sathyab

I guess you guys are right. It makes sense to discourage with that hand as there's little chance of getting a ruff. I was facing this problem as declarer however, with the full lay-out being: [hv=d=n&v=b&n=s72h97432dk4ckj73&w=sjt943ht6dat82cq5&e=s65ha8dq9763c9842&s=sakq8hkqj5dj5cat6]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] The natural line of play is to pull trumps as you have no idea how many spades the opening leader has , it could be anywhere from 3 to 6. Having seen the six of spades at T1 I thought to myself "If East has three or more spades, I can dump a diamond on the third spade and then another on the fourth spade, pull trumps and try to guess clubs and make ten or eleven tricks; if I play trumps right now what if West wins and plays diamonds thru the King, then I might lose three tricks right away and have to guess clubs to even make the contract". If I thought further I might have decided that there's an even chance that East has the Ace of hearts or even if West had it, I'd have a problem only if he played a small diamond back which he can't afford to if he's looking the Ace alone, as I might easily have the Q and they may lose a diamond trick. If West did win the Ace of trumps and play a small diamond and he's good player, you should play low, as he will either have the Q or neither honor, he could not be underleading the Ace of Diamonds. But I didn't look that far ahead, so plan A seemed good enough :D So I played a second spade and yet another. To my chagrin, East ruffs and plays back the one card I didn't want to see, a small Diamond to his partner's Ace. This is getting worse by the trick. Anyway I ruff the next spade with the nine, over-ruffed and East exits a diamond. Having taken a totally anti-field line of play so far I should now have played West for the Queen of clubs as anyone who chose to play trumps first will play clubs the other way around. But I played East for the Q and went down one in what was a cold contract. I expected that most declarers would make ten tricks as they would also miguess clubs the way I did. Wrong !! This was an OKBridge tourney, so I could see all play records. Only one declarer played clubs the way I did after having discovered that East had 2-2 in the majors. The bidding and opening lead were duplicated practically at all tables. East won the Ace of trumps at T2 and played back a diamond to his pd's Ace or exited a trump a table or two. Now after pulling trumps everyone else played a low club toward dummy :) So the best I could do on the hand was 18% for making ten tricks and I shrank it to 1.87% instead, which felt a lot better than converting a 48% board to 2%.

This came up the other day and I was a bit non-plussed. Fairly common situation, your partner a low honor such as the Q or J and you hold two small in a suit contract. And let's further assume that in general, your priority at trick one is attitude. Is it still attitude when you have two little ? If it is, naturally you would play a discouraging card from two small or three small. This was the lay out: [hv=d=n&v=b&n=s72h97432dk4ckj73&e=s65ha8dq9763c9842]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] The bidding was p-p-2nt-p-3d-p-4h. Partner leads the Jack of Spades, honor leads are standard in your agreement. Does East play the 6 or the 5 playing UDCA ?

Hands like this are rarley more than a guess. Aren't they best settled by simulation ?

Is it possible that declarer is trying to get you to shift to a club and his diamond play was just a ruse ? Could he have xx AKx JT8xx AQ9. With this hand unless he finds a lucky lay-out of clubs such as stiff J on his left, he seems to have only 10 tricks. By playing a diamond he might induce a club shift from you, also there're possibilities in diamonds that block the suit and might create some interesting minor suit squeeze posibilities. Anyway here's the full hand. [hv=d=w&v=n&n=s63ht7daj83cqj542&w=sakqj7hq8d97ct876&e=st8hak2dqt652ca93&s=s9542hj96543dk4ck]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] As you can see, if you win, you must either play your stiff King of clubs or continue a diamond (I'd say that's really counter-intuitive) and partner shifts to a club holding declarer to ten tricks. If your club holds, practically any continuation is okay as partner can hang onto the stiff Ace of diamonds in the end. If you win and continue with a major, declarer cashes the heart honors pitching a club from dummy and dumps spades on your partner and he's the lucky recepient of a two-suit strip squeeze :( Here's the five card ending: [hv=d=w&v=n&n=s63ht7daj83cqj542&w=sakqj7hq8d97ct876&e=st8hak2dqt652ca93&s=s9542hj96543dk4ck]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] The last spade finishes off your partner. I did not find the club shift at the table, continuing with a heart instead. Unfortunately I'm not sure if this is exactly how the play went or if decalrer gave us (well my partner, I'm not getting in on that hand again) a chance to bust up the sqeeze by playing a club. What I find fascinating is that if declarer plays for the top diamond honors to be split, this is a very attractive line of play and doesn't give defense a second chance beyond trick two.

