In BWA, I bid 3NT. Why? Give partner:
J10x
K10x
K10x
AKxx
How could he have more, and yet slam is a very poor proposition. Note that we are guaranteed not to have a fit.
Discussing Lo Presti's play, you speak of a "second key play". No. He could easily have cashed a second C and then exited in S or even H and just waited for a second D trick. Heck, he didn't even need to cash the second C (although, of course, he should, so he wouldn't have to worry when declarer, after drawing trump and eliminating defenders' H, leads a C from dummy).

Hi Bobby,

In the room where di Bello was declarer, imagine the EW diamond holdings were slightly stronger e.g. West holding J9xx and East holding K10x. Now West after taking the CQ has to lead at least the D9 to avoid East getting endplayed – it is all too easy to switch to Autopilot and lead a small D.

On the author of today’s quote, I had the pleasure of meeting TP at a couple of book signings and he was a great guy and a very sad loss a little while ago. If anyone hasn’t read his stuff , can I recommend certain parts in “Eric” (a lovely take on Faust and hubris – don’t ask for what you think you want as you might get it), “Pyramids” (a lovely send-up of the Achilles and tortoise fable) and “Guards, Guards” on the general unfairness of life when buying boots that don’t leak or fall to pieces. I suspect David, as the resident bibliophile, will not need such encouragement though.

regards,

Iain

In the main hand, I might have bid 1H in response to the double. Whether or not this is correct, how do you think the rest of the bidding would proceed?

Hi David,

While not discounting your wise counsel on evaluation, sometimes distributions turn out to be at least slightly different than expected, and at any rate are not that easy to determine, at least for me, to be certain.

Partner could very well be: s. xxx, h. xxx, d. Kx, c. AKQJx or even without the jack of clubs, but substituting the jack of spades instead and then requiring a heart lead by an unknowing opening leader to severely test the higher percentage chance for the slam (making when clubs are only 4-2, but spades 3-3) when the opponents instead held the spade jack.

And finally, although I am getting up there in years, I still play club bridge twice every week and often in local higher rated tournaments
and believe me, I am still learning the game with its millions of different nuances and unexpected occurrences which, at least to me, just adds to its incredible allure.

In any event, many years ago (1968) when the Aces first began and we (with the early use of computer simulation) studied percentages dictated by thousands of example possibilities, the only result that eventually sounded somewhat strange was the one many of us expected, since the art of bridge turned out to be the unexpected much more often than first thought.

The above seemed to affect our entire group into forcing us all to believe that bridge really is a partnership game, enlisting each others judgment whenever possible (here 4NT), instead of committing one of what we then called one of the seven deadly sins, being unilateral (either bidding 6NT or only 3).

Besides as a peripheral advantage it is better on the ego, to let partner make the mistake than yours truly.

Hi Iain,

It must be nothing short of fantastic to come face to face with a noted author, especially one who has likely made famous quotes which have stood the test of time to be often referred.

And even when that author such as Oscar Wilde, George Bernard Shaw, Winston Churchill and even Mae West has a satirical and/or off color motive for so doing. I can assure you that I wish I had been there, enjoying what I firmly believe to be a precious once-in-a-lifetime experience.

Hi Ryan,

A good question since I think this junior bridge player was showing advanced promise with his choice of 1 spade (with 4 small) instead of 1 heart (4, but not so small).

His reason is that if LHO or even RHO had then kept the bidding open with partner remaining silent, it would have allowed the 1 spade responder to then bid 2 hearts in competition allowing partner to show a preference with equal length holdings in both majors, but in any event not get higher than the 2 level in either case in the event North had 4 hearts, but not 4 spades. Small difference, but very likely to score up +110 instead of minus 100.

If instead, 1 heart is responded then to get the spade suit in, one risks being preferred to the 3 level, not a desired result.

However, in this particular case and with North possessing such a “moose” of a hand the bidding would likely take a very similar course, except the final contract would, no doubt, result in 4 hearts not 4 spades.

Thanks again for allowing us to discuss this experienced subject, well worth mentioning.

Hi David,

Finally and apologetically, yes the defense on the subject hand is indeed very simple. The key for the defense is to get one diamond lead from West through dummy, then cash out (under leading the original AK is unnecessary, once a diamond has already been led through).

However this particular report is of a hand already played and recorded so that when Juniors perform admirably we think it worth reporting, with specific names mentioned, just to recognize their development as upcoming players.

No doubt, those above accolades are overbids, but not the reasons for so doing.

Thanks Bobby. I didn’t know if having 1S available for North would matter, though making a forcing bid is clearly better.

Hi Ryan,

Bidding one spade over one heart is an altogether different type response than a cue bid which forces partner to better describe his hand and somewhere between 17+ points up and while not GF is still strong.

Merely bidding 1 spade denies holding 4 hearts shows about 16-19 points and at least 5 spades, but is not forcing.

Sometimes bridge bidding is confusing, but in all cases exemplifies total consistency and once learned, forever remembered.