Bridge Blog

The Vineyard Trophy

June 28, 2008 – 11:47 am

The Vineyard Trophy

 

            The Vineyard Trophy has, without my being aware of it, become a very serious thing.

            It began as a shorthand way of saying which of the duplicate players had the best off-Island tournament. On the ferry home, or perhaps at the Tuesday bridge game the next week, we would ask one another, “Who won the Vineyard Cup?” It may have been Hugh Knipmeyer who coined the phrase “Vineyard Cup” or “Vineyard Trophy.” There was in those days no trophy at all. Bridge players, being competitive types, were just comparing master points to see who had been the best at that particular tournament. It was all very friendly, and the “winner” was always warmly congratulated by the others. We enjoyed each other’s successes, and while winning the imaginary cup was a goal, it was not the main goal.

            Going to off-Island Tournaments, at least in the numbers that often go now, is a relatively new phenomenon. Twenty or thirty years ago, Margaret O’Neill used to go (she was, I believe, the first year-round Vineyarder to make Life Master), and Betty Sabin, Eileen O’Neill, Rita Moniz, perhaps a few others. Starting about ten years ago, it was Art Flathers who made the expeditions what they are today, when as many as 14 players descend on Newton, Hyannis, Falmouth, or Cromwell, Conn. Tournaments are social events as well. Large groups of players often go out to dinner together, gather for a nightcap after the evening session, or breakfast together. Always with the ubiquitous hand-records and score-cards: “What did you bid on Board 29?”

            About four years ago the idea surfaced that maybe there ought to be a real Vineyard Trophy. I may be wrong about this, and somebody can correct me, but I remember the conversation at the Saybrook Fishhouse (near Cromwell) as very light-hearted, something like, “Wouldn’t it be funny if there were a trophy we could present at the next club game?”

            Bill Blakesley volunteered to make a trophy, and Hugh Knipmeyer provided a Barbie Doll liberated from one of his granddaughters. You can see a picture of it where you click on this blog. It’s delightfully funny and kitsch. I think it perfectly captures the spirit of the friendly, tongue-in-cheek competition for top honors. I was happy to display it in my house when Nancy and I won it. It gave our guests a chuckle because it’s really a kind of parody of serious hardware.

            However, the trophy comes with a set of rules. Because Bill made the trophy, he also made the rules. New rules are added from time to time. If there were meetings to vote on what the rules should be, I missed them all. Perhaps there is a “mermaid’s cabinet” to decide such things. Perhaps Bill does it ex cathedra, as it were.

            At Sturbridge this month Claus Buchthal was the top point-getter in the Vineyard gang with 9.58 master points. This is remarkable for two reasons: first, Claus will be 95 years old this summer; second, he played several sessions with pick-up partners. Winning with a stranger for a partner is hard. Winning consistently is amazing. I like to think that in the days before there was a physical Vineyard trophy, we’d have gathered on the ferry and rejoiced in our congratulatory way that Claus had won the mythical cup this time.

            However, one of Bill’s rules is that the winner, who must be a Vineyard year-round or seasonal resident, must play at least one session with a Vineyard partner or teammate. I’ve tried to think why there is such a rule, and I conclude that it is to prevent someone like summer resident Barbara McLagan, who plays often with a team of her off-Island friends and usually does very well, from winning the trophy when she wasn’t part of the gang that traveled together, ate together, and originally invented the idea of a Vineyard trophy. One could argue about whether Barbara perhaps should be the winner anyway, or whether she would even care if she were passed over, but that’s not the point here.

            Under Bill’s rules, Claus is disqualified and the winners of the Vineyard Trophy were Gail Farrish and Dottie Arnold with 9.14 master points. This was Gail’s fifth time winning. Yes, five times! More than any other winner, by far (next frequent are Bill and Knip). I was surprised to learn that this was Dottie’s first win. She plays often with Gail at tournaments, but I guess the other four times Gail snuck off and won some points with somebody else. Way to go Dottie this time.

