The first hand from the Christmas Pairs seemed to spring a trap on the majority of declarers. The auction shown was common and the lead was most often the ♦K (the two instances of a club lead made the contract simpler for declarer, but the spade lead was still testing).

How do we tackle this hand?  After winning the ♦A the next step is to lead the ♥Q and the more astute defenders let that win. At this point strategies varied but two paths emerged to give the defence four tricks.

• There were four instances of declarer ruffing a diamond low, and being over-ruffed - giving the defence four winners (two hearts, a spade and a club).
• There were two instances of declarer cashing the ♣A and the ♣K on the first two rounds of the suit - generating two losers there to go with the major suit aces.

You might see from the traveller that five declarers went down in 4♥ - one of them managed both issues!

What should have happened?  There are plenty of clues that should lead declarer to the right answer. The lead of the ♦K should be viewed with suspicion - how often will it be led if not a singleton?  With that in mind the first choice after the ♥Q holds should not be a diamond ruff, but to return to a top club and continue hearts. South will win and try a spade, and North wins that and plays a second diamond. Now declarer must be careful - and ruff high. Declarer can now draw the remaining trumps and turn attention to clubs. Cashing the next top club gains only when North has a doubleton queen (5 possibiliites), while leading towards the jack gains when North has a small doubleton (10 possibilities). The choice is clear.

It wasn't an easy hand to play - perhaps next time it might be made.

The hands on Monday this week provied surprisingly dull. although there was no board which was totally flat - there seemed to be at least one table had an accident every time that event got close. 

The best bidding hand was the slam on B14 (nobody bid a slam on any other board - maybe after so many slams went off last week?).  Two pairs ended up in a perilous 7N and would/should have gone off on best defence, but were allowed to make. Two pairs bashed the better grand slam of 7♦, and one of these pairs had opposition bidding which positively encouraged bidding the grand slam. There were a variety of auctions - one table started 1♣ - P - 2♦ (gf), another 1♦ - 2♦ (gf), another 1♦ - 4N (key card ask), a fourth started with a pass from East and 2N from West - which leaves 6 tables where the opening bid was 1N (11-14 most cases, but 10-12 once).  How should the biddng go after a 1N opener?  There is clearly slam potential on this hand but West needs to be concerned that the pair might be missing two aces or an ace and the ♦K, which would make the slam poor odds. The way to find out how many partner holds of the ♦AK ♣A is to settle on diamonds as trumps and then use a key-card ask.  Three of the Wests found this approach, and heard support for diamonds over their 3♦ bid; they could now launch into Blackwood - one heard partner jump to 6♦ and was unable to proceed, one heard three key cards and bid 6♦, one heard three key cards and bid 7N.  None found the right answer of three aces and then 7♦. It is curious to note that on this deal there were eight Wests decided to ask for key cards, and only five of them got sensible answers and of those five only two bid the winning 7♦.  Why is this such a difficult game?

Now to the play on this hand; there is nothing to say about the play in 7♦ (twelve top winners plus a spade ruff) - the question is whether the defenders should have beaten 7N?   The defence in both cases started with a neutral diamond from South, and declarer set about running the diamond suit.  North had six discards to make and it is not difficult to discard safely.  SInce 12 tricks for declarer are clear, you can quickly check that there is no heart holding for declarer when North's hearts matter, so they can all go.  Declarer has 13 easy tricks if they hold three spades, so North can also spade three spades. If declarer follows with two top hearts, again North has no problem, as there is no holding where North cannot spare a club (declarer cannot have ♣Q when the contract is cold, or six clubs which would not open 1N).  What about South's discards when they come? The first two are easy as the fourth club and fourth heart cannot matter. When the next discard comes, declarer will have also discarded twice. They key for South is to mirro East's (hidden) shape. This is most easily done if North is careful to give count signals in disacrding spades and hearts (and longer suit first).  With none of the missing queens, North should be very conscious of the need to inform partner so that they can make the right choices. Count signals here makes it clear to South that declarer's shape is 2344 - so if declarer threw a club on the fifth diamond, South needs simply to discard the same suit as declarer on the sixth. Using this pattner, the 7N contract will always go down.  

In practice it did not go like that.  At one table North discarded three spades and three hearts, but when East discarded a club and a spade, South's third discard was a (fatal) second club, so that the top hearts now squeezed North in the black suits. At the other table North threw a fourth spade in order to hold onto all their hearts. Sadly for the defence.

This week's hands produced plenty of potential and real swings with only boards B2 abd B17 providing almost uniform results.

There were two execllent slams

• B14 : where opposite the 2N opener the 6142 10-count is clearly worth a slam exploration.  Some just punted the slam but could have been missing a cashable AK (or in some cases two aces).  The initial step was a transfer over 2N, and where a few openers broke this with a jump to 4♠ (something which hints at control of all suits as if missing one you could have allowed space to explore) it was easy to bid the slam. The traditional mild slam try is 2N - 3♥ - 3♠ - 4♠ (you transfer at the four level if no higher interest) but despite the fit the opener is a minimum and might pass this. Transferring and raising to 5♠ is a stronger push in the same vein and is more likely to get a raise from partner. The slam is decent odds - leading up to the top clubs and finding the ace onside genrates two discards for the losing diamonds - and if that fails then you still have the chance of the ♦Q dropping in two rounds. Given those odds are really only 59%, to which you must add the possibility of South cashing the ♣A at trick one - it was surprising to find that 12 out of 16 pairs reached a slam.
• B20 : with 33-hcp and a long heart suit and such good spades (and 6N unbeatable by North) you would expect most to find this but it was only bid at 7 of the 15 tables which played it.  The worst auctions were the jumps to 3N passed by South, who felt not invited to the party (altthough one South did raise to 4N and got to slam). The 2-over-1 sequence which went 1♠ - 2♥ (gf) - 3♦ - 3♥ - 4♣ led to a comfortable use of key card ask and to 6N.

There were also slam attempts on B2 (off two aces), B7 (off two aces and more), B8 (a mildly misfitting flat 31-count needed 3 finesses of which two failed, but makeable on an endplay), B21 (off A and an unavoidable KQ).  Unusually there were no hands with good slams which were missed by all. 

But back to the deal shown. The contract was usually 3N and it caught the eye because in Division One all three declarers went minus while throughout the other divisions every declarer succeeded.  Was this good defence at work?

The common contract was 3N (12 of the 16 tables) and the lead varied but most commonly was a heart (6 times). Declarer could count six top tricks in the majors, and needed three more.  The diamond suit looked to be the strongest candidate for another trick, and at table two declarer took a double diamond finesse, but when the second one lost the defenders had 5 tricks to cash.  Sad. 

Might declarer have done better? It was perhaps worth thinking about the other trick that was needed. You might not know this but with that club suit, the chance of declarer being able to build a trick is actually 95%.  That should therefore be the first suit to tackle. So win the ♥9 and lead a club to the ten and queen. East continues hearts and declarer continues clubs. A third heart leads to a third club, and West is on lead. Which suit should West lead? A diamond give the contract immediately, while a spade lets declarer try the ♠J for free before going after diamonds if that fails. Success for declarer!

Things might change if West wins the first club and plays a spade through, but when it emerges that the hearts break 5-1, the odds on the double diamond finesse change significantly, and declarer should resort to leading towards the ♦Q for the ninth trick.

It wasn't all a heart lead; there were two instances of West opening 1♦ and two of overcalling 2♦ and these all got a diamond lead, which stopped declarer going wrong in diamonds. It also gave declarer confidence in playing West for the ♠Q and that gave the ninth trick with no sweat.  This was a case where silence might have encouraged declarer to go wrong, but as shown above the contract should still make.

The intiial tale in 3N was one of the losing declarers in Division One; the other two failing declarers in Division One do not want to talk about what happened on the hand.

Monday this week delivered a plethora of part-score hands, with 13 of the 20 being well short of game potential.  We can add to this B1 where everyone (except one misbid) was in 3N making, B8 where everyone bid game and only one failed, B20 where everyone played 4♠ and made it.

There were two instances of people bidding slams - it was a 33% slam which succeeded on B2 and it was a 29% slam which failed on B14 - two teams gained and two teams lost, while the other six found both were flat boards.

This hand offered little in the bidding but playing in 1N - almost all on a spade lead - there was quite a variation in the results, with one table down three, four going down two, two down one, and two making. The difference between the top and bottom scores is a swing of 9 imps, so it is worth getting these right.  What happened?

On a spade lead, every table cahsed five rounds of the suit, giving East the chance for two discards. Three defenders felt obliged to discard a diamond (once high, twice low) to tell partner they liked that suit - and in doing so they damaged their holding there.  Discarding other suits to show no interest in them would work better.  They did however all beat the contract.  The most common discarding was ♥6 (or once ♥T) followed by the ♥2.  Whether this was Suit Prefernece or count, at least partner could now place the top hearts.  At this point the field split into two Wests who led out ♣A and another for which declarer was duly thankful and scooped up 7 tricks, making the contract. The others found the diamond switch and South faced a bit of a dilemma; if they cashed their hearts they were stuck in the wrong hand at the end and had to lead clubs away from the KJ (two chose this to settle for -2); but if they took a club play before cashing all the hearts they might not get their hearts (one tried this and ended -3).

But there was an optimal line for declarer which never happened; on the spades declarer must throw two clubs, keeping the heart winners and crucially a doubleton diamond.  When the diamond switch comes declarer needs to duck and win the next diamond, cutting East off.  Now three rounds of hearts ending with the ace, leaves you in dummy to lead a club to the jack - and West can win but then has to put you back in hand with the ♣K to cash the long heart.  The club play at the end was not a guess - as if East has the ♣A they would be winning it to cash diamonds. The exact discarding is needed for this to work - from dummy three diamonds, and from hand two clubs.

Deep Finesse tells us that the defenders can always cash eight tricks putting the contract one down. The robots playing at table nine were the only ones to get close to this - for this you need the defence to set up their diamond winners before cashing the spades - as this leaves the ♠A as an entry with East if South was to duck the ♦T.

There were a lot of swings in the first half of the match on Monday, and things did calm down in the second half.  Only one match result changed after half time, with the Simons team coming forward to beat Wignall by 9 imps, having been down 19 at the break. There was one board with a completely flat traveller (12 pairs in 3N+1 on B2) and there was an easy game available on another (B15 had 9 playing 4♥ successfully while the others all made 3N). 

On the slam front there was only one relevant board (B6) and whether you bid it and and which suit you played in depended on how bouncy the opponents were. After a 1♠ opener from East, five Souths passed while seven overcalled 2♦ on their ♦AKQJ8 suit.  The overcall led partner, with seven card support, to jump to 5♦ and out of the six instances of this three pushed to bid a slam which could have been defeated (and was defeated on two occasions). The seventh 2♦ overcall got a quiet raise from partner and this let East-West find their club fit and bit the unbeatable 6♣ slam.  Where South did not overcall, only two of the five bid a slam (and that was the cold slam).  It's a little unusual that silence led to fewer making slams than did an overcall!  The simple, successful auction by Sasanow & Stirrup (1♠ - 2♥ -3♣ - 4♦(splinter) - 4♥ (offer to play) - 6♣) has a lot to commend it.

The play on the board shown is not complicated, but half the declarers in the heart game went off - and we have to ask why?  The answer is that they drew trumps. This is not normally a problem but with a nine card fit, but before you draw trumps you need to count your winners and your losers.  On this hand you have two spades and a diamond you must lose; and you have the prospect of two spade tricks, possibly a diamond, and that means you need at least seven trump tricks and maybe eight. Playing to ruff diamonds will generate more trump tricks and create the possibility of a long winner in diamonds, and is the way to go.  But you must tackle your side suit here - as so often - before you embark on trumps.

