Bridge Aussie Style

I had some fun watching and commenting on the 2010 Australian Seniors Playoff last night.  I was watching Round 2 of 9.  There is an excellent website (North Americans take note) which has all you would want to know including convention cards, hand records, results by round by hand and so on.  It’s effective, easy to use and I hear from Nick Fahrer that it was not all that hard to program.  Have a look

Australian Senior Playoffs

Since they use Bridgemate the scoring is almost live. 

Round 2 was not a good one for those who like to bid a lot (and I expect that would be most of the Aussies playing!).  How would you bid this hand?

Board 23 Both Vulnerable Dealer South

East KQ4 AKJ9876  5 J4

The auction starts with two passes and then 1NT and it is your turn. Neill was able to bid 2 showing hearts (you get a similar effect if you are playing 2 shows an undisclosed major),  When partner bid 2 he chose to bid a modest 3 and that ended the auction.  If you are playing a system where you have to more or less just bid the suit then perhaps 3 directly is right.  Or maybe 2 is enough?  What do you think.  Well 2 would have been plenty this time. 

This is the whole deal:

	Lusk A1052 105  A84 AQ108
Hughes 8763 2  K9732 K96		Neill KQ4 AKJ9876  5 J4
	Chan J9 Q43 QJ106 7532

Lusk who is famous for bidding aggressively (or as it has been called Lusky) knew how to defend aggressive contracts and found the best lead, a trump.  Three has no play but it is interesting to see if you can make 2.  The goal is to avoid allowing Chan in and to keep Lusk on lead since he will eventually have to help you.  Suppose you decide that Lusk has not led away from the trump queen and cash the top two hearts.  Now you play a top spade and are pleased to see the J9 fall.  Lusk is in.  He can get out a spade but you win and return another and he is endplayed.  It seems only a bit far fetched.  In fact, all of the other tables who played this board played in 4 but one.  At that table the West hand decided to pass 2 and tough it out there.   (Not something I would do).  2 was not a success and went 3 down.

I have this theory and I have been using it recently.  Some matches things just don’t make.  It doesn’t pay to push.  It’s better to back pedal a little.  What do you think?

Here is an example of a Lusky auction.  It started us all off in the mood on the first board of the set.

Lusk
void
3 
AKQJ1042
A10754

Lusk was dealer with both sides vulnerable and started things off with a quiet 1. 

Hughes Lusk   Neill   Chan

             1     2    2

3         ?

You are not surprised the opponents are bidding hearts.  Partners spade preempt is not thrilling suggesting he has very little help.  Still if he has six spades and say two hearts he has to have five minor cards or so.    There is an argument for ignoring clubs since diamonds are self supporting and most of the time the hand will play at least as well in diamonds.  Your call?

The Lusky bid is 5.  Unfortunately as mentioned before this was not a time to be Lusky.  Here is the whole deal

	Lusk void 3  AKQJ1042 A10754
Hughes KJ94 KQ108 987 K9		Neill 652 AJ7652  void J832
	Chan AQ10873 94 653 Q6

On a very good day you might even make 5 with the clubs behaving splendidly.  But that was not the case in Round 2.  Every North-South pair played 5 and everyone got the lead of the A and everyone went down.  The match ended with Hughes-Neill outscoring Lusk-Chan 19 imps to 16 imps to win a modest 16 VP to 14 VP.

The event continues Saturday April 11.  It’s always fun to watch Aussies.  Take a peek.