            On Tuesday night last week Gail and I conspired to vote Claus the Vineyard Trophy. Neither of us consulted Dottie, and for that I am sorry. If we had, I’m pretty sure she would have agreed with us, but we didn’t. Neither did we consult Bill.

            Well, it turns out that the vote was illegal. The Vineyard Trophy is not democratically awarded. Bill Blakesley decides what the rules are and whether there will be exceptions. He has ruled that Gail and Dottie are the winners after all, and that Claus is only an honorary recipient (sort of like a “lifetime achievement” award).

            So be it. Bill made the trophy, he gets to make the rules. Now I think I liked the imaginary trophy better.

            Nancy and I are off to Alaska on Monday. No bridge blog for at least two weeks.

Weak jump shift? Results 6/24

June 26, 2008 – 3:33 pm

Weak Jump Shift? 6/24 Results

            This is the West hand from the Tuesday game in Vineyard Haven on 6/24. EW vulnerable; NS, not.

                         ♠ T985432   ♥ 76   ♦ AT   ♣54 

North deals and the bidding goes

North      East     South     West
   1♣         1♥       Pass         ?

            Nancy and I play weak jump shifts (always). 2♠ (alerted) in this auction says, “Partner, I have six or more spades and fewer than 6 HCP.”  That’s probably what I should have bid, but I didn’t. I bid 1♠, and the auction progressed:

 North      East     South     West
               Nancy                  me
   1♣         1♥       Pass        1♠
 Pass        3♥       Pass        3♠
 Pass        4♠          all pass

        I think if I had held the North hand (see below) I might have doubled.

                                           ♠ KQJ6
                                           ♥ K84
                                           ♦ J42
                                           ♣ KT8
                                              N
              ♠ T985432                                 ♠ A
              ♥ 76                                           ♥ AQ953
              ♦ AT            W                  E      ♦ Q7
              ♣ 54                                          ♣ AQJ72
                                              S
                                         ♠ 7
                                         ♥ JT2
                                         ♦  K98653
                                         ♣ 963
            The opening lead was the ♦2. I played low from the dummy, and no matter what South does, I win two diamond tricks. He played the king, and I won with the ace. I led a club to the queen, winning the finesse, then played the ace and ruffed a low club in my hand, dropping the ♣K. Now the heart finesse won, and I played the ♥A, the ♦Q, and ruffed a heart in my hand, dropping the ♥K. Things are going amazingly well! I led a spade to the board and led the ♣J. Of course I have to ruff it, because I have nothing left in my hand but trumps. No matter what North does, he gets only the KQJ of spades. +620 and 6 match points (out of 8). Isn’t it amazing what a 21-point dummy will do?

            Would we wind up in 4♠ if I had made the weak jump shift to 2♠? Maybe not, but it could be argued that we don’t belong there. It’s pretty lucky to get a diamond lead and find both the other kings on-side and those suits splitting 3-3. On the other hand, maybe it’s UNlucky to find KQJx in one hand.

            The results of this hand were all over the place, but in every case it was EW winning the auction. One West played two spades, making four (+170) and earning 4 match points (average). That might have been our result if I’d made that jump shift. Other Easts played 2♥, 3♥, and 4♥, making three and five (+140, +200, +650). 4♥ making five was the next-to-top match points score EW (7). The best EW score (8) was 3♠doubled, making four (+930 - foolish North). The worst EW score (0) was 4♠doubled, down four (-1100 - brilliant North). One West was down one at 4♠ (probably not an opening diamond lead), and one East was down two at 2NT. 

Winners on Tuesday night 6/24 in Vineyard Haven: NS 1. Patsy McCornack and Gail Farrish. 2. Michael and Sandy Lindheimer. 3. Bob Iadicicco and Berkeley Johnson. EW 1. Bill Blakesley and Hugh Knipmeyer. 2. Dan and Nancy Cabot. 3. Miles Jaffe and Jim Kaplan.

