Double, double (Updated)

Some years ago, I wrote a series of haiku about Lightner doubles:

Double is Lightner

Asking for a heart?  A spade?

A diamond or club?

Double is Lightner

Asking for whatever suit

That partner wants led

Double is Lightner

But, when they rewind, I think:

Was it stripe-tailed ape?

Try a passive trump

The only lead to beat it?

They run thirteen tricks

While Mr. Lightner had a very nice concept, the pitfalls are many.  The following situation came up in a Swiss event yesterday:

At red v. white, you hold AKTxxxxx – xx Kxx in second seat.  The auction proceeds:

1H-4S-5D-5S

6H-P - P-P/X

At one table the partner of this hand passed, at the other he doubled (and all passed).  What would you lead in each case?  Assume you have a good partner but haven’t specifically discussed this kind of situation.  If you would bid differently, feel free to chime in as well.

Update:  In fact partner of the given hand held Qxxx Txx Axx xxx.  The double was based on a suspicion that the opponents were saving (probably not a good double even if it meant that, with only one trick.)   A diamond was led at the table with the double and the contract was unbeatable, with declarer having J AQJxxxxxx  x  Ax and dummy -- K  KQJTxxx QJxxx.  At my table I declared 6H undoubled -- I'm with Drew and Kenny who led a club here, but the opponents led a spade tapping dummy and I had to take the club hook and go down.

Should the double be Lightner?   I think so.  A better hand could have maybe bid 5H as a slam try rather than 5S, after which a double would clearly just mean it's our hand.  But it's not totally clear, so the hand on lead could have guessed that partner didn't have a diamond void and led something else, especially since it's not clear where you get a second trick other than SA if partner is ruffing a diamond.  It's best to have as many partnership agreements as possible, but if on uncertain ground it's ok to look at your hand and make a practical guess.  Best to know what partner means and not be in that position! 

BTW you can make 5S on an endplay, so anyone who saves at red/white beats a club leader this time (although I don't think I would.)

Bidding problems from District GNT

Many bidding problems are clearly a bit of a guess -- if you can reason well about the percentage guess, the long-run rewards are significant. Here are two problems from a close District GNT semifinal which we won last weekend (final at a later date.)

1. You hold Ax AKQT9x xxx Jx. At neither vul., partner opens 3c in second seat, passed to you. Your style is "modern standard." Your call?

2. You hold xxx x Jxx AJ9xxx. White v. red, partner deals and opens 3S -- the auction continues 3S-4H-4S-5S-P-6H-?? Are you bidding?
(stories follow)

----------------------




#1: I decided opposite most hands we needed at least a club hook, more often needed a hook and heart break, and sometimes had no play for game. The few times game was good didn't seem to compensate and I passed. Partner held xxx x xx AQxxxxx (how traditional) and just made 3C. At the other table my hand bid 3h and preemptor bid 3nt, which even on a non-diamond lead is under 40%. They won the spade lead and lost a club hook -- down 5, we won 8 imps. Needed some luck, but I think I made the percentage guess.

#2: A difficult guess -- you know the save will be super-cheap, but mightn't partner have a stiff club, so you can beat 6H even when the opponents have their bids? An agonizing decision where you can lose 12-14 imps either by a phantom save or by failing to save. I can't tell you for sure what I would have done, because partner did it for me -- holding KQJxxxx xxx x Tx he bid 6S over 5S, so the problem I posed never arose. Against imperfect defense he got out for 500 and we won 14. (His lefty holding Kx clubs needed to pop king to cut communication at a crucial moment -- he led a low club from hand to discourage this, good technique.)

Upgrades

Have you noticed that your partners and opponents (not you, of course – you are a very sound bidder) seem to be more likely to have 14 hcp than 17 for a 15-17 notrump? This might not be an illusion, and they might not be wild bidders, either.

Let’s assume that 5-3-3-2, 4-4-3-2 and 4-3-3-3, including 5-card majors, are considered balanced. The 5-3-3-2s represent about 1/3 of the balanced hands. I feel safe in saying a typical expert upgrades the majority of these. Of course, you wouldn’t upgrade QJ Jxx Jxxxx AKQ :-) – but you would upgrade AJT9 KTx Kx KT9x or the like. Let’s assume 1/3 of all balanced hands are upgraded, for now. I don’t think this represents wild overbidding. Subjectively, I’m fairly certain there are people who upgrade more than 1/3 of hands, maybe close to ½.

The important objective statistic is that balanced 14s are about 2.3 times more common than balanced 17s. (Thanks to Richard Pavlicek’s excellent webpage for some of these stats; as he notes, the hcp distribution is different for balanced vs. unbalanced hands.) If your opponent (or partner) upgrades 1/3 of the 14s to 1NT, and 1/3 of the 17s to the 18-19 range, then when he opens a 15-17 1NT you should assume he is about 1.15 times more likely to have 14 than 17! If all the 15s and 16s are treated as 15-17, the overall percentages are that a 15-17 NT will contain

14 hcp: 17% 15: 39% 16:30% 17: 14%

Just hypothetically, if someone upgrades half of all balanced hands, the percentages become:

14 hcp: 24% 15: 37% 16:28% 17: 10%

So 14 would be almost as likely as 16, and much more likely than 17.

Decisions, decisions

This hand from a bbo match presented a number of interesting decisions. Spoilers are embedded so you may want to cover things up as you go…or just enjoy the story.

Neither vul, partner dealt and bid 3h. Second hand doubled. I held:

♠ K972
♥ Q
♦ AJ832
♣ AJ9

What is your plan?

