06.14.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 11:20 pm by Administrator
Sorry about my absence for the last week. I promise to be more regular in the future.
Here is a hand that left me a bit dumbfounded, not the hand itself, but the results at other tables. I picked up the following hand (sorry I don’t have all the spot cards, I don’t have my hand record with me):
Not vul. v. Vul.
S: x
H: AT9x
D: AKQJTx
C: Kx
A very nice hand.
Partner opens 4C!!! Normally, I hate it when partner preempts and I have a good hand, but sometimes it makes placing the contract much easier, as it does in this case. After my partner’s preempt, my RHO overcalls 4S.
Decision time. There are 3 choices – bid double, bid 5C or bid 6C (pass is not a rational option holding my hand). Let’s examine the possibilities. If I double, how many tricks will I probably take. I should get 1 heart trick, maybe even 2, 2-3 diamond tricks, and if we are very lucky, 1 club trick. Best case scenario is we get 6 tricks for 800, worst case is probably 3 tricks, for their making the contract.
So how many tricks can we take in clubs. Well, first, I have to examine my partner’s sanity. What kind of hand would she open 4C. At this vulnerability, partner should have an 8-card suit with 7 tricks in her hand (maybe even 8). In theory, partner could have 8 clubs to the Q and a side ace, but that is not likely, since RHO bid 4S vulnerable. RHO probably has the AKxxxxx of spades or better. Therefore, in order for partner to have her bid, she should have the ATxxxxxx or better in clubs and probably very little on the side. Assuming this, we should have 8 club tricks, at least 5 diamond tricks and the A of hearts, for 14 tricks. How many losers do we have? Well, we have one spade loser off the top – however, once we lose the spade, it is unlikely we have any more losers. If partner’s trumps are AT9xxxxx, she might have a problem. If her clubs are AQxxxxxx and the clubs are 2-1, the contract should be cold and if her clubs are AQJxxxxx, the contract is cold unless LHO is able to trump an initial diamond lead or diamond switch at trick 2 after the A of spades is cashed (not a likely scenario). When you combine the odds related to trump breaks, the diamond suit split, and the ability to get to declarer’s hand, the odds of making 6C are in excess of 70% if the defense leads a spade and continues a spade, and much higher on any other line of defense.
Therefore, the bid should be 6C, for plus 920 or 940, which is what I bid. The opening lead was the K of hearts, at which point partner pulled trump and scored 8 clubs, 6 diamonds and 1 heart, i.e., more tricks than were available – making 7 for 940.
So did anyone else score 920 or 940? No!!? One pair was in 7C doubled, down 1. Several people doubled 4S and 5S for 500 or 800, and a number were in 5C making 7.
What would you have done?
By the way, partner had the AQJTxxxx of clubs and nothing else (without the hand record, I cannot recall the distribution of the other 3 suits, but it is a clear 4C opening at any vulnerability in my opinion.
It is important to realize that some players will open at the 4-level at this vulnerability with very bad hands, perhaps as bad as QJTxxxxx and nothing else, or even a worse suit with one side card. That is usually asking for trouble because partner never knows what to do. Such preempts often preempt partner more than the opponents.
Comments anyone?
Permalink
06.11.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 10:21 pm by Administrator
I will try to write up a hand a little later tonight. However, just one or two notes.
First, I received a suggestion that I comment on director calls/rulings. I think it is an excellent idea – that is to comment on my own rulings and calls I receive as a director. Obviously, I will not attempt to second-guess another director’s ruling.
Second, I just looked at last night’s post, and found that the hand diagrams got shoved together. I am going to try to figure out how to clean this up, even if I have to change the template for the blog. But I am working on it.
Permalink
06.06.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:15 am by Administrator
It’s been a long day and it’s late, so I probably won’t ramble too much tonight. I played 2 sessions today (I know, what else is new??), with some interesting hands both sessions. Without the hand records in front of me, I don’t have a lot of specifics, but a couple of issues worth discussing.