You might care to note that there is one lead from South which will always beat the heart game - you might be able to guess that is a trump, and it beats the game because North can play a second trump when they win the first diamond - holding declarer to seven trumps, to which two diamonds might be added but declarer has lost control before any spade tricks can be created. An initial spade and then a trump is not good enough because declarer now has time to set up something in spades.

There were plenty of swingy hands on Monday and many fewer flat travellers than previous weeks. There were three slam hands which lined up as follows

• B7 was a 50% slam which was only bid once and made. For most it was a case of East finding no enthusiasm for a slam search opposite a passed partner - and the slam was 50% when partner's ace was opposite your void, so some days it will be an even better contract.
• B9 was a much better (over 75%) slam and that was bid 6/17 times - but curiously never bid in Division One!  Well done those who did bid it.  The key questions seems to be whether you treat a crisp 14-count as a minimum opener or as having extras.
• B20 was an excellent slam, missed at only two tables.  It is in fact a decent grand slam, and one pair got to 7♠ but the spades 3-1 and the clubs 5-2 with the queen in the long hand was too much with which to cope.  Sad for that pair.

It continues to be worth watching the extent to which the strong pairs (top divisions) bid more aggressively than the lower divisions (hint, hint!)

• B4 say two 3-level openings in Division One, but only one in DIvision Two and none elsewhere - and while no West passed in the top two divisions, there were two passes in the lower divisions.  Despite that the scores on the board flattened out.
• B11 in the top Division saw West on their first chance bid 3♥ once and 4♥ three times - while across the others five Wests started with 1♥ making life much simpler for the other side.

There were a few interesting play hands (try out playing B13 in 4♥ on the lead of the ♠K) but this hand stuck out as exactly half of those in 4♠ made their game and half did not. The lead of the ♦K was fairly standard. Stopping at this point to count your tricks you can see three plus another diamond for four tricks outside trumps (North will have some club honour, so hopes for ♣Q are very small) - so you need six trump tricks or to develop the hearts to get up to ten.  Of those who went off, all but two played a round of trumps en route and saw the ♠J fall. What they failed to do was realise that its appearece offered them a new plan - the danger of over-ruffs had now gone and provided the two top hearts stand up, cross ruffing seven trump tricks brings the total to ten. It can be difficult once you have a plan in mind, but being able to change when new opportunities arise is vital for success.  [The other path to success found by some was to sneak out the ♦9 at trick two and ditch a club from dummy when it was not covered]

There were a smaller number of very flat boards this week, one stand-out being B5 in which every table played 4♠ (two went down by rushing to take a club ruff early, and leaving themselves open to a force; setting up the possible ruff is right, but once trumps are checked to be 3-2, the club ruff should wait until after the top diamonds are knocked out). Another in the same vein was B16, where across two denominations, every East-West scored between +120 and +150.

On the slam front there were a number of swings to be found

• B2 : a near-trivial 7N hand on which two pairs bid to 7♦, two settled for game, and the other 13 tables all bid the small slam. It is worth noting that the two grand slams came with silent opponents; at this vulnerability there is no reason for West to be cautious - the six (only six!) Wests who came into the auction are to be commended.
• B3 : was a so-so slam (about 40% shot) which was bid by two pairs (and was a bit of a blind shot in both cases) and it made.
• B9 : was thought to be a slam hand by one member of one partnership, but even game was not making without help.
• B10 : was a very good slam bid at only 6 tables, four of these being the four in Division One. Two declarers in slam failed; the four successful declarer all received a helpful red suit lead. The other two could have succeeded (one easily, the other less so)
• B13 : was slam very much on a finesse and little more, and the two pairs who bid that lost out when it failed. 

This board had the greatest number of swings on the play; two tables just invited game on the second round but the majority (with reason) took the view that game would have play and with such strong hearts an opposing double was unlikely.  Three suits were led by West (no trump lead) but the majority was for a spade lead, which East won; you might think a trump was normal here (necessary if we swap the ♠K and ♠Q) but there was only one defender did that - the others all worried that spade losers could be discarded on diamonds, and played a second spade hoping partner could switch to a club. In all cases West could see three defensive tricks. How could the ♣A get lost after that?  At one table West gave up their heart trick by leading a heart at trick three (was this a mis-click?) and another West decided to test declarer by leading a low diamond from the queen (declarer ran that to the jack). The final success following an initial spade lead came after the ♥Q was followed by ♠K and a third spade.  Declarer won that and cashed all the hearts. West discarded down to ♦Q4 ♣J while East read the position correctly and threw all the top clubs to come down to ♦T65.   Declarer led the ♦J and West slipped by playing small; confident that East had three diamonds left, declarer ran this and was surprised to find it had won.

There were two cases of 4♠ making on a club lead, when East tried to cash the ace at trick two in one case, trick three in the other. This allowed declarer to ruff out the clubs to get to discard two spades.

It all shows that defence can be difficult.

We had a flurry of very flat boards on Monday - three examples of all 10 tables playing in the same game and making (B1,B2 and B16) and another where all but one played the major suit game going down (B18).

There were two boards on which a slam was unbeatable, but in both cases you need to be playing in the right trump suit

• B6 : where a club lead from the king meant making the 6♥ slam became easy rather than difficult, while the 6N attempt was impossible until North discarded in dummy's long suit, and 6♠ was missing KQ9852 of trumps which is not a good start. The one auction on this board to 4N is to be recommended.
• B10 : despite 33 hcp, there is not a slam in no-trumps here (to make it needs very good breaks) but in clubs there is an extra trick or two and that slam is trivial (even though one declarer went off). Of the ten tables, four bid to the correct contract.

There were a few learning points on other boards too

• B8 : there were six tables faced with a choice after West opened 3♥; five of them found the very commital 3♠ overcall on a hand that is semi-balanced and weak no-trump strength. A more attractive alternative is 3N (could be making when partner passes 3♠ thinking it a misfit, although here it goes down instantly) but the winner is double. At the one level we'd rarely think of doubling when we could make a 1-level overcall instead, and that is correct, but at the 2-level and higher you need a much more robust suit as partner has less chance to explore, and you are more likely to be stuck there.
• B11 : it's worth noting that two tables managed to let 3N make when the defence had led ♣9874  opposite  ♣AJT632,  by blocking the club suit.  With the short hand, you need to be thinking about unblock when the second card of the suit is played.
• B17 : the overtrick didn't matter in 4♠ but it was interesting to note that of the six tables where East doubled the 1♣ opening, five declarers werer awake enough to realise that this meant the double finesse in spades was the wrong choice.  The three North declarers who had opened 1N lacked that information, which is why we see two instances of 5♠-1 on this hand. Bidding is nearly always the right thing to do (and we fully endorse East's double here) but sometimes it backfires.

But of all the hands on Monday this was the most interesting to bid. The spotlight was on South to start with, and three chose to show a weak two bid with this hand (nobody for 3♥ or 4♥?).   Opening at this volunerability and position has to be the right choice.  After those openings it was easy for North to think about slam but settle for 4♥ after partner suitably discouraged. The other tables all started with essentially the auction shown.  What should happen now?  There was a big divergence here - the choices being pass (once), 2N (twice, some sort of second negative), 3♣ (once) and 3♥ (three times). 

With a shape like this you need to start telling partner about your hand, and the last choice was the only one that works - reaching 4♥ in two thirds of cases.  The concern about bidding 3♥ over 2♠ is not unfounded - we have traditionally been taught we want to bid decent suits in slam auctions. But the fact is that unless one of your suits is useful to partner they will need to have game in their own hand, and if that is the case they will surely bid game. You just have to bid 3♥, and partner must allow for this and not get too excited.  Over 3♥ it is very reasonable for North to try 3N, which is ideal as it lets South now show their club suit.  Does not an auction  2♣ - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3♥ - 3N - 4♣ - 4♥   describe the hands very well and land you in the right contract?

As in many sessions, the outcomes this week dpeended more on the bidding than on anything else.  There were a remarkable number of flat hands (13-15 pairs but never all 16 in the same contract) and four hands where slam bidding came up - 

• B4 : two pairs went overboard with 20 HCP opposite 10 HCP and a 4-4 spade fit, only to find two fo the three useful finesses were wrong. Odds against but could have got lucky.
• B5 : was a good slam to reach (cold without a spade lead, and decent odds with one - either dropping the ♥Q or a full cross-ruff), but 6♦ was only reached once. 
• B12 : was a possible slam (needs clubs 2-2) and the three instances bid were all bid over an opposing 5♥ - so sometimes as a sacrifice.  The clubs werer 3-1 and the slam went off.
• B15 : was the "big" hand on which four bid the grand slam, eight bid the small slam and four stopped in game.  Three grands were South gambling in ignorance of the important ♦Q, but the Sidgwick-Spencer sequence led to North making the final decision, and holding ♦Q and a fourth diamond and the ♠QJ makes the final stretch a lot more reasonable.

But back to this hand, bid to game by two pairs. It takes a little care in the play to make it - after a club to the king and three rounds of hearts, declarer played the spade ace and discovered the bad break. A spade finesse must follow and declarer needs two more entries to hand for two more finesses. The first is a club to the queen and run the jack of diamonds and then a second diamond. The last entry has to come from ruffing dummy's winning ♣A to take the last spade finesse and draw the final trump.  Well done to Malcolm Green, taking advantage of the favourable lie when in a contract that might be higher than you would like.

It was all about slams on Monday, with team 6 managing the amazing feat of six slam disasters, but still only lost by 24 imps!

In the first half there were four excellent slams:

• B1 was an excellent 6♣ or 6N, yet three pairs played in part-scores and five in game. It is genreally harder to bid the slam after North has shown a weak two - but nearly all did and still four pairs reached a slam.  The part-scores came from a mis-reading of an explanation of a bid, and from two instances of gross undervaluation. And it was undervaluation - or is this about not trusting partner to have their bid - that resulted in the game contracts.
• B5 was an excellent slam but with the 3♦ opener at most tables there was little chance to make slam tries. In fact it was only at one of the four tables where North did not open that a slam try was made - and maybe it should have been accepted. The one pair to bid the slam were given a pass by North on the first round, and this made life simple for them.
• B7 : the excellent slam here was only bid by two teams, even though all 12 Norths came into the bidding on the first round (seven with 1♦ and five with 2♦). The two successful auctions started 1♣ - 2♦ - 2♥ (natural, forcing)  after which West took charge.  The others who had a 2♦ overcall chose a raise to game, a slam try not accepted, and a system mix-up. This was a board where the 1♦ overcall meant that the 1♥ from East was more wide-ranging and no pair managed to get to grips with the hand after that.  Sometimes pushing the opponents can backfire.
• B11 : this was the most straightforward slam hand of the first set, as the opposition interference was over after the opening bid. The sequence shown - with 2N as a refusal of the transfer showing 4-card support - was the most common, and every pair should have been capable of this. Only 5 of the 9 who had a 1♣ opener managed.  It was more difficult after a 1N opener from South and a double from West (where one West passed over 1N, the pair had no chance).  The answer from East is to bid 2N, showing a game forcing two suiter; you might not reach the slam now but at least you have a chance. Neither the 4♥ bid over a pass, nor the pass over a redouble, gave any chance.
• B12 : saw one pair go overboard and play in 6N, undoubled even though the man on lead had two aces. Best defence would have taken this contract 8 down, but going one down was actually a gain - as the other table went down two in 3N!

As we finished that stanza, there were 12 slams bid out of 48 chances to bid a good slam - and of the seven teams to gain on those boards, two teams (1 and 5) had gains on two of them. 

In the second half there was one excellent slam, but ....

