Undercooked by Foxymoron

Bridge shares with other sport the use of the word "undercooked" in a figurative rather than a culinary sense. From a cricket report many years ago: "An undercooked pitch made stroke play easy yet seldom did wickets tumble." Not properly developed is the metaphorical meaning and this was the case with our auction this week.

The North hand is far too good for 2NT, weighing in at 23.6 on the K-R evaluation tool. We bid 2C-2D-2NT which we play as 23-24 balanced. Now Graham Horscroft raised to 4NT. From his point of view we could be missing two aces, but the five-card suit might tilt him towards just bidding slam. However, his K-R is 8.7 so I think his judgement is correct. And now the focus was on North. I think I should upgrade again and bid 6NT but I had already added two points and decided to pass. Together we had undercooked the hand.

6NT is a great contract. If the diamonds are 3-2, you have 12 top tricks and thirteen if they don't lead a spade. And when they don't break you can lead towards the king of spades for your twelfth trick. You can, in theory, also pick up the diamonds if you finesse on the second round, but you should not. A cunning West might have dropped the jack from JTx when you get egg on your face. This phrase apparently arises from the 19th century theatre when sub-par actors were sometimes pelted with eggs. Our auction was certainly sub-par.

Double Fit by Foxymoron

The wildest hands usually occur when both sides have a double fit. It will usually be right to bid one more, but one has to be careful at matchpoints that one does not take this too far. On the following hand, from the most recent game, the top spot was achieved by those that went to the six level:

Six declarers played in doubled contracts, and the top score for EW was when the declarer was allowed to make 6Hx for +1660. This can be defeated by an initial lead of a spade from North or the ace of spades from South, but that is not easy to find. I was pleased to see the score of 1660, a "Restoration" after the return of Charles II in that year. John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester, wrote of him:

Restless he rolls from whore to whore
A merry monarch, scandalous and poor

I don't think merriness was the cause of these big swings. More misjudgement. With a double fit, each side should be bidding one more and 7Dx-3 by NS is par.  EW have a double fit in the majors and NS in the minors. One or two NS pairs bought the contract at the six level in a minor, and EW have to find the diamond ruff or club ruff to get even 500 from this. 200 was the common result.

It is interesting to apply the "Law of Total Tricks" to this hand. That says that the total number of tricks for EW and NS in their longest suits should be 11+11 which is 22. Indeed EW can make 12 but only in spades and NS can make 10 by North in either minor. It is a good approximation but is often one out, particularly if the defence can take a ruff.

Some members had the following puzzle on a Xmas card (and also on Facebook):

I know many solved it. You need to find East with SK HT987 D9876 C9876. Precisely. Win the ace of spades, dropping the king, and cash the queen of spades. East is squeezed in three suits and gets squeezed again in the suit which he unguards.

Let us hope there are more double fits when the club reopens on 7th January.

Leading Question by Foxymoron

A leading question is more frequently met in court, and we have heard "Objection" and "Overruled" in many a televised court case. I remember when I was buying my house asking if there was any leading in the roof. I thought that was a leading question but the solicitor did not. "Leading", like "sewer" and "wound" and many others, is a heteronym.

How do you play a double of 3NT? Well the first requirement is that you don't think they are going to make it. If the cards lie badly for declarer, then others may be there and doubling for one off, particularly when they are vulnerable, can be lucrative. 

A common way to play a double of 3NT is to ask for the lead of the first suit bid by dummy. But this is not a command, and you need to consider the whole hand. The above was an interesting example. Anne Catchpole and Keith Bush (East) bid Pass-1C-1D-1S-2D-2NT-3NT. As both 2D and 2NT were non-forcing I now doubled this as North, quite happy with a diamond lead. South led the six of diamonds and now declarer can make by rising and playing a spade. But he ducked and I won as North and continued diamonds and declarer ducked again in dummy. I needed to switch to a heart at both trick two and three, but this could have been wrong if declarer had KTx. Continuing diamonds would work when partner had the ace of hearts, king of spades or a club trick. Declarer won the third diamond and played a fourth and there was no defence. I won and played a heart, but that just cost the ovetrick and was +950 for East-West, which all Welsh people know was the split of Wales into three parts after the death of Hywel Dda in 950. It was not a "dda" score for North-South,.