 

Strurbridge Regional

June 24, 2008 – 7:34 am

I’ve been looking through the results of the Sturbridge Regional held last weekend. Unless I’ve missed somebody, here’s how the Vineyard team did. Claus Buchthal 9.59 MP. Gail Farrish and Dottie Arnold 9.14 MP. Ed Russell and Deirdre Ling 4.99 MP. Rhonda Cohen and Eric Stricoff 4.53 MP. Barbara McLagen 4.31.
           By vote of the Tuesday bridge crowd, the requirement that the player play at least one session with a Vineyard partner or teammate is waived for this tournament. Claus wins the Vineyard cup.

Claus played in several events, all with non-Vineyard partners, and as usual was in the money in most sessions. He was first in both B and C in one side game. Gail and Dottie were 2nd in C in a compact Swiss (teaming with Ed and Deirdre), 3rd in a compact knockout, and 2nd in a round-robin team event. Newly infected with the tournament bug, Eric and Rhonda won in C in a 299er.

Nightmare Misfit

June 21, 2008 – 6:01 pm

Here’s a hand from a two-table team game last week. Both EWs got stung.
Would you and your best partner have done better?

                                           ♠ Q74
                                           ♥ 9762
                                           ♦ J9865
                                           ♣ K
                                              N
              ♠ AKJT86532                              ♠ –
              ♥ –                                              ♥ AKJT543
              ♦ 4                W                  E       ♦ Q3
              ♣ T73                                         ♣ Q982
                                              S
                                         ♠ 9
                                         ♥ Q8
                                         ♦  AKT72
                                         ♣ AJ632

Neither side vulnerable. East deals.

South      West      North     East
R. Fokos Claus       me        Anita
                                            1♥
 2NT*       4♠          5♦*       5♥
   5♠         all pass

*At both tables, South bid 2NT (unusual, showing 5-5 or stranger in the lower two unbid suits). I bid 5♦, which under ordinary circumstances would be a good save. If NS can make 4♥ or 4♠,  5♦ down one doubled (-100), the likely outcome, would be an excellent result. Even 6♦ doubled down two (-300) is great if NS can make 5♥ or 5♠, but it turns out that Robert was exactly right not to go on, because the best EW can do is 2♥ or 2♠.

            My opening lead was the ♣K, followed by a low diamond to Robert’s king. He tried to cash the ♦A, and Claus ruffed. Claus played three rounds of trumps, putting me in with the ♠Q, in hopes that I would lead a heart. No such luck. Claus ruffed the diamond continuation and ran a bunch of spades, but eventually he had to lose two more clubs - down three for -150.

            In the other room West bid 6♠:

South      West      North     East
                Bob I.                   Nancy
                                            1♥
 2NT*         3♠      Pass        4♥
 Pass         4NT     Pass        5♥**
 Pass          6♠        all pass

** 2 key cards, no queen, in hearts.

            Bob got lucky when South cashed the ♣A at trick three, setting up the queen on the board. Whether North ruffs the next club or waits to get his ♠Q later, he gets only one trump trick, and so Bob was also down three for -150.  No IMPs either way, but why didn’t South double?

            It’s not likely that EW would ever wind up in hearts when West has nine spades and no hearts! But even if that somehow happened, Anita or Nancy would fare no better at 5♥ or 6♥. She can drop the ♥Q and pull trumps without a loss, but unless an opponent screws up and leads a spade, she will lose two diamonds and three clubs, taking the same number of tricks as West.

            I  think South’s unusual 2NT made a difference. If South passes at his first turn, West will keep bidding spades, and East will keep bidding hearts, probably winding up at 4♠ (1♥, 1♠, 2♥, 3♠, 4♥, 4♠). The 5♦ helped even more. Nancy says she would have passed 4♠ if Bob had bid that instead of 4NT, but Claus would certainly have bid 5♠ even if Anita had passed 5♦.