• B14 : three teams managed to bid a slam missing two cashable aces - but only two of them suffered, as the "normal" (4♥) was going off in the other room on best defence.
• B17 : this was the excellent slam, bid by the only pair who were playing a strong club system - although it is not clear what all their bids meant. Well done to Shelley & Ward.  It was not impossible to bid on natural (2/1 GF) methods, via 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ (6+) - 3♣ - 3♦ (values) - 4♣ (setting trumps) - 4♥ (cue).
• B24 : this was actually a poor slam but 12 tricks were there as cards were lying very well for declarer.  Unfortunately the pair to bid a slam bid the grand and were down two.

....  which makes the total for the day - 13 instances bid out of an excellent 60 opportunities, plus 5 instances of hopeless slams reached on 3 other hands.

We can go through a set of board with no slams, but when slams arise there are enormous numbers of points to gain by getting them right.  Practicing slam bidding will pay off for any pair - and it will be useful even to just step through this set of hands to convince yourselves that you and partner will bid successfully if the same hands arise tomorrow.

While the slams give big swings, there are more regular swings on part-score hands and these are very much worth collecting. On this hand there were five pairs played in hearts and two made eight tricks, one made seven tricks, and only two were held to the six tricks they deserved.

Let's check the bidding first; 4 tables had this sequence (another got to 3♥), but amazingly there were four Easts who passed the opening bid, and less surprisingly, there were 5 Souths who could not settle for defending against vulnerable opponents and doubled the 1N bid, inducing partner to rescue the East-West pair. East's pass was a winner but dangerous; South entering an auction when his/her side was so likely to be outgunned is in appropriate.

But back to the play in defending against 2♥ or 3♥; every North led a high spade and declarer won the queen. Declarer now played either diamonds or clubs; two mistakes were made by defenders - one was not continuing the spade attack from the right side, and the other was not realising the diamond position and working to stop declarer from ruffing a diamond that they never intended to ruff.

Here's the sequence at a successful table - spade to the queen at trick one, diamond which North ducked to South's jack at trick two (North's carding suggesting an odd number, which should be five as West never bid the suit), two top clubs from South, small diamond to North's king (would declarer not have played the queen if they held the king?), second spade to the ten and ace, declarer tried a heart towards the nine but the king went in to play a third spade. South won and could give a ruff-and-discard safe in the knowledge that declarer had no losers to discard. And then came the trump queen for down two.

Collecting +200 on a hand like this when other are allowed to make -110 gives you a very useful 7 imps.

It was surprising to see such varied results on this board from Monday, where eight of the fifteen playing in 3N made the contract. The easiest make was the single case of 3N played by South - and this resulted because rather than overcalling a 1♣ opener, one East decided to double.

The commonest auctions saw North open either 1♣ or 1N, and East bidding 1♠ or showing the majors, and then North-South reach 3N.  The lead was the ♠T at almost all tables.. A few Norths ducked the first round and the defenders then ducked the second round - making game impossible on any layout. The more discerning won the ♠Q at trick one, and knowing they needed diamond tricks, played a diamond to the nine and queen. The most common defensive error came now - where three Easts cashed the spade ace - setting up declarer's ninth trick as well as cutting their partner off from the spade suit. Should they avoid this?  Yes, as long as West has given some sort of county signal at trick one - and even if the signal was attitude, the overall odds suggest that  declarer is more likely to have three. [To be fair - this is an awkward signalling position]  A number of declarers after winning the ♠Q crossed in clubs to run the ♦J - finessing into the danger hand, but when East ducked (a bit pointless as North's play would not happen if they were not going to run the jack) that was five diamond tricks and the contract was now made.  That happened twice - and common sense says that should be avoided; one other declarer tried it but there Mark Rogers covered and game was dead.

The other two cases of 3N making came firstly when one North managed to sneak a club trick through a West who played the ♣2 on the second round, and then when another West fell alseep and ended with ♠J ♥A ♣QT and when he won the spade jack was embarassed to give a trick to the ♣J. 

Isn't is curious just how many different ways players can find to go wrong?

This was the most common start to the auction on this board from Monday; the others were where three Norths chose to open 1♥ and one chose 3♥, both of which seem inadequate in an optimial position for aggresssion and with the fear that the opponents hold the spade suit.  After two passes there was a choice for West and two actions got chosen - there were four who doubled and four who bid 4♠.

For the doublers, there was only one East who took out - surely the right choice as partner needs to be able to double here for takeout or you will lose out too often. Now 5♦ got doubled and went one off, but that was not a terrible result. When the double was passed out, East started with singleton ♠T covered by South and West. At this point West did not know who had the singleton spade and switched to diamonds. Declarer was able to ruff the second one, draw trumps and by running the ♠8 to West's ♠9, was able to set up a ruffing finesse to make a trick from the ♠J7 on which to discard the losing club. One player in 4♥-doubled failed to spot this line and went off - as did the two declarers in 4♥-undoubled after a 1♥ opener.

Declarer has to be on the ball, but could the defence have succeeded?  The answer is yes - the winning defence is for West to cash two spades and a diamond, and then lead a third spade promoting the ♥J. [One diamond and then a small spade also works as the ♣Q becomes a winner]. But as suggested earlier - it is better for West not to have this dilemma!

Those who bid 4♠ had made a very dubious choice - committing to a suit, vulnerable at the four level, when the preempt from the opponents suggests suits will not break well. In one sense the bid got its just desserts when South doubled and collected 800 twice and 1100 once. Those Souths were a little fortunate, as if West had recognised the error in bidding 4♠ then the possibility arises of an escape to 5♦ - though in practice nobody did run.  One South did worry about this and settled for +400 defending the spade game un doubled.

What would we recommend on the hand?  Without doubt, the auction from table two - where West doubles for takeout and East takes it out. This would generate a small penalty of 200 going to North-South and be far cheaper than the alternatives proved to be in practice. Isn't life simple sometimes?

There were two instances of East-West stealing the hand here but otherwise the field was split between 3♠ (5 times) and 4♠ (7 times).  Three of those seven in game made the contract and four did not. What was the difference?

The three successes all had the auction shown, and started with the ♣Q, in two cases overtaken and followed by two more top clubs (the sleepy East who didn't overtake had let the contract make by doing so).  The key play was when South ruffed the third club with the ♠T - and the error was for West to over-ruff. On general principles this should be avoided, the ruff is ruffing with a trump trick that was always coming, and in such cased delayed gratification is nearly always the right answer. Ruffing with the ten weakens South's spade holding, and that benefit to the defence is negated when West chooses to weaken their holding at the same time.

One East found a neat way to avoid partner falling into that trap - he switched to a diamond at trick three and that set up a quick fourth trick for the defence.

After three rounds of clubs, the defence to the game is far from trivial.  Declarer must be expecting the ♠K to be with West and should continue with a low spade to the queen. Ducking would seem normal for West, and when declarer repeats it after crossing to the ♥A, West will win the king.  At this point the only way to defeat the game is to lead out the ♦K, sacrificing one trick in diamonds to get back two tricks - the long hearts which declarer would otherwise enjoy. 

In practice West was never tested as the optimistic declarers either left the spade play too late, or played for the ♠K to be onside.

Today's hand starts as a lead problem. The bidding is as shown, but might have been slightly different at other tables. What is best, playing matchpoints?

This is the hundredth contribution since Garry Watson and Patrick Shields started this back in February. Please let us know if it is proving interesting and useful for you.

This hand was played in spades at all but one table and missing two aces and the KJ of trumps, making game comes down to finding the right play in spades. Three tables had a trump lead, for which one hopes declared said thanks, but the most common choice was a heart. 

The favourite play with this spade combination is to take a double finesse but on this hand you lack the two entries you need to the dummy. You are forced into playing spades from hand. There are two options : ace and another towards dummy, or small to the queen and then using a diamond entry (not certain but not unlikely) to lead back for a finesse through the AT9. 

If we forget the 4-1 breaks then ace and another to the queen will lose to xx or Jxx onside (6 cases) while to the queen first will lose to Jx or Jxx with West (also 6 cases). Cashing the ace first does also work for any singleton honour, so that choice wins.

But after ace and another there is a choice - you can play the queen next or the eight. The odds are even, and on the basis that West might rise with Kxx while they won't with Jxx, it looks better to play the eight. But of course you now lose two trumps. What is surprising is that every table managed ten tricks, so why did nobody go wrong?  Please let us know.

Those who had the lead of ♦A and another also all got the spades right, but they had a good reason for that. Can you see why?

Here's a lead problem from Monday.

You opened a weak two bid on this rather poor hand, because it pays to get in there first, and the seventh heart compensates for the lack of hcp.

Now you have to choose the opening lead ... 

The swings in last night's league matches started on board one; almost everyone played in spades but the number of tricks varied between 8 and 11.  We'll tell  how Keith Stanley ended up with eleven tricks, but first to the bidding.

The East hand doesn't fit well with a preemptive bid, having 7 hcp outside the trump suit. It doesn't fit well with a weak two bid, having a seventh spade. It is not a bad idea on hands like this to pass to start with, since you expect that even after a pass you will be able to find the right contract.  And indeed that did happen to some; Paul Denning passed and heard partner open a strong 1N and could then transfer into the spade game.

Back to the auction shown. With 3♥ showing an upper range hand but without a good suit, South had little to go on, and opposite a passed partner needed to go and seek out tricks. This reasoning led to the ♥A lead.  Although the signal from partner was discouraging, there was still a prospect of a heart ruff, as declarer has no obvious path for drawing trumps, so he played a second round of that suit.  Unfortunately the second heart was misread and North played the ♥Q on this, and Keith gobbled this up with the king.  There was now a heart winner in dummy to take care of his losing diamond, and the only danger was any opposition ruffs. So Keith went to draw trumps as quickly as he could, and when the ace dropped the king he was blessed with an overtrick.

The other instance of 4♠+1 had a similar play in the heart suit. The hand was played by West (1N opener and a transfer) and the lead was a heart to the ace and another back to the queen and king. With the same intent to avoid a ruff, Garry Watson also played a spade to the ace.

Another table had the ♦6 lead. This hit the jackpot as it set up the diamond king, and it was natural for declarer to take a trump finesse now. Two spade losers and the ♥A sealed the fate of the game in that room, for the second 11 imps swing on that board.

This hand was another handsome gain for the winning team on Monday, but it was a very difficult hand both for declarer and defence.    Against 4♠ the defence started off with two rounds of hearts and this made things immediately awkward for Tony HIll.  There is surely a diamond to lose and you cannot let the opposition win that trick at a time when you have no trumps between the two hands.  If the trumps break 3-3 it is easy, but if they are 4-2 then you will have to lose a diamond before drawing trumps; in fact you must lose a diamond while there is still a spade (trump) in dummy to take any force.

Tony could see this issue and with a 4-2 spade break more likely than 3-3, Tony at trick three - having ruffed the second heart - started with the ♦Q.     Can you see any defence when he has done this?    In practice the diamond was covered and then he continued with a diamond to the jack.  He won the club switch and drew trumps, making five spades, four diamonds and the heart ace for ten tricks.   Clearly they could have beaten him by taking a diamond ruff.  Could he have done better?

After a fairly normal auction, South led the ♣7 - how shoudl declarer proceed?

This hand delivered 10 imps to the winners on Monday, and took 10 imps away from the runners-up (but was not enough to affect the overall placings).  The contract was the same in both rooms, with the 4♥ reached in this auction after a 14-16 opening of 1N.

The contract was the same at 10/12 tables and the lead was always from South's club sequence.  From declarer's perspective there are prospect of two spade losers and anything from one to three heart losers.  With the possibility of a diamond ruff, you really must tackle trumps first and the question is how to play the suit.

