Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Cute defensive hand

 

This hand is adapted from a Swiss event last week at the NYC regional.

 Dummy:     QT8x  xx   AKJx  Jxx

You:  9xx  AKT  xx K9xxx

 

The opponents reach 4S via a Stayman auction:  1NT-2C-2H-3NT-4S.  You choose to lead a diamond.  Dummy wins, partner encourages.  A heart is ducked to your T and you play another diamond – after some thought declarer, an expert, wins and ducks another heart.  You get out with a third heart, ruffed in dummy.  Declarer runs the CJ to your K and you exit a club which he wins with the A.  Now he leads the HQ.  You are down to 9xx ---  ---  xxx and dummy now has QTx  ---  Jx   x.   What is going on, and what do you do?

 

Answer: Declarer must have started with AKxx  Qxxx  xx  AQx.  So, he could pull trumps and claim, but he is afraid you have 4 trumps (especially since he infers you have only 3 hearts and 2 diamonds) and hoping to get some information when he leads the HQ.  Discard, and he may assume you didn’t want to ruff from Jxxx and hook the ST, going down in a “cold” contract.

 

At the table, I actually had J9x of trumps (that’s the “adapted” part of the story), so there was no way for declarer (Gavin Wolpert) to go down at this point.  He did say he was indeed planning to hook the trumps if I discarded.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

GNT district final -- slam hand

On Saturday our team (me/Jiang Gu, Josh Sher/Mike Prahin) lost the 56-board District 3 GNT final by about 20 imps.  Good luck to Bob Heitzman/Jeff Aker and Bruce Rogoff/Josh Parker at nationals.  We picked up some imps on the following hand:

 

I held Txx AK  AQx  Kxxxx, partner opened 1H, and the auction was uncontested:

 

1H-2C-2D-2H-3H-4C-4D-??

 

Fortunately we had agreed that 2H here only shows 2.  I think this is a useful bid to have for hands where other bids are misdirected, and I think jumping to 3H over 2D when you want to show 3 and set trumps is fine – still plenty of room to cuebid.  Anyway in our cuebidding style 4C should deny any (1st or 2nd-round) spade control, so I was sure partner had one to make another try with 4D.  I had terrific red-suit cards I hadn’t really promised, so I was sure we belonged in slam.  I decided to bid 6D; it seemed clear this would show 2-3 in the reds and let partner make an intelligent choice.  After some thought, he passed with:  A  J9xxxx KJTx Ax.  There is not much to choose between 6D and 6H, both good contracts; 6D might survive 4-1 hearts if they don’t lead trumps, so it looks a little better, but it could be in trouble if diamonds are 5-1 with hearts 3-2.  Of course at the 7-level, diamonds would be much better – 7D is about 60%, but on this kind of combination can you really be sure your counterparts will reach 6?  They didn’t in this case.  Also 60% is just barely high enough even if we are sure they bid 6; and it’s quite hard for either of us to know enough to give us that 60% -- the DT is crucial, for instance.  So in practice it's a bit academic that 7D is a "good" contract.

At the table, the hearts were Qx and diamonds broke normally, so you’re making 7 of anything – we picked up 12 imps.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Overruffs looming (Updated)

Here’s a hand from a Thursday match on BBO I worried for a few days I should have played a bit differently:


Dummy:  932   986  AJ9732   4

Declarer: AQT75  AQ5  Q  AT53

 

At both vul, I dealt and the auction was 1S-2C-2S-P-4S-P-P-P

 

The play began unobjectionably, I think:  CK to the ace, DQ to the K and A, heart to the Q and K, HT to the A, club ruff low (rho played the J), DJ pitching a heart (they follow small).  Now the position is:

 

Dummy:  93              9     9732    --

Declarer:  AQT75    ----   -----    T5

 

And you’ve lost one trick.  Your move?

 

(I suppose I should cash the DJ earlier in case clubs were 7-1 and I never get back to dummy.  But we would get to this same crossroads.)  

Update: After a little more thought, I really don’t think my play was wrong.  Anyway, here is what happened:  I realized that the contract was unmakeable if lefty had Kx in trumps (must lose overruff, trump king and club or the equivalent.)  Since I need rho to have the SK, and I can score at most one club ruff anyway, it looked right to play a spade to the Q at this point rather than guess if a red-suit ruff was safe, and that is what I did.  Indeed this line makes easily if lefty has xx in trump, or stiff J.  I didn’t notice until later that you won’t make if lefty has Jx trumps, because there is always a promotion – but no other play will make either, so my original logic and intuition still seem sound.  You also can’t make on any line if lho has small stiff.

 

  So what happened at the table?  Why, the one case I didn’t mention, of course:  lho had stiff K.  So I was down 1.  Of course you can cater to stiff K if you choose; but I don’t see any line which caters to both stiff K and xx on the left – xx is 3 cases, so must be more likely than stiff K even though the individual cases are less likely because of the club break.  Except that stiff K happened – that makes it more likely J.

 

At the other table, there was an interesting variation.  Declarer in the same ending ruffed a heart small which lived, then ruffed a club with S9, overruffed by J.  A trump came back and he had to guess; he finessed, playing lefty for 8x, so that was a push.  I think he actually should have played for the drop at this point.  Suppose lho indeed started with 8x  Kxx  Kx KQxxxx.   RHO has just given you an unlikely gift by playing a trump – if he played the DT, partner’s 8 is eventually promoted (or declarer can pull trump and lose 3 tricks anyway.)  So, going back to the 7-card ending, my play must be right – it caters to all cases of xx (meaning 86, 84 and 64) on the left rather than basically committing you to play for stiff K (or 64) as well as risking 5-2 hearts.


Phew!  After a few days of worrying about this hand, I think my conscience is clean.  Now someone can tell me I’m wrong.

Monday, April 20, 2009

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.)

Thursday, April 9, 2009

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.)

Thursday, April 2, 2009

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.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

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.