The question is whether South should have led a heart. I thought so, as you know declarer will make five or six clubs and he has a heart stop. If he has AQ of hearts he may well be making anyway. But I cannot really fault the diamond lead.

And the answer to "Threat perhaps perceived by Alice (6,3)" was MAD HATTER. The anagram indicator is in the solution and it is also "and lit"."

Threats by Foxymoron

All squeezes in bridge require threats. Either two threats as in the simple squeeze which is usually positional, or three threats as in the double squeeze where both opponents are squeezed in turn.  Which reminds me of one of my favourite crossword clues: Threat perhaps perceived by Alice? (3, 6). But I digress. A hand at the Woodberry this week was particularly interesting as the right line of play was not clear and one wanted to combine a simple finesse with a potential squeeze.

John Bernard was the only declarer to bid and make 6S. It is quite difficult to reach and not so clear that you want to be there. Making 12 tricks in spades would have been well above average. South should call a spade a spade as he is not quite good enough for 2C. North should bid 3S with eight losers, and now South will surely bid 6S.  The idiom "calling a spade a spade" originates in the classical Greek of Plutarch's Apophthegmata Laconica, and was introduced into the English language in 1542 in Nicolas Udall 's translation of the Apophthegmes, where Erasmus had seemingly replaced Plutarch's images of "trough" and "fig" with the more familiar "spade". "Not many people know that!" Michael Caine might have said. And I have gone off topic again.

In 6S if West leads a club it is easy as now declarer has three club tricks. Say that he leads a heart. South will win, cash the ace and king of diamonds, discarding a club and ruff a diamond to find they do not break, West being forced to part with a club. Now it is normal to take the spade finesse and West wins and returns a spade. It looks right now to take a discard on the king of hearts, but that would be fatal; it is needed as the squeeze card. The winning line is to ruff a heart, draw the trump, cross to the king of clubs and only now cash the king of hearts, squeezing East in the minors. West has already been forced to part with a club and now East has to do the same.

Of course this did not happen and the defence went wrong quite quickly with East pitching a diamond at some point.

Ruff Justice by Foxymoron

When the opponents reach game and you have AKxx in their trump suit you might be reluctant to double as it could help them in the play, but usually the bad break cannot be managed, and if they make they are probably getting a top anyway. Such was the situation with a hand in the Children in Need SIMs this week, where declarer needed to find an unusual line to make the contract.

After two passes, East opened 1H and South bid 2NT, unusual, showing the minors. West competed with 3H and East pressed on to game. As North I did not think 4H making would be a good score for NS, so I doubled and partner led a normal diamond to the jack, king and ace. Declarer set about his task well, ruffing a diamond and ruffing a club, and now tried to ruff another diamond in dummy. This would have worked well if the diamonds were 5-3, but on the actual layout North was able to overruff, and play ace and another heart, leaving declarer a trick short.

The winning line was a surprising one. After ruffing one diamond and one club, East needs to cash the ace, king and ten of spades. South cannot ruff, and now declarer can ruff a spade in dummy for his tenth trick. Declarer loses two trumps and a diamond. It is surprising that declarer needs to ruff the fourth spade, rather than the third diamond, but the evidence was all there. The lack of a trump lead and the double suggested that trumps are 4-0. Also East needs to drop the doubleton QJ of spades so needs South to be 2-0-6-5. 

It was a bit harsh that the alternative line of ruffing the diamond failed, but it did have an element of rough justice, an expression which goes back to Roman times.

And the play problem in the slam that your scribe had with Colin Elliott from last week was tough. You need to play for QJ doubleton in hearts and spades and the jack of clubs onside. But you need more. Win the spade lead in South, and play the queen of clubs. If East wins and returns a spade you win and now cash the hearts and the ace of diamonds. West who began with 987x QJ QTx Jxxx gets squeezed. East (R. Merchant) chastised West for not finding the diamond lead, but he relented when the board was taken away.

Heart of Gold by Foxymoron

This week was the funeral of Colin Elks, known to all his bridge friends by his mother's maiden name, Colin Elliott. He had a debilitating illness all his life, but he coped with it stoically even when it deteriorated over the last few years. I played with him once a month for around 20 years and he was a fine player and he enjoyed tinkering with his beloved Precision. He played it with several partners: Nigel Freake, Ken Barnett, Martin Baker and, for a while when he was in this country, the noted pianist Alex Panizza. He was also a frequent partner of Chantal Girardin.

