At the third table, play went as at the second table until west won the DA. West then shifted to a heart. Somehow magically at this table the ten and nine of hearts were switched and thus declarer was defeated. Okay, the last sentence was a lie, but west must shift to a heart as his only hope of defeating the contract.

Hi Bobby, David,

Should west be playing the second club? If East has long clubs headed by the AK and nothing in hearts surely he would take T1, possibly cash a second club, then play a heart through. South could have both diamond honours and West the HAQ when this would be essential.

Regards,

Iain

Hi David,

Yes, West should shift to a heart at trick two, but South would never have ducked the first club, breaking the defensive communications, if, though while holding both the heart and club aces, but without possessing at least the heart ten or instead, only a doubleton heart ace.

Sometimes high-level defense is much easier to execute against a good declarer, at which time the defense will be able to understand and count on that worthy adversary for making a logical counter to what has happened earlier, instead of some play which could be considered mindless. One of the difficult problems of progressing swiftly through the classes of bridge players, is falling victim to playing against lesser players and then countering those sometimes illogical moves.

The Trick 2 heart shift appears to make the hand cold, but only if South now draws trump before attacking diamonds.

Hi Iain,

Yes my answer to David confirms, at least agrees with, your suggestion of West now switching to a heart at trick 2, but, do not expect miracles from such a switch, because I, 100%, agree with partner not possessing the AK of clubs, so why would South be making a play at trick one which could lead to his immediate demise? It would be possible if he was hoping for a defensive mistake and had to plan for a club ruff in dummy and just had to hope that the defense would not switch to hearts, but my point is that the above conversation could be the only reason why any worthy declarer might subject himself to being at the defense’s mercy at this critical part of the hand?

Hi Jim2,

Well analysed and even assuming that no living, breathing bridge player, no matter how talented, usually can ever be anywhere near 100% convinced of where all the important cards are located, but being realistic enough to know, when playing against an experienced and otherwise capable declarer, that he will find a way to play that hand to its best advantage.

Relying on the above assumptions, the defensive options then usually only center on finding a way, depending on how the other cards are distributed, to legitimately defeat the contract.

As a sidelight, but perhaps worth mentioning, the above is the most important reason for considering the playing of matchpoint (duplicate) bridge, instead of IMPs or rubber bridge, just too difficult, and with too much luck involved, to rank it up there with the beauty of those last two types of the game.

For precisely the above reasons, games of baccarat, roulette, and craps, (often called games of chance) though extremely exciting, begin and end with the house odds insuring an eventual victory for the casino, but poker, bridge, backgammon and to some extent blackjack could well be considered games of skill, pitting the mind and ability of the players against their opponent as a principle reason for victory or defeat.

Hi Jim2,

Please excuse my omission of the best pure mind game of all, chess, with absolutely no luck at all involved, as a game of skill.

I was just amused by the change created by a Trick 2 shift.

That is, if a non-heart is led at Trick 2, declarer needs three diamond tricks and can accept a diamond ruff to get them. If a heart is led, however, declarer needs only two diamond tricks, but must take precautions against a diamond ruff.

I found that there was an element of luck in chess. It’s just not where one might expect it.

For example, I knew who I would be facing in one match and tried to prepare for the game. My research revealed that my opponent preferred to play the Ruy-Lopez as white, and either the Open Morphy or one particular Dragon variation of the Sicilian Defense as black.

I had enough time and personal memory to refresh/master only one of those Sicilian Defense variants. So, I had to choose one and hope that either he drew white or that I drew white and he chose the one I selected to prepare for. Alternatively, I could elect to make a Queen’s Pawn Opening as white.

I chose Dragon, drew white, opened P-K4, and … he played the Dragon.

Luck.

Hi folks,

I used to play quite a lot of chess and found cases of good luck but not bad luck in many games. If my opponent blunders, this is my good luck. If I then fail to take advantage of the goof, blundering in turn, then he has had the good luck returned. No bad luck is involved in either case, though. Curious!

There is still bad luck in the way that can occur in any game or sport e.g. if you are playing a knock-out competition and are up against a player who “has your number”. Victor Korchnoi, aka the Leningrad Lip, gave a circle of fine players who had disproportionate scores against each other – if I remember rightly, he had a huge score against Mikhail Tal who dominated Lajos Portisch but Portisch had a big score against Paul Keres. Keres, however, was Korchnoi’s bete noire. Curious.

regards,

Iain Climie