Solution to Study in Scarlet

This is the full layout. West has 13 penalty cards which must be played as directed by declarer. Clearly 6NT by East-West can only make on a spade lead and the layout is unique.  West is forced to lead the king of spades and declarer wins and cashes four more spades, forcing West to discard clubs, and discarding the blocking jack of clubs reaching this 8-card ending:

Now North leads the two of spades and East is squeezed for the first time. If he discards a scarlet suit, South discards from the other suit and directs West to discard from the same suit as East. Now the top clubs force West to discard from the same suit, and South makes the last four tricks.

If East discards a club, North cashes five rounds of clubs and East is squeezed for a second time. Declarer makes two tricks in the scarlet suit which East unguards, with West being forced to unguard that suit.

A Study in Scarlet by Foxymoron

"What do you make of this traveller?", asked Holmes, arriving at the Baker St Bridge Club, 221b Baker Street.

"Very odd," replied Watson. "It must have been mis-boarded, I presume. EW made slam (6NT, 6H or 6D) at all tables except one in which NS made 7NT and one where 6NT went one off by EW."

"On the contrary, the result was correct." "But did you not notice that EW were Lord Dunsany and his wife Lady Beatrice Child Villiers?"

"Good gracious, how did you deduce that?", responded Watson.

"Elementary," responded Holmes, "Lady Villiers has a bad habit of showing her hand to her partner before the opening lead. Also the writing of 7NT= is of one who is an expert in Calligraphy, and a writer of some 90 books would have that skill. And he always scores, whichever seat he is in. They clearly reached 6NT by East and West showed her hand to her partner before the final pass."

Holmes continued: "Now South, a chap called Charlie, bid 7NT and was entitled to treat every West card as a major penalty card. It is a simple matter now, Watson, for you to construct the whole deal. 7NT cannot be beaten even by best defence. And East does not have any penalty cards. You do need to know that 6NT can only be made on a spade lead and this makes the EW hands unique."

So, over to you. Solution after Xmas.

Carelessness by Foxymoron

Oscar (Wilde, not the Owl) might have said that to go off in one slam may be regarded as a misfortune, but to go off in two looks like carelessness. But this was not the case on Tuesday, despite the declarer's claim that his brain was not working. In one of the two slams he correctly played for a 2-2 break in trumps with nine trumps missing the queen. But on this occasion one of the opponents had Qxx. 

The other hand was particularly unlucky:

I am impressed by the new design on Bridgewebs, above, which is very attractive. North-South reached 6NT at one table by North, which is a bit pushy with a combined count of only 28 points. After a club lead won by North, however, declarer can make. He should cash a top heart, playing for his normal best chance of the queen dropping doubleton. East plays the queen, perforce. A Woman of No Importance, one might think, but not so. Now crossing to the ace of clubs and leading the nine of hearts is the right line. West should duck, of course, but if declarer thinks East is not capable of false-carding from ❤️QT doubleton he should run it. It only remains to guess the spades, and declarer will make one spade, five hearts, two diamonds and four clubs, using the ace of diamonds as an entry for the hearts.

Unluckily, at the table of the declarer in 6NT, East fished out the nine of diamonds for his opening lead. The effect of this was deadly, as whichever hand declarer wins in, the contract can no longer be made. If he wins in North, cashes the ace of hearts, crosses to the ace of clubs and leads the nine of hearts, West ducks and declarer can get to dummy with the ace of diamonds for the winning hearts, but then cannot make a spade trick without losing a trick to the jack of diamonds.  

Ten-card Suits by Foxymoron

It is very rare that one picks up a ten-card suit in bridge, 0.0017% according to Wikipedia, but this happened twice recently at the Woodberry. And on both occasions the optimal contract was rarely reached. This was the first of them:

A couple of players opened 2C and reached 7NT. Fortunately they were not playing against Secretary Birds who could have called the director and recited the clause in the Blue Book specifying the minimum standard for a strong 2C opening:

(b) Above 1D at least 16 HCP, or 13 HCP in two suits containing 10+ cards.

I think the right opening bid is 4NT, specific ace-asking, but this should be modified so that partner's response will never take you too high. Partner should always bid his lowest ace, but 5D must be a minor-suit ace, as you should never respond 6C. Another approach is to open 2C and then jump to 4D asking partner to cue an ace if she has one. Nothing is perfect, but on this hand anything sensible should get you to 7D, which your scribe and his partner did not manage. 

A week later, this hand occurred:

Now an opening 2C is permitted, but might not be best. East is sure to bid over it and indeed it is East-West's hand, and poor old North has to save in 6C if EW reach 5D. Quite a good method over 2C is that 3C shows either 6 clubs or short clubs, and this would work well on the East hand. "Walking the dog" is a good strategy for North on this hand.

Both hands had scores all over the shop. This expression seems to originate from The Era in 1862. “We have two men to go in and want eight runs to win, but I think we shall just do it, as ——’s fellows are bowling all over the shop;”

And the answers to the quiz last time. Arshavin was the footballer who scored four times in a Premiership match in 2009 without being on the winning side. Arsenal blew a 4-0 half-time lead against Newcastle and drew 4-4 in 2011.  And the three London derbies to end 4-4 are Arsenal v Spurs and Spurs v Chelsea, both in 2008 and, the tough one, Charlton v West Ham 2001.

