Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Ace-Asking

So as Andre has pointed out recently there are many parts of standard bridge that people seem to skip over or never get to. I’ve witnessed a lot of confusion about 4NT being quantitative or ace-asking – especially after a 1NT opener. When asked about some auctions after a 1NT opener the only person under the age of 18 who knew the correct answer was Adam Kaplan; I guess juniors are the worst at trying to skip steps, and in the process missing a lot of important concepts.

I’ll start with transfers: 1NT-2D;2H-4NT. This should be a quantitative 4NT with a 5 card heart suit. Opener can now choose to pass or sign off in 5H/6H/6N. To ask for aces in Hearts a Texas Transfer and then bid 4NT.

The principle is also the same for Stayman. Bidding 4NT before a major has been agreed on is quantitative and shows the other major. 1NT-2C;2H-4NT shows a quantitative invite and a 4 card Spade suit. 3 of whichever major opener did not bid is artificial agreeing on opener’s major and at least mild slam interest. This bid is where all of the polled youths were not sure of the correct meaning. 4NT after 3 of the other Major is now, of course, ace-asking.

This bidding is simple, yet I see it confused at the club quite frequently. I know there are some advanced standard bidding concepts that I know, but this is a very good example of how people need to fully learn some detailed rebids.

Anyway, Andre and I are off to play in Charleston with a couple of Atlanta juniors.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Knowing When a Sluff-Ruff is Right

Things tend to come in threes. Since I was twice irked by takeout doubles of 1NT last week, I guess I kind of knew a third one would be coming soon, and it came last night. My LHO picked up Kxxx, AQx, Ax, Txxx, and I opened a 15-17 1NT. Obviously, dude doubles, partner transfers to hearts, and RHO bids 2S, which is passed out. So they have reached a 2S contract that most tables wouldn't reach after my hand opens 1NT. However, my masterminding skills were in top form last night and I actually had a rather mundane 14 count: AQx, Tx, K9xx, KQxx, so the field will be bidding 2S as well, after a takeout double of a 1D opening.
 
Anyway, the more interesting part of this deal is the defense. I led a heart which declarer took with the jack and then led the jack of spades. I rose with the ace and played another heart. Declarer took this in hand and led a small spade to dummy's K, failing to pin partner's now-stiff 9. Now she played ace and a diamond, partner winning with the jack. Partner now led a low club to my Q. I then cashed the spade queen but now what? I have a partial count on declarer's hand: 4 spades, 3 hearts, and 2 or 4 diamonds (if partner's first play on diamonds to accurately be showing odd count is accurate), so declarer has 2 or 4 clubs. If he has 4 clubs, giving him a ruff and a sluff here cannot help him. If he has 2 clubs, giving him a ruff and a sluff also will not help him unless partner has the ace of clubs. Can partner have the ace of clubs? Would declarer have bid 2S on JTxx, KJx, xxxx, xx? I think not. The fact that declarer has only 4 spades should indicate more high cards. And partner might have taken more action with the ace of clubs and QJ of diamonds.
 
So, I continued with a low diamond, expecting partner to have only the jack left (in which case tapping the dummy is clearly best regardless of who holds the club ace), but knowing that she may well have Jxx left and this be a sluff-ruff. The latter is in fact what she had. I'm making sure I get my second club trick. After the hand, I get a strange look or disapproval from dummy, as if I had misdefended. We teach and are taught that sluff-ruffs are bad bad things to do, but when it is right, and you can work it out that it's the right play, it's sweet. Of course, you have to be counting and trusting partner's signaling and visualizing cards in declarer's hand that are consistent with the bidding, and playing out what might happen if you make a particular play. -110 was worth a top as most of the people were -140 or -170.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

The Double of 1NT

Let's go over the double of 1NT. This is about as annoying, maybe more annoying, than people not knowing about responsive doubles. Most players, even inexperienced players have some sort of agreement about what they play over the opponents' NT openings - DONT and Cappelletti are two of the most common ones, and in those systems X is a one-suited hand (in DONT) or a penalty double (in Capp). But if you haven't talked about your defense to NT, it shall be assumed you're playing natural suit overcalls, but what does that mean for double? A "natural" double of 1NT is a penalty double. Unquestionably. And responder is supposed to pull only if very weak and with a long suit.

