The Aces on Bridge: Tuesday, September 30th, 2014
Forethought we may have, undoubtedly, but not foresight.
Napoleon Bonaparte
| North | North |
|---|---|
| Both | ♠ K 6 ♥ A 10 8 6 ♦ Q 2 ♣ A J 10 9 5 |
| West | East |
|---|---|
| ♠ 10 8 5 3 2 ♥ 4 ♦ J 10 8 5 ♣ 7 3 2 |
♠ A Q 9 ♥ 9 5 2 ♦ K 9 7 4 3 ♣ K 6 |
| South |
|---|
| ♠ J 7 4 ♥ K Q J 7 3 ♦ A 6 ♣ Q 8 4 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1♣ | Pass | ||
| 1♥ | Pass | 2♥ | Pass |
| 4♥ | All pass |
♦J
What makes bridge such a challenging and enjoyable game is that it is so hard to make generalizations about how to play it. No matter what rules I give you, someone will be able to find the exception. Today's deal saw declarer playing by rote, and as a result missing his chance to turn a good contract into one that could not be defeated.
South played four hearts on the lead of the diamond jack. When this card was covered by the queen and king, declarer took his ace, drew trumps, then took a losing club finesse. East was not slow after winning his club king to shift to a low diamond for West to win and shoot a spade through dummy’s vulnerable king. With the ace-queen offside, that was one down and an unhappy declarer.
Had declarer seen the looming danger, he would no doubt have ducked East’s diamond king at the first trick. With West frozen out of the lead, the defenders can get one spade winner at most, and the contract is safe.
Just for the record, imagine that the black-suit honors were switched (so that dummy had the spade jack and club queen, while South possessed the spade king and club ace). Now, after West leads the diamond jack, South can virtually insure the contract by ducking the diamond in dummy, keeping East off lead for the duration of the deal. If he covers the first trick, East might obtain the lead in diamonds and find the spade shift.
The choice is close between rebidding one no-trump or repeating the clubs. In favor of the latter action are the good club spots and the basic hand pattern (one which tends to play better in suits than in no-trump). Against rebidding one no-trump with a five-card suit is that you do have a partial diamond stop and you get the hand range off your chest accurately at one go.
BID WITH THE ACES
| ♠ K 6 ♥ A 10 8 6 ♦ Q 2 ♣ A J 10 9 5 |
| South | West | North | East |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1♣ | Pass | 1♠ | Pass |
| ? |
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Today is backwards day. in BWA, I’m sure you meant to start the last sentence by saying “In favor” (of bidding 1NT), rather than “against” doing so.
More importantly, in today’s hand, if S ducks the DJ, all W has to do is lead a S at trick 2. E wins 2 spade tricks and can sit back and wait for the setting trick in clubs. S should definitely not play the DQ at trick 1, but he should win the A, draw trump, and exit with a D. As long as E has the DK, there is nothing EW can do to defeat the contract, no matter how the key cards are distributed, even if trumps are 4-0 either way.
David Warheit –
If South wins the JD with the AD, then East could have led from KJ109x. If South ducks in both hands, West can shift to a spade.
As long as South covers with the QD, the defense is dead. If East does not play the KD on the QD, declarer has 10 tricks. If East does play the KD on the QD, declarer withholds the AD and West has no entry for the spade shift, as the column states. Declarer then goes about setting up the club suit for pitches.
Thanks, Jim, you are right, except that you meant to say that West, not East, could have led from KJ109x. My line does work if E has the DK, which he probably does since W probably has a less dangerous lead than to lead away from the K, but your line works no matter what.
Nice try David.
Good answer, Jim2, you of TOCM experience, you are now ready for everything… See, it worked in your favor this time! (let the DK migrate to wherever it wants, you win!)
Hi David (with attention to Jim2),
While not intending to debate your salient point about the language used with the BWTA, the “against” word could be interpreted to mean the counter argument to choosing two clubs in favor of one no trump.
In any event, clarity should be the focal point, and certainly, as you pointed out, “in favor” would have worked better for you and, no doubt, for others.
Regarding your other intelligent point, perhaps the lesson on this hand, if there is one, is the disadvantage of a popular leading convention, played by significant numbers of bridge lovers, some of which are excellent players.
“Jack denies” is the name of that convention which simply means with KJ10 usually or against NT, AJ10 also, needs to start with the 10, since the lead of the jack denies holding a higher card.
While the above clarifies that combination for partner, it also does so for the declarer, sometimes (I think too often), allowing the declarer to play the hand perfectly where otherwise he would have to guess what to do. Like other “tells” in bridge, when attempting to allow partner an easier road to defensive bridge, it often lionizes declarer (especially a very good one) into playing perfectly, never ending with a satisfying result for the “telling” side.
The litany for the above argument also applies for excess defensive signalling as well as making weak distributional bids and then failing to buy the contract, which again tends to make a hero, even out of just an average declarer, by allowing him to guess how to play the hand.
And so it goes, but let the record show that in bridge I prefer attention to an adaptation of an old adage of “remain silent and sometimes thought a fool, rather than open one’s mouth (bidding) and remove all doubt”.
Not all players will agree, but I think simply, if a bridge partnership has natural talent (intuitive), within reason, adhere to my suggestion, resulting in a significant plus, especially if often playing against very good players.
Hi Michael,
Does bridge offer its own language, resulting in varied discussions, but almost always how best to play the game?
You bet it does, and usually, within reason, a peaceful ending. However a new admonition has caught my ear, “Never play bridge with a partner who shares the same bed”.
To each his own, but perhaps a pause for thought.
Hi Bobby,
Surely BWTA is a case for GETNIF aka Get the notrumps in first, at least with some partners. I know I shouldn’t but ….
Regards,
Iain
🙂
(Of course, it was the column line, not anything I invented. TOCM has, though, forced me to look for safety plays.)
Forethought does the planning
Foresight predicts the activity
Foreplay sets the stage
Often everyone leaves forlorned
Waterloo sucks!