            Some players might jump to 4♠ over East’s 1♥, showing a determination to play spades, and then some East’s might pass. But I don’t think I’d jump to 4♠ (over 1♥) with the West hand. Slam looks too likely. Give East the ♣A, and six is almost certain, seven a possibility.

            It’s just a nightmare misfit. There’s nothing to do about it but shrug and pick up the next board.

Results 6/17

June 18, 2008 – 7:56 am

Results 6/17 - 9 diamonds

 

There were 9.5 tables in play in Vineyard Haven on 6/16. We played a Howell movement - 13 rounds, 2 boards per round. Personally, I’d rather play a Mitchell movement - 9 rounds, 3 boards per round with a skip. NS would play 27, EW 24. Two boards per round is just too slow with the players we have.

1. Len Auerbach & Richard Coban. 2. Jim Kaplan & Miles Jaffe. ¾. Bob Roach & Diane Clayton. ¾ David Donald & Michele Riel. 5.Robert & Ency Fokos. 6. Dan & Nancy Cabot.

 

            How was the big diamond hand bid at your table?  North picks up:

 

                ♠ 964   ♥4  ♦ AKQJT9843  ♣ –

 
            I bid 2♣, which I’m told in a tournament would be illegal. Our card says 21+ HCP or a game-going hand, but the hand has no defensive values at all and only 10 HCP. It’s not quite game-going. Nancy bid 2♥, showing either one ace or two kings, and I bid 5♦. I’m sure many Norths would have opened 5♦, but I at least wanted a stab at slam. If she’d had three or four controls, there would have been time to find out where they were.

            5♦ goes down with a spade lead, but at our table the opening lead was a club. Nancy had the ♥A and ♥Q. The finesse won, and so I could dump a spade. Several others had the same result.

Results 6/10

June 11, 2008 – 10:12 am

Results from Vineyard Haven 6/10, 8.5 tables in play. NS: 1. Claus Buchthal and Millie Briggs. 2. Barbara Donald and Gerry Averill. 3. Eric Stricoff and Rhonda Cohen. EW: 1. Bill Blakesley and Hugh Knipmeyer. 2. Sari Lipkin and Carol Whitmarsh. 3. Jim Kaplan and Miles Jaffe (welcome back, Jim).

It’s worth noting that Claus and Millie, who finished first NS, are both over 90 years old. This may be the pair with the greatest combined ages ever to win a duplicate event on Martha’s Vineyard. It is a record that will not soon be broken (except for the next time they win). I didn’t play Tuesday, but I wish I had a hand from their winning effort to display here. Anyone remember one?

One for the Knipper

June 6, 2008 – 9:10 am

One for the Knipper

 

Here’s a hand from Thursday 6/5 in West Tisbury. South deals, both sides vulnerable (Hands rotated).

 

                                           ♠ A82
                                           ♥ 7653
                                           ♦ AKT84
                                           ♣ 3
                                              N
              ♠ JT94                                         ♠ KQ75
              ♥ 2                                              ♥ QJ
              ♦ Q932             W                  E   ♦ J65
              ♣ QJ72                                       ♣ K965
                                              S
                                         ♠ 63
                                         ♥ AKT984
                                         ♦  7
                                         ♣ AT84 

South      West      North     East
  1♥         Pass         2♦        Pass
  2♥         Pass         4♥        all pass

Opening lead: ♠J

            This hand was played five times, and all five times the contract was 4♥. South opens with 11 HCP plus distribution. North bids 2♦ with 11 HCP plus a singleton spade and jumps to 4♥ when South makes a minimum-hand rebid. Here’s an oddity: with only 22 HCP, missing two kings and all the queens and jacks, four Souths made six and Hugh Knipmeyer made seven.

            If there are no defense errors, can you take 13 tricks?

            Knip took the ♠A, cashed the ♦A and ruffed a diamond. He drew trumps in two rounds, cashed the ♣A, ruffed a club on the board, and ruffed another diamond in his hand. Then he ruffed another club on the board. His last two losers (a club and a spade) went on the ♦K and ♦10. Well done!

