Taking a break
At the moment I'm too busy with all sorts of stuff to post on a regular basis. I've decided to take a break. Depending on work I might return soon, in a few months, or even stop forever.
Greetz,
Free
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Toying with voidwood
Yesterday I had following hand:
♠ AJ9x
♥ AKJT9x
♦ xxx
♣ -
Playing a natural system (pretty basic actually), partner opened 1♠ in 1st seat, Vulnerable. What's your plan?
I thought of several possibilities:
2♥ = natural, forcing for 1 round
2NT = GF with fit
4♣ = splinter
5♣ = voidwood
Normally I prefer to bid 2♥, but with this partner I wasn't sure I could set up a GF at 3-level if he rebids 2♠. After 2NT we play pretty standard responses, so with a minimum hand he'll rebid 4♠ which we don't want! I thought my hand was too strong for a splinter, so voidwood was the only thing left. However, if partner doesn't have a control in ♦ we may already be too high... Nothing was really satisfying. Then I thought a little further, and found a response that was imo better than all the rest. Can you find it?
I bid 5 Diamonds, voidwood. This solves the problem in ♦ (who will lead this suit now?) and lets us play 6♠ pretty comfortable. The auction continued as follows:
1♠ - pass - 5♦! - 6♣
pass! - pass - 7♠ - pass
pass - pass
Partner's pass should show 1 keycard (not counting ♦A), so I made a gamble and bid the grand slam.
Partner's hand was:
♠ KQTxx
♥ Q
♦ Axx
♣ Jxxx
The slam is laydown, but the trumps were 4-0! After a ♥ lead you'll have to count on a 3-3 ♥ split so you can play some kind of dummy reversal ruffing some ♦s. Otherwise you can only make 12 tricks...
While I was dummy, I was thinking about these Zia voidwoods (I've seen him do this several times as well, voidwood with another void). Actually they work amaizingly well, although this hand doesn't illustrate this completely. For example, partner has ♦A: without it, the killing lead would've been avoided. He also has ♥Q, a lucky card. Playing 6♠ (this was my initial plan) while partner had ♦xxx obviously would've been a better example, but I don't like to change the hands.
Nevertheless the Zia voidwood works in the sense that opponents don't know there's a suit wide open, and the hand should practically be over once they've lead the wrong suit. I think it's less useful if you have a ♦ control of your own.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Unlucky? Yes!
The new competition season has started 4 weeks ago. At this moment we're not scoring the way we would like to. Most of the time we all play well, but "luck" is not on our side! Many imps are lost because of extremely bad splits (5-0 trump splits for example), or opponents playing 1♠ with 24HCP while our teammates go -2 in 3NT. The following hand is a perfect example.
Opponents blasted blind to slam as follows (we were silent):
2NT! - 3♦!
4♠ - 6♠
2NT = either weak with both minors, or strong with one Major
3♦ = to play when opener has the minors
4♠ = GF with long and solid ♠s
The hands were:
♠ T8
♥ AKTxx
♦ 9xxxxx
♣ -
♠ AKQ9xxx
♥ x
♦ -
♣ KQTxx
North can't know they won't lose a single trick in ♦, but still bid slam because he had "2 tricks".
The contract may not be as easy as it looks. A trump lead for example is annoying, but not fatal. Can you construct possible holdings in ♣ for EW?
At the table, my partner lead ♣A so declarer made +1. However, even if he leads a trump the contract is still laydown thanks to amazing splits. Look at the full hand:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
After a trump lead, declarer can ruff a low ♣ and later on let the ♣A come down on another low ♣. His ♣T can be discarded on ♥K. This line only makes when one of the EW players has a doubleton with the Ace, and guess what: that's exactly the way the suit split in our hands... What are the chances?
