by Linda Lee on
March 7th, 2010
The Camrose tournament was on this weekend and I had a chance to comment on a match this morning. If you are interested in all the teams and results of this Great Britain contest check out:
Camrose Results
England was the final winner beating out the Republic of Ireland who were second. Wales was third and Scotland was fourth. Northern Ireland was a distant fifth and a second Northern Ireland team (as hosts) labeled NIBU even further down the scoring table
The match this morning pitted the two Irish teams. the Republic of Ireland versus Northern Ireland team. Oddly one of the pairs on the Republic of Ireland team was not listed as one of the three pairs playing (a last minute substitution perhaps). The pair was Karel de Raeymaker (he had Belgian parents) and Anna Onishuk (who was born in Russia). Hence the “unIrish” names.
Their partners in the Open Room were John Carroll and Tommy Garvey.
Playing for the Northern Ireland in the Closed Room where I watched was John Murchan & Ciara Burns with their teammates Hastings Campbell & Greer MacKenzie in the Open Room.
It was an exciting match at my table with lots of bidding. At one point I thought that Karel should have a nice cup of tea, herbal not Irish, since he needed to take it down a notch. But then perhaps his style was just not “my cup of tea”. Do you like these weak 2 bids? The first one was white on red (but in second chair)
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
QJ865
84
J104
Q84
All the bidding meant that Anna had to work extra hard and she was a fine declarer. Perhaps the most interesting example of their style (Bid Boldly, Play Safe a la Rixi Marcus, the fine British Women Internationalist) was this deal. Coming into Board 11 of 16 Northern Ireland was leading by 11 imps 22-11. First let’s follow East during the bidding
954
KJ643
QJ6
K5
White nobody vulnerable partner opens 2NT and you transfer to hearts. What now? Personally I bid 3NT. If partner takes a move in hearts then I am interested and not otherwise. Karel invited with 4NT. The auction did eventually squeak to a halt in 5 despite partner’s maximum (with no heart fit). The opposite hand was
AQ102
A10
A75
AQJ6
In the other room your opponents were in a more normal 3NT making 4. So it was up to Anna to bring home 5 and I will give you a hint the hearts are 5-1. So let’s see how she did it. I will rotate the hand to make Anna South
| |
North
954
KJ643
QJ6
K5 |
|
West
J73
Q9753
K84
98 |
|
East
K86
KJ643
QJ6
K5 |
| |
South
AQ102
A10
A75
AQJ6 |
|
The opening lead was the 9 won in dummy. She played a heart to the ace and the 1- covered with the Q and the K. South showed out with the 6. She now played on clubs. ruffed the third round with the 7 while Anna discarded a spade and West got out a spade. (Well anything else was worse). Anna won in hand and it was effectively over. She played another club and everybody discarded (but if West ruffs she overrufs and only has a diamond to lose. If West discards a diamond she cashes her spade, ruffs a spade and can endplay North in a red suit. Do you like it? I did. And that won her an imp (some imps are better than others.
However Board 15 was the deciding match of the set. Coming into this board Ireland led Northern Ireland 24-18. This hand was a bidding challenge.
West
KJ83
83
AKJ108
K8
Suppose you open 1NT white on red after your RHO passes. (I wouldn’t with the weak doubletons. What do you think?) Anyway your partner bid 3 natural and forcing. You bid 3NT. Partner persists with 4 natural. Your call?
Do you like 4? I don’t know natural (I guess). When you aren’t quite sure where partner is heading this seems like a safe bet.
Now its up to partner. Let’s see what he does?
East
A
AKQ974
Q5
J1053
Partner continues with 4NT. Darn if I know what that means. Is it a notrump raise or keycard for diamonds or for clubs or for hearts or maybe no suit at all. Anyways partner bids 5. I hope they know what is going on now cause I am confused. I supposed that West may be responding aces in a 1430 manner or maybe responding for hearts. East ended the torture with 6. This doesn’t seem so bad except for one minor problem. If hearts don’t break this is going down not to mention that playing it from the East hand you have to deal with a club lead. Playing notrump from the East hand does give you more options. Still with hearts not breaking and no spade miracle this should go down from either side most of the time.