There are few options which give you one loser, but one is finding a doubleton ten with North. In that case, small to the nine and an honour is followed by leading the jack to pin the ten and finesse the other honour.  Another is finding a singleton honour with South, but that does leave you the difficulty of coping with a 4-1 trump break and repeated clubleds. After winning the ♣K at trick one, this was the chance pursued by Patrick Shields but Alan Wearmouth did the right thing as North ducking the trick two heart, allowing the nine to lose to the ten and now the contract was always off.  Were he to rise with the queen, the contract was a likely make.

In the other room, Mark Rogers was concerned to keep entries to the long diamonds and won the club ace at trick one, so he tackled the hearts by leading first up to the ace and when the ten appeared he was suddenly in control, and he managed to keep his heart losers to just two. With the spades lying nicely, he made the game (by cashing the top three diamonds, set up a spade, and cross ruff).

In the heart suit, the best play for holding to only one loser is indeed cashing the ace first, while the best play for avoiding three losers is to start with small towards the J962.  The difficulty is knowing which matters to you more - which comes down to knowing how the spades will behave.

Tricky stuff.

All three tables on Monday started with the same first five bids on this hand, but then paths diverged.  One pessimistic North passed, not giving partner any leeway for a decent hand with some spades.   The other two made a takeout double, over which South bid 2N.  One North was happy to pass that, while the other took out to 3♦ which South converted to 3♥.  All three tables therefore ended in different contracts, and in all three cases either the declarer or the defence slipped up.  Here's how - and how to avoid it next time -

T1 in 2♠: the opening lead was the ♣Q which enabled declarer to set up a third round winner in the suit. Unfortunately declarer decided to ruff this winner with a high trump, creating an unecessary second trump loser - and so went one off.

T2 in 2N : the opening lead, listening to partner's bid, was a spade from West. East cashed two top spades and now the contract could not be defeated.  East needs to recognise that to make the 2N bid sensible, South must have four spades - and it is therefore vital to duck one of the first two rounds.  After that the spades will run and the contract will go off.  Declarer made 9 tricks.

T3 in 3♥ : declarer rufffed the opening spade lead, lost the heart finesse, and ruffed the second spade. Declarer came to hand with the ♦A and ruffed a third spade before playing a club to the queen and ace. West returned the ♦Q won in North. Declarer cashed the ♣K and played a third round. When East ruffed awkwardly with the ♥8, declarer discarded the winning ♦T rather than the losing ♠J. This was fatal. 

All accidents were easily avoidable - it looks like we have a lot to learn !

The winners of the GCBA Spring (Swiss) Pairs are Roy Collard & Val Constable.   They had won 5/6 matches in the first two evenings to give leave them (and John Councer & Mark Rogers, who had to drop out) a good margin ahead of the rest of the field. In the final session, Roy & Val clocked up 30 VPs, just enough to stay ahead of their main rivals Joe Angseesing & Keith Stanley who collected 42 VPs.  The margin was just 6 VPs as the last match started with the board on display.

The bidding shown was that of the winners, and against Roy's 3N, Garry Watson led a small heart.  This was ducked to the ♥9 and a heart came straight back, removing declarer's dummy entry.   Using then entry wisely, Roy took a diamond finesse and then tried a spade to the king.  When West signalled an odd number, East knew to win the first round of the suit - and at this point declarer was completely cut off from the North hand.

But what could East play next? It had to be one minor suit. Patrick Shields exited with a small club (expecting declarer to be a 1246 shape) and here Roy made the key play of inserting the ♣T.  He was expecting to lose a trick in the suit anyway and this was the only realistic chance of anything good happening.  And it did!  He won the ♣T and played out the ♣A, ♣K and a fourth club.   This set up the long club and put East back on lead.

Since a major suit would clearly be fatal, East played a second diamond. Roy finessed the ♦J this time, and cashed the ♦A to find that he was up to 8 tricks now.  He had two winners in dummy but couldn't get to them, and he could set up the fifth diamond by giving a trick to the king.  It looked easy but there was a trap - which Roy spotted.  If he cashed his club and then gave up the diamond, East would be left on lead to play a major suit, but this would be in a 1-card ending, and he needed dummy to have a winner in the major suit still held by East.  Would Roy know which it was?    This is a dangerous position, but Roy avoided all danger by not cashing the long club he had just set up. Instead, he exited with the fourth round of diamonds first, which meant East was end-played in a 2-card ending, and dummy could keep a winner in both majors and not have to guess.

Well done, Roy, because going one off in this contract would have cost 4 VPs, giving them the same score as Joe & Keith who would have won the trophy because they won their head-to-head match.

It's not often that a three-suit squeeze falls into your lap, and it was surprising that there were not 11 pairs reporting this from board 23 on Monday.

It is hard to imagine different bidding, but there are rumours of Easts who didn't know that with a strong NT in protective seat, the answer is to double and then bid NT (as a 1N bid shows a weak NT, and a jump to 2N shows about 18-20).  Here it is awkward for West as there might only be a 23-count between the two hands, but with the strong hand on lead and the location of the points signposted, these hands usually play well. So a raise to game is indicated.

Against 3N the defence start with a spade. Declarer is none too happy as there is a diamond to lose and the club ace, before nine tricks are available. But as so often, the answer is just to set about your longest suit. So knock out the diamond and win the spade return to cash the diamonds.  South can easily discard one club and one heart - but on the fifth diamond what can be spared? The answer is nothing, so away goes a spade and now declarer can knock out the club ace. South has been squeezed in three suits.

Surprisingly only two tables played in 3N and made it.

The only Gloucestershire represenative at the EBU's National Swiss Teams in Solihull over the weekend was the team of Ashok Kwatra & David Simons, Pam Pearce & Steve Sasanow.  They were lying fourth overnight, and slipped back to 11th on the Sunday but that was still a good result in a field of 40 teams from all over the country. On the hand shown Pam & Steve combined well to bid a slam that was bid by only one third of the field.  The key is that the opening bid is not a minimum hand; despite having just 11 hcp, when you apply the Losing Trick count, it is a 5-loser hand.  That might exaggerate its value a little, but for sure it is a trick better than any minimum opening bid.  Pam chose 4♠ at this point, and Steve then proceeded to the slam via Blackwood.

That hand was from the last match and gained the team 10 imps in a in against a team whose memebers have in the past played for Scotland and for England in the Camrose. 

In the previous match this problem came up : dealer opened with ♠ AKQT42 ♥ Q5 ♦ A95 ♣ Q6  and heard the bidding start as 1♠ - P - 2♣  - 3♥. The intervention makes the forcing nature of 3♠ not so clear (unless 2♣ has been forcing to game) and both tables chose 4♠ to avoid missing game.   In both cases partner, with  ♠ 93 ♥ A ♦ QJ76 ♣ AKT953  came out with a reluctant pass and when spades behaved but clubs did not, declarer could still muster 13 tricks.    It was a flat board, and here just over a third of the field managed to reach the slam (actually 12 played at 6-level, 4 at 4-level).

Count it have been done better?  Unless 2♣ was game forcing then West does have a problem; it is usually important to show a 6-card or 7-card suit and so you might want to bid 3♠ on quite limited hands.  But that would be landing on a pinhead, and there are hands which need to show long spades but don't want to commit to spades.  Life becomes difficult if 3♠ is not forcing, so it should be, but who has ever discussed it - so the jump to 4♠ is reasonable.  [The only other option is the uniquitous takeout/values double but partner will never read you for this shape]   So after 4♠ might responder continue?  I think the answer has to be yes; slam is not certain but a try must be made and there is only one try availabl, bidding 5♥, and on today's hands partner would clearly accept.  Bridge is a difficult game, particularly if the opponents make jumps like 3♥.  [One should be grateful however that the hand did not bid 4♥]

Both the Dawes and Porter teams were winning by a small margin, and the Markham team was losing by a similar margin, when this hand came along, and the Markham team picked up the 52 imps which enabled them to win their match, by just 13 imps.

The first questions are around bidding, which is nearly automatic until the point shown. Automatic that is if your 1N rebid shows 15-17 and your 2♦ checkback is game forcing (very much the favoured style these days).  The one alternative to consider is a 4♣ splinter after 2♥.  It's not common to splinter in partner's suit, but it is a very descriptive choice, as partner can then judge whether or not the hands are fitting.  On the bidding as shown, the West hand counts as a 6-loser hand opposite a strong NT which is usually a 6-loser hand too. That means you cannot give up at 4♥, there has to be another try and here a 4♠ cue shows a feature and passes the decision to East.

It remains a close call as to who, if either, bids the slam. The two GCBA pairs in the Markham both opened a strong NT on this hand and West now transferred into hearts and continued with 4N. This bid is best used as a natural, quantitative raise but everyone took it as asking for key cards and after hearing of two, West settled for 6♥. 

When played by West the opening lead was the ♦8. Declared knocked out the ♥A and South carefully returned a passive diamond. Declared now took the spade finesse and was one off.  Notice how if South had returned a spade after winning the♥A, West might easily deduce that the spade king is with North, and be forced into the winning line of the club finesse. West might have tried harder, testing the clubs with ace and a couple of ruffs, before resorting to the spade finesse.

There were three instances of 6♥ by East. Two of them were the uninformative strong NT auctions described above; in both those cases South led a club, and declared wrapped up 12 tricks very easily. The final table had a long cue bidding sequence on the way to 6♥ and from this Mark Rogers was able to deduce that a spade was best and the spade lead killed 6♥.

We had two pairs from each team bid the slam, but our two pairs succeeded, and both of theirs failed.

You might or might not bid this up to 7N, but even if you are playing in 6N at pairs, since you have twelve top tricks, it is all about making the thirteenth. So let's focus on that.  The lead against a no-trump slam by East was a heart on 12 of the 13 times that contract was reached. What does that tell us?

Quite a lot.  Firstly, since it is so dangerous to lead away from a king against 6N, we have a strong expectation that the heart king is with North. So we will not take the heart finesse. We also have an inference that South has the spade queen, as if both suits offered a safe lead, then South might have led a spade.

We don't need to rely on that yet to make thirteen tricks. The first step, here as so often, is to cash your long suit and watch the discards. Here we see North start with two heart discards from North and then North discards two spades (suggesting North started with exactly four hearts).  As declarer, East can alway afford one club and a heart and a spade.  South's first discard is a heart.  On the final diamond, North discards another spade, and East can throw another heart.

The key chances for East are now that the clubs break 3-3 making the ♣7 a winner, or finding the spade queen, or a squeeze once one of the black suits is cashed.  There is always one layout that can go wrong, but here if you cash the top spades first then North has to discard a club on the second one and now the clubs run, while if you cash one spade and then the clubs you find that North is holding the fourth club and the heart king, so you take the spade finesse with certainty to collect South's queen.

The grand slam wasn't certain, but there were plenty of chances and the defence couldn't avoid giving you some help as you went along.  This makes the grand slam worth bidding. In practice half the field made 12 tricks and half the field made 13 tricks.

This was the wildest hand from Monday and the bidding started this way at most tables.

There were also three instances of a 2♠ opener (spades and another suit) and one of a 1♠ opener (which results in North bidding a slam, going down). After the 2♠ opener, North was very excited and two of those tables eneded up defending six hearts for a plus score, while the third played in 5♠x making.  All cases of opening the bidding scored well.

Over 4♥ five Wests were very fortunate that North - with a clear takeout double - passed and that was game made for East-West.  There are some who still play that the double of a 4-level opening suggests defending but this is a perfect example of why that style is considered ineffective. 

The other six Norths found a takeout double and South had an easy choice then of removing to 4♠. This was not enough to stop East-West continuing to 5♥ and it was now the big decision came. Two Souths (and it has to be South as North has already described their hand well) found the right choice in continuing with 5♠ and they were rewarded with a plus score. 

