On Board 2 this week N/S could make 6S, but it was a difficult slam to bid with any confidence.

With 4 Hcp and an eight-loser hand, I am going to assume that the East hand is too weak to enter the auction.  In that case, North will open 2C.  The 2C bid is a game force and South’s 4S call shows a weak hand with tolerance for Spades and is based in the Principal of Fast Arrival – with a stronger hand with Spade support South would have bid 3S not 4S.  When I held the North cards, I Passed 4S – and the Losing Trick Count supports this decision, as 18 – (3 + 10) = 5.  But maybe North might try 6S, thinking that South’s tolerance for Spades might mean there will be no trump loser and that South might also have enough to cancel out two of North’s three losers.

In fact, twelve tricks always can be made, although it takes careful declarer play to do so.  The JS in dummy means that there is no trump to lose and the QH takes care of North’s Heart loser.  This leaves three losing Diamonds in the North hand.  The obvious way to dispose of two of these is to ruff them in dummy.  Therefore, the best opening lead is (as so often) a trump.  If East leads a trump, then declarer can win in hand and play the AD and another Diamond.  West will win this and play a second round of trumps.  This means that declarer can only ruff one Diamond in dummy.  But fortuitously, West’s Diamond holding means that the third round of Diamonds, ruffed in dummy, establishes North’s TD as a winner.  So, even on a trump lead, 6S can be made.

A poor declarer will unthinkingly start by drawing trumps.  Once that is done, there is no way to avoid losing two Diamond tricks.  The key strategy is to think before playing from dummy to trick one.

My Player of the Week is the one North who bid and made 6S, Linda Freedman.

Board 7 this week looked fairly dull – pretty much every N/S pair bid and made 3NT - but I found it interesting as it provides an illustration of how to score well at duplicate.

N/S have a combined 27 Hcp and both have 4333 distribution with no 4-4 major-suit fit.  It seems reasonable to assume that at all tables the contract will be 3NT.  At thirteen out of fourteen tables this was the case, with one N/S pair choosing to play in 2NT.  At every table nine or ten tricks were made.  So, why write a commentary on this hand?  Well, it illustrates an important principal of play in duplicate.  If, as declarer, you consider that you are in a contract that will be the same at most or all tables, then your task is not so much to make your contract, but to make as many tricks as possible.  On Tuesday I failed in this task.  Sitting North, on the safe lead of the TC I had the choice of trying to develop Hearts or Diamonds first.  I played on Hearts, losing to the QH at trick two.  Later in the play, I was in a position to take the double finesse in Diamonds.  I lost the first Diamond trick to the QD and then, with two cards to play and having made eight tricks so far, I was back in dummy to play another Diamond.  West played low and I had to decide whether to take the second finesse.  A top player would have had a complete count of the hand, which would have helped.  If, and I suspect this was the case, all four hands had only Diamonds remaining, then the finesse would have been completely safe, as if East had won the KD, they would have had to return a Diamond to my AD.  But I am not a top player and I didn’t have a complete count of the hand!  I chose to take the AD, saying that I didn’t want to risk going off, if East still had the KD and a card of another suit.  But this was wrong thinking.  It was vitally important to make ten tricks and I had to risk the second Diamond finesse to do so.  3NT= scored 31%.  3NT+1 would have scored 81%. 

My Players of the Week are the six declarers who made 3NT+1, Richard Gay, Linda Fitzgerald-Moore, Dan Duffy, Tamar Warshaw, Celia Locks and Janet Lewinson.

There were a few slam hands this week.  I’ll have a look at two of them.

It seems to me that the most likely slam to bid is 6S.  Playing Acol, West opens 1NT.  East can transfer to Spades and then, why not bid 5NT?  A bid of 3NT would be a way of offering partner a choice of games, between 3NT or 4S.  With three Spades, West would choose 4S.  The 5NT bid might be interpreted similarly.  Otherwise, it might be a Grand Slam Force, asking West to bid 7S with two of the top three Spade honours – East knows that this would elicit a 6S response.

Playing Strong and Five, West opens 1C.  East’s 3D is a game forcing bid.  With a minimum hand and three Spades, West bids 4S.  East can then bid 4NT, RKCB, to investigate a slam.  The 5C response shows one key card.  East’s 5D bid asks about the QS.  With the QS and three-card Spade support, West bids 6S.

