so we got a slightly above average 56%. Our best slam was one we bid and made off two cashing Aces. This sounds like poor bidding, but I think actually we knew what we were doing. Judge for yourself:

W N E S Phil Danny - 1♣ x 1♥ 4♠ - 4NT* - 5♥* - 6♠ - - -

I decided not to open the East hand, reasoning I could always get in to the auction later. When Phil doubled 1♣ for takeout I jumped to 4♠. Phil saw the potential of his Diamond suit, and well placed ♣K, and bid Blackwood. This is a bit risky with a void, as I could well have the useless ♥A (and indeed I did), but he reasoned that on the expected Heart lead he could ruff it then throw away Hearts on the long Diamonds, as indeed turned out to be the case. An interesting strategy from South might have been to Cash the trump Ace to see dummy, then on seeing there was no Club void cashing the ♣A.

Going in to the final round against John Di Mambro and Ronald Gaffin we needed something special to qualify. The first board was a good one, as I made 4♥+2 for another 100% board. A little feature of interest came at the end of that hand. With no outside entries to dummy I played on the Spade suit, with the lead in my hand as South.

	♠ A J T 5
♠ Q 8 7		♠ K 9 2
	♠ 6 4 3

I lead low and finessed the ♠T. When this lost to East I won the return and finessed the ♠J, making three Spade tricks when this finesse won and the suit split 3-3, and I thought "that's lucky". Then it was pointed out that actually West can thwart me by going up with the ♠Q on the first round. If I win this East holds up the ♠K and I get cut off from dummy and only get two Spade tricks. And if I let the ♠Q win I also end up losing two Spade tricks.

In the end it didn't matter as they qualified anyway and we didn't, finishing on 48% and just outside the top five. Maybe next year.

Matchpoint warm up

In preparation for attempting to qualify in the National Pairs next week, Phil and I played the match point evening at the Buchanan.

Things started very well, when I doubled a Blackwood response of 5♦ leading Phil to find a winning Diamond lead against 6♣ which let us take the first two tricks and defeat a slam that would normally make. A pleasing instance of partnership co-operation in defence. Then two boards later we were the only table to bid and make 7♥ after a very unconvincing auction. But these few highs were wiped out by all the little boards that make the difference in match points. It was a high standard, much higher than us, and after those initial highs we plummeted to finish bottom with 38.5%.

As bridge players like to do, I have rationalised our bad score into boards where the opponents were particularly successful against us, and boards where I had to admit we brought it on ourselves. In the first category were a couple where they bid a game (e.g. 3♣-5♣), we sat there and defended accurately (taking the maximum possible of two tricks), but got a bottom as other tables were not in the same making game. Nothing you can do about that.

Another example is the deal below, where our opponents were the only ones to bid 4♠, after Phil opened the South hand with a Weak Two.

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

It's probably an overbid by East with his Hearts sitting badly, but worked well here with the Club fit and ten tricks were easy.

That one I expected to be a bad score, ,ore frustrating was the board below. I took a bit of a risk and thought it had paid of handsomely with a good result, until I looked at the Bridgemate and saw we'd got another bottom score.

W N E S Danny Phil 1♦ - 1♠ - 2♦ - - -

After Phil opened the South hand 1♦, I responded 1♠, reasoning that with my Diamond fit we'd always end up somewhere good. This turned out to be the case as Phil rebid 2♦, and made it for +90. But every other table had East-West going down one in 4♥, for +100 to East-West. It's a cruel game.

Last time Phil and I played together (see here) it was aggregate, and we thought afterwards that we should have bid a few more thin games. Six months later playing match points, we adopted that strategy, and played some very dicey contracts, that all went down. The deal below was the height of our folly:

W N E S Danny Phil - 1♠ - 1NT - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 3NT - 4♥ - 4♠ - - -

The auction is fine up to 2♠, but then I should really pass. We might have a game, but it's very unlikely, and 2♠ could well be high enough, if partner has only a doubleton Spade and weak hand (as here). But I chose to invite anyway. And Phil, perhaps overestimating my playing ability, chose to accept with his 5 point hand and tried 3NT based on his long Clubs. But we couldn't play 3NT with 20 points between us so settled in 4♠. The one advantage of bad bidding is that it's hard to defend, and we managed nine tricks, but would much rather have had them in 2♠+1 than 4♠-1.