Lately, I have seen a lot of people play something like a takeout double of 1NT, which is kind of silly. Twice in the last 3 days at the bridge club, my opponent made a "takeout" double of my partner's 1NT and when LHO bid a suit, RHO bid 2NT. Both times, I had enough points to know our side had over half the high cards so I doubled, later to find that the doubler has something more like a minimal takeout double of the suit her partner bid. Why don't people know that doubling 1NT is basically a penalty double and that doubling and then bidding 2NT, shows about 20 hcp?

Apparently beginning bridge teachers and books do a really crappy job of teaching the concepts behind doubling. It's pretty simple. If the opponents have bid one suit, double is takeout (or negative or responsive if your partner has opened or overcalled). If you double NT, it is penalty. Doubling and then bidding a new suit or NT shows a huge hand - too big to overcall. This is standard. Learn standard so that I don't keep getting irritated with such silly auctions, and pissed off when such an auctions gets me a zero.

On another note, Saturday afternoon, Sean and I got a near-top for going down 6 vulnerable in 5S. We may have run to our better fit (6C) if the lady with KT9xx of spades found a double, which I may have been able to hold to -2. But the field was in 4H or 5H making 5 the other way. It's not often you can go down 6 and get a good score.

Online last night, Sean and I had another score that you rarely see: +4000. 2NTXX -7. LHO decided to open 2NT with 8 solid clubs and not much else. Partner had AKQTxx of diamonds and dummy came down with Jxxx of diamonds, so after cashing a high diamond, he underled his honors and my 9 won trick 2 so we wound up taking 6 diamonds, then ran 5 hearts, and had the ace of spades. If declarer guessed correctly to play the jack at trick 2, it would have been -1280 for us, quite a large swing on that one play.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Breaking Up a Double Squeeze for 6NT

Last night was the annual Christmas party at the local club. I must say, my partner and I had copious amounts of alcohol - he finished a bottle of wine by himself, and I had several glasses of pepsi and malibu, not to mention all the food from the potluck. Clubs really should do this more often - have potluck dinners. As usual, my dish was one of the few empty ones at the end of the night, and it's not because I didn't make enough; it's just that good.

Anyway, on to the bridge... I had another issue with people now knowing what a responsive double is. My LHO, one of the better players at the club who has 2000ish masterpoints, held xx, AKxx, AJxxx, xx, and the auction went 1C-1S-3C to her. This is a clear responsive double situation but she chose 3D instead, which was passed out (ugh. surely 3D should be forcing here) and they couldn't help but make 3. Fortunately 3NT and 3M were just about as cold so I couldn't really complain about the result. It was just another instance of my being frustrated by the fact that people just don't know about responsive doubles.

More interesting was this hand where we bid to 6NT.
Dealer: E
Vul: EW
North
xxx
J9xx
xx
AT9x
West
AKQJT
KTx
  xxx
xx
East
 x
Ax
  AKJ9x
KQJxx
South
xxxx
Qxxx
QTx
xx
6D in the 5-3 fit has a sure club and diamond loser, 6C in the 5-2 fit has 2 sure club losers, 6NT is makable on a double squeeze but I'm totally not convinced that's the right line, but 6S in the 5-1 fit makes pretty easily since spades split 4-3 by either ruffing a heart in dummy or ruffing out a club to set up a long club.

In 6NT, north led a diamond, which is probably best. If nothing else, it cuts down on entries for a later squeeze. I tanked for awhile, took the ace and continued with the CK and CQ, both holding. I tanked again. Now I could play for clubs to be 3-3 or play for something good to happen in diamonds. It turns out I should then lead a diamond and south won't be able to take a club now, but I decided it's not very likely north led from 2 small and ducked the club ace twice, and squeeze possibilities looked grim now. This was not against a good pair. So, I played for clubs to split and went down 1.

Let's see how the squeeze could materialize. If north takes one of the first 2 clubs and leads another diamond, I can cash the 3rd round of clubs, run the spades and reach a 3 card ending. On the last spade at trick 10, north, must unguard hearts to keep from making dummy's club good, therefore dummy can throw away the club. Now, south must also unguard hearts to keep from making dummy's diamond good, and the heart ten would take trick 13. Making 6. Simple.
Dealer: E
Vul: EW
North

J9x

T
West
T
KTx

East

Ax
  J
x
South

Qxx
Q

But, is the squeeze still there if north ducks clubs twice? You can't rectify the count now without risking losing both club tricks or a club and a diamond. So, on the run of the spades, you can reach this ending with one spade left to cash:
Dealer: E
Vul: EW
North

J9x
x
AT
West
T
KTx
xx
East

Ax
KJ
Jx
South

Qxxx
Qx
North can safely pitch a diamond and south a heart. The best you can do now is play AK and a heart and hold south doesn't unblock the Q to get himself endplayed. I think I would have been able to execute the squeeze if north had cooperated, but she made what turned out to be an excellent duck of clubs twice.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Bridge Pros and Prostitutes redux

I've been thinking about an article I wrote a couple of months ago comparing bridge pros to sex workers. I still think the two jobs are very similar in that they both take advantage of the fact that there are some rich people willing to blow lots of money (well, it would be lots of money for the average person) to be treated well.