A corrollary to making passive leads at MP is in bidding. How you get to a contract quite often is just as important as the eventual contract, i.e, the more uninformative the bidding the better. Naturally of course there's a trade-off between accuracy in your own constructive bidding and being helpful to your opponents in the process. Case in point: You're the dealer holding 9 JT872 KT84 876 with both Vul in the second qualifying session at BRP in Hawaii and the bidding goes p-(1c)-p-(1s)-p-(3s)-p-(4c)-p-(4h)-p-4s. You were all set to lead the Jack of hearts, but put it back and lead a Diamond. Declarer was a looking for a Diamond cue-bid on the way to slam, but when partner denied it, he subsided in game. Good bidding opponents; thank you ! The full hand being:[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s76hq954daj965cj5&w=sa843hak3dq2ckq94&e=skqjt52h6d73cat32&s=s9hjt872dkt84c876]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] I have sympathy for the bidding, his partner could easily have the Ace of Diamonds and one more club and a slightly weaker hand and the slam is icy. Noone ever said MP was not cruel :D

is the title of a hand in Pietro Forquet's famous book, "Play Bridge with the Italians". It might well have been the theme of the entire sixth (and mercifully the last) session of the Blue Ribbon Pairs in Hawaii. Although, stated as a problem they're much easier, so I expect a lot of you to get it, of course :D [hv=d=w&v=n&w=sakqj7hq8d97ct876&s=s9542hj96543dk4ck]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] You're on a lead after a typically uninformative auction, 1s-p-3nt. When asked about 3nt the opponents inform you it's a balanced 13-15 hand which tended to deny three spades. You lead the 5 of Hearts, Q by dummy, 7 by partner, playing UDCA and the deuce by declarer. At T2, he calls for the seven of Diamonds, 3 by pd, declarer playing the Ten. If you decide to win, how do you continue ?

With that hand, if I found myself hesitating over 2h, I'd bid something. Here an easy double to suggest take-out of the bid suits. The enormous distribution is enough compensation for me at the 2-level even an unfavorable vulnerability at MP. Over time, I have learnt that there are situations where you're caught napping, but the worst thing to do is to hesitate and pass. There's almost no reasonable action of partner that won't be challenged thanks to your hesitation.

He did encourage with the smallest spade possible. From his point of view even if the second spade doesn't cash, it's probably safer than any switch from partner probably. But the opening leader's the one who may be reading too much into an innocent come-on signal in spades perhaps. I guess what you're asking is: why should the spade bidder not play the lowest spade in tempo ?

I think the good-ole' "you have bid your hand once, so don't bid the same hand again" advice is valid only for those hands that fit the bidding sequence exactly such as making a notrump bid where you have defined both your strength and shape fairly narrowly. For every one such hand there're that ten others that don't fit in one way or another. In this case it's because the first bid you made was a close choice which could have worked out under different circumstances, but doesn't now. Do you stay fixed for making what appears to be poor choice of your first bid or try to undo it ? Your 2nt bid is only a slight distortion in terms of shape, after all if you had one fewer spade and one more minor card you'd still be bidding 2nt wouldn't you ? I'd expect partner to make a card-showing double of 4h if he had something useful. He didn't, neither did he bid his imagined/imaginary seven card minor suit. So that rules out a penalty double by me. So that leaves 4s. How likely would 4s work out opposite a partner that couldn't double 4h ? Not very well, I'd estimate, hence the pass.