            As long as the diamonds split 4-3 and trumps were not 3-0, Knip’s line of play was absolutely foolproof. After the hand, Knip remarked that lots of players don’t think of trying to set up the fifth card in a 5-1 holding.

            Knip owns more master points than any of the rest of us year-rounders. Nancy and I took a lesson from the old master last night. We were East-West and got a zero on this hand.

Here are the results from 6/5. 5.5 tables in play. 1.Claus Buchthal & Gail Farrish. 2. Barbara Besse & Hugh Knipmeyer. 3. Dan & Nancy Cabot. 4. Millie Briggs & Simi Denhart

SOS Redouble 6/3

June 4, 2008 – 12:26 pm

SOS Redouble 6/3

Here’s a hand from Tuesday 6/3 in Vineyard Haven. South deals, both sides vulnerable.

                                           ♠ KJ92
                                           ♥ AJ87
                                           ♦ AKQ6
                                           ♣ 2
                                              N
              ♠ A843                                         ♠ 6
              ♥ T9654                                       ♥ KQ2
              ♦ 843             W                  E      ♦ JT72
              ♣ J                                               ♣ AQ975
                                              S
                                         ♠ QT75
                                         ♥ 3
                                         ♦ 95
                                         ♣ KT8643

 

            This is North-South’s spade hand. Anita Persson and Carol Whitmarsh bid 4♠ and made five (+650). Rhonda Cohen and Eric Strikof made four (+620). Two other pairs bid 2♠ and made three and four (+140, +170). One pair went down at 4♠.

          The bidding was  different at our table: 

South      West      North     East
                (me)                  (Nancy)
Pass         Pass        1♦          2♣
Pass*       Pass**    Dble***    Pass
Pass#       Rdble## Pass        2♦###
Pass          2♥         all pass

            North’s opening bid is normal. The hand is too strong for a mini-Roman 2♦, the only other choice. Nancy overcalls 2♣ vulnerable with 12 HCP plus a singleton, also the normal bid.

* South has a problem. If she chooses to make a negative double here, N-S will find their spade game, but she has only 5 HCP plus distribution, and her length is in Nancy’s suit. Pass and see what happens is not an unreasonable choice.

** I don’t like it, but I pass this hand with 5 HCP. I expect that N-S will bid again, and so Nancy won’t be stuck with 2♣ on a 5-1 trump fit, and . . .

*** . . . and sure enough, North makes a reopening double (for takeout), expecting South to say something. . .

# . . .  but what South “says” is to convert the reopening double to penalties. This is a very good bid. In clubs, N-S should take three diamonds, a heart or two, and probably four clubs. They would have collected at least +800, more than their spade game is worth. (At another table 3♣ was down four undoubled - that South should have doubled!).

## This is an SOS Redouble. I know that North’s double likely indicates both high-card strength and shortness in clubs. South’s Pass indicates length and strength in clubs, behind Nancy. An SOS Redouble says, “Partner, we’re in a terrible spot. Please bid some other suit.” (In the direct position, we play that a Redouble indicates 10 or more HCP, but that can’t be the case in the pass-out seat at a low level.)

### Nancy should have bid 2♥, but she bid 2♦ thinking that North’s opening might have been based on a 3-card suit. I took her 2♦ to be a cue bid asking me to pick one of the two unbid suits (lucky I didn’t pick spades!).

            The opening lead was the ♣2. I took the ♣A and led a spade to my ♠A. I led a heart toward the board, and North played low and the ♥K won. When I ruffed a club, I was over-ruffed, and North cashed three diamonds. North got two more hearts (three in all), but that was all.  Down one (-100) meant that we were beaten on the hand only by the E-W pair who found a way to set 4♠.

            At another table E-W were down four doubled at 3♥ (-1100). I suspect that West may have finessed on the first club lead. That was the top N-S score.