The layout favours E/W, with the AD and the KC well-placed.  If East plays in 6S, then a Club lead guarantees the contract.  If the AH is led then the KH will provide a discard for East’s Club loser.  A low Heart lead will allow the KH to win the first trick, so that the Club finesse can be taken for an overtrick.  On a Diamond or a Spade lead, East can draw trumps and eventually lead a Diamond towards the KD.

The contract is slightly more challenging if West is declarer.  On a Club lead, it will be necessary to take an immediate Club finesse as otherwise the defence will be able to make two tricks when they take the AH.  It won’t be possible to discard Clubs on East’s long Diamonds and then ruff the JC, as West has insufficient trumps – a defender will be able to ruff one of the long Diamonds.  The play is easy on any lead other than a Club.

At one table West played in 6NT and received the lead of a low Club.  Declarer was one off, so I assume they played the AC at trick one.  This credits North with the sense not to lead a way from a Club honour.  But without the Club finesse there is no way to make twelve tricks, so they should have bit the bullet and played low from dummy.  6NT-1 scored 0%.  6NT= would have scored 100%.

Two E/W pairs bid and made 6S, my Players of the Week Ben Thomas & Sam Oestreicher and David Rothberg & Laurence Raven.

On Board 11 three slam contacts could be made, but to be fair to those who stayed at the game-level, it needed a fortuitous layout to guarantee twelve tricks.

With 4441 distribution, as South has on this hand, it is likely that you will have to mislead partner.  With a singleton Diamond, the plan should be to open 1C and to rebid 1H over partner’s expected 1D response.  With sufficient strength to reverse however, you can bid 2H over the 1D response.  (You have misled partner insofar as they will expect you to have at least five Clubs.)

North might now think about a possible slam.  There is a fit in Hearts and North’s hand has good controls in all four suits.  A jump to 4NT, RKCB, seems justified.  South shows two key cards without the QH.  North knows that the partnership holds all five key cards, but the QH is clearly a possible loser, so the final contract is likely to be 6H.  6NT may make (it does), but the twelfth trick may well come from a ruff, so 6H looks to be the safer slam contract.

At the club, four out of fourteen N/S pairs bid a slam.  One pair overstretched by trying 7NT, which was one off.  One pair finished in 6S with a 4-2 fit.  The app says that 6S can be made, but they also went one off.  One pair played in 6NT and again they were one off although 6NT can be made.  Finally, one pair played in 6H and they made their contract.  The play in either 6H or 6NT is reasonably straightforward.  It is quite common to play in a 4-4 major-suit fit missing the Queen of trumps.  A good technique is to cash the Ace and King, hoping that the suit divided 3-2.  On this hand however the Heart holding in the North hand means that a better play is available, allowing for declarer to avoid losing two heart tricks when West has QJ** in the suit.  The best technique is to cash the KH and then lead towards the North hand.  If West plays low then North should do likewise.  If East follows then there will be only one loser as the suit is breaking 3-2.  If East shows out then again there is only one loser.  On this hand the QH drops singleton, but the North holding guarantees that there is only one Heart loser.  This leaves declarer with eleven tricks on top, three Spades, three Hearts, two Diamonds and three Clubs.  The only realistic possibility of securing a twelfth trick is that the Clubs break 3-3, which as it happens, they do.

My additional Players of the Week are the one pair who made 6H on this hand, Gils Ridger and Vic Washtell. 

On Board 1 the best contract for E/W was 5C, but not a single E/W pair played with Clubs as trumps.   It is an interesting hand because East, with the best hand at the table, probably should stay silent on the first round of bidding.

North opens 1D.  So far, so straightforward.  What about East?  With 16 Hcp, East wants to bid.  But with no five-card suit there is no suitable suit overcall.  With a singleton Heart, a NT overcall is out of the question.  And the singleton Heart also rules out a take-out Double – to Double with a singleton Heart, East would need a stronger hand and a longer Spade suit.  So, East should (reluctantly) Pass and await developments.

South will respond 1H and North will raise to 2H.  Now East can enter the auction with a Double.  If South decides that 2HX is a good contract and chooses to Pass, then they will regret doing so, as West will bid 3C.  When South gets another chance to bid, they can bid 3H, but now E/W will have found their Club fit. 

South has an eight-loser hand and knows of a nine-card Heart fit, so over East’s second-round Double, they should bid 3H.  The question is, can West enter the auction at the four-level?  With only 3 Hcp probably not.  If West remains silent, then N/S will play in a Heart part-score.  3H should be one off, which at the club was good enough to earn E/W a score of 67%.  But E/W would score even better by making 4C+1.