This hand drove me insane trying to figure out what he could have for 5h. So I played for a distribution, or rather the only distribution, that seemed consistent with the bidding and signals available after trick 1. I placed declarer with x AKQxxxx A Qxxx. This is not a terrible gamble, as you know whatever cards partner has are going to be in the minors, so you hope to find better clubs than diamonds. For the defense unfortunately, Ace of clubs and a club continuation is the only way to beat the hand on this lay-out. It never occured to me that declarer could have xx AKQTxxxx Ax x, yes a 2-8-2-1 hand ;) No matter how long your hearts, you're looking at two spade losers and chances are you'll find either the Ace of clubs or the King of Diamonds, but probably not both. So with that hand I'd double knowing that partner could have the perfecto. In defense, having "figured" out the hand, I played the Ace of clubs, partner playing the six from Q876. He apologized for not playing the eight, although honestly the only card that could have stopped me from continuing clubs was the Queen and that would be very hard to find and be wrong when declarer has a doubleton club. BTW, I absolutely loved partner's 2s bid with KQxxx x QJx Qxxx. Yes, you could pass and hope to balance at the two or three level later, but if it goes 4h on your left, you're out of the auction forever. I mentioned that partner took a while before playing to the first trick, because it did happen and I'm pretty sure at least some of the players would be calling the director rather than congratulating you on your brilliant defense, had it been right. Partner does have a problem after all, he's worried about how many spades would cash and what his signal might mean. It'd be interesting to send this hand to a reputed director with the 1714 hand for declarer and see how he/she would rule.

I'd highly recommend Larry Cohen's RealDeal CD's. It's not specifically about squeezes, but practically every other hand's about advanced tehniques like squeezes, end-plays or placing opponents's cards in a high-level MP game. If you're looking to improve your dummy play and defense technique, I don't think you can do better than these CD's. The interactive nature of the problem presentation is so much better suited for training than the conventional bridge column. More than anything else it increases your hunger for better play

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=st92h43dk87ckjt43&w=saj6h97dt5432ca95]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] Playing in a club game where North is known to be a decent player, the bidding goes (1h)-p-(1nt)-2s-(4h)-4s-(p)-p-(5h)-all pass. You lead the Ace of Spades, partner plays the 3 of spades, playing UDCA, after considerable thought. How do you continue ?

As for the suggestion that you already have a bid to show balanced 15-18, PASS, the problem is that it creates very difficult balancing situations. If you pass now, you may not be able to enter the auction at all. When it goes 1x-p-1y-p-1nt, partner has no idea yet that his unpassed LHO doesn't share some of your high cards even he's prepared to act based on shape and now when it comes back to you, you're again faced with a headache. Your RHO could be passing with as little as 5 HCP or as much as 11 HCP. Entering the auction now isn't any less hazardous than entering it right upfront. BTW, if it did go 1x-p-1y-p-1nt-p-p, what does a double here mean ? If you're not playing a natural 1nt in the sandwich position, should it show that now ?

Yes, we need to take some tricks before they disappear on the hearts presumably. But some analysis is needed though to make diamonds more attractive than clubs. If you reduce the problem to "Partner has a minor suit card; I need to find it", it appears to be a guess. After all if declarer has 6 spades, Kxx of hearts and two minor suit aces, it's a toss of the coin. Some of the time it'll turn out to be just a guess, can we do better when it's not ?

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=sqjhaqj6dt93cjt75&e=sa7h54dk875cq6432]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] In the sixth session of Blue Ribbon Pairs in Hawaii, with your side silent, bidding goes 1s-1nt-2s-3s-4s. Partner leads the 9 of spades. Your move.

Is it possible that 3c is a temporizing bid over 1h ? What does pd bid with a strong hand with AKx of hearts for instance, x AKx AKQTXX Qxx ? Unless you have specific agreements, with that hand he's planning to rebid 3h your 3d, 4h over 4c or 3h and probbaly pass 3nt. With that in mind, I'd bid a forcing 3h. If pd has a genuine two-suiter such as xx x AKQxx AKQxx he would now bid 3s and I'd sign off in 3nt. If the partnership had some special bid for the above awkward hand (I don't what that'd be; over 1c-1h, some people play 3d to show that hand), I'd bid 3s and follow it up with 4h over partner's rebid. Bidding 3d with xx x in minors has little appeal for me. Yes it's true pd gets more room to bid, but what you have shown of your hand ? This is not a hand where all pd needs is room to bid, he needs to know about your hand and there's a lot your hand has to say; the long hearts and great spades, and you convey neither of that by bidding 3d and I don't believe you can do so intelligently over partner's rebids either.