Both sides can make 11 tricks on this hand; it looks like further support for the old adage "if in doubt bid one more". For anyone who stopped below the 6-level on thsi hand, that was good advice.

Another fascinating hand from Tuesday evening at CBC was this board.  The auction shown is illustrative, as the only known auctions involved a strong 1N opening.   After the start of 1♣ - 1♦ - 1N showing 15-17 hcp, the West hand knows that there are at least 34 points between the two hands and therefore the hand must be played in slam.  How 7/24 tables in the pairs events managed to play in game remains a mystery.

Going higher than 6N is quite possible, as a long suit and 34+ hcp is worth more than two completely flat hands and 34+ hcp, but West cannot bid higher without first checking on aces.  To raise to 4N at this point would be quantitative, so West needs to get diamonds agreed as trumps first and then bid 4N.

The sequence shown uses a 2♦ checkback to ask about shape and creating a game force (2♣ would be the start for invitational hands) and then 3♦ to emphasise the suit.  East might actually support with two honours at this point but if East persists with 3N, West simply continues and once 4♦ has been bid, East should assume that the hand will be played in diamonds.

East's duty over 4♦ is to cue bid controls, and in the modern style either aces or kings are good enough, so the 5♣ cue bid denies the heart king. It frustrates West's intention to ask for aces but with at least 34 hcp between the two hands, West knows that they cannot be missing the ♣A and the ♥K, and the latter is known to be missing.

So now we know about aces, but we still don't know whether a vital card like the ♦K is missing.  What can West do now?   What about a cue bid of 5♥ and see what happens.  East replies with a cue bid of 6♣.  What can West deduce from that?  Firstly the presence of the ♣K, but secondly the absence of the ♠Q as East would cue bid that if held (having already denied the ace and king).

Does that tell us anything about the ♦K?  The answer is yes, with similar logic to that applied already.  We know the ♠Q and ♥K are missing, and that the defence have at most 6 hcp.  So West now knows that East has the ♦K and the ♣Q and the ♥Q.  At this point West can count twelve top tricks, and for a thirteenth there is the chance of the ♣J, a long club trick, a spade finesse or a heart finesse. 

Is that enough to bid the grand slam?  The answer is yes, because there are so many chances.  Should you make 13 tricks if you are in 7NT?  That's another interesting question and we'll discuss that one tomorrow.

Did anyone have a good bidding sequence to report?

This hand from Monday divided the field equally - five big scores to North-South, and five big scores to East-West.  This being a matchpoint pairs event the same scores could have been achieved with half the field making one less over-trick than the others in a part-score - but somehow  when it is a vulnerable game made in both directions it seems more interesting!

The bidding shown came from table two. The first question to ponder is the West opening bid. These days where a 1♣ opener is often prepared (clubs or balanced), and therefore gives little lead directing influence, it has become much more mainstream to open 1♠ when holding 5-5 in the blacks.  The 1♣ opener on this or a 5..6 shape is reserved for cases where you have enough strength to be sure of bidding spades twice later in the auction. This hand doesn't quite qualify for that. 

But whichever suit is opened North will overcall in hearts.  It was a very cheeky bid by East, 1♠ on just 2 hcp, but the spade suit has such importance that every chance to introduce it should be taken.  Here, after South started to show a good hand (with a cue bid) it enabled West to bounce all the way to the 4-level. It was normal now for North to pass, and South with five trumps to bid one more.  Five tables got this far in the bidding, but two subsided in 4♥ and three subsided in 4♠.

The crucial decision came over 5♥ - do you defend or bid on?  In practice one bid on, two passed, and two doubled.   The right choice by West isn't clear - two aces and more in defence and perhaps something from partner says that their game is going down, but with a void heart, making 5♠ for a higher score is not out of the question.  Either answer could be right on different days - perhaps the solution is to pass it round to partner and let partner decide. On this occasion partner will pass.

But now to the defence - all four tables defending 5♥ led the ♣T which was won by the ace.  At exactly one table of the four, West played back a club to give a ruff and then won the ♦A at trick three to give another ruff - collecting +500.   The other three assumed that partner had led from doubleton ten and tried to put East on lead with a spade to get a diamond through.  But this didn't work.  The failing defence is plausible with the auction shown, but if partner produces a ♣T lead out of the blue when West has opened 1♠ then it should be easily identified as a singleton.

A lot can swing on these very close decisions - here in both the bidding and the play.

During last week three county players - Richard Chamberlain, Paul Denning and Patrick Shields - played in the Teams game at the two-yearly European Open Championships, held this year in Montecatini in Italy. Patrick & Richard played together in the Seniors teams, while Paul played with Adrian Thomas and two Welshmen in the Open Teams.

This was hand 5 in the first of the Swiss Teams matches in the Open, Ladies and Seniors Teams.  Twice (across 178 tables) East-West were allowed to play the hand and for the remainder, 40 pairs played in hearts, one played in 4N, one North played in 5♦,  and the remainding 134 in spades.  The play is clear enough in spades - you just draw trumps and take the heart finesse (twice). It loses and you always end up with 12 tricks.  The fact that three pairs managed 13 tricks must be put down to someone revoking!

The play in 6♥ is not to simple, and nearly half the thirty declarers in 6♥ failed to make 12 tricks. Nine of the failures were when East was on lead and played the ♠T at trick one, and now when partner won the ♥K and could see the long spades and no diamonds in dummy, the spade ruff came fast.  All declarers who had a club or heart lead succeeded, but ten declarers (mostly South) were faced with a diamond lead.   They had to ruff in the South hand, and then cross to the North hand to try the heart finesse.  When this lost and West played a second diamond it looked like curtains, but it wasn't.   A number settled for going down, but those more awake ruffed the second diamond, and cashed the ♥A to see the ten fall.  Now over to the North hand with a top black card to draw the last trump with the ♥8 and there were 12 tricks.

But of course you don't want to play in hearts.  So how should the hand be bid?   There is an old saying "what do you call an 8-card suit"  and the answer is "trumps".  The secret to this hand is for South to ignore the heart suit. In reponse to partner's opening, show good long spades and slam interest.  If you do, the North hand should be middling cooperative, since the top spades and the club ace are excellent cards, although there is not much else.  The most convincing sequence I have found was when 3♠ set the suit and North cue bid 4♣ over which South leapt to 5♦ as Exclusion Blackwood (ace asking but ignoring diamonds). Now North showed two key cards but not the queen of trumps (with 5N) and there was room (6♣) to ask for kings and North denied any, so that 6♠ was known to be the right contract.

Although a lot of pairs got to spades, only 90 of them (exactly two thirds) reached the correct level, with 3 bidding the grand slam (down) and 41 stopping in game.  So even at this level bidding a small slam in spades when the grand slam is on a finesse proved too difficult for half the field.

This hand produced quite a variety of scores on Monday.   It is hard to see how so many tables played the hand in 4♥ undoubled (stories, please).  Given South surely opened it must mean that neither North nor South bid after that!

The expected bidding sequence is as shown, and now South has a difficult choice to make. Where South settled for 4♠ this brought forward 5♥ from the other side and double seems inevitable.  But that is only two down.

One South (an Indian gentleman) was more enthused as South on the above sequuence and over 4♥ he chose 5♥.  The sense that there was a contract for North-South is correct, but the bid unfortunately by-passes both 4♠ and 5♦.  Looking at it from a positive persepctive, South can see only four losers and if partner has three of the required cover cards (♠K, ♦A, ♦Q, ♣A) then there is an easy slam.  The catch is partner might only have two (but here the singleton spade and long diamonds compensate for one each).  A double (always takeout) would have been more flexible over 4♥ but the cue got the job done, when partner bid 6♦.  Over this East not unreasonably bid 6♥ (a decent sacrifice) but South was having none of that and continued with 7♦.   The grand slam is indeed an excellent contract and deserves all the match-ponts.

One table saw West overcall 3♥ and that was too much for North who passed (correctly);  East raised to 4♥ and South doubled.  This was passed out, but really it should have been removed as double in these circumstances is always showing a generally good hand, and not showing values in their suit. 

There was plenty of variety in the choices on many hands last night; on this hand North-South played in four different denominations and East-West played in the fifth!  The auction shown is that of the Constables, whereby Val ended in 4♠.  

From East's perspective this contract looked to be doomed, but look what happened. West sensibly enough chose a club lead, which has an appealing combination of being passive (not giving away any tricks) and agressive (might catch a ruff).  This went to the jack and queen, after which declarer tried the trump suit. When this behaved badly, it was back to clubs to cash the winners there.  East got in with the club ace, and could cash two trumps but whatever came next South could win in hand.  It still looks like there is a diamond to lose, but Val correctly cashed her winners to see what would happen, and when they are cashed the West hand is squeezed in diamond and hearts.  Decalrer comes down to ♦A87 opposite  ♥K ♦K9  and West has no answer.   Contract makes despite the bad break.

East initially felt relieved not to have been tempted by a double.  But later the thought came - perhaps I could have beaten this contract.  Can you see how?

Partner has opened 4♠ vulnerable, so your two aces must mean game was likely to make.  On that basis you need to be doubling when the opponents bid on.  Your double of 4N first was intended to get partner engaged, as you might have been uncomfortable doubling clubs; but it is easy to double 5♥ when you get the chance.  You start, naturally, with the ♠A and partner plays the four; your carding is low for even and low to encourage.   But if partner thinks you might have a singleton then the signal should be a suit preference.  What comes at trick two?

First of all well done to the Markham team who have now won their division and will get a go at the national playoffs in July.

This hand looks like it is all about the bidding but the play made a difference too. The decent slam was reached at the majority of the tables, and we might comeback to the bidding later, but for now consider the play in 6♠ on a red suit lead.

A good trump break is clearly wanted, so drawing trumps first looks right. After that comes the question of how to play the clubs. With five trump tricks and three in the red suits, you need four tricks and can afford one loser. No 3-2 break matters and there are some 4-1 breaks you can handle and some you cannot. Those you can handle are stiff king anywhere and singleton nine or ten with South. Small to the ace does that.

But what I saw was small to the queen. This is a textbook false card situation for South. Playing the deuce leaves declared no option but to try the ace next and that generates five tricks in clubs and thirteen overall. When the Notts man dropped the nine, declarer naturally played small to the jack next in case that had been a singleton. 

The result of all this was declared made 12 tricks and not 13. It scored at +980 as a flat board with the other two tables, but if it had been thirteen tricks it would have scored as +1 at both tables and the Dawes team would have won 11-9 as opposed to the 10-10 draw it achieved. It was only an overtrick but it did earn Nottinghamshire a VP.

This was the strongest of the four hands in the first match on which questions of slam arose. After the bidding shown (or where South bid 3♠ on the second round rather than 3♥), some Norths raised to game and there matters rested.  The others cue bid 4♣ showing a control there as well as suspport and some slam interest. A new suit at the 4-level is rarely natural (for me only after 1M-1N-3M where you might have a long suit not strong enough to bid at the 2-level).  It just about always agrees the last bid suit as trumps, and where there are options it promises a control there (other times it might just be a good raise, so that 4♥ say is a limited raise).   After this cue bid, South could happily bid a control in the other major and now North will check for aces before bidding the slam.   Bridge sometimes seems an easy game but only 4 of the 12 pairs playing at County level reached the slam - in which there are 12 top tricks after the ♠A goes.  In the CBC Pairs movement, 0/7 bid the slam.