You guessed it. Hearts don’t break and 6 has no chance at all. Is this one of those times where 6NT makes? Not exactly. Here is the whole hand
| |
North
Q1054
J1062
6
A974 |
|
West
KJ83
83
AKJ108
K8 |
|
East
A
AKQ974
Q5
J1053 |
| |
South
9762
5
97432
Q62 |
|
Nope there really isn’t any legitimate way to make 6NT unless you guess hearts. North (Garvey) started with a clever 10 after West opened with 1 and East had shown great hearts. But let’s face it heart lead or no heart lead West was not going to guess em. West played a second heart and got the bad news. Now West (Hastings) ran the J. And North made the rather remarkable play of ducky the ace. Perhaps he felt safe in the knowledge that the hearts were not running, declarer couldn’t have more than one spade trick etc. But he failed to consider what he would do if West had five diamonds. Because after he ducked Hastings cashed all of dummy’s winners and then five diamonds. His last three cards, all black where the K and the KJ. As long as Hastings could guess the ending he was destined to take two tricks and make the hand. So the 14 imps lost on this board was a result, not of the unusual bidding in the Closed Room (6 is a fine contract) but the defensive mistake by Garvey. And that was the match. The final score Northern Ireland 32, Ireland 24.
Paul added ….
This set was the first 16 boards of a 32 board match. In the second set Northern Ireland surprisingly increased their lead by 4 IMPs, playing against the top two Irish pairs, to gain a rare 17-13 VP win over their southern neighbours.
by Linda Lee on
February 27th, 2010
I was doing commentary in the eleventh round of the Izmir Teams Championship 2010
Izmir Turkey above, on the Aegan Sea looks quite lovely. But I am going to talk about just one board, Board 6. East-West were vulnerable. This hand is interesting both bidding and play. East opened 1NT and South held
109543
void
72
J107642
South who was, no doubt, influenced by the vulnerability bid 2 (spades and a minor). West bid a forcing 3 and North passed. East held
Q76
A962
Q53
AK9
What do you like here? I might bid 3 to see if partner could add something to my iffy spade stopper. I might bid 3NT with a diamond fit and at least some control of spades. East bid 3 which I am sure was meant as natural. South passed and let’s look at the West hand
AJ8
KQ8
AJ10984
8
West was definitely thinking slam and bid 4NT. I am not sure if this was intended as Blackwood but anyway partner bid 5. I am pretty sure that East was responding to keycard for hearts. South doubled showing a heart void which propelled East to bid 6NT rather than 6.
But the double is going to affect the play as well (or it should have). Let’s put the hand together
| |
North
K2
J107543
K6
Q53 |
|
West
AJ8
KQ8
AJ10984
8 |
|
East
Q76
A962
Q53
AK9 |
| |
South
109543
void
72
J107642 |
|
South led the J and East won and play the Q. (South missed the inning spade lead). North won and returned a club. East won pitching a spade. West now run diamonds. North is as it turns out squeezed in three suits. North should be thinking, I need to hold five cards. I know partner has no hearts so I must no matter what hold four hearts. Therefore I can only hold one spade and no clubs. North should throw the spade early and similarily the Q. In fact the Q should go before the 5.
Now let’s go back to East. Suppose that North had come down to that ending. East would then run hearts. The idea is to squeeze South in spades and clubs. We arrive at this ending after all the hearts are run:
| |
North
K
J
–
- |
|
West
AJ
–
–
- |
|
East
–
9
–
9 |
| |
South
10
void
–
10 |
Now East has to decide if South has two spades K10 and North is holding the J and the 10 or the spades are as pictured. If South held the K he would have had 6 spades king and five clubs jack rather than the 6-5 he actually held. It does seem a bit more likely. But, the opening lead was a give away. South would not have lead the J without the 10. So East should get it right. So it turns out that not only did South fail to find the killing spade lead but the J was a bit of a disaster. If South had led a small club and North had played in tempo throwing a spade earlier and the clubs out of order, I think there is a quite reasonable chance that East would get it wrong.
At the other table where there was no opposition bidding South did lead a small club, but East had an even tougher job on the run of the clubs (with no idea about the heart distribution and pitched a heart early on so declarer had no problem here either.
This hand is not a pure double squeeze. North was triple squeezed on the last diamond forced to give up spades or clubs. So I suppose this is not unlike a compound squeeze. Once North gave up clubs then the double squeeze was set up. Even if North did not have the only spade stopper he would still have been triple squeezed. Suppose South held the Q, North would have had to hold his K and abandon clubs, a guard squeeze. What if South could stop spades on his own with say the KQ?
Now East has no role in guarding spades and can just hold clubs and hearts and there is no double squeeze, the entries just don’t work out.
by Linda Lee on
February 26th, 2010
I fell down the stairs yesterday. It is a twisty staircase from the attic to the bedroom on the second floor. I saved myself with my right arm but it paid the price. My right arm hurts a lot when I type (or really when I do anything at all). I think I did something unspeakable to my right tricep and maybe part of the shoulder.
I mention this by way of an excuse for less blogging and even more mistakes than usually. Many of you have pointed out errors I have made and some of you have just ignored the little typos. I thank all of you. I can’t help it. My brain is wired that way. It moves quickly but not accurately (a butterfly with a broken wing?)