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=saj8h965dqt43cj87&w=s975ht842d982ct96&e=skqt2hajdaj65ck32&s=s643hkq73dk7caq54]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] Ok, here's the full deal. I got some of the spots wrong when I reproduced the hand from memory (the ACBL web-site was down), but the critical spots in the heart suit, 965 in North's hand are correct. South believed that playing the Nine first and following it up with the 5 later (playing UDCA) was suit preference for clubs. He played a club and watched in horror as declarer grabbed the trick with the King and played a club. South was on lead again and shifted to a spade now. Declarer plays a low Diamond to dummy's 9 and pd's T, takes the next spade, ace of Diamonds felling the Kinganf finally ruffs his good spade with a Diamond and gets out for down 1. We analyzed it later to see if it makes any difference if South plays Ace and Queen of clubs, now pd wins the third club with the Jack and can play a low spade. If declarer plays the Ten he's home again for down, but if he plays a higher honor, then a Diamond to the nine, North can with with then and play back a Diamond. Now if declarer plays the Ace and another Diamond, North can exit in Diamonds, the defense scores 1h, 2c, 2d and 2s for that magic +200. If South plays a spade either because North followed with the six of hearts at T2 or independently (?) comes to the conclusion that a spade is likely to cause less damage when it's wrong than a club switch, North takes the Ace and exits a spade, passive defense eventually end-plays South into playing clubs himself from his own hand for -200. The king of Diamond shift wasn't given much thought by South at the table and I thought later that it didn't appeal to me. But looking at it now, it seems okay. Problem is that declarer is likely to duck it, in which you must continue the suit and eventually defense will prevail. This is the kind of bread-n-butter MP deal where it appears as though the 1D opener doubled mainly to take NS out of their comfortable spot of 1nt knowing it'd be hard to defend it solo. If NS recognize it as such, i.e, that it's a low-level part-score with no great fit for either side, shouldn't them be doubling to protect their plus score just in case they chuck a trick on defense ? Note that with his 14 and partner's 1nt response vul, South should have enough confidence that they have the balance of strength. Even if opener has five Diamonds and say two clubs instead of 4-3, NS can still beat the contract 1 trick easily. Imagine how much harder NS have it if EW weren't vulnerable. Now not only would they have to double, but have to beat it two tricks, as they're almost sure to make +120. There were quite a +150 for NS. BTW, Phil, you won't get it out of me if I was sitting North or South :D

I don't understand why dummy should necessarily put down a long running suit. It could have been a pure quantitative auction just as easily; you have seven high cards, the opponents could easily have the rest or close to it and you could have blown it easily by an aggressive lead.

I agree that playing the six on this hand makes it impossible to read; in general I hate the six whether on lead or returning partner's suit or whatever, it's probably the most ambiguous spot in the deck. Anyway, pd should have 3 lousy hearts, 965. Given that, is 5 a suit preference or is pd following suit without thinking about it ? Playing a Diamond from the King doesn't appeal much it'll ruin whatever holding pd may have QTXX suddenly becomes a lot less formidable for declarer when you or partner is eventually end-played into playing Diamonds one way or another. That realistically leaves a spade or club. Can we figure out that a spade is right regardless of what the 5 meant ? If it's right to play clubs, should we give thought to Ace, Queen and another club ? Pd is unlikley to have just two clubs, he would have a major suit then. Besides, we're getting end-played all the time, shouldn't we share some of the fun and joy with pd too ?