The other boards with slam interest were more tricky. On Board 4, there is a 10-count (♠T976 ♥Q92 ♦KT72 ♣AJ) hand facing an opener showing 21-22 balanced.   It is natural to test first for a spade fit, but over 3♣ partner bids 3N to deny any four or five card major.  Do you give up?  Everyone did, but a simulation (admitted only only 28 hands) showed that slam was excellent opposite this hand on 43% of the deals, was about even money on 21% of the deals, and was a bad proposition on 36%.   Even with no judgement as to which to bid and which not to bid, that looks like bidding a slam is worthwhile.  With judegment it should be a Good Thing. Although you want to play in diamonds when you have a diamond fit, it was curious that the times you don't have a diamond fit - where partner often has 5+ clubs, were the most likely to give you a slam (50% of those were excellent slams).  What this means is that it is probably worth a raise to 4N on these hands.  On this occasion partner has a 4333-shape and 21-count, so it is clear for partner to refuse.  In practice, everyone (19 tables) stopped in 3N.

The next hand to mention is Board 5, where some did bid a slam (6 of 19) but  only two made it.   A similar bidding principle applies to it, when the auction starts 1♠-2♣-3♠ and you are looking at ♠K64 ♥74 ♦KQ6 ♣AQ763.   To show spade support and extras, you bid a new suit (diamonds here) at the 4-level.  Partner will cooperate with a 4♥ cue and then it is up to you whether to allow partner off the hook with 4♠, or to continue with a club cue bid.  Slam is actually quite respectable as there are lots of chances, but it is someway short of the 12 top tricks of board 8. Thes best line involves trying to ruff out ♣Kxx after playing two trumps.  Today nothing succeeds unless you guess to finesse West for the ♠Q and even then the club and heart finesses won't work.  Exercise for the reader to find 12 tricks!

Finally the question of slam arose on Board 13, when partner responds to your 1♠ opener with 2♦ and you are looking at ♠QJ762 ♥5 ♦Q6543 ♣AK.  You want to show diamond support as there could well be a diamond slam on here, but you might want to play in a spade game or 3N.  The answer is a jump to 3♥ here as a splinter (since 2♥ is forcing).  Partner could bid 3N over this, or show spade support, or confirm that diamonds are trumps.  In fact, partner bids 3♠ and you now get the chance (very important) to limit your hand by just bidding 4♠.  Partner was never slamming on this hand, but the pair who bid 4♦ over 2♦ lost the chance to limit the hand and their slam investigation resulted in 5♠-1).

This hand from Monday was a very reasonable slam which was only bid at one table, and that declarer went down. It was unlucky to go down when the first round fo clubs was ruffed with a singleton trump, but the hand is interesting and the slam concerned is worth some analysis.

The bidding to slam was as shown. There were three Easts who did not open on the 6160 shape, and they all heard a 3♣ opener on their left passed around to them. Two passed that out and one tried 3♦ and played there.  Tame stuff when compared to the other tables!  Two Easts found a 1-level suit opener and ended in spade games, but half the field started as East with a 2♠ opener. 

Looking at the hand as declarer in 6♥ we have to assume that hearts break either 2-2 or 3-1 (yielding 6 or 7 trump tricks), and there are four top tricks outside, which is never enough. The primary source of extra tricks has to be clubs and for sure some winners can be set up by ruffing out the suit, and there will always be two long cards eventually.  There is also the diamond jack which might become a trick. If the clubs break 3-2 then the hand is trivial - one ruff sets up the suit and there is a diamond entry (and a spade ruff later) to cash the suit. We need to think about clubs breaking 4-1.

Suppose we ruff the spade lead and draw two trumps before setting about clubs. A club to the ace and a ruff, diamond to the king and a ruff,  and a spade ruff - this will put the lead in South with winning clubs. If trumps had been 2-2 these will cash, but if trumps had been 3-1 the first of these will be ruffed and we are down to 11 tricks. So this approach will not cope with a 3-1 trump break with a 4-1 club break. 

Suppose we tackle clubs first - playing to the ace and then ruffing one before drawing trumps; that fails if the defence can ruff the second (low) club with short trumps. This only fails on the 3-1 trumps and 4-1 clubs with both shortages in the same hand. That's an improvement.

FInally let's look at the third alternative, one round of trumps and then clubs. If the second round of clubs gets ruffed by the defence, then we know the trumps can be drawn, and the ♦K and spade ruff entries are enough to reach the clubs. This seems to work with all 4-1 club breaks - so even better.

We have, so far, ignored the 5-0 club break which actually happened. Drawing two trumps and then finding a 5-0 club break forces you to rely on the diamond finesse for the twelfth trick. So we make half the time. Drawing no trumps when clubs are 5-0 will see an immediate ruff and if the remaining trumps can be drawn you are back to the diamond finesse, so that is slightly worse. Drawing one trump and then finding a 5-0 break will let you make eight trumps and four outside winners on the layout today, but when the ruff is from two or three trumps you wil have to resort to the diamond finesse again.

It all seems to add up to the fact that one trump and then clubs is the winner!  We cannot all do this analysis on every hand, but it is worth noting the pattern, which miht be useful inthe future.

[There is a plausible line of going for three spade ruffs, but in the end position you have to cash South's winners and lead a club, and could go down on clubs breaking and trumps 3-1]

Jack writes: If East is 6331 then the one round of trumps and then clubs line doesn't succeed. East can ruff the second club and then play a spade which forces you to use your spade ruff entry before you can draw trumps. Also, I don't think we can rely on the diamond finesse if East is void in clubs. Say if East is 6340, then they just discard when you lead a club at trick 3, overruff when you ruff a club small and force you to ruff a spade too early as before. If West is void in clubs and East is 6115, then the only winning line is to play a top club at trick two otherwise West will ruff the club at trick three and you will eventually have a spade loser (of course a non-spade lead would have beaten the contract in this case, but with void-QJx-QTxxxxx-Axx you could hardly blame West for leading their partner's suit).

This hand was played in 3N at nine of the eleven tables and all but one of them by North.  The bidding shown will have been very common. The one variation is that West might consider a double; as well as getting partner off to the right lead, there is a chance of a decent penalty as it looks like all suits are breaking badly and the opposition are (or at least North is) limited in strength.   But it is dangerous, and wasn't chanced at any table.

The diamond lead was found at all but two tables and was a bit unlucky as the North's who ran that round (expecting the leader to hold the jack for a small card led) gained a bonus trick from the lead. The next step was to play on hearts; sometimes the right action when declarer goes to knock out an ace is to dis-oblige, but not always.  Declarer would be moderately happy with ducks here as it unblocks the suit.  When East rose with the ♥A it has the potential to make life awkard.  East expected partner to have good spades on this auction, but felt the spades could wait.  It was more important to take out North's club entry before the hearts were unblocked.

So he led his highest club (the five) but partner did not read it correctly and covered the ♣9 with the ♣K, and declarer could now set up the clubs and overtake the second heart with the king to get entry to them.   Could West have known?  The answer is yes;  declarer surely has 10 hcp on this bidding and that means partner can have at most 5 hcp, and partner has already shown up with the ♥ A and almost certainly the ♦ J.  Which places all the clcub honours.   Notice how awkard it becomes for declarer if the ♣9 is allowed to hold. Overtaking to set up the suit loses two club tricks, while letting the ♣ 9 win cuts you off from hand.  :(

Could East have made it easier for partner?  The answer is yes;  a spade switch after winning the ♥A and then rely on partner to play a club.   Much safer.

In fact no heroics were needed by EW to beat this hand;  even after the gift of a diamond lead,  declarer only had prospect of 8 tricks and was always going to struggle.  Still 44% of declarers did succeed, which might justify the assertion that declarer play is easier than defence. 

Making 3N on this hand from Monday proved too difficult for the majority of declarers in that contract. There were two steps to success, both of which apply in lots of circumstances.

In each instance East led a spade in response to West's bid. Declarer can see eight top tricks at this point and must look to either the king of diamonds or the queen of hearts as the extra trick. West's bid suggests values with that hand and makes the heart finesse look to be the safer options. It does no harm however to duck the frist two rounds of spades - and it was failure to do that which cost the three declarers the contract.

But that was not all there was to the hand, as the planned heart finesse was about to lose. The key to success was cashing all your winners before the crucial  moment of the finesse. By the time they reached that point, the discarding from East-West made it clear that the heart finesse was not going to work. Both declarers therefore played to the heart ace and a second heart to East's king. East was down to ♦AQ at this point and had to give dummy the last trick. There are many times where cashing declarer's long suit is the key to putting the defence under pressure, and it often pays.

Today's hand shows up a simple technique, which a surprising number (7 out of 19) missed in the Spring Fours last weekend.  The contract was easily bid (at every table except the one which tried 3N and went off), and was never in doubt with four trump tricks and three sets of ace-king outside.   The opening lead was the ♥Q won by the ace, and declarer played the ♠9 which held, and then a second spade which West won with the ace, while East discarded.  West returned a second heartWwon by the king. What do you do now?  Do you settle for losing a heart and a spade, or do you try to do better?

This hand from last night presented some interesting dilemmas in the bidding and in the play.  Let's do the bidding first.  Clearly South is rather too good a hand to open with 1♥ and the next question is how to treat the hand after 2♣-2♦ ?  If you show the two suits, you have forced yourself to the 3-level and essentially created a game forcing auction as the lowest point at which you will stop is 3♥ and then only if you have no fit.  It seems better therefore to treat is as strong balanced. It has 22 hcp, but is above average even for that count because it has no jacks and has a decent five card suit; you must however be willing to downgrade a little because KQ-doubleton doesn't usully pull its weight.   If my ranges includes 22-23 then it fits fine; if I had to choose between 21-22 and 23-24 on this hand, I would tend to go for the higher range.  Having got that far, if North is expecting about 22-hcp balanced, what is the best course of action with the long clubs?

This isn't a problem we see every day, so thinking back to the last time might not help.  One tool which can help is the Hand generator (http://playbridge.com/pb_gen_pick1set1.php) on the internet which allows consideration of a random selection of 22-hcp hands opposite this particular North hand.  Using that tool to look at 25 hands, it seems that 44% of the time you'd want to be in 5♣ (or occasionally 5♦ is just as good), 12% of the time you want to be in 3N, 20% of the time you want to be in 2N, but 24% of the time you want to be called urgently to the telphone (as there is no viable contract achievable).  The North hand just has to guess which of the answers to go for, as you cannot stop in a part-score after this start to the auction.  On today's layout, the best answer is 5♣ but it will struggle with the heart finesse wrong (but it take a spade at trick one and a heart lead then to beat it - and both declarers in 5♣ suffered this fate).

At the table North chose 3N and now it became a defnesive play problem.  All the current wisdom suggests that leading from honours into a strong NT hand will cost you tricks more often than not, and that makes the diamond lead here seem to be a stand-out.  Decalrer will be pleased at this, and should cash the diamonds before trying a top club. West is likely to duck lest declarer has KQ6, and will win the next round. At this point it is vital to switch to spades, but can West tell?  If declarer has played all four diamonds then yes, as partner has had a chance to discard and can surely throw a heart to show no interst there.   If declarer has not cashed the fourth diamond, it is very difficult, but a spade is still indicated as a heart could be so dangerous, giving declarer an entry to the long clubs.

At the table, West found the fourth best lead of a spade and the defence started with six rounds of that suit. If declarer throws four hearts then it is clear for the defence to switch to hearts, and if declarer doesn't then the defence will always get the ♥ K and the ♣ A to put declarer an ignominious down four!  Feels terrible with sucha good hand. 

On the evening there were only two declarers who made their contract, and these contracts were 1♥ and 2♥.