I really want to thank the squeezer who downloaded the Problem Hands from Clyde E. Love. He found some interesting points although as it turned out the analysis of the squeeze was not wrong in either hand. We are updating the Problem Hands right now – fixed should be online in a day or two. Thanks to Rainer Herrmann. Any more feedback would be welcome. The squeeze deals can be downloaded for free at www.ebooksbridge.com.
Thanks also to Richard Pavlicek who found the dreaded 12-14 combo in my blog on www.masteringbridge.com. I am writing a bit about signaling for bridge students. One of the things I am thinking about now as I am about to do attitude signals is how to explain to students when count is appropriate and when attitude.
I have a busy weekend playing bridge coming up so I hope my arm isn’t too distracting. I am thinking about buying some kind of support. I can actually type but I have to be careful to make sure my upper arm doesn’t get moved while I do it.
In between playing bridge there is the men’s curling final and some hockey games to watch. If the Canadian men make it to the final I will be watching it while playing bridge. I am not sure how Colin will cope since he is my partner at that time – he will have to work out how to get a computer near the TV.
We are making a lot of progress on our new design for bridge blogging. It is going to have a lot more pictures including bloggers pictures on the home page. So watch for it in a few weeks.
by Linda Lee on
February 23rd, 2010
Now that Canadian has won the Ice Dancing medal in an incredible display of grace and beauty we have all stopped obsessing about losing that silly hockey game. Well at least most of us have come out of mourning.
Canadian duo of Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir
So since you asked Paul, here is what I have been thinking about regarding opener’s rebids with a minimum balanced hand and perhaps we can start a discussion.
The sequences are these
A) 1
– 1
OR B) 1-1
OR C) 1-1
The issue is should you opener rebid 1NT or bid a major at the one level. In example A) opener could have hearts or spades and in B) and C) opener could have spades. She now has a choice of bidding 1NT or the major suit. As always part of this decision is based on how it fits into the entire system. In our case we play strong notrump and responder was bypassing diamonds to bid a major on weak hands with up to five diamonds. Over 1NT we had no way to checkback for the major on less than an invitational hand.
Still, if responder almost always bypasses diamonds to bid a major suit with less than a major suit you would that does remove example A) as being a problem. If responder has a major suit then she will either already have bid it or will have a good enough hand to check for it. That means that only B) and C) are issues and as you point it this revolves around the spade suit.
If opener rebids 1NT now and responder has less than an invitational hand (which over 12-14 would be about 11) you may “lose” the spade suit. Apart from playing in an inferior part score, you may miss a game when you have a fit and a maximum and you may sometimes have a problem competing effectively when the opponents enter the auction. So it appears that the simplest solution is to bid 1
on hands B) and C) when opener has spades and bidding 1NT denies four spades.
What is the downside to this? When partner rebids 1 you have a huge range of hands, You don’t know whether partner is balanced or not. Responder is under pressure to bid again in case opener has a good hand. You may wind up in an inferior partscore, since you will either play 1NT from the weak side or in many cases responder will give preference on a weak hand and wind up in a suit contract when 1NT would have been better. Unless responder has four spades you may still have trouble competing on some hands. Since responder doesn’t know if your minor was a real suit or a three card suit she can’t effectively compete in the minor.
My personal bias is to rebid 1NT on the balanced hands and have a way to checkback for a major fit on any hand where responder is at least 5-4 in the majors, with hands that are not quite invitational but would be good enough for a game try if you find a fit. But this doesn’t really solve the problem when responder is say 4-4-1-4 with about a ten count.
Playing weak notrump this problem is less acute. Here when opener rebids 1NT she has 15-17 so responder usually can make a try on a hand that might make game with a spade fit and with a checkback mechanism you can even handle weak hands (less than 
with 4-4 fits as long when you are 4-4-4-1 with support for partner’s minor, any 5-4 in the majors or 4-4 in the majors with a preference to play the 4-3 rather than play notrump.
Conclusion:
No system handles everything. At imps playing strong notrump you probably should consider rebidding 1 on auctions starting 1 minor-1 or having some way to look for spades over 1NT with a hand in the 9 or 10 point range especially.
We decided radically to never bid 1NT with a major and to stop bypassing diamonds. I am not sure how this will work out. We will see.
AQ 
Q742 
Q64 
10972
. What should South do now with her 10 points. She doesn’t really have a club stopper. I suppose she might bid hearts but instead she took the “safe” route with 2
A and another because Sondra will win and play a third spade. The elegant solution is to play a diamond to the 
bid didn’t make a whole lot of sense in the auction and have passed or gotten out in 5
K onside declarer only had to locate the 