He had a love of music, and knew all the Abba songs, and was a great fan of Nottingham Forest, in particular the golden era under Brian Clough. And it was notable to learn at his funeral how helpful he was to his friends and family, often driving them through London and beyond. He had a spell as a mini-cab driver and certainly "had the knowledge". When he could no longer drive, that was a major blow, and also led to him giving up bridge. He loved the quips and camaraderie at the table, and did not take to online bridge at all. He also "had the knowledge" of our bidding system in bridge, and one of our luckiest, and I suppose unluckiest, auctions was on the following hand, many years ago, after he had introduced the "two-way heart" to the Precision system.

I was out to lunch in the auction. 1C was strong and 1D was 0-7. Now 1H was 2-way showing hearts or 20+ and 1S was a relay. 1NT was 20+ and 2C asked. We played steps after that at the time, as my old system notes showed, so 2NT was 26-27. Colin's 6NT concluded the auction. So, how did I bring this home? Solution next week.

Whether or not you make it, the TD will arrive shortly later to replace your other board and tell you that you have the wrong board. So, you are getting 40% on the board you should have played as you spent far too long trying to make 6NT on a board that you were not scheduled to play.

Colin accepted this bit of bad luck (or was it my usual incompetence) in the same way as he accepted life, uncomplainingly. 

As Kipling said: 

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

    And treat those two impostors just the same ...

The phrase "heart of gold" originated in the late 1500s. It was first seen in William Shakespeare’s play Henry V, in which Pistol describes his master as "a bawcock, and a heart of gold". Colin was certainly a bawcock.

Eastbourne by Foxymoron

It was good to see eight and a half tables at the Woodberry Weekend in Eastbourne, excellently organised by Shelley Shieff. Non-members are encouraged to join these events and the Allworth Salver, the main event of the weekend, was won by Tim Pelling and Naomi Cohen, occasional visitors to the Woodberry. We hope they will come more often.

The dealing program had created a number of interesting hands. The following was in the Alan Parker Teams, traditionally held on the Saturday afternoon. Alan always wanted to make at least one slam in a session, preferably a success when the opponents failed to cash the ace and king of a side-suit, and if it was doubled all the better!

This was quite a tricky slam, flat in our match, but not bid and made at any other table. We bid 2NT-3C-3S-6S. 2NT showed 20-22 and 3C was simple Stayman. Many have not discussed whether 4NT after 3S is Key Card Blackwood or quantitative and whether one is playing "3041" or "1430". I prefer the latter, as it is the score for making 6H or 6S, vulnerable! There are pitfalls here. Say West leads a diamond and you start on trumps as one does. You lead the queen of spades and West ducks. Now if you continue with another spade you cannot make it. West ducks again and there is no way to untangle 12 tricks. Another unsuccessful line, after a round of spades, is to play three rounds of hearts, ruffing in South. Again you cannot make it. West ducks the next round of spades, wins the third round, and exits with a diamond, and you cannot draw the trump and enjoy four clubs. And equally frustrating is if you try to ruff a heart immediately you fail, provided West ducks two rounds of spades.

The winning line on the diamond lead is to cash the other top diamond and now ruff a diamond, cross to the king of hearts and ruff another diamond. Now you play on trumps and are home and dry. This seems to be a military expression from the 19th century when you finished an exercise conducted in wet weather.

The teams was won by Elsa Nelson, Roy Cooper, Nigel Freake and Chantal Girardin, pictured below. The first two were top of the X-imps as well. Well done!"

Saturday night was a quiz, well run by Stefanie Rohan and Andrew Clery with an excellent picture round from Shelley Shieff. It was won by Anne Catchpole, Peter Rogers, Nigel Freake and Chantal Girardin.

The name Eastbourne is a corruption of East Burn, with Burn being a stream. Appropriately the winners of the Sunday morning pairs were Stefanie Rohan and David Burn. 

And I nearly forgot. The weakest possible bridge hand is a "41", 432 432 432 432 with a 5 in any of the suits, totalling 41 pips. It cannot win a trick in no-trumps, whereas all "42"s can! And 41 is the atomic number of Niobium, which was originally Columbium.