Playing UDCA in a suit contract, he would play 5 from 95, right ? If declarer has the Jack, pd has already blown it by leading K from that horrible holding of KQxx (may be other leads were worse, let's hope !), so the best you can do is give him attitude. Yes, partner will have a headache if he get in before you do when you play the 5 for he may place you with the J5. Sathya

[hv=d=n&v=b&w=s872ht842d985c875&s=s654hkq73dk6caq63]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] Pd RHO you LHO p 1d X P 1nt X p 2d all pass Playing in the LM Pairs in Chicago in the first qualifying session, this hand occurs fairly early in the session. Your RHO is someone you recognize from his pictures in the ACBL bulletin, in case it affects your decision. Do you agree with South's final pass ? You lead the King of hearts. You're playing UDCA and pd contributes the 9, declarer wins and plays back the Jack which you win, pd playing the 5 to the second trick. How do you continue ?

What really struck me was the single-minded approach of all those who chose to post. Everyone here thought of 7h because most of the time your partner would have the two Aces of interest to you, as if you don't care if the two Aces your partner has are the wrong ones. The opponents would then rescue you by saving in 7s. There was even a cue-bid of 6s in preparation of 7nt ! Why exactly is it naive for partner to cue-bid the Ace of clubs if he has it? His partner's hand is not limited by any means and that cue might be exactly what he needs to hear. The weaker of the two hands often doesn't know exactly what the stronger hand is looking for. So it cue-bids whatever it can letting the partner make an intelligent choice. That's what treatments like serious-3nt and non-serious cue-bids are all about. I don't see any reason at all to simply gamble 7h if there're ways to figure out if partner has what you're looking for. Fourteen IMPs is a terrible thing to chuck, just because you think it's naive to assume that partner is going to cue-bid an Ace. As it turns out partner has Ax AJTxxx xxx Qx. So the "naive" approach tells you he doesn't have the Ace of clubs, but it's pretty nearly impossible for him not have the Ace of spades. 6nt anyone ? As for 7h, you might get lucky if West is eager to sacrifice in 7s ahead of his partner, otherwise it's 100 in the minus column I'm afraid.

It looks like the only guys playing in that sectional two weeks ago in San Jose were the 4s bidders. We would have gotten some Match Points had some of you 3s'ers showed up :D Sathya

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=shkqxxdakqtxxckxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Playing against competent and aggressive opponents in a GNT A semi-final match it goes 2s by W, 3h by partner, 4s by E. You try 5s, LHO passes, partner bids 6h and now RHO continues to make a nuisance of himself by bidding 6s. We all know the five level belongs to the opponents, but who does the six level belong to ?

I was the one guilty of bidding 4s with KQxx x xx AKQxxx. Unless "North is a complete lunatic" said one of the posts. Hey don't pre-judge people without knowing them, they could be indeed be totally off the rocker Far too often one makes a bid not totally consciously, but based on some experience and instinct and often we think of reasons to justify the bid later. This was an exception. Of course I could have bid 4c showing 6-4, but given the favorable vulnerability I rejected that descriptive call in favor an obstructive 4s bid. At any other vulnerability I'd have bid 4c. Even as I made that bid, I was thinking "If my LHO now bids at the 5-level, partner should be able to figure out the relative strengths of the hands around the table given the colors". The 4s bid is so much the in-your-face-I-know-am-sticking-it-to-you call. I think of it as the Bridge-equivalent of Dennis Rodman in Magic Johnson's face. The easiest notion for me to brush aside holding the responder's hand is that partner has a balanced 19-20 HCP hand. Whatever else may be happening, that ain't one of them. It's pretty nearly impossible for partner to have 19 HCP outside of hearts and your red/white opponent to have his 5h call. Can someone actually try running this on a simulator ? On the actual hand, x AKJTxxxxx AK x, RHO was covered, he probably had decided he could bid safely upto 5h. But what if he had a slightly weaker hand, say "only" eight hearts topped by AKQ, two black stiffs and AKx Diamonds; may be you would bid 4h or 1h, avoiding the double. But if you did double, would you rather bid at the 4-level at the second opportunity or the 5-level. Over 4c, you bid 4h and now your partner can look at the Queen of Diamonds if he was dealt that card quite fondly and may bid 5h over 4s. But over 4s you don't have any of that luxury. Too strong to bid 1h or 4h, how about trying the 5-level, sir ? Sathya