The Bathurst team is leading against by a considerable margin in the USBF trials. 14 of those IMPs enriched them at board 60:

Both Meckstroth and Wooldridge played 6 notrump after South doubled a Stayman. Both took the club lead in hand (really surprised me that both Souths played the ten, I thought they good enough to play the jack) and played queen and other spade. South played the ten on the first round so Wooldridge finessed with the eight and could claim. Meckstroth played a top spade on the second round and duly went down. 

It was a deserved gain but not well deserved. Wooldridge’s play is superior. In the spade suit it seems to be about equal after the double but he has better chances for a squeeze if his play doesn’t work. Still he could and should have played better. Consider the case where his finesse looses. If South plays back a club or a heart the entries for the double squeeze are crippled. He must rely on the simple heart-diamond squeeze because he cannot cash the king of diamonds before runnning the spades.

A better play would have been to cash the top diamonds before playing on spades. In this case if South takes the second spade and exit in a rounded suit he can win in hand and cash the king of diamonds before running the spades. If South played a club it will be a simultanous double squeeze, if a heart a non simultanous one. With South having a 2326 distribution he would have felt the 14 IMPs difference.

Strul met Lall at R32 of the Vanderbilt. Surprisingly there was only one two digit swing in the third quarter and that was a pretty interesting one:

The Lalls reached four hearts on an ugly auction: 1N-2H-(X)-3H-4H. Brogeland started with the queen of diamonds and the lack of dummy entries meant that declarer couldn’t discard his losing diamond on the established club. Lall went for a spade-club squeeze line but it didn’t work because North had the king of clubs.

Monaco’s top players reached three notrump (the redouble showed three hearts):

Allegaert led a diamond. Helgemo took in hand and played the king of hearts. Shivasdani won and continued diamonds. After this it was easy nine tricks with the help of the spade finesse. Go back where Shivasdani took the heart and reconstruct the hands! Partner didn’t bid over the redouble so probably has no four card unbid suit. Declarer shape should be 4333. He must have the king of spades, hearts and diamonds and one top honour in clubs. If partner has the ace of clubs the line chosen by Shivdasani beats the contract. Is there a way to beat it if declarer has the ace?

Yes, if partner has the king and the jack. South must duck the first heart, take the second and play a club. Declarer must duck this and North can switch back to diamonds. Declarer has nine trick but can’t untangle them. Which line should South choose? One works when partner has the ace of clubs. The other when he has the king and the jack. While the latter needs partner’s cooperation (not trivial), with the ace of clubs the three notrump bid is much more likely (not only to bid on, but to bid three notrump, not four hearts; as you can see if declarer has king-jack of clubs four hearts makes easily). I think in an expert game South should try the duck and club approach.

There were two small technical errors - in my opinion - at the first two tricks. South should play the jack of diamonds on the first round, not the ten. The information about the highest card in a sequence is much more valuable than the information about the lowest card. Incidentally it makes easier for North to switch back to diamonds. The other was Helgemo’s king of hearts. If he starts with a small one South might think that partner has king doubleton so take the first trick and the contract cannot be defeated any more.

You can replay the hand here.

Well, it has been a long time since my last post and I cannot promise they will be more frequent. Anyway I hope you enjoy them.

While we’re waiting for Philadelphia I share an incredible card reading by Claudio Nunes. It was at the 2008 Olympiad (or World Mind Sports Games) semifinal.

In the other semifinal both north-south pairs reached four spades and went down on a trump lead when they tried a diamond to the queen and later a finesse with the ten. While in Italy vs Norway Helgemo-Helness subsided in 2 spades making three. Nunes-Fantoni reached the game and a trump was led. He drew trumps as Tundall discarded a small heart. A club went to the jack and the next club was taken with the ace. Groetheim played a small heart to his partner’s ace who played another club. Nunes cahed the last club and discarded a heart from dummy as west parted with a heart and east with a diamond. Now Nunes made the key play of leading the queen of diamonds to the king and ace. He returned to hand with a heart ruff and played a diamond to the eight making the contract.