(a) bid 4h
(b) pass planning to double anything
(c) pass planning to double some things, bid over others
(d) xx inviting partner’s input



I chose (b), with much less than 100% confidence, on the basis that game wasn’t certain and +300 seemed like a reasonable expectation, with a sufficiently small chance of -530. I would expect substantial expert support for (a). I don’t like (d) because partner is unlikely to be able to help you, and you might help the opponents.

Lefty bid 3S which I doubled. RHO ran to 4D, doubled more happily. I led HQ and visible was

J865
A95
95
T765

K972
Q
AJ832
AJ9

Dummy won HA, 2 from partner (udca, standard suit-pref), and ran D9, partner following with the 7. Your plan?

I think ducking this to get a signal from partner on the next trick is best, but I won and tried a spade – small, ten, queen. At tricks 4 and 5 I ducked the DT and DQ, partner pitching hearts up the line. Now declarer played A and a spade, and I was in with 6 tricks to go, now holding 9 – A8 AJ9 with J 9 – T765 in dummy. Your move?



Partner seems to be 2-7-1-3. I think he should certainly not pitch this way with 3 small clubs, so he has Kxx or Qxx. Perhaps Qxx is more likely, because he might have pitched a small one from Kxx. Do you see how to guarantee 5 of the last 6, for down 4, when partner has Qxx?


The (actual) ending:
Dummy: J 9 – T765
Me: 9 – A8 AJ9 Partner: -- KJT -- Q32
Declarer: -- 7 K6 K84



The CJ to create an entry to partner is a nice try, but declarer can counter by ducking. You must play A and a diamond, giving up your trump trick – partner must be careful to pitch one club, keeping Qx with two heart winners, to avoid a throw-in, and declarer is dead. (After CJ ducked, do you get a second chance to play diamonds? Interestingly, no – you have stripped an idle card from partner and he is strip-squeezed.)

At the table I fell from grace and led the C9. I could say I was playing partner for CK, but that doesn't hold up -- you can't get 1100 anyway so your play is irrelevant. Getting 800 when he has CQ is clearly the issue – the fact is if I had thought of the right play, I would have done it. It went 9,T,Q,K and I was endplayed again with a club for down 3.

Declarer had AQ4 73 KQT64 K84. Final result: +500, win 2 against -420 (3h-x-4h at the other table.) Win 9 would have been so much nicer.

Footnote: More double-dummy madness: suppose declarer gives you back the trump trick, playing DK under the A. Partner must adjust his discards, keeping 3 clubs and one heart when you cash D8, then you must exit CJ. Going back, the order of partner’s discards in the main variation must be club last.

Opening leads

As a counterweight to all this deep analysis, here are a couple of opening lead problems. In a 20-board match the other day on BBO, interestingly we made all 12 of our contracts, and the opponents made 6 of 8 -- no misdefense, just a lot of winning finesses! The two outliers hinged on these opening leads:

1. Both vul, opps bid uncontested 1nt-2d-2h-3h-4h
You hold: KJ862 K KT4 J742

2. Neither vul, opps bid uncontested 1s-2d-2nt-3d-3s-3nt-4nt-6nt
You hold: J83 K92 5 QT9762

Fun with KT doubleton

A few years ago in a New England knockout, I failed to falsecard from KT in a suit where dummy had Q9x and declarer AJ8xx. It looked like a potential game swing away, but an accomplished player at the other table missed the opportunity also, for a push. Alan Applebaum (who was declaring for our team at the other table) told me afterwards that ever since someone pulled that one against him many years ago, his alertness goes up the minute he picks up a hand with KT doubleton. Seems like a good tip. Like most little points of bridge technique, it didn’t come up for a few years, until…

Playing a compact ko match against some French internationals in Houston, I held QJxx KT Axx Q8xx. White v. red, lho dealer, the auction went P-1D-P-1S-X-XX-2C-X-AP, where the XX was support. Hoping that partner had stuff in hearts, I led a trump, and dummy had xx AJ87x xx KTxx. Dummy played low, partner won the A and led a low spade, declarer winning the K. Declarer led a low heart and I played the K – note that aside from the falsecard possibility, this would be the normal communication-cutting play if declarer held 9x or xx. In fact declarer held Kxxx Q9x xx J9xx. After long thought, he played a low heart to the 9 and T. We cashed our pointed winners and tapped the dummy, and with no hand entry he had to give me two more trump tricks, for down 2, a juicy 500. Notice that double-dummy, my brilliant K lets declarer make an overtrick instead of going down 1 (it gives him a hand re-entry and unblocks the hearts. He had just blown the contract dbl-dummy, less than a second earlier, by blocking the hearts. After H9!, T, J, he can exit with CT and the defense has no answer.) If you make declarer’s H9 a low spot my play would look bad for sure, so I can’t put this on the personal highlight reel without reservations, although it was certainly good fun.

Justice in bridge is very long-term. We won that earlier New England ko match despite the missed opportunity, but the 11 imps won on this hand (vs. 3nt -1) were not enough to win the 12-board match.

A hand from the Spring NABC

I hate to say it, but for most bridge players I know, disappointments stick in the mind at least as long as triumphs. It's particularly disappointing to miss a pretty play that would have paid off. The pangs almost always hit me immediately after a hand -- the one area I consider myself truly world-class is the post-mortem :-). But in this case, what with the hurry of that inexorable 15-minute pairs clock, the tension of being close in a national final, and the need to keep moving on to the next hand, there wasn't much time for analysis, and the painful feelings didn't strike until five days later. I was back home coming out of the shower when I remembered this hand from the second final session of the NAPs, and realized that not only was it makable, but I should have made it:

Dummy: K975 842 84 QJ94

Declarer: AQ2 AJ973 K5 AT5

With RHO dealer, neither vul., the auction went P-1H-P-2H-X-4H-AP, and the S3 was led, which could systemically be three small or honor-third. Plan the play. Extensive analysis in the comments.