This afternoon, my opponents bid a vulnerable 5C in competition, and my partner, with a decent hand, doubled for penalties. Well, they made their contract. The double gave us a clear bottom board. At imps, the double would have cost us 4 imps, but at matchpoints, we went from an average to a bottom. Some people did not find game, others were in 4S making 5, and one or two others were in 5C making 5. The issue is whether partner should double. Some general information on the auction. We are vulnerable, they are not. The bidding went something like this:
Partner (South) West Me (North) East
1D 2C 3C* 4C
4D 5C Pass Pass
Dbl All pass
*Limit Raise or Better
My limit raise was questionable. It was 9 soft HCP with 6 diamonds to the QJ. No aces. My shape was 2-3-6-2, if I remember correctly. Tomorrow, I will have the hand record available and I will discuss the pitfalls of my bidding.
Anyway, partner failed to take one of the most important steps when deciding whether to double a contract, something that most players neglect to do. She failed to do a cost-benefit analysis. How much do you stand to gain by doubling and defeating the contract versus how much do you stand to lose if they make their doubled contract. In this case, it looked like the double was close, and we could beat the contract at most one trick. The opponents were not vulnerable. We might gain a few matchpoints if we beat the contract, but probably only a few matchpoints. However, if declarer makes the contract, we stand to lose a lot 4-9 matchpoints, a lot more than we stand to gain. Therefore, is it worth a tight double. Probably not. Change the scenario just a little: instead of unfavorable vulnerability (we are vulnerable, they are not), assume favorable vulnerability (we are not vul, they are). Now the cost-benefit analysis changes. We can probably make a part-score, but not game. We stand to gain a great deal by beating the contract just 1 trick – 200 versus our 130, while at unfavorable vulnerability, we look to gain 100 versus 130. Probably not worth the close double. So in the modified example, we stand to gain a great deal (probably the same 4-9 matchpoints we stand to lose against the double making). Therefore, the double would be better.
I know this makes little sense without a hand in front of you. I will post the full hand tomorrow, and we can discuss the issue further. I am simply not coherent enough at the moment to write this out properly.
Tonight was the first session of the world simultaneous pairs, always a fun event. We had 7 tables at the club. One pair did exceedingly well (as of a few minutes ago, 81 in the world). The results at our club matchpointed much better across the world than they did at the club. All 7 of our North-Souths are in the top half world-wide field. For example, we were tied for 4/5 north south at the club with under 48%. However, world-wide, we have 55.48%, so far, for #648 out of nearly 3100 pairs. All I can say is that this is a wild game.
Well, hopefully tomorrow I will be coherent and I will have my hand records so I can post some hands to discuss.
Permalink
06.04.09
Posted in 7-Card Fits, Jump Rebids, Preempts at 12:54 am by Administrator
Two interesting hand from this afternoon. The first hand I call “To Save or Not To Save . . . That is the Question”.
You pick up the following hand, not vul v. vul:
S: 86
H: 94
D: A964
C: K8765
Not a great hand but reasonable support for a minor suit or NT (if partner has the majors). Anyway, the bidding proceeds as follows:
Partner RHO You LHO
3C Dbl ?
I chose 5C! If partner opens 3C at this vulnerability, partner could have real garbage. He may have one defensive trick, probably in clubs (which in this case is meaningless on defense). He should a 7-card suit, which means we are only missing one club. Therefore he probably has the AQJxxxx of clubs. If he is missing the Ace of clubs, then he might have an outside A or K. In any case, we have no defensive club tricks since one of the opponents is void in clubs. I have one diamond trick. Partner might have one trick on the side, but not likely. Therefore, the opponents can almost certainly make 5 of a major, and quite possibly 6. I want to keep them guessing, so I preempted to the 5-level, hoping that they will double. I am prepared to go to 6C if necessary, but I hope it is not necessary. I was concerned that they might make 6S, but there is a reasonable chance that they will not bid it, and if they do, partner could easily have a slow trick (a side queen) or a singleton diamond, meaning that they cannot make 6S. Was I right in bidding 5C?
The answer is NO!! I should have bid 6C!!! This makes their decision even more difficult. When I bid 5C, I gave them too much bidding room . They could bid 5D, 5H, 5S, double or bid at the 6-level. By bidding 6C, I have taken an additional level away from them. Now, the only real choice is double or bid 6S (or another unbid suit, which may or may not work).