We were playing a simple Acol system with three Weak Twos, and I think it worked well. The only confusion was in defence, when we weren't sure what counted as enough to encourage, and I ended up eagerly continuing a suit that Phil didn't really want. Of course we'll fix all that up though and come storming back for the National Pairs.

Aggregate at St Andrew

Having not played for a while I've a few games coming up. Tonight was a practice match with John Faben at St Andrew, practice for him as he has a match in the National League tonight. We were therefore playing the system that he'll be using, which was unfamiliar to both of us. 5 card majors, 14-16 NT and 2/1 game forcing, and plenty of other things I highlighted on the Convention Card (Ghestem, Drury, Bergen Raises, DONT).

As tends to always happen, not much of it came up, but I was ready when it did. On the third board I had a two-suited hand, and was determined to get the right bid. Playing Ghestem you can bid all the different two suiters. Here's the options when the opponents have opened 1♣:

2NT	The lower two remaining suits (Diamonds and Hearts)
A cuebid (2♣)	The lowest and highest remaining suits (Diamonds and Spades)
A jump in s minor (2♦)	The other two suits (Hearts and Spades)

I was dealt Diamonds and Spades. South had just asked me a friendly question, but I had to say "hold on" and think for a bit about my bid first, before correctly choosing 2♣. I was delighted when John alerted this as Diamonds and Spades. This was the full deal:

W N E S Danny John 1♣ 2♣ 3♣ 3♦ 4♣ - - -

John then raised me to 3♦, but we were outbid and the opponents stopped in a good spot of 4♣, making with an overtrick. I might have tried 3NT as North, which fails when the Clubs don't split.

There were only three tables at the event, mostly made up of Raymond's and students from his class. It was a friendly atmosphere and no one was too worried about the scores. But one pair afterwards were delighted when they bid and made a slam no one else did. This was our auction to 6♠:

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

John opened 1♠ and a replied 2NT with a game forcing raise in Spades. After that the bidding was mostly natural, as we trundled towards 6♠ (I tried to stop in 4♠ but John kept going). It was a good contract, but doomed when the defence accurately found the Diamond singleton lead and return. In aggregate scoring this was expensive, 6♠-1 when the other tables were making 6♠ or 4♠.

But never mind the points, my personal highlight was when I did something clever when against a 1NT contract. As a defender I was cashing my long Clubs and had enough to get the defence up to six tricks, leaving one card left for everybody. I was fairly sure that my partner had winners in both the Majors, but was worried that when he got down to the final card he wouldn't know which winner to keep. So rather than cashing my last Club winner (and giving John a long pause and awkward discard) I played a Heart across to partner at Trick 12, and John was able to cash the last two tricks. I've thought of doing this before but not been bold enough to do it.

Overall it was a fun night at the Club, and I hope John is now ready for the National League tonight!

School Teams Match

My Secondary School bridge club has about eight keen first and second year pupils (aged 11-13), so the last two lunch times I've arranged a mini teams-match, where each table plays four boards. That might not sound like very much, but in just 45 minutes with children eating lunch it's quite an achievement

During the matches I've started doing the scoring live on a big whiteboard, without waiting until both tables have played each board. This means that if, for example, they can see that the other table made 1NT+3 they can hen go for 3NT themselves. This is of course slightly unfair, but I did this as I wanted them to really think about the effect of the game bonus, and was fed up of overhearing people say that they had "beaten" another pair because they got a positive score against them, like 2♥+2.

The board below was an exciting one. I substituted as South, and after a lively auction supported Spades so North ended up declaring 4♠. East said: "I think I've pushed them too high" and lead a Club (it may be makeable on a Heart lead).

Declarer ended up making just six trump tricks and the Ace of Clubs, for 4♠-3. The reason he only made six trump tricks is because he tried to ruff a club back to hand, which East over-ruffed. This was indeed a good result for East-West, as surprisingly they can't make a game.