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Triple squeeze
I encountered the following hand this weekend:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction was pretty standard, ending in 3NT played by South. LHO started with a small ♠. 11 tricks were easy, but perhaps 12 were possible by means of a squeeze. So I took ♠K and played a low ♦ to the K. LHO hesitated, so we know where ♦A is. Next was the ♥J, which is necessary to rectify the count for a squeeze. With normal layouts and if the ♥J holds, we have 3♠s, 1♥, 3♦s and 5♣s = 11 tricks, perfect for a squeeze.
♥J held, so I played a ♦ to my Q and LHO took the Ace (mistake). He returned a ♠. After cashing all my ♠s, I ran the ♣s. This is the position in the end:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
On ♣5 I discarded ♥K, and LHO was squeezed in 3 suits. 3NT+3 won us a full imp, it's not much, but in MP it would've been a top.
I have no idea why LHO didn't take his Aces. From the auction he should've known his partner had nothing, and creating a third trick was impossible.
Note that if you don't play ♥J, the squeeze doesn't work. When LHO holds up his ♦Ace one more round the squeeze also doesn't work, because the communication to my hand is broken.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
2007 World Championships Shanghai
The 2007 World Championships started a few days ago. Australia's captain David Stern uses the following blog to give daily news:
http://worldbridge.blogspot.com/
Friday, September 14, 2007
Transfers after 1-level intervention
It's been a while since I posted, but I've been quite busy. Don't worry, I keep coming back! ;-)
This is about a method I play when opponents intervene at the 1-level. Beginners learn that, for example, 1♦-(1♥)-1♠ shows 5+♠s, while Double would show exactly 4 ♠s. This is useful in some cases, but too limited in other situations. What do you bid with 8-9HCP without ♠ and without a ♥ stopper? Is the distinction between 4 and 5 card Major really that important? Doesn't opener ever raise 1x-1M-2M with only a 3 card support in an uncontested auction? So why shouldn't he do it now?
Obviously you know what I'm getting at by now. Reserve only 1 bid to show the Major, while the free bid can now be used to show some values without a good bid.
One problem remains: should you bid natural, or in transfer? I think transfers are by far superior than natural bids because they leave space (just in case your opponents shut up) to investigate the best fit. Opener can accept the transfer with only a 3 card support, responder will know what to do.
Here's a scheme I like:
1♣ - (1♦) - ?
Dbl = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper
1♣ - (1♥) - ?
Dbl = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper
2♦ = natural, F1
1♦ - (1♥) - ?
Dbl = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper
2♣ = natural, F1
You see I use the 1♠ bid as trash bin. It's a consequence of the transfers, and in fact has some pre-emptive effect. Also, it's no problem for us, we don't need the 1M bids since we seem to have no Major fit anyway. The 1♠ bid can be described as some sort of takeout Double without a biddable suit, usually without a fit as well. The hand is very well described!
After 1X-(1♠) I use normal takeout Doubles. Transfers are no use, and usually there's no big problem anyway.
You might wonder what to do when opponents Double. Well, I prefer a very similar approach, but now we use an entrire level of transfers:
1♣ - (Dbl) - ?
RDbl = 5+♦
1♦ = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = good ♣ raise
2♣ = poor ♣ raise
1♦ - (Dbl) - ?
RDbl = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = good ♦ raise
2♦ = poor ♦ raise
1♥ - (Dbl) - ?
RDbl = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = 5+♦
2♦ = good ♥ raise
2♥ = poor ♥ raise
1♠ - (Dbl) - ?
RDbl = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = 5+♦
2♦ = 5+♥
2♥ = good ♠ raise
2♠ = poor ♠ raise
In all of the above cases, other bids are fit jumps, and 2NT shows at least an invitational hand with 4+ card support.
The biggest advantage of all the transfers is that you now have different kinds of support, which can be very valuable in competitive auctions! Another advantage is that the strong hand can declare most of the time, and the player that doubled has to lead away from strength. This increases your chances for success.
The biggest disadvantage is that you can't ReDouble for penalties. Obviously you can pass and hope you get the opportunity to penalize your opponents later on (which can really happen), but if you look at the frequency of penalizing your opponents opposite the frequency of handling a competitive auction, the latter is most important.
