Hi Bobby,

Do you agree with South’s leap to game? Or should it be seen more as a jump in the dark?

Hi Mircea,

Good question, especially when it combines being on point and at the same time wanting to know why.

From one standpoint, yes, South’s all the way jump (to game) is somewhat a stab in the dark, but from a practical point of view, a very educated one.

The opponents, with almost certainly less than half the deck in high cards, are competing in their suit, therefore, from a percentage standpoint, suggesting that North, South’s mysterious partner’s hand, rates to have his values in either the suit he opened and/or the fourth suit clubs as well as a better than usual choice of a supporting spade honor (although probably not as many as three of them).

Mircea, Charles Goren, in all his wisdom (and plenty of commercialism present) suggested needing about 26 points to make a major suit game (10 tricks), but he (and his very competent advisors), one of them Milton Work (who is said to have invented the point count and its nuances) but, in doing so, expected perhaps 5 or 6 of those points, on the average, would be waste paper, therefore needing only around 20 or 21 “working” points with an 8 card trump fit to be successful.

Therefore the detective work on today’s AOB hand should ring positive bells on what to expect from partner. And he, like long ago milkmen, delivered in spades, both literally and figuratively.

Learning very high-level bridge takes study, concentration and above all experience in mostly what to expect, and the detective work necessary, is no small part of it.

Of course, today’s column didn’t discuss what you so intelligently asked. However I hope that, while you are correct in your thoughts, my respect for South in his 4 spade gamble remains solid, although it doesn’t hurt that a bridge writer wanted to trump up his success, even though the main thing was his superb play rather than his bridge guess in the bidding.

The column states that without the double South would undoubtedly have covered the 10H with the JH on the opening trick. I have no question that I probably would have done so, but should a top player have been able to work out the possible threats to the contract and arrived at ducking the first heart as a way to maximize his chances even without being alerted by the double? It seems almost certain that West is leading his highest heart so South seems to have a head start there in piecing the hand together.

Thank you as always for the wonderful column. The Saturday ones, especially, are always so much fun to work through.

Hi Jeff,

Thank you for both the question and especially the kind words.

My answer to your question revolves around what the opponents lead from Q109 in an unbid suit. If they play, what is called coded leads, in this case the 9 from K109 and Q109 (and A109 vs. NT) then the 10 (in this case) would deny a higher honor and thus a super declarer might look deep enough into the hand to not cover with the jack.

However if defenders did not play that convention, then almost all declarers would cover, hoping the jack would force the ace for what might lead to easier play later in the hand.

Never get the impression, like many do, that very good players are basically clairvoyant and always know what to do, simply because they do not. No one I have known nor heard of, and that goes back since the beginning of contract bridge and before, could play our modern game (or its ancestors, Whist and Auction) without error, or at least seemingly close to perfect.

What should the above tell us? Very simply, at least to me, many conventions are anywhere between good and great, but the dangers in all of them is that wise opponents also are entitled to know all of their adversary’s conventions and for that matter any, private understandings they may have, and by that knowledge become lionized to be more knowing opponents.

In other words “loose lips sink ships” or at the very least, makes them better prepared to play and defend closer to very good than they might otherwise do.

Absolutely the worst convention imaginable, at least to me, is Jack Denies, when on lead, which while it may, at times, help partner, it IMO tends to make just fairly good declarers, total lions aka King of the Table, while playing against you.

In the AOB hand, West’s speculative double based on his trump stack, helped declarer play the hand to best advantage. Whether he would have anyway remains to be seen, but West’s greed tended to backfire, something penalty doubles often do by peaking the opponent’s interest, in this case declarer, and causing this one to rise to great heights.

Bobby,

I like the BWTA hand. I ask my partners never to make a TO double just because they have points as I might well base an aggressive bid expecting to ruff my clubs in dummy and not get overruffed. Partner can be 4-3 in the majors and has only 2 cards in opener’s suit.

Partner can come in later with a good hand unable to make a TO double or bid NT and I will expect and get values. Bid 4H holding 6432 and partner’s delayed TO double was AKQ5 of hearts.

Hello. I just want to ask you how do you do in order to display special suits symbols in your blog. Do you have a special software or keyboard mapping in order to make it practical and natural as opposed to entering the extended ascii code when writing you articles?
Please let me know ,,,
Thank you in advance