 

Here are the results from 6/3. 8 tables in play. N/S 1. David Donald & Michele Riel. 2. Duncan & Jocelyn Walton. 3. Claus Buchthal & Sari Lipkin. E/W 1. Bob Roach & Diane Clayton. 2. Bill Blakesley & Hugh Knipmeyer. 3. Dan & Nancy Cabot.

Mini-Roman 5/29

May 30, 2008 – 7:17 pm

Mini-Roman 2♦              ♠♥♦♣ 

            In a two-table team game at Claus Buchthal’s house on 5/29, my partner, Robert Fokos, picked up the following hand:

            ♠ KJ43  ♥ KQ42  ♦ A  ♣9862         

            We were using a special convention to show this kind of hand, “mini Roman 2♦”: 11 to 14 HCP and 4-4-4-1 or 4-4-5-0 distribution. We had agreed that the shortage may not be spades, because that crowds the bidding too much. (The older Roman 2♦ convention had the same distribution with 17 or more HCP - hence the “mini.”) Art Flathers was a proponent of mini-Roman, and many of his students still play it. The advantage is that you describe your distribution and limit your strength in one bid. Because of the shortage, the mini-Romaners take 6 to 10 HCPs out of the deck and can sometimes bid game with as few as 21 or 22 points between the two hands; slam with as few a 30.

            With fewer than 8 HCP, responder just signs off in his cheapest long suit, which the opener will pass unless that happens to be his shortage. In that case, the opener rebids the cheapest suit above the responder’s bid. The responder passes or sets the contract at the cheapest level; and opener must pass. With a strong hand, the responder bids 2NT, which asks the opener to bid his singleton or void. The responder should then have enough information to set the contract (or go into Blackwood).

            I used to play mini-Roman with George Willoughby, but we always seemed to get in the wrong contract with it. Nancy and I tried it briefly and gave it up. This hand did not make me want to take it up again. Here’s the whole deal:

                                           ♠ KJ43
                                           ♥ KQ42
                                           ♦ A
                                           ♣ 9862
                                              N
              ♠ 52                                              ♠ AT98
              ♥ T976                                         ♥ 85
              ♦ QT542       W                  E       ♦  K73
              ♣ T4                                            ♣ QJ75
                                              S
                                         ♠ Q76
                                         ♥ AJ3
                                         ♦  J986
                                         ♣ AK3

 

            Here’s the bidding: 

North      East      South      West
(Robert)                (me)
2♦*         Pass       2NT**    Pass
3♦***     Pass       4♠?        all pass

* Alert: mini-Roman, at least four spades
** Alert: asks for shortage
*** Alert: singleton or void in diamonds

            My hand (South) has 15 HCP, surely enough for game. But my only four-card suit is a lousy minor. What should I bid? If I bid 3♦, and Robert’s shortage is NOT in diamonds, he will pass and we may miss a game. So I bid 2NT. If Robert were short in clubs or hearts, 3NT should have a good shot. But of course, the shortage is in diamonds (I don’t know he has the ace!). I should perhaps sign off in 3♥ or 3♠, but this is IMPs, so I bid game, choosing spades because I figure that I should protect against quick losers outside of trumps. Hearts would probably have been safer, as it turns out.

            The hand takes two spades, two ruffs in dummy, three hearts (the fourth heart got ruffed by East, but I shed a losing club), a diamond and two clubs: +620.

            Notice that if I play 3NT from the South, the normal opening diamond lead will set the contract. When East gets in with the ♠A, the ♦K and a low diamond will trap my jack, and the defense will take a spade and four diamonds.