Friday, August 24, 2007
2Sx? No, we prefer 3D
Take a look at following auctions:
Open room:
pass - 1♣ - pass - 1♠
pass - 2♠ - Dbl - pass
3♦ - pass - pass - pass
Closed room:
2♦! - pass - 2♠! - pass
pass - Dbl - pass - 2NT!
pass - 3♣! - pass - 3♦
pass - pass - pass
Yes, these are the auctions from 1 board played at 2 tables! It was the match we played against one of the Danish teams (Blakset). At both tables we were doubling our opponents in 2♠ (both down), and at both tables our team ended up in 3♦!
The board was not fouled, everybody was sitting in the right direction, nobody was psyching,...
Here it is:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
In the open room, the auction started pretty standard. The raise to 2♠ seems unnecessary to me because there are lots of values in the doubleton. Nevertheless the North player decided to raise. Now East had a clear Double, showing his values, red suits, length in ♣ and shortness in ♠. West was afraid to leave it in and decided to play 3♦.
In the closed room, West started with a "trash mini-multi", showing a poor hand with at least a 5 card Major. North (me) couldn't double that, because we play Dbl as takeout opposite a 2♥ opening. Whatever action we want to take opposite a 2♠ opening can usually wait a round. So East bid a 2♠ P/C which went back to me. Now I had a takeout Double, although my ♦s were a bit short. South was too afraid to leave that in, and started a Lebensohl sequence to 3♦.
Our team mates in the open room made 7 tricks, we only made 6, for a nicely combined total of 13. Christina Mortensen (= West in the closed room) claimed they defended better! :-)
So where did it go wrong? I'm not entirely sure (and my opinion is biased anyway), that's why I posted 2 polls on the Bridgebase forums:
Open room
Closed room
At the moment, it seems like people agree with Gert's decision to run, while they don't agree with the decision in the open room.
Maybe some will not agree with my takeout Double, who knows? An auction like 2♦ - 2♠ usually points out the weakness of the ♠ fit, so I really thought my partner would probably pass 2♠x. Well, he didn't, but I can't blame him.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Psychs I've seen in Bruges
1. First of all, one I've heard from a friend:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction started:
pass - pass - 1NT! - ...
Now West had a problem: he couldn't Double because that promissed either ♣ or both red suits. So he tried 2♣, showing either ♦ or both Majors! Ofcourse, East did what he thought was best: Pass!
pass - pass - 1NT - 2♣!
pass - pass - pass
EW made some overtricks...
Once again you get proof that Dbl should not be too artificial, especially after a 3rd seat favorable 1NT opening! With Gert I play Dbl as 4M-5m or strong distributional, so we can easily Double. If partner passes, great, but if he bids we can still find 3NT (next best thing).
2. One of our opponents did this at our table:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction went as follows:
1♦! - 1♥ - 1♠! - 1NT?
2♠ - pass - 3♦ - Dbl
pass - 3♥ - pass - pass
pass
(1♦ usually shows 5♦s, opps play Polish ♣)
I bid 1NT because I didn't suspect a psych at that time, and partner could've overcalled a bit light. After the 3♦ bid however, I was shaken awake, as was my partner. But how many ♠s did I have? Hard to find 4♠ now imo.
West started his singleton ♠ to his partner's Ace but didn't get his ruff (apparently East was the only one who didn't realize the psych). We made 2 overtricks, but 4M makes if you can guess the ♣s.