Below is a photo from one table. It was non-uniform day, though someone always forgets...

Double Trouble

I've not played much competitive bridge lately, but the school year has began so here's a hand from my school bridge club, where I got schooled.

♠ x x x x ♥ A K x x x ♦ x x ♣ x x ♠ K J x ♥ Q J T x x x ♦ K Q J 9 ♣ -

W N E S 1♥ - 2♥ 3♣ 3♦ 4♣ - 5♣ 5♥ - - x - - -

Put yourself in South's seat. You deal and open 1♥, which partner raises to 2♥. That's good news, and is all you need to hear. East now comes in with 3♣ so you show your second suit with 3♦. By the time it comes back it's at the five level, but with a big trump fit and void in Clubs you have no problem bidding 5♥. This gets doubled.

The defence begins by trying to cash a Club, which you ruff. You draw trumps in two rounds (West had a void), then start on Diamonds. West wins the Ace and switches to Spades, East taking the ♠A. You have now lost two tricks and need the rest. East returns a Spade into your ♠KJ but you don't dare finesse, so play the ♠K.

At this point declarer played another round of trumps, then looked at his losing Spade and announced "I think I might be down one." He could see no way to get rid of the Spade loser in each hand. Then his friendly bridge teacher (sitting East and having made a very poor double) suggested he play a couple of Diamonds. Sure enough the ♦J won, away went one Spade in dummy, then the final Diamond was also by this stage a winner, so away went the last Spade in dummy. Declarer ruffed his losing Spade and claimed 5♥x. West couldn't understand why he wasn't getting a trick with his ♠Q.

It was a great teaching moment. The idea of making losers disappear is sophisticated and I think you need to see it happen to believe it.

I didn't mind that I'd doubled another making contract.

Blyth Valley Bridge Club #2

This week Anna and I were on our Summer Holidays in Suffolk. We were also here for Easter holidays, and in fact that was the last time that the two of us played together at a bridge club. On Tuesday we returned to Blyth Valley Bridge Club, and were greeted again by the friendly locals. Several people recognised us, and I was impressed that the scorer Ron knew that we'd come first last time we were there (read my report here).

We weren't at all worried about the results, just happy to be out and about playing bridge together. Perhaps because of this relaxed attitude we did quite well, and even the boards where we could have done better still seemed to get a good result. For example, on one I raised Anna's 2♠ to 3♠ just in case she might want to bid game. She didn't, and went one off in 3♠, but this was still an OK score as others were going off in 4♠.

Twice we got a top score for making 4♥+2, which shows the benefit of not bidding a risky slam; making 6♥ would have got us no more matchpoints. For example this deal, with no one vulnerable:

♠ A x ♥ J x x x ♦ T x x x x ♣ x x ♠ x x ♥ A K Q x x ♦ ♣ K Q J x x x

Danny Anna W N E S 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ 2♥ 3♦ 4♥ - - -

East opened 1♦ and Anna has a tough decision as South. Other possible bids are double (strong hand), 2♣ (longest suit), 2NT (showing Clubs and a Major). Instead she decided to show her good five card major with 1♥. When I showed a bit of support she went straight to 4♥, and played there. On the expected Diamond lead she could draw trumps and lose just the one trick in Clubs.

What helped our relaxation was that the baby (being looked after by Nana) was doing OK. I got more or less hourly updates, and had to excuse myself to look at my phone between rounds. A trial run earlier in the week had not gone well, so to demonstrate the little monster really was OK I was sent a photo message of her smiling.

In general we all played quite briskly. One exception was where I was very slow on this deal:

♠ A Q x x x ♥ x x ♦ x x ♣ Q T x x ♠ K T x ♥ A T x x x ♦ K J x ♣ A x

Anna Danny W N E S - - 1♥ 2♦ x - 3NT - - -

Two questions:
1: What would you have bid as North on the second round?
2: How would you play 3NT on the lead of the ♥K?

Anna was faced with the bidding decision, and decided to stretch a bit and double, which showed 10+ points.