This hand was from round four of the Spring Fours and a number of declarers slipped up.  There's what happened : after West opened 1♥, North made a takeout double.  East felt it was a good raise and so chose 2N, but South had five card "support" for partner's implied spades and could not resist bidding 3♠.  when this came back round to East he bid 4♥ as a two way shot - it might make but it was probably a decent sacrifice over 3♠.   North had heard his vulnerable partner bid and had soem defensive values, so he doubled.

Against 4♥x, North started with the spade ace.  The discouraging signal from partner was a disappointment, so he now switched to a diamond.  This ran to the king at both tables in our match, and one South returned a spade, the other a diamond. Could it make a difference?   And if we accept the unfortunate lead, has declarer been on the ball so far?

The most innocuous hands can present many choices both in bidding and defence. Here in the bidding North faced the frequent question of whether to play in 3N or in the 5-3 major fit.  On any one hand either option might turn out to be best; statistical analysis in the past has been inconclusive, with neither choice showing a clear advantage over many hands.  Here North's shape being 5422 encourages a suit contract and in practice North chose 4♠.

When East led the ♣5 against this game, he created an unexpected dilemma for declarer. The dilemma was this : if the trumps break badly, then taking a successful club finesse is vital, while if they break evenly taking a losing finesse offers the defence a chance to take a diamond ruff. Which should you go for?  You are comparing (a) a winning club finesse and a 4-1 spade break which combines at about a 15% gain, with (b) a losing club finesse and running into a diamond ruff when the trumps were 3-2.  But what is the percentage on this?   It needs the diamonds not to be 3-3 and for there not to be a blockage preventing the ruff, which mihgt be about 50%.  This gives, for (b), roughly 12%, and then you have to allow something for the defence missing the right play, so perhaps even less.  Clearly you finesse!

Declarer at the table chose the club finesse and ran into a diamond ruff - down one.  Unlucky!  Or do we blame South - after all if South had not bid such a poor heart suit, East would surely have led a heart and now declarer cannot go wrong!   :)

This hand was an interersting play and defensive problem, and in practice many errors were made.  Here's is what happened at two tables.

Both tables had West playing in 1N and North led a heart.  The defenders cashed five rounds and declarer had to discard three times from dummy, and twice from hand. It was easy to throw two clubs from West and a diamond from dummy and then a club and then he threw a spade.  North played a spade and South won the ♠K.  He hadn't noticed how  North had carefully played the ♥8 before the ♥T (a suit preference signal for clubs) and he played a diamond through.  Declarer failed to realise that South had passed initially and shown up with 9 hcp already, so that North really had to have the ♣K and probably the ♦Q also.  [Actually a club return would never be from the king, so that would have been rather a strong signal as to where the ♣K was]. West was able to lose to the ♦Q but then have three diamond tricks to go with two spades and the club ace for down one.

Another West did a little better;  he did not discard any spades from dummy, choosing one club and two diamonds.  When the North finished the hearts and played a spade, South won and returned a diamond, but this time Steve Peterkin had spotted where the missing high cards were.  He won the ♦A, carefully cashed the ♣A (Vienna Coup, setting up the squeeze) and then cashed his spades - three of them.  This created too much pressure for North who had to keep the ♣K and so threw away a diamond.  Steve could now drop the ♦Q to make his contract on a squeeze.

But could the defence have done better?

The official scorer should soon confirm that the joint winners of the Summer Teams (it being an individual competition) are Tricia Gilham, Richard Harris & Mark Rogers.  They turned up on five of the six sessions and Mark had three different partners over those sessions.   They came in the top four in all five occasions, albeit equal fourth in one session.  Well done to all.

The team they overtook was led by Garry Watson and it was this board which stopped the members of that team coming first.  This was the problem at table nine.  The 2♣ bid was either a single suited heart hand, or a hand with 4-cards in hearts plus a longer second suit.  With the North collection, you "know" they will bid their heart fit, but you have some values too; you might feel an inclination to obstruct that if you can.

Your options are bidding 2♦ and then bidding spades later (presumably after they bid hearts), bidding 2♥ as a (often limited) takeout double (they can double to ind their fit), or bidding 2N as a puppet (partner must bid 3♣) after which you will bid 3♦.    What do you fancy?

[LATER NEWS: other tables had North facing a similar probleme but over a 2♥ overcall;  now the choices are double or 2N]

The Spring Fours is the EBU's top quality double elimination teams game, held every year in Stratford at this time of year. It attracts top teams from all the home countries and this year also had players from Brazil, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Norway, Poland, Slovenia and the USA.  Despite the attractions of the Cheltenham Congress one team from Gloucestershire did go to Stratford, with John Atthey, Paul Denning and Patrick Shields joined by Filip Kurbalija from Cardiff.

The standard is as high as you get in this country, and the competition lasts four and a half days. It is all a series of 32-board matches, and once you lose twice you are out of the main event and into one of the secondary events. The players are all very friendly and you should feel encouraged to attend (a most unfortunate clash however still exists).  The last rounds of this year's event, featuring Zia's top seeded team, the Engliash national team, the Irish National team, and the team organised by Andrew Black will be broadcast on BBO today (Tuesday) starting at 1000 hrs.  Well worth watching.

This hand was curious, as when you look at the East-West hands you see 25 hcp and you expect everyone to bid game.  But if you look at the game prospects, they are not great.  After one round of diamonds there might be no entry at all to the West hand and you have to lead hearts and clubs away from East's honours.  If fact 3N can be made but it needs East to win the trick one diamond with the ace and lead a club to the king.  Not everyone found that.

When you have the auction shown do you feel good or bad?  The answer should be neiether, as you have made a normal action and what you find when you look at the traveller is that only 11 out of 32 tables bid to game and four of them went down.  So the average result was a few hundreds plus to East-West.   If North-South had opened a weak 1N then the auction would have been different but again if East did anything other than double, you would expect the contract to be a part-score.

There was another hand a few rounds later when after P-1♣ you have to bid with  ♠ AKQT87♥65♦A653♣K   and your 1♠ overcall was passed out.  Declarer then proceeded to collect 13 (yes 13) tricks, for a flat board, as exactly the same had happened in the other room.  When you look at the traveller you find 16 others in the same contract;  on that hand we must presume a club raise by South gave East-West a second chance, or again a weak 1N opening (which is what RHO held) might catch a double and propel East-West to game.

It is odd that on both hands the 1N opener makes it easier for East to show its strength;  in a way the 1♣ opener is more disruptive.   Funny game!

This hand from the last league round was found tricky by a number of pairs, but some of the over-bidders got lucky when the cards were lying kindly and their ambitious contract made.  Others were not so lucky.

The illustrated bidding is a normal start and at this point he South hand begins to think about slams.  It would be easy to rebid hearts now showing six (forcing after the GF 2N rebid) but it's not a great description of the hand. If partner has shown 15+ then there is aslight dilemma : opposite 18-19 we want to be in a slam for sure, but opposite 15-17 there is still a chance and we must engage partner in the conversation.

One option some play over this 2N rebid is a 3♣ asking about range : partner bids 3♦ on the top half of the range, and 3♥ or 3♠ or 3N with the bottom half of the range.  Here you would find out that you have a max of 32 hcp between the two hands, which doesn't rule out a slam but makes it less likely.

There is no easy answer to the bidding (but please say if you see one).  The play in slam is interesting : in 6♥ you have no choice but to play for the trumps breaking and the king onside. Even that is not enough if a spade lead has been found, but this is too difficult and the the league winners failed to find this.  But they had a flat board when their team-mates played in 6N, which depended on the same favourable heart layout.

6♠ wasa more interesting contract.  After winning the minor suit lead, a spade towards the king (best odds in the suit being to finesse the ten) sees the jack appear, strongly suggesting that the suit is breaking 5-1.  Declarer can recover fromthe shock by now leading a heart towards the queen, and later leading hearts through West to neutralise West's trumps.  Entries to South must be preserved in doing this, and in particular the ♠T must be preserved as an entry.  Difficult, andnot found by the team in 6♠.

This is the problem from the other table on the same board.  You can see that West here was rather more certain what the right contract should be.  The opening lead was a diamond and when South won that with the jack and looked at dummy, the one danger which was urgent was the heart ruff option, so South quickly played a spade.  You finesse this (the best odds) but it loses and now a heart comes back.  How do you plan to make this contract?

This was an interesting hand from Monday, where the successful contracts were three part-scores fron North-South, and one game from East-West.

All but two (correctly) opened 1♦ on the North hand in third seat, and heard a 1♥ overcall.  Divergence started now with two pairs directly supporting diamonds, while ten declarers preferred to show their spades; one South managed to do both with a fit-jump to 2♠. [The other two auctions started with 1N from North]. A key question now was how high should West bid?  The choices over 1♠ were 2♣ (once), 2♥ (twice), 3♣ (once - another useful fit jump), 3♥ (four times) and 4♥ (twice). 

The results were varied but in all cases but one North showed their spade support which allowed South to judge what to do next; the case where they didn't show spade support was when one West jumped to 4♥; there were misjudgements galore after the various starts, but only two tables managed not to bid 4♠ (going off) over the 4♥ game which also had four losers. A key to these situations is to leave the opponents the last guess in a competitive auction - and here the jump to 4♥ was the choice which most deserved success.

But does it look right to play or to defend? First from the West-East perspective looking at the two hand we can see a sure 4 losers which makes bidding 4♥ a bad choice, but we can also see an expectation of 2.7 (do check that out) tricks in defence - so we expect 4♠ to make more often than not. From the North-South perspective, looking at just those two hands, there is an expectation of just over 4 losers playing in 4♠ alongside an expectation of 3.5 tricks in defence against 4♥ which actually strongly suggests a sacrifice.

The players cannot during the bidding see their partner's hand or its shape, but if they could then East-West would judge to bid up to 4♥ and North-South would judge to bid to 4♠ - which means that 8 tables, despite going negative, did the right thing in bidding 4♠.

The Law of Total Tricks is a concept which can be applied to this sort of situation, although it doesn't always work; looking at a 9 card fit in each direction, the default here is that there are 18 tricks, and we find that the limit in each direction is 9 tricks - which is consistant with the LTT.

This hand had a few interesting features, this time in the play rather than the bidding.  The bidding shown was typical, with the 2N then 3N sequence by North showing a raise to game with a stopper in their suit and no four card major. The opening lead is one to ponder : clearly a diamond works brilliantly, but a heart was more common.  Should a diamond be found?  There is something about trying to set up this heart suit, with just a queen and a king as entries, which is not so appealing - so the answer is yes there is a case.

But let's go back to the heart lead.  From declarer's perspective there are now three top tricks in each of clubs and hearts plus the ace of spades, and an expectation of the fourth club being a trick too.  On that basis, the target looks to be obtaining one more trick from spades and we all take the double finesse to do that.  Running the ♠Q or ♠T also has the (seeming) advantage of losing the next trick to the safe hand - or at least the hand that cannot lead a diamond to good effect.

So declarer rose with the ♥A and ran the ♠Q to West, who won continued with another heart.  Winning that in hand, declarer crossed to clubs to play another spade, and got a great shock. Suddenly there was one less trick in clubs. But the spades might break; when the ♠T was covered by the jack and ace it was back to the ♠9 only to find a disappointment there too.  Two options remained : lead up to the ♦A or an end-play on West to lead away from the ♦A, which he was likely to have for his bid.  That looked easy - cash some clubs ending in hand and watch what West discards.  If West has only one diamond left duck a diamond to the ace, and if West has two left then cash the top heart and exit in spades and wait for the ♦K.   All very reasonable and that's what declarer did, but when West was forced to lead away from his ♦QJ it was to his partner's ace and he could cash the ♣J to beat the contract. Sad.

In practice 6 of the 9 declarers as South made the game, and 3 did not.