3. I couldn't help it, the last day against our friends from Oxford:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction went:
1NT! - pass - 2♦ - 2♠!
pass - 3♥ - pass? - 3♠
pass - pass - 4♥? - pass
pass - pass
(1NT = weak; 3♥ = invite+ with ♠ fit)
I lead ♦A and got an encouraging signal. Partner thought I lead from AKx and wanted me to cash the suit before declarer's losers would go away on ♠AK. I don't think I'd ask for attitude from AKx, rather count (by leading the K), but ok, we forgive him because it was the last day and we weren't 100% concentrated (nothing to win or lose anyway). After the ♦ continuation (I thought I'd get a ruff) declarer made 4♥ by discarding his ♣ losers.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Another missed slam
I forgot one where I made an easy 12 tricks, because it's just crazy to bid slam on this hand. We didn't even reach game, and it needs too many well placed cards to actually make a chance. Here it is:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction was quickly over:
pass - pass - 1NT! - pass
pass - pass
(weak NT)
After a ♥ lead, I immediately took ♥A and finessed ♠J. When the K drops under ♠A and ♣Q drops under ♣K, an easy 12 tricks are for the taking...
Slams we missed
Apart from the 2 grands we've missed (we bid only small slam) we only missed 2 slams. Coincidence or not, both contained a void. Note again that these were also 26-point-slams, just like the ones we bid...
1.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
pass - 1NT! - pass - 2♣!
pass - 2♦! - Dbl - 4♣!
pass - 4♥? - pass - pass
pass
1NT = 12-14, balanced or semibalanced (4441/5422)
2♣ = puppet to 2♦, many hands
2♦ = obligated
4♣ = shows a splinter, good ♥ and no ♦ stopper.
The question whether South should've bid 4♦ remains unanswered. South claimed that a splinter bid is an "evaluation bid" (and with Kxxx he should refuse), while North claimed that South should just show his ♦ cue, because showing a good ♥ suit without Ace and Queen is very suspicious to say the least. North also claimed he's endplayed if no ♦ cue is shown by the opener.
Both players agreed that North must have very long ♥ from KJ with slam interest. Since he doesn't hold anything in ♦ or ♣, he must have solid ♠s as well. But that doesn't guarantee that we won't lose 2 or 3 tricks. 5-level is probably safe, so percentage wise South might've just cuebid his ♦A, but still it's a borderline decision.
2.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
1♥! - pass - 2NT! - 4♦
4♥ - 5♦ - 5♥ - pass
pass - pass
1♥ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2NT = fit, either invitational, or GF with a void
Afterwards South admitted he should've just bid 6♥ instead of 5♥. Opener shows a non-minimum hand by his 4♥ bid.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Slams we bid
1.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠?
pass - 4♥ - pass - 5♠
pass - 6♦ - pass - pass
pass
Result: 6♦=
A sharp one on the first day. We weren't sure about the 3♠ bid, but we both considered it to be natural. We have numerous ways of supporting partner's ♣s, and an autosplinter wouldn't make much sense.
Bidding 2♠ followed by another cuebid and 3♠ wouldn't necessarily show 5-6, so we agreed (afterwards) that this sequence above should be natural with 5♠ and 6♦.
2.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
1♣! - 2♥!
3♥! - 3NT!
4♣! - 4♦!
4NT! - 5♦!
6♣! - 7♥
1♣ = 14+ natural or 15+ balanced (no 5M), F1
2♥ = GF, 6+♥
3♥ = sets, 3+♥
3NT = minimum hand, no ♠ cue
4♣ = ♠ cue and ♣ cue, slam interest
4♦ = cue
4NT = odd number of keycards (3 or 5 in this sequence), ♠ cue
5♦ = 1st round cue, no 1st or 2nd ♣ cue
6♣ = shows trump Q, interest in grand slam if I have a 3rd round control ♣
Result: 7♥=
Always fun to bid a sharp grand slam on vugraph against the team that would eventually win the tournament.
3.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
1♠! - pass - 2♥! - 2NT!