The N/S pairs who scored well generally did so because, when they played in a Heart part-score, E/W failed to take all their tricks.  It should be easy enough for East to make their four big cards and to give West a Spade ruff.

If E/W do find their Club fit, then the consequence may be that N/S ill-advisedly bid to the four-level.  My Players of the Week are David Brown and Susie Rose, the E/W pair who defended 4HX and who took their deserved five tricks.

On Board 24 the best contract for E/W was 6NT, but most pairs who managed to bid the slam contented themselves with bidding 6H.  My partner and I were the one pair who bid 6NT, which we achieved largely, I think, because my partner made an unorthodox bid

If West opens 1H and East responds 2D, then West has a difficult rebid.  With 5-4-2-2 distribution the hand is unbalanced, so a NT rebid should be out of the question.  But my partner chose to rebid 2NT, showing a balanced hand with 15-19 Hcp.  I then raised directly to 6NT.  I might have bid 5NT, asking partner to bid 7NT with a maximum hand.  Although 7NT makes, with 15 Hcp partner would have bid only 6NT.  What else could partner have bid over 2D?  A 3C bid would show a four-card Club suit, which of course West does not have, but would also show the fifth Heart and the general strength of West’s hand.  This would allow East to show their three-card Heart support and would, I imagine, propel the partnership into a 6H contract (having discovered that they possess all five key cards but are missing one king).  The question is, would East think to bid 6NT over West’s final 6H bid?  I think maybe East could do so.  If you assume that West has one black king, then it looks as if there will be twelve tricks in NT.  If West has the KS then there should be one Spade trick, five Hearts, three Diamonds and three Clubs.  If West has the KS then again there will be twelve tricks and the thirteenth may depend on a successful Club finesse.  For aficionados of the Losing Trick Count, it is worth noting that the LTC suggests that 7H will make as 18 – (6 + 5) = 7.

The bidding on Board 23 was likely to be competitive and I think South, who had the strongest hand, needed to be aware of the implications of the opponent’s bids.

Before I start to analyse the bidding, note that on this hand the LTC does not work so well.  E/W have a 5-3 Heart fit and the LTC suggests that they can make 4H as 18 – (6 + 8) = 4, but the app says that they can only make 2H.

Whether N/S play Acol or Strong and Five, the South hand is too strong for a 1NT opening bid, so South opens 1D.  West will overcall 1H.  North only has 4 Hcp, but with a five-card Spade suit and secondary support for partner’s suit, it must be worth bidding 1S (as long as you are confident that partner won’t get carried away!)  The auction started like this at my table and sitting East I now bid

2D, an Unassuming Cue Bid, because I had three-card support for Hearts (adequate when partner has shown a five-card suit by their overcall) and an eight-loser hand.  If the auction starts like this, then South should resist the temptation to make their natural NT rebid, because their Heart holding doesn’t look sufficiently robust.  Playing in NT there will be a Heart lead and it sounds as if East has enough strength to gain the lead later in the play.  A second Heart lead from East will probably allow E/W to make four Heart tricks to go with whatever tricks they can garner in the other three suits.  Even 2NT may well be defeated.  Instead, I think South should Double, which will give partner a chance to describe their hand further.  But, with a six-loser hand, and with their Diamonds sitting under South’s opening bid, West is likely to bid 4H, in which case South can happily Double again – this time for penalties.  4HX should be two off, giving N/S a score of +500, which will translate to something approaching 100% (although at the club one E/W pair managed to be three off in 5C).

In retrospect, I think my 2D bid was poor.  It will only work if the Club suit comes in and with West having a singleton Club, it will not do so.  It must be better for East to bid a mere 2H, bidding to the level of fit.  Again, South should Double and not bid 2NT.  In this case, the final contract might be 2S by North, as suggested by my second bidding sequence.  Maybe East or West would bid again, in which case the final contract might be 3HX or 3S.  It seems to me that South would do best to Double 3H rather than to bid 3S, but maybe this is because I can see all four hands!

My Player of the Week is Vic Washtell, who sat South at the only table where North played in 2S.

On Board 12 the contract should surely have been 6NT, but with correct defence this was an unmakeable contract.

N/S have a combined 33 Hcp.  They both have balanced hands and South has a beefy five-card minor suit.  It should be straightforward to bid 6NT.  In my second suggested bidding sequence, South’s 2C bid is Puppet Stayman.  North’s 2D response says that North has at least one four-card major suit (but no five-card major).