4-4 by Foxymoron

The heading was a round in a football quiz I attended in a pub. It concerns the remarkable 16 Premiership games that have ended 4-4. I decided it was too obscure and difficult for the Woodberry Weekend quiz and Shelley concurred. But it did pose some interesting questions. Who was the only person (below) to score 4 goals in a Premiership match and not be on the winning side? Which team led 4-0 at half-time and did not win? Three London derbies (in the Premiership) ended with the score of 4-4. Two are relatively easy, but the third ....? Answers next time ...

What has this got to do with bridge, you may ask? Well, the Stayman convention is used to locate a 4-4 fit after a 1NT opening. I (and some top players) think that it is used far too often and bidding 3NT is usually better.  And it is not always right to respond to Stayman with a 4-card major. My "Bols Tip" is that you should suppress a 4-card major if you have an honour in each of the other suits and are (4333). As in the following hand:

Stefanie Rohan passed the North hand and I opened a 12-14 NT in third seat. Some would pass again on Stefanie's hand but she decided to bid Stayman as that was her only way to invite game. 2NT would have been a transfer to diamonds. I bid 2D, denying a 4-card major on the South hand and raised 2NT to 3NT. I now think that I should pass 2NT, despite having 14 Miltons, as the Kaplan-Rubens evaluation of the hand is only 12.4. Making 2NT+1 would have been 70%. Still, nothing succeeds like success, and with all the heart honours onside 3NT was a cakewalk and this was a joint top. 4H would have been hopeless.

"Nothing succeeds like success" was first put into print by Sir Arthur Helps, in Realmah, 1868: Rien ne réussit comme le succès. And Graham Horscroft included "cakewalk" in his Woodberry Weekend quiz - it gets its name from a 19th Century dance in the USA.

As I write, Arsenal are 4 points clear, but will it be 4 runners-up spots in a row? Always the bridesmaid never the bride. The phrase originated from a Victorian music hall song titled "Why Am I Always A Bridesmaid?" written in 1917.

The whole event was a great success and well run by Shelley Shieff and Nigel Freake and all the results are on the website.

Six of One by Foxymoron

A hand at the Woodberry this week reminded me of the phrase "six of one and half a dozen of the other". For two reasons. One is that it did not matter how the opponents defended. The other reason was because partner had a powerful 6-6 in the majors, and bid it to its full extent. The phrase, meaning that both options are equal, derives from the writings (ramblings?) of the British naval officer Ralph Clark in 1790:

It is impossible to trust any one of our men hardly much more any of the Convicts; in Short there is no difference between Soldier Sailor or Convicts there. Six of the one and half a Dozen of the other —— old Elliock was a man Majr. Ross placed the greatest confidence in and he and Ancott have Repaid the Major for the Confidence he placed in them as all Rascals.

In that case, there was no difference between the military and the convicts. In the hand this week there was no difference between the two potential defences or the two potential contracts:

At our table South opened 1S, and West overcalled 2C, slightly light, but important to get in to the auction. North passed and East bid 3NT.  With his powerful two-suiter, South "three-bet", as they say in poker, with 4H and it did not matter whether North corrected to 4S or not. Both game contracts would have made. North did bid 4S and several Easts doubled, and found there was no defence. Stefanie Rohan and Ken Rolph were one of the beneficiaries of a double, on their way to a convincing and deserved first place.  After all East does have a weak NT and partner has made a vulnerable overcall. And it is six of one and half a dozen of another whether West leads a trump or not. With both majors breaking 3-2 there are but three losers on either defence.

"Nothing I could do about that", commented East at our table. "Well," I responded, "with both majors stopped and a fit for partner you might have bid a natural 4NT". "You weren't getting rich from defending 4S, were you?"

Duck or Grouse by Foxymoron

I once attended a meeting of the London Collectors' Society, which concentrates on coins, notes and comics. One of the attendees had a collection of Duck or Grouse pub signs, some of which I suspect had been stolen. Reports of pubgoers hitting their head on a low beam have increased dramatically since the miscreant built up his collection of over a hundred different specimens.

The following hand was a missed opportunity for a successful duck, and the failure to find it could well have been because declarer had hit his or her head on a low beam. 

South opened a weak 2S and this came round to East who bid 2NT. Minimum but acceptable in view of the intermediates. West raised to 3NT and South led a spade round to East's queen, so this should not have been a problem. East led the jack of diamonds, covered by the queen and king ... But now declarer could no longer make it. The diamonds were blocked and attempts to endplay North or South do not work. If South's queen of diamonds was a singleton, nothing could be done, but as the cards lie, ducking works. South can establish the spades, but declarer makes two spades, five diamonds, the ace of hearts and can lead towards the king of clubs for his ninth trick. This requires the partner of the weak two opener to have the ace of clubs, a reasonable chance.

Going off in 3NT was worth precisely 0 matchpoints, a duck or "duck's egg", a term more commonly used in cricket, and apparently just from the shape of the 0.

The meaning of grouse, to complain, goes back to at least 1885 and is thought to be Army slang, possibly derived from the Old French groucier. North-South were not grousing as this board helped them to win on the night.