Dbl - 3♣ - 3♠ - pass
4♣! - pass - 4♦! - Dbl
4♥! - pass - 4NT! pass
6♠ - pass - pass - pass
1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2♥ = GF, natural
Dbl = ready to penalize
4♣ = cue, serious slam interest
4♦ = cue
4♥ = cue (yes we cuebid singletons in partner's suit), no ♦ cue
4NT = shows even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
6♠ = poor bid
Result: 6♠= (7♠ makes however)
I pushed a bit (showing serious slam interest) when I found out opps had a ♣ fit. This was justified, but for some reason I didn't investigate grand anymore. I must have been distracted because I'm always mad if my partner bids like this opposite an unlimited hand...
4.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
2♥! - 2♠!
3♦! - 3♥!
3♠! - 3NT!?
4♣! - 4♦!
4♥! - 4♠!
5♦! - 5♥!?
6♥?
2♥ = 10-13HCP, natural, unbalanced
2♠ = relay, usually GF
3♦ = natural, 0-2♠
3♥ = sets trump, at least light slam interest
3♠ = cue
3NT = light slam interest (???)
4♣ = cue
4♦ = cue
4♥ = also light slam interest
4♠ = even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
5♦ = cue
5♥ = no ♥Q
We had a bit of a misunderstanding here. Showing only light slaminterest with South's hand is imo an underbid. After this, North never gave South 4 keycards, especially when he bid 5♥ later on. North showed slam interest with only 1 keycard, so South could've done more by bidding 5NT. This should show lots of keycards without the trump Queen, why else bid like this? 6♥ was a gamble, since North gave South only 2 keycards, but didn't know if he had ♠A or not.
Result: 6♥+1 (7♥ could've been bid imo)
5.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents silent:
1♠! - 2NT!
3♣! - 4♣!
6♠
1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2NT = invite with fit, or GF with a void
3♣ = relay
4♣ = void splinter
6♠ = didn't think grand slam was possible
Result: 6♠+1 after a weird ♣ lead! Otherwise ♥K has to be found to make grand slam.
6.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
1NT! - 2♦!
2♥! - 3♠!
3NT - 4♥?
6NT
1NT = (11)12-14HCP, balanced or semi balanced
2♦ = transfer, 4+♥
2♥ = no good hand with 4♥
3♠ = GF, 4♥, 5+♦
3NT = no fit
4♥ = North thought he showed 5♥ and 6♦, while South thought he showed an even number of keycards with ♦ as trumps
This was bid on the final day, where we didn't have anything to win or to lose. A bidding misunderstanding made sure we were in a ridiculous contract, but that didn't mean we didn't made the best out of it. When my hand came down, I told partner to play a bit fast if he was going down for sure. I knew the chance of success was pretty small, but this feeling got confirmed when partner immediately started playing with an enormous tempo!
Conclusion: we went down in only 1 slam which we bid without much concentration, but we missed some (lucky) grands as well. Note that all of these slams made on distribution rather than HCP! This proves yet again that evaluating the hand is the most important, and points are only useful to a certain degree.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
European Championship for University Students
This week the European Championship for university students took place. It was organized in Bruges, which is very close to where I live. I competed with Gert Vandyck, with teammates Willem De Visschere en Rutger Van Mechelen. We are a decent team, but our results were a bit disappointing. Lots of (stupid?) mistakes were made at both tables, but that didn't mean we couldn't make fun! The atmosphere was great, opponents were friendly most of the time, people were relaxed,...
There were 32 teams. The organisation wanted to play an incomplete round robin, followed by semi finals and finals with the best 4 teams. There wasn't enough time to play against all teams, so we only played against 28 or so. Nevertheless, we got to meet a lot of people this way.
The matches consisted out of 8 boards (tight schedule if you have to play 30 matches in 4 days), with quite an agressive VP scale. Going down in a vulnerable game could easily mean a 19-11 loss! Every mistake was translated in your VP's, even overtricks from time to time...
With so many teams, a round robin was a bad idea in my opinion. Halfway in the tournament, most teams don't stand a chance to get to the semi finals, so they're just playing for fun and let their concentration slip. The organisation has some ideals they want to accomplish, like creating a certain atmosphere between all players. Still we see all people from the same country stick together most of the time. This means the social contacts aren't actually made, so it might be better to try to give all teams something to play for and give the "university spirit" a lower priority.