Against 6NT East should lead anything other than a Club or a Heart.  North will have shown a strong NT opening bid, so such a lead is very likely to give a trick away.  I would lead the 8S.  If East leads the 8S, then the contract will fail.  North can see ten certain tricks.  If the Diamonds break 3-3 then there will be two extra tricks.  A 4-2 Diamond break is more likely.  In this case, there will be at least four Diamond tricks available, and if the JD is with East then five Diamond tricks can still be made.  There are four Diamond tricks available on any distribution, but only if declarer starts by running one of their Diamonds, because North’s Diamond doubleton is strong enough to generate a trick once the JD has been forced out.  The only realistic chance to make another trick is to hope that the KC is onside; with East having KC there is no chance of making twelve tricks.

If East leads a Club or a Heart, then declarer is presented with a free trick.  In this case 6NT is cold as long as declarer plays the Diamonds correctly, starting by running one of their Diamonds.  Four Norths played in 6NT and one made twelve tricks.  At that table a Club was led, but the declarer misplayed the Diamonds.   The twelfth trick arrived by a sort-of phantom end-play.  Declarer led a low Heart.  East won the QH and led a second Club, presenting declarer with a second free trick!  At another table declarer received a Club lead, misplayed the Diamonds and then more or less gave up – I was declarer at that table.  At two other tables North played in 6NT and went off – but the lead wasn’t recorded at those tables.  At another table North made eleven tricks in 6NT after the lead of the 8S.  I can name the East at that table, Phil Burke, as one of my Players of the Week.

Board 24 provided an excellent illustration of the principle that if you by-pass 3NT when you have a minor-suit fit and 3NT might well make, you should bid a small slam, not the minor-suit game.

With a combined 27 Hcp, N/S are unlikely to consider bidding a slam.  3NT seems the obvious contract.  If West opens 1D, then North will Double and South can jump to 3NT.  If (as happened at my table) East Passes as dealer, then North will open 1C, South will respond 1D and North will rebid 1S.  South might then jump to 3NT immediately.  My partner bid 2H first, which is Fourth Suit Forcing.  When I rebid 3C, showing my Club length, partner decided to bid 3NT anyway, probably on the principle “When in doubt, bid 3NT”.  I call this the Alan Shackman Principle and my partner on Tuesday was Alan Shackman.

Maybe however, after North’s 3C bid, which denies a Heart stopper, South might consider whether 6C might be worth a try.  The third bidding sequence shows how this might play out.  A 4C bid at this point would be a slam try.  4D and 4H are cue bids.  4NT is RKCB.  The 5D response shows four key cards.  But really, if South decides to by-pass 3NT, they should jump straight to 6C.

Board 11 was played by E/W in NT at five out of twelve tables.  The app says that even 1NT can be defeated, but at three tables West made at least eight tricks.  Why did the defence at those tables get it wrong?

If E/W are playing Strong and Five, then West will open 1NT which is likely to be the final contract.  If E/W are playing Acol, then West will open 1C and East, with only 5 Hcp but with four Clubs, will bid 2C.  West will make their natural NT rebid and 2NT is likely to be the final contract.

North may well lead the 6S against West’s NT contract.  If South wins the first two tricks and then clears the Spade suit, then N/S will come to five tricks, four Spades and the AC.  But West will be able to make at least seven tricks, one Spade, one Heart, two Diamonds and three Clubs.  In practice there will be an eighth trick available for declarer, because on the fourth Club North will have to discard either a Diamond (allowing the JD to make) or a Heart (allowing declarer to make a second Heart trick).

The way that N/S can make more tricks is to attack Hearts before the AC is forced out.  If North leads a Spade, the South should win the first trick and then return a low Heart.  West will probably play low, allowing North’s QH to win.  North can then return another Heart, allowing the defence to establish the Heart suit.  When North wins the AC, they can lead a Spade to South, who will then have two Heart tricks to cash.  This defence gives N/S seven tricks, two Spades, four Hearts and the AC.

My Players of the Week are the two E/W pairs who took at least seven tricks against a NT contract declared by West, Anne Ruff & Chris Ruff and Carmen Gay & Jessica Gay.

Board 1 illustrated the important idea in duplicate, that you should try to make as many tricks as possible, not just make your contract.  This is especially so when you can judge that at most tables the contract will be the same as the one that you are playing.