Eh?

Observed on BBO at one point over the weekend, while trying to escape from Olympiad marking. In what had, to that point, appeared to be a top level teams match, declarer holding QT5 opposite dummy's K743 in a side suit, with the hand well under control, and the ace almost surely on his left, but no endplay imminent, chose to begin by leading the queen.

I still don't get it. Dummy entries were short, so it was infeasible to cross and lead towards the ten, but it would still seem to make sense to simply lead low from hand to the king, no?

An interesting Stayman hand

Partner opens a weak 1NT (or any sort of a 1NT) and you hold: T87/T98/KJT854/J. Consider the virtues of Stayman. It actually seems like a better place for that particular ploy than the classic [4441] shape. And of course, as soon as you start thinking along those lines, a whole host of other opportunities suggest themselves.

You must remember this (Card Combinations I)

First of a series, intended mainly as aides memoire for me.

Holding KQT8xx opposite a small singleton and needing to play the suit for at least two tricks (typically at notrump), you must finesse the ten on the first round. Unless, duhhh, RHO produces the J or A on the first trick of course.

Swiss cheese

I played in the first night of a three session Swiss Pairs event at the club last night. What a wonderful format -- with only 16 pairs entered they are simply playing two 12 board matches each evening. Unfortunately, I was only playing as a substitute and so I won't be able to repeat the experience.

It didn't hurt that I was declarer on six of the first seven boards we played. We all love to be in that controlling position don't we?

The first set in particular threw up some interesting hands, including the very first one. With both sides vulnerable, in third seat you hold

♠ - ♥AK753 ♦AJ9 ♣JT976.

Partner passes, and RHO bids 4♠. Your call?

I decided on a "two places to play" 4N, despite never having played with this particular partner before. Fortunately, we were on the same wavelength and his 832/QJ9/76/KQ843 fitted rather well with my collection, making six in clubs when the defense failed to attack diamonds quickly enough (i.e. at trick 1.)

I was not, initially, quite so happy with partner (though it wasn't his fault!) on the next hand. With nil vul I held K64/T73/J762/863. RHO, the dealer, opened 3♥ and choosing to pass was not a difficult decision on my part. LHO seemed to hesitate briefly before passing in turn, but of course partner was there for me with a double. RHO passed, and I had to decide how best to represent this powerhouse hand. I choose the low road of 3♠ but, partner was there for me again with a raise to 4♠.

The opening heart lead was not unexpected, and I had to plan the play with the following combination (RHO has preempted in hearts):

AJT73  K    K9    AQT74
K64    T73  J762  863

Fortunately, the defense was rather kind. After winning the ♥ lead, rather than tapping dummy, a ♦ was returned to LHO's ace. This was followed by a low club. Glaring rather suspiciously at this, I inserted the ten, and was moderately surprised both that it held, and was not ruffed. The early play seemed to suggest that trumps were splitting, so I simply drew two rounds, finishing in hand, repeated the club finesse, RHO showing out, cashed a high club, ruffed a club, and claimed, losing only to the outstanding high trump. What an easy game.

And, one final eponymous hand. You hold A74/-/AKJT3/AKT84. With both sides vul, LHO opens with a weak 1NT. Your contemplation of whether to double this (yes!) is interrupted by RHO's 2♦ transfer. You decide to double anyway, planning to bid 3♣ at your next opportunity. LHO foils you with an undefined (except for heart length) superaccept to 3♥. Partner passes, as does RHO, and the spotlight falls on you again. Your call?

You hold ...

Welcome to the bridge blog. Stay tuned for graphics, reasonable layout etc.

Hand 19 of the second segment of the Bermuda Bowl semifinal between South Africa and USA I produced a couple of interesting auctions and even more interesting contracts.

Rosenberg/Zia were NS and Bosenberg/Eber EW, with South dealer and EW vul. The auction requires some commentary to understand:

(Zia) 3♦: I have a few diamonds and not much in the way of high cards.
(Eber) x: I have a pretty good hand.
(Rosenberg) 4♦: I have thirteen cards.
(Bosenberg) 5♦: I have a desire to torture partner.
(Zia) Pass: My work is done.
(Eber) 6♦: Back at you partner.
(Rosenberg) Pass: I still have thirteen cards.
(Bosenberg) 6♠: Foiled.
(Zia) Pass: See above.
(Eber) 7NT: I have a really good hand.
(Rosenberg) x: I still have thirteen cards, but one of them is the ♥A.

In the other room, the final contract was 7♥ on a 4-2 fit, but undoubled. Down 2, against down 1 here, for a routine push.