However, in light of some recent personal non-bridge adventures, I have come to realize that I have no problems with people performing a service for a fee and taking advantage of the rich, lonely, horny people to a point. We all need money so if someone wants that lifestyle and can find ways to get it funded, what's wrong with that? It's the other negative behavior that often is associated with prostitutes, strippers, and professional card players that bothers me - things that aren't directly to the job like excessive drug use, mental illness, instability, becoming too involved with the job that they fail to be prepared for life if/when they can no longer find clients, failure to realize that turning a hobby into work may cause the hobby to not be fun anymore, and generally being an unproductive to society.

There are some very respectable pros - people who give back to the bridge community, play in clubs, have no difficulty being nice to and even playing with bad players for free, and I guess these people happen to also be the ones that teach beginners rather than just play for masterpoints. And I know at least 2 strippers who are awesome people and clearly very good, caring, even religious people and not into drugs or gangs or things like that. I can't say I know any prostitutes but I assume that like strippers and bridge pros, a small percentage of them are also good sane people who I might not mind having as a friend.

In other news I looking forward to ST@Cs this week. With 345 mp for the year, I need some mp to catch bob jones for the 1000-2500 unit 114 mini-McKenney and playing 5 sessions in Macon/WR gives me a decent shot at 30 or more mp. Maybe.
Sent from my iPhone
Jxxx
KTx
Kx
KQxx

ATx
A87xx
ATx
xx

I was declarer in 4h after lho opened 1D and led a low D to rho's J and my A. I immediately led a low club. Lho rose with the ace and shifted to the SK. So now there's no potential second spade loser and I dont need to ruff a diamond in dummy, but I still need to bring trumps in for one loser. What's the best way to do this?

After winning the SA, I led low toward dummy and lho played the jack. If that's a stiff, I need to take a double hook through rho. But even if it's QJx or QJ I can take a finesse and be okay as long as no spade ruff is available. When lho has Kx of spades and 3 hearts or rho with xx of spades and 3 hearts, they could then score a ruff to set the contract. I took the HK and let the ten ride. Lho won the Q, led a spade to partner and got a ruff. I still don't know what's right in this context but I still like my play.

Monday, December 6, 2010

Thoughtful Discarding

One of the annoying things about playing bridge at an out of town club is that people always ask why you are there. The people are always super nice and accommodating, but explaining to the people at each table where you are from and what you are doing at a bridge club 200 miles from home gets old. Anyway, Sean and I found ourselves at the 22 table Charlotte club game Saturday, before going to the VT-FSU game that night.

We found ourselves defending after north had opened 2C, showed, hearts, blackwooded, and landed in 6NT. Declarer was visibly disappointed with dummy, Sean led a passive heart, and I didn't give my sequence of discards enough thought.

Dealer: N
Vul: EW
North
AKxx
AKQxx
AK
Tx
West
Txx
xx
T9xxx
K75
East
Qxx
xxx
QJx
J8xx
South
Jxx
Jxx
xxx
AQ9x

Declarer has 10 top tricks and chances for an extra trick or two in spades and clubs. I had it in my mind that I might want to duck a club finesse at some point - might be right if declarer had Jx but if that's declarer's club holding, he has already misplayed the hand by squandering dummy's heart entry. My next thought was that I have lots of diamonds so I'll pitch a nebulous diamond, so I played the 4th highest, which I think was the 4. Sean is in a bit of a dilemma about what to pitch on the 4th heart. Keeping length with dummy's clubs is important if declarer has anything but 2 small clubs. After my nebulous diamond discard, Sean pitched a diamond as well. Even if I wanted to encourage in a black suit, I may well not have enough length to do so safely. My second discard was probably the worst one, the 2 of diamonds, confirming that I dislike diamonds but still doing nothing to suggest what black-suit valules I have. However, once letting go of one diamonds, Sean probably should continue pitching diamonds to avoid unguarding his spade Q or club J. If the diamond discard was wrong, then it's too late to fix it.