            Nancy Cabot and Nancy Neal were playing these cards in the other room. Here is their bidding:

North      East      South      West
(Nancy C.)         (Nancy N.)
1♣         Pass       1♦            Pass
1NT*     Pass       3NT        all pass

* South would have bid a four-card major over any diamond holding, if she’d had one.
            Played from the North, the opening lead against 3NT was a helpful spade, and with a little more help from East, Nancy took three spades, four hearts, a diamond and two clubs - making four (+630). While careful (normal) defense will hold Nancy to nine tricks, no East would make the killing lead of a low diamond from the king. In IMPS +630 is the same as +620, so there was no gain either way, and +600 would have lost only 1 IMP.

Bad Trump Split

May 28, 2008 – 11:30 am

Bad Trump Split? Don’t Give Up.              ♠♥♦♣

 

            Here’s a hand from Thursday 5/27 in Vineyard Haven (hands rotated):

 

                                           ♠ QT7
                                           ♥ T4
                                           ♦ T95432
                                           ♣ AQ
                                              N
              ♠ –                                               ♠ AJ932
              ♥ J97653                                      ♥ Q82
              ♦ J8               W                  E       ♦  Q6
              ♣ KT943                                      ♣ J92
                                              S
                                        ♠ K8654
                                         ♥ AK
                                         ♦ AK7
                                         ♣ 765

            South deals, nobody vulnerable. Here’s how the bidding went at our table:

 

South         West           North           East
1♠               2♥               2♠               Pass
3♣*             Pass            4♠**           all pass

* Help-suit game try. Although South’s spades are ragged, with such strength in the red suits, he won’t need much for 10 tricks so long as the opponents don’t rattle off three club tricks. It’s worth making an attempt. Partner will sign off at 3♠ with a minimum raise.

** With a maximum raise to 2♠, two honors in spades, and most of her strength in the help-suit, North has an easy 4♠ bid.

 

            The opening lead is the ♥J. You take the ♥A and lead a low spade. West discards a heart. Aaaargh! There is a 5-0 trump split. You play the queen, and East takes the ace and returns the ♥Q to your ♥K. Now what?

 

            Clearly taking out trump will be a disaster. Faced with at least two trump losers, you’re going to need the club finesse, so you do that first. It wins, so you cash the ♣A, return to your hand with the ♦A and cash the ♦K, then ruff a club on the board. So far, so good. This is what’s left (and you know where everything is):

                                           ♠ T
                                           ♥ –
                                           ♦ T954
                                           ♣ –
                                              N
              ♠ –                                               ♠ J932
              ♥ 9765                                         ♥ 2
              ♦                    W                  E       ♦  –
              ♣ KT                                           ♣ –
                                              S
                                         ♠ K865
                                         ♥ –
                                         ♦ 7
                                         ♣ –
 

            Lead the ten of diamonds. East should ruff low, but no matter what he does, he can get only one more trump trick (three in all), and you make 4♠ (+420). If instead East discards the ♥2, you lead another diamond, overruff whichever trump East plays, and concede one trump, making 5♠ (+450).

 

            4♠ was also down one (-50) and down two (-100). One pair stopped at 2♠, for +170.

 

            5♦ also made for +400.

 

            The best score on the hand was 3NT making five (+460). When the diamonds break, you can try the winning club finesse. You take six diamonds, two clubs, two hearts, and a spade. If East is trigger-happy with his ♠A, you might even take 12 tricks. I think it’s hard to bid 3NT with at least an eight-card fit in spades, but perhaps that South was apprehensive about his ragged spade suit and bid 2NT after his partner bid 2♠, showing the heart stoppers and game interest.  With club stoppers and long diamonds, North can raise to 3NT. You can’t quarrel with results, but I’d rather be in 4♠.

 

            It’s kind of surprising that holding ♠AJ932, four players passed 4♠. You’d think somebody would have doubled.

 

Results from 5/27. 7.5 tables in play. 1. Barbara Besse & Miles Jaffe 2. Duncan & Jocelyn Walton 3. Don Nelson & Lou Winkelman. 4. Sari Lipkin & Sue Collinson. 5. Michele Riel & David Donald

 

Bridge Blog is powered by WordPress Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Wordpress theme derived from Silver Light by Bob