Imo starting with groups of 4 would've been a lot better. Half of the teams get to play side tournaments, the rest plays a knock out. Every knocked out team joins the side tournaments, every day there are some winners. If you have an off day, no problem, tomorrow you get a new chance to beat your opponents. This way you can also make lots of new friends, and the teams with a real chance for the big title will have to beat their opponents face to face.
The organisation mentioned that they weren't planning on playing a round robin next time, so I guess they already realise it's not the best solution. We'll have to wait and see, but it should be an improvement.
Enough with the rant...
Congratulations to the French team "Paris Sud" who won!
In this week I encountered lots of interesting problems, which I will try to share with all of you. To warm you up, I'll give you one where I really fooled my opponents after an awful bid from Gert:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
The auction started:
pass - pass - 2♦! - Dbl
pass - pass - RDbl - pass
pass - ...
I was sitting North, so I had a problem. 2♦ was any GF, the RDbl was explained as a strong balanced hand. 2♦xx and made is a game score, so I should try to find some contract which will go -2, maybe -3. If I would bid 2♠ and partner had a singleton, it would be problematic. Since I didn't have a RDbl available, I choose to bid 2♥! If partner has a 3 card support he'll pass, with a singleton he'll RDbl. The auction continued:
pass - pass - 2♦! - Dbl
pass - pass - RDbl - pass
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - RDbl
pass - 2♠ - Dbl - pass
pass - pass
My LHO made it clear that I would die in 2♥ with a strangling gesture. I was happy to get a RDbl from partner, because it meant we probably had a ♠ fit!
East started with ♣A and switched to ♦T, really hard for me to read that card. I played the King which was taken with the Ace. The ♣ return was for East's Queen, she took ♦Q, and continued with a small ♣ which I ruffed. Now I played a small ♠ to the King which held, and ruffed another ♣ (West discarding a ♥!). I had a chance now (to go only -2), so I played a small ♠ to East's Ace.
She gave the hand some thought, she thought I had 4♠ and 5♥ (what I was hoping for), so she could give her partner a ruff! ♥AK followed by ♥ went to my Queen (you really had to see the look on my screenmate's face when her partner still followed suit!), a ♠ to dummy and my ♦s were high. Result: 2♠x-2 and 5 imps to the good guys!
The double on 2♦ was awful and plain useless (he was probably on lead anyway, so there's no lead directing purpose), but it got me a nice story and it won us some imps. Luckily Gert realised his mistake and refrained from doing such things again.
The defense wasn't much better than the Double, but I think both my opponents thought I had 4♠ and 5♥ and misjudged the hand completely. They probably tried to shorten me in trumps, which is obviously a reasonable idea, but it didn't work. A ♥ return from West however would've been fatal, but how could they know that I bid my 4 card suit first? In the end, East was endplayed and there was nothing left to do than giving me my 6th trick on a plate.
More stories will come for sure!
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Psyching vs strong Club
It's been a while since I posted, but I've been very busy, haven't played much, so didn't encounter any interesting hands. So I decided to dig a little into the past, around a month ago, where we had a funny auction after a strong 1♣ opening. Here's the hand:
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
South opened a strong 1♣, and looking at the vulnerability and the strength of my hand, I thought that a psych would probably work out just fine. So I intervened with 3♦! North, having some values and some defense, but no shape decided to pass. East had a great hand, thought game might be possible. So he bid 3♠, showing good ♠s and a ♦ fit (a fit non-jump). South somehow decided to pass with this monster, which turned out to be a good decision. The auction ended abrupt:
1♣ - 3♦! - pass - 3♠
all pass
The play was easy, and we made +1. We lost imps however! Look at the scoresheet below:
Some people got in realy ridiculous contracts... Nevertheless, we all enjoyed the way we got to our contract. :-)
The European Championship for university students starts this weekend, 15km from my house. I'll be competing which will make sure I'll have some good material to post afterwards. You might be able to follow my actions on vugraph from time to time.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Safety or gamble at MP?