This diamond handling is good only when west has the king and nine of diamonds or when east has the king and west the jack. This is a lot worse (looks like 50%) then the basically 75% play which the other two declarers tried.

Maybe he could deduce from the opening lead and defence that this is more probable though it’s hard to see how.

In the 17th round of the European Teams Championship France took on Hungary. Barczy arrived in a doomed doubled three spades contract after overcalling his five card suit rather than his seven card one. He escaped the trump lead as Christian Mari (World Champion) led the queen of clubs. Barczy ruffed and played ace and jack of the diamonds ducked to Volcker who trumped it.

At this point Marc Smith wrote the usual nonsene one would expect from a commentator that a trump would hold declarer to 4 tricks. Three more. Anyway Volcker who should have known at this point South’s distribution continued with two rounds of hearts. Barcy ruffed and carefully played the ten of diamonds (to conceal the diamond position) covered ruffed and…overruffed. The contract was making know. There was nothing poor East could do. He should have remembered the famous Hamman board where he won the selection for his team by not overruffing dummy with a small trump.

This not overruffing theme is in every variation. Even in the Smithian one (trump instead of two rounds of hearts) East should not overruff the next ruff to hold declarer to seven tricks.

Even cashing one heart before the trump allows declarer to escape for one down but I leave this one for you to work out.

You can replay it here: View

The bulletin writers/editors have a much easier run than the BBO commentators as they have time to check, analyze etc… So it’s really surprising when they come up with something like this:

Jos Jacobs wrote down the result from three matches of the 11th round of the European Open Teams. Piekarek went down in six diamonds. The rest played 5 and Kholomeev went down without adverse biddding. Narkiewicz and Haraldson (both heard South overcalling 2 diamonds to show the majors and North cooperating) made on an endplay after eliminating the majors and playing a club to the nine. Paulissen found the endplay with silent opponents while Gold went down. In fact the difference wasn’t in the bidding. Every declarer made the contract where the defence started with ace and another heart as they had sufficient entries for the elimination. Where South (Kotorowicz and Brink) led a spade there was no hope for elimination. While Kholomeev played ace and other club, Gold didn’t. Afther gathering some information (maybe he already knew the distribution) in the heart suit he played the club six from hand. I cannot be sure - of course - but probably he planned an intra finesse. Small to the nine and queen from dummy later. But Brink (if the BBO data is correct) played the jack on the first round and Gold played him for doubleton jack-ten. A pretty rare defence against an intra finesse.

It’s possible that the operator mixed up the tricks and Gold played club ace-club as well.

You can watch the three matches here: View View View

BBO vugraph commentaries suck. The commentators usually tell why their methods are better than anything else. How the players (much better ones than the commentators) should have found the play that were obvious to them from 52 cards. Or simply trying to get witty instead of commenting. Well, in fact there are two commentators whose comments I like pretty much: Michael Rosenberg and Kit Woolsey. Yet they aren’t always in top form. Take this deal from the semifinal of the USBC:

Ralph Katz tried the queen on the club lead and ruffed when Steve Weinstein covered. He continued with a trump to the ace, a trump back and a third one. When spades behaved he claimed thirteen tricks. On a bad spade break he still might have made on a squeeze.
After the first trump the slam was virtually laydown. Katz should have ruffed two clubs high and enter dummy with the red kings. A textbook dummy reversal I would expect most advanced players find if presented on paper. Maybe Woolsey played a backgammon game in another window or simply fell into the commentators’ trap of seeing all 52 cards.
What surprised me more is that Katz who was hired into the world’s top team and won a Bermuda Bowl right away didn’t find it. I thought he earned his money by impeccable play. Usually not the right time to sleep when playing against one of the best pairs in the world in the semifinal of the trials.

You can see it card by card here: View