31 by Foxymoron

 There are so many card games called 31 that they are too numerous to mention. One of the first appeared in a sermon by St Bernardino in 1440 and other more recent games have acquired the simple name 31.

St Bernardino

The goal of assembling a hand totalling 31 is a common feature of games such as Cribbage, Commerce and Trentuno, but getting a hand at bridge with 31 points is a much rarer occurrence, but it occurred on Tuesday.

Several Souths blasted 6NT here, and it is a reasonable contract, requiring clubs 3-3 or the spade finesse. A top was earned by Nigel Freake, who played the heart-spade squeeze on West and made all thirteen tricks. At my table I had a 2S overcall after my "strong" 2C and contented myself with 3NT, being unsure what 4NT would mean. My West stated that he was "squeezed" in the two-card ending, so I did not have to read it. Mike Bull was in 7D by North which is too pushy, but he should have reached the same two-card ending. He had the seven of hearts lead and should get down to the ending with the nine of hearts in North and AQ of spades in South. West cannot see the nine of hearts, and he might well play partner for it and discard his high hearts. If he does bare the king of spades smoothly then you pay off to that and take the spade finesse.

There has been some discussion at the club of the requirements for an opening strong 2C. If you agree to play this as strong, then your agreement must be:

5 D Rules for “Strong” opening bid 

5 D 1 To be considered a “Strong” opening bid, the minimum allowed by agreement is: 

(a) Opening bid of 1C or 1D: at least 13 HCP 

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

This is much better than the previous rule which permitted you to open 2C with two aces and a king, by agreement. Note that the key phrase here is "by agreement". You are ALWAYS allowed to vary from your agreed system.

Law 40A3 A player may make any call or play without prior announcement provided that such call or play is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding. An old gambit used to be opening 2C on xx xx QJTxxxx xx and passing the 2D response. 

Nearly Six by Foxymoron

 When I see the card combination AJT in bridge, I count it as six points, and I am always reminded of the David Walliams sketch "Computer says No". If you haven't seen it, you can view it here.

.: - Little Britain - Computer says no - :. - YouTube

The combination counts as 5.9 on the K-R evaluator, nearly six as Danielle Lloyd says, and I had no problem in opening 1NT on the North hand below, a good 12 count.

EW had no good way into the auction, unless they are playing "Tyriog", the Welsh translation of Landy. This is something of a misnomer, in that landy is also an old French word for a person of great power. The way this works is that 2C shows 4 or 6 hearts and 2D shows 4 or 6 spades. If you only have four of the anchor suit then you have a longer suit elsewhere. This will allow East-West to compete to 3D, the top spot.

What about the opening lead against 1NT on the East hand? A simulation shows that a diamond is much better than a heart and indeed holds declarer to seven tricks, for close to an average, as 2S can be made, but only by North. Should South transfer to spades? I think so, but it is very close with a poor suit and no aces. Much depends on partner's red-suit holdings, and you won't want to play 2S opposite a low doubleton, as you are very likely to lose four trump tricks. 

The strange score was Passed Out, presumably East miscounting his or her points, and the best score for NS was 3S making by South with the defence not switching to hearts at any time.

Restricted Reasoning

The principle of restricted choice states that when a defender plays one of two touching honours, the chance of him having the other honour is half that of his partner having it. For example. If you have a nine-card fit with AKTxx opposite xxxx and you cash the ace dropping the queen (or jack) on your left, then you should finesse on the second round.

This concept is confusing to the average person, but not half as confusing as the following restriction would have seemed to Welsh speakers.

The restricted choice element of the English version is clear, but the Welsh equivalent was "lost in translation" as they say, and as Google translate will clarify.

Let us see an application of this principle in a more complex setting, in a hand from last night's EBU SIMs.

At our table, West led the ace of diamonds, and declarer ruffed, drew trumps in two rounds and finessed the spade. Now there was an inescapable spade loser. If declarer cashed the ace of spades first, before drawing trumps and leading a second spade, she should find the winning line. West played the ten of spades on the first round, so that East is two to one on to have the jack of spades. 

Suit play gives the best line as running the nine, but that is in a vacuum, without an opening 1NT for West. 

The right line is therefore to duck the second round, and here that brings home the bacon, an old phrase, which originates from the 11th century.

Geoffrey Chaucer mentions the phrase in The Wife of Bath's Tale and Prologue, circa 1395:

But never for us the flitch of bacon though,

That some may win in Essex at Dunmow.