I therefore played the hand in 3NT. On the ♥K lead I figured that West had a lot of Hearts (and Diamonds) so the Spades were probably not going to be breaking. I wanted to finesse East, but didn't have any entries to do that. So I ducked the ♥K, and ♥Q, and West now reluctantly lead a Spade for me. That now gave me five Spade tricks along with two Aces, up to seven tricks. I didn't want to cash all my Spades in dummy yet as didn't know what to discard, so played another Heart for West to win and be endplayed. She cashed the ♦A and played another Diamond round to my ♦KJ giving me my eight and ninth tricks.

At the break I went to check with the babysitters, while four teas and four biscuits were collected. After I got back I was left with the last one, but it was a Honeycomb Club so I wasn't too disappointed.

In the second half I lost my concentration a bit, and at one point Anna sat down at a new table as East, and I sat down North. We still played fairly well though, and sometimes managed to steal the odd trick for a good score. I can only think of one time I definitely bodged, when the trump suit looked like this:

	♠ K 7 4
♠ Q J 8		♠ A
	♠ T 9 6 5 4 2

South was declarer with Spades trumps. He lead up a small Spade, and I eagerly played the ♠J, which went to the King and Ace. Clearly I should have played low, then (if declarer still played the King) we would have got three trump tricks.

Here's a photo when I asked everyone to show me their cards so I could write about it on the blog (then decided not to include that hand):

At the end we left promptly to go and see how the baby was, walking through the village of Walberswick and getting a little ferry in the rain.

It was another very enjoyable afternoon at a friendly Club.

Scottish Schools Bridge Championship

Last year I took two teams of four to this event (see here); this year I was delighted to add a Primary 7 team who had previously done well at the Glasgow Minibridge Championship (see here).

Following their recent domination of the event it made sense for it to be hosted by Hutcheson's Grammar school, and John Di Mambro did a great job converting a lecture theatre into a ten table room. He even threw in a hot lunch, and we had Horst Kopleck directing the event. Around the room the atmosphere was great, as the kids were competitive while also being friendly.

My teams have now been playing for nearly two years, and I noticed a definite improvement since last year, both in cardplay and in the bidding where we were much more focused on the game bonus. I was particularly impressed that after each board the pupils were able to reflect on what might have been. For example, after making 1NT+5 someone asked me "Should we have bid 6NT"? (No, but you should have bid 3NT). Someone else said to me afterwards they thought that "Shape was more important than points" and next time they had a void they were going to bid game.

The main error was the same as with all beginners; a temptation to win all your Aces and Kings without trying to bid extra tricks, especially when you are feeling the pressure. Kids hate the idea of deliberately losing a trick.

My Senior team of 16 year olds have a lot of potential, but unfortunately for the last few months haven't played much bridge due to the distraction of their National 5 (GCSE) exams getting in the way. I was a bit worried when I asked someone on the train how many points you need for a game, and he replied "All of them, at least 9000", then when pressed admitted he didn't know what a game was. I was therefore extremely surprised when I went to watch at their table. One of them opened 1♣ and when the other replied 1♦ this was alerted as showing Hearts! "Do you play transfers?" asked the bewildered opposition. The advanced bidding systerm was not a success, as they finished in 4♣-4 and was quietly dropped after lunch.

I've only taught very limited bidding, with12-14 1NT and the rest natural, but it normally got to the right contract. We only struggled with strong hands, where my advice is simply to bid game in one go. At one point today one player overcalled 1♦ with 20 points (we've no other way to bid it), which was passed out and resulted in four overtricks. "I had 20 points!" said the overcaller, "next time you should bid more!". "Next time you'll have a different partner" was the reply.

Slam biding is also still to come. As far as I could see no one in the room got there on this board, although they all played it for 13 tricks.

I like to think Anna and I would have bid at least 6♥, and 7♥ is possible with some special bidding agreements.

When they read out the top three I was surprised our S1/S2 team of girls had finished third (our of ten), and even more surprised the P7 team second. All of the kids did well, coping with playing 24 boards and learning a lot.