I don't think there is a layout of the cards that would make it important for me to hold Txx of spades so I kind of think the spade 10 should be my first discard (playing upside down) followed by a low spade and a low diamond. That makes it clear that Sean must protect his spade honors while not suggesting that I have clubs under control, and therefore he would pitch 2 diamonds on the last hearts. Any encouraging club discard may convince Sean to discard a club as well. And Sean also must hold all 4 clubs or else declarer could come home with 3 club tricks via a double finesse and then the low one would be good, too.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Play in 4H?

After a miserable first session, the second session of the LM pairs for my dad and I started out okay and when Grue went down in this 4H contract against us on the 4th round, I got a little optimistic, but then things really fell apart. I was glad to see Grue misplay one, although on a closer look, it's not as clear-cut as I thought at the time.

Dealer: N
Vul: EW
North
AQ64
KT
AJ52
K53
West
JT2
A7642
986
74
East
98753

QT7
AQJT9
South
K
QJ9853
K43
862

WestNorthEastSouth
1NTX4
Pass4Pass Pass
Pass

Double showed a 1 suited hand (clubs). My dad led a diamond which Grue won with the 10 and with almost no thought played the king of hearts. I won and led a club through to get my ruff for -1. Clearly the contract could have been made by cashing two spades to pitch a club from dummy or even make an overtrick by cashing the SK and coming back to hand with a diamond to pitch 2 clubs on the AQ. At the time I though this was a pretty obvious play but it's not really. The diamond lead, which looks like it's probably from shortness so getting trumps in asap may be the way to go, basically playing for either east to have the heart ace or west to have the club ace, not unreasonable at all. Fooling around trying to use a diamond entry to get to cash 3 spades is too dangerous, and cashing the AQ of spades, squandering a potential spade trick, could cost an overtrick. On the other hand, if the diamond lead was from the Q, the defense has already given you a slight advantage over the field so playing safer to make 4 may be right. So, I still think the right play is the play the AQ of spades, pitching a club from dummy at tricks 2 and 3, so you can ruff the 3rd club high later, but I'm not so sure any more.

We got 47 out of 64 matchpoints as weak notrumpers might wrongside the contract and go down immediately on a club lead from my hand.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

More on Responsive Doubles

The weekend in Orlando didn't yield many things that I would want to blog about - I spent most of the time at the bridge table being frustrated. In the second round I made a claim - a totally legitimate and proper claim, stating that I was pitching 2 losers from my hand on good cards from dummy, and then showing my hand. LHO pitched a bit of a fit because I played before she did and then didn't understand that me stating a line of play and showing all my cards face up on the table was a claim because I didn't use the word claim.

On Sunday, I pitched a fit because we had an auction 1S-2H-2S-X-all pass. I was the 1S bidder and I checked their meticulously filled out convention cards to see if responsive doubles were marked. Both cards identically showed the only doubles they played are negative through 3S, so I felt no need to ask as this is more than enough information to indicate that RHO, the doubler, has the spade stack. I proceeded to misplay it, eventually letting rho trump something with her singleton trump and going down in what is a cold contract if I take a normal line of play or if the doubler actually has 4 or 5 trumps. I guess I could have asked but I hate asking if it's something that's clearly on the card. After the hand, I question them about the double and they say it was a negative double and that they do not play responsive doubles (and don't understand how that is relevant here), I tell them they are wrong and summon the director. He quickly agrees that my assumption about who had the long trumps is reasonable and says he'll look at it more closely. Eventually the director ruled that other people went down in 2S and that I, as the seeded pair playing against a pair that was clearly not very sophisticated at bridge, could/should have done more like ask a question, to protect myself from being misled, so the result stood. Grr. In a more serious game, I think that one I may have taken to a committee.

Responsive doubles are takeout doubles when the opponents have bid and raised a suit and partner has bid something or doubled in between. Why doesn't everyone know this?

Quick quiz to name what kind of double is applicable in various situations:
1S-X-2S-X     responsive
1S-2H-X         negative
1S-X-2H-X     penalty
1D-P-1S-2H-X  support (penalty if you don't play support doubles)
1D-1S-3D-X   responsive (penalty if you don't play responsive that high)
1D-X-1NT-X  penalty (many people wrongly believe this is negative as well)
1D-1S-2H-X   snapdragon would apply (but penalty is standard)
1H-1S-1NT-X penalty
1S-2H-2S-3H  maximal (the only way to invite to game as 3S is just competitive), but penalty if you don't play this