Saturday I played a marathon as preparation for the upcoming EK for university students. Concentration for a long period of time could be one of the biggest problems we'll face, so we played in a good field for an entire day with MP scoring. Imp tournaments are more relaxed imo, so MP is a great training.
We didn't do great, but it wasn't bad either. Some silly mistakes mainly in carding, but our bidding system and competitive agreements work.
The most interesting hand I declared was the following:
♠ AQ9x
♥ AQxxxx
♦ Axx
♣ -
♠ KT8x
♥ K
♦ KJx
♣ AJTxx
We were on the way to grand slam, but partner missed in number of keycards (it was late), so we ended up in 6♠ instead of 7. Not that it's such a great grand slam anyway, so I didn't complain (it would probably make, but that's not the important issue imo).
LHO leads ♣K. Imo the best way to make lots of tricks is to play on ♥s. I discard a ♦ in dummy and take my ♣A. Now comes ♥K of course, followed by a ♠ to the Ace. When you play a small ♥ RHO shows out (doesn't ruff ofcourse, since that's pointless).
Back into the tank! Is there still a way for +1? Is my contract in danger?
Trumps are 3-2 or 4-1. 3-2 is no problem. So what about 4-1? If RHO has 4 ♠s we'll probably go down. If LHO has 4 of them, we need to unblock ♠s when ruffing out our ♥s, and take the ♠ finesse later on to keep control of the hand. That's a safe line when LHO has 4♠s, but may still be dangerous if LHO has 3 ♠s and a singleton minor! We will have played ♦A to ruff a ♥...
Anyway, I choose to unblock the ♠s, ruffing with ♠T and ♠K (keeping ♠8 opposite ♠Q9x). When I played ♠8, LHO played the ♠J and I made +1.
I was quite surprized that scored a top! Since 6♠ is a normal contract, and ♠ are divided Jx-xxx, any line you choose will get you an overtrick as long as you play on ♥. LHO didn't have a singleton ♦, so the lead doesn't matter much. EXCEPT: the lead of a small ♠ will make it harder on you, because they take away an easy entry for ruffing out the ♥s. I guess you'll need even better unblocking there, and you'll need to play on a 3-2 split for sure. Still, you can always make the contract.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Funny game yesterday
Yesterday I played some games with Gert against Ed and Rob. It's always fun, they like to psych from time to time, they don't mind if we do it too (so it's a good training in "who to trust"), you can fool them, they can fool you, and nobody really cares that much about the scores.
Not long ago we made some changes to our intervention handling after 1NT openings. Because most worldclass players advise us to be able to play 1NTx, we abandoned the forcing pass. It came up, with success. I opened 1NT, LHO doubled, partner passed, and RHO held following hand:
♠ T982
♥ 98
♦ K3
♣ T9732
What is he supposed to do? Penalty doubles can be anything, and he holds a K! So he passed. 1NTx+1 was the result.
The non-forcing pass puts pressure to your opponents: do they have to pull or not? If pass obligates partner to ReDouble, opponents get a second chance, and he will pull to 2♣ (probably -1).
A few hands later there was time for some fantasy. I held:
♠ AKQJ87
♥ J653
♦ 94
♣ 5
Nobody vulnerable, I could open 2♠ showing 10-13HCP with 5+♠, unbalanced. However, I thought the hand was just too strong for that, so I opened 3NT, which shows a normal 4-level preempt in one of the Majors.
Partner asked me to bid my suit, and RHO bid 4♠! Easy Dbl ofcourse, for a telephone number.
A while later I get the following hand:
♠ A873
♥ Q962
♦ T942
♣ 7
Unfavorable, the auction went (we were silent):
1♣ - 1♥!
3♣ - 3NT
(1♥ shows 4+♠s)
What do you lead?
Here's the full hand:
|
|