So the auction went as such:
Partner RHO You LHO
3C 3S 5C 5S
Pass Pass 6C Dbl
All Pass
I feel it should have gone:
Partner RHO You LHO
3C 3S 6C Dbl or 6S
All Pass
The full deal was:
Me (North)
S: 86
H: 94
D: A964
C: K8765
West East
S: AKQJ54 S: T32
H: T872 H: AK63
D: T2 D: KQJ853
C: T C: Void
Partner(South)
S: 97
H: QJ4
D: 7
C: AQJ9432
Actually, partner is a bit good for his 3C opening, but his QJ4 of hearts may as well be three small cards, so no harm in this case.
As it turns out, with proper defense, the opponents make 5S, not 6S, for 650, but 6C doubled only goes down 3, for 500. Once we bid 6C, the opponents can do no better than an average minus result (we got 8.5 out of 12 matchpoints for minus 500).
If they bid 6S, I see only one line of defense to beat the contract. I know we have no club tricks and partner should have no quick defensive tricks outside clubs, so I have to hope that partner has a singleton diamond. Therefore, I must lead the A of diamonds (I hate leading aces against slams, but sometimes it is necessary to minimize damage or to beat a contract), and then a second diamond, hoping partner has only one. The odds are not great, but this is probably my best shot. In this case, it pays off. Partner ruffs the second diamond, holding this to 5S (or down 1 in 6S).
Please feel free to post any comments.
The second hand, I call “But I Only Have One Trump for You, Partner”.
My partner’s hand is as follows:
S: 764
H: Q
D: AJT75
C: QJT8
So the auction went as such:
Partner RHO Me LHO
Pass Pass 1H Pass
1NT* Pass 3H All pass
*Forcing for 1 round, 5-11 HCP
We made 6, but could be held to 4. Should partner have passed my 3H bid?
The answer is clearly no. Partner should take another bid. I have announced approximately 15-17 or 18- HCP and a 6-card suit. Partner has a hefty 10 HCP, though no clear fit for me (and no knowledge as to whether I have a fit for one of his minors). What should partner do?
3NT is a treacherous bid. I do not have to have any useful spade cards, and we could lose 5+ spades off the top. I have jammed the auction a bit too much to comfortable find a minor suit game, but that was probably intentional. What kind of hand do I have? As noted above, I have approximately 15-17 or 18- HCP and a 6-card suit. For my jump to 3H, I either have a very good heart suit (at least AK9xxx, no Q, since partner has it) with at least 15 HCP, or a broken suit, something like AJ9xxx or KJ9xxx) with at least 16 HCP. Anything less than these two types of hands do not merit a jump to 3H. If my suit is a good suit, that Q is a huge card. It means I should have at least 5, if not 6 heart tricks, assuming a 6-card heart suit, plus at least 7-8 HCP on the side (should be useful cards, not soft values, otherwise I probably would not jump to 3H). If my suit is broken, that Q is still a big card, filling in my suit. Plus, I must have more side values if my suit is broken. In either case, we have game values and at least a 7-card fit (at least 6-1). I believe this is worth a 4H bid.
It is important to note that if you had a small singleton heart (say the J or smaller), then 3NT might be a better call. If my trump suit is broken, I can pull 3NT to 4H, as a broken trump suit might play better in a suit contract than in NT. If my suit is solid, it might produce the same tricks in either contract.
The full deal was:
Me (North)
S: 32
H: AKT985
D: KQ2
C: K9
West East
S: KT98 S: AQJ5
H: J62 H: 743
D: 983 D: 64
C: A32 C: 7654
Partner(South)
S: 764
H: Q
D: AJT75
C: QJT8
4H is cold on any defense (losing 2 spades and the A of clubs), but no trump can be held to 2 (losing 4 spades and the A of clubs).
Any comments?
Permalink
06.02.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:05 pm by Administrator
Welcome, everyone. My name is Michael Blaher, a long-time bridge teacher and club director. The main purposes of this blog are education and discussion on bridge, the ideal game for obsessive-compulsive personalities. Most of my posts will have to do with a particular hand I encountered during the day. Some are bidding issues, some declarer play problems, and others defensive play problems. Many will be a combination of the three. Other posts may have to do with specific issues rather than specific hands which arise. You are welcome to comment on these posts (please keep the comments relevant, clean and non-inflammatory).
I will attempt to post almost every day, but, as we all know, that is often hard to do.
I don’t have a hand or issue for today, but hopefully, tomorrow.
Permalink