This hand from Monday looks like an innocuous 3N but there were two tables who went wrong - and others who tried to go off. It's worth looking at the different options.

Once the diamond ace is knocked-out there are 8 top tricks.  One option is to develop diamonds for 3 or 4 tricks which would deliver nine or ten. The danger is that if you have to lose the lead twice the other side might get two diamonds to go with three hearts. Another option is to sneak through one diamond and then play clubs for four tricks.

It's tricky to work out the odds, but the diamonds line will only fail if both red suits break badly and the same hand holds four diamonds and five hearts (which is a 16.95% chance). For the one diamond then clubs line - assuming the first diamond wins - is with these pips about about a 76% shot - which isn't quite as good. The simple oiption wins!

At the table we had eight declarers bashed out diamonds, and all had an easy time when these broke evenly.  There were four declarers who played one round of diamonds which was ducked and then reverted to clubs - the bad club break scuppered two of them (whio had ducked trick one) and should have killed a third while the fourth survived, Only one declarer started with a club to the ace and then the ♣9 to the ♣T and the ♣K, which allowed time to switch to diamonds. 

And there was one declarer who got a small heart lead and won ♥9 on the first round, and the robots who played in 5♣ and went off in that.

The 2017 World Championships are taking place in Lyons over this week and next week. The only British representation is the English Ladies Team completing in the Venice Bowl. Their day to day progress is recorded by the EBU and is easily seen on their website at www.ebu.co.uk

This hand comes from the first round match between some of Europe's best, Helness and Helgemo for Monaco, against long standing American champions Meckstroth and Rodwell for the USA.  The Americans are well known for not needing 24 points to make 3N and this hand shows that the style they adopted in their youth still applies and delivers when they are old enough to play in the seniors!

The 1♦ opener is Precision style, denying 16+ (when they open 1♣) and encompassing a weak NT. After the other three had bid, South was looking at possibly the best hand at the table and started with a redouble.  Given partner had overcalled vulnerable, when the opponents bid game he felt sure they were too high and doubled the game. 

Let's look at those bids. The 1♦ opener is on a hand of just average strength and just one ace and no kings; we would never consider such a bid, although the lead-directing value might justify the risk in first seat when non-vulnerable against vulnerable.  The 1♠ overcall again we would hardly consider; non-vul we might think of 2♠ but not at red. Good players are quite circumspect about jump overcalls when vulnerable, and will often make a 1-level overcall on such a hand, and that's what Helness was doing here.  The rest of the auction seems inevitable after that start, with opener's 1N bid an attempt to dampen partner's enthusiasm. Is this the same game we play?

But now to the play. Will the contact make?

I was slightly disappointed when our opponents made 4♥ on this deal, after a successful spade guess, but it was interesting to see that all declarers playing in spades made the same number of tricks. Not all the auctions can have been the one shown as five tables played the hands in NT and five Souths played in hearts but only two Norths. The leads varied but either a club or heart is a neutral start and can still be found after the ♦A is cashed.

How is declarer to takle 4♥?  It looks very much like a loser in each of hearts, diamonds and clubs - so it comes down to not losing a spade.  At my table on ♣Q lead declarer drew two trumps and exited with a diamond towards the queen.  West rose and cashed the top heart before playing a second club. [If only declarer had played a second club first, West would have been end-played - was that an option one can find?]  Declarer tried winning and exiting in clubs but East played a second diamond and declarer had to ruff in dummy and choose a line in spades.

She chose a winner by playing a spade to the ten.  I asked why she got it right and the answer was around an expectation that West migt be less inclined to double 2♦ with fewer hcp, and so was more likely to have the spade queen. It was a positive reason (good) but not very strong.  Success depended not just on the spade guess but on being able to make four spade tricks. The line chosen works for Q-alone or Qx or Qxx onside, and the alternative of small to the king and then lead back the ten works for West having Q-alone, 9x or xxx.   So it was an even money choice (at 36.7% success rate).

However, the best choice in the spade suit, in isolation, is to lead the king and then the four, collecting on Q6xx and Q6xxx (both back and run the ten next) and Qxx and Qx with East, as well as any singleton Q.  Declarer had lost some options by delaying playing the suit until there were limitations on the entries position.  The value in doing this might depend on your opinion of the opponents - are they likely to help if you give them the chance?  Here they did not.

But actually declarer can do better than any of this. Look at the trump suit - is it possible to make more than four tricks?  How about this approach - win ♣K and lead a diamond.  Suppose they win and play another club; you win that and ruff a diamond, then ♥K and ♥A and ruff another diamond.  If you can find the spade queen with West now (because you have gained a heart trick) you have no need of a 3-3 or otherwise useful spade break. Playing a spade to the ten and ruffing the fourth diamond means you always make 5 trump tricks, and with two clubs and three spades you are home when the ♠Q is onside (a whole 50% success rate).

Another variation is to take a spade finesse at trick two. Whether you win or lose, you can follow up with two trumps and then try cashign spades to ditch a clcub. If successful in that you can ruff South's third club with the ♥9 and that means one less loser.  This might actually be the best line as (assuming a 3-2 trump break as most lines need) you will succeed unless the ♠Q is offside and the hand with three trumps can ruff the third spade.  Now we are talking a 70% success rate.

It is amazing how many ways there are to play a hand, often with hidden extra chances, but so many times the extra chance doesn't matrer, and that makes it easy to fail to notice it.  But some day it will matter, so do be on the lookout for these !

This hand looks straightforward from a North-South perspective and you easily reach 4♥.   The shock comes when you first play trumps and find they break 5-0.  Can you recover?

All those defending against 4♥ found a club lead, either the queen or the ♣4 when the game was played by South.  With prospects of only two spades to lose and the diamond ace, it is natural to start with drawing trumps, but curiously which top trump you play first matters.   It all comes down to the need for entries to the North hand when trumps break badly.  Winning the club ace on the lead of the queen at trick one offers you an extra club trick letting you cater for the diamond ace being offside.  But this option gets lost if you play out the ♥2 at trick two.  You need to play a top trump from North so that you can continue (with either minor) when you find the bad news.  It is hard to foresee that this matters; it looks more like you'd want the North hand entries later for after trumps are drawn, which inclines one towards using the top trumps in South first.  It is therefore had to criticise those who chose wrongly.

You might succeed by not playing trumps at trick two. This is reasonable as setting up the side tricks is set to become a problem if trumps break 4-1.  If you start with a diamond or spade at trick two the defence have to work hard to beat you. At that point, and indeed at trick one, there is only one defence which can beat the game by force.  This defence aims to stop North-South cashing four minor winners.  Can you see it?

The answer is for East-West to play three rounds of spades at the start, and when South ruffs high West can discard a minor (say a diamond). When East duly gets in with the ♦A we get another spade and a high ruff in South gets another (same minor suit) discard from West and now that minor suit will get ruffed.   You cannot expect anyone to find this defence, particularly when North has shown spades.  On the auction (which did happen) 1N-2♣-2♥-4♥ the lead of the ♠ A is quite appropriate - but those in that boat chose a club.

Well done to Steve Sasanow, the only declarer to make 10 tricks (after ♣Q to the ace, ♥A and a second club) who scores 14/14 for that.  Commisserations to his opponents.

This hand was interesting both from a bidding and a play perspective.  To note first the bidding, only 2 of the 7 tables found the slam where there are 12 top tricks and chances of making all thirteen.   Most tables saw a 2N opener by North after which the South hand is just enormous.   South needs to show long hearts, slam interest, and ideally shortage in spades.   We can all do the first with a transfer but the second step is more difficult.  Since your bidding is already high, a new suit would be natural, but you are strong enough to jump, so 3♦ - 3♥  - 4♠ really ought to show short spades in a hand with long hearts and slam interest.   Even though it seems like there are wasted values in spades, North should appreciate that the ♠AK will still take care of minor suit losers, and having so little wastage (one jack and the only queen is working full time) this is a prime hand and worth bidding the slam.  It does no harm to bid Blackwood on the way, not for your own sake, but so that if all key cards are present you can bid 5N to tell partner than in case (s)he can count 13 tricks.  Here you will probably end up in 6♥.

[An alternative or is this too fanciful?  Here it could proceed 4N - 5♠ - 7♥.  You might well ask why?   South will be assuming some heart support here and if partner has three then the ♥Q is not a worry, so with the extra heart South pretends to have the queen.  North can see that South doesn't have the ♥Q can can now count 12 top tricks and there are chances in diamonds (queen or a long card) or spades (singleton queen with partner or the finesse) or even clubs (parter has the king or QJ) for the extra - so it looks worth taking a chance on the grand slam]

You might have expected interference to make bidding the slam more difficult, but when Tony Letts opened 2♦ (weak weak two) with West, Rod Bird & Pete Jackson sailed into the slam after starting X - P - 4♥.  Opening 3♠ might have provided rather more of a test. Did anyone find that?

And now to the play ... with 12 top tricks, whatever contract you are in, the mission is finding the thirteenth.  The long diamond is the best bet, and Paul Denning showed how to do this easily after the ♦Q was led. It is not safe to bash out the diamonds, for fear of an over-ruff, so he won ♦A and cashed ♠ A throwing a diamond from dummy.  Now a diamond ruff, ♥A and back to ♥Q and he could ruff another diamond high - and then draw the last trump and come to ♣A to cash his winners.

But what if the ♣ K is led?  You do have to win the ace and now the entry to hand is gone.  All you need to make thirteen now is a little planning.  One option is to play for one diamond ruff and drawing trumps ending in North, but that needs the diamonds 3-3 and the hearts 2-2 and the dropping of the ♣J suggests that might not happen. The answer is a double squeeze - you just need the ♠Q onside.  But you must think this through before trick two.  You need to cash the ♠AK (throwing clubs) before drawing and running the trumps.  In the end position, when West is forced to keep the ♠Q and only two other cards (diamonds) you can throw the ♠J  and keep three diamonds, and East must keep the ♣Q and so also had at most two diamonds. Now you cash your diamonds.  Magic!

This was the simplest of auctions and the contract was 1N at 16 tables on Tuesday.  The puzzle is why so many declarers made 6 tricks, and some even made 7 tricks.

It seems natural for East to start off with a top diamond, but when partner plays the nine and you see dummy's holding, you need to show some caution. This is true whatever signalling system the nine represents; it is quite common for a player to have no choice as to what to play (sometimes a singleton, sometimes to avoid burning tricks) and we should only read a message into partner's card if partner had a choice of what to play.  It therefore looks right to switch, and a club is the least dangerous switch.  Declarer ducks this and partner wins with the king, cashes the diamond queen, and plays a spade through.

It is easy to win this and cash two diamonds, but it is now you must avoid going onto autopilot.  Two things you have learned up to now must register - firstly that declarer has only 1 high card point in the minors, and if it was a 12-14 opening, then that means at least 11 points in the majors, and so at least the queen of spades. The second point to note is that declarer played the club ten on the first round.  To do this with any holding other than ♣JT exactly, is to give away a trick, and while you might find a declarer willing to do that, these are rare.  The layout looks to be very much like it is, and when you play the ♣Q you will set up the vital 8th trick for the defence, to get the contract two down.

It's not quite so simple if declarer might open 1N with 11 hcp (which we would advise, non-vulnerable) as partner might just have the ♠KQ862  and you want to be cashing out that suit rather than reverting to clubs.  But the odds must be against that one particular layout in the majors, so playing the ♣Q is still right.  If you had found this you would have outscored all six defenders of 1N in the downstairs movement on Tuesday.

The East hand on this board was the wildest distribution seen on Monday.  After South's pre-empt, North might well have raised to game, as hearing either 3N or a spade bid from East would not be good news.  The pass gave East a much improved chance to describe the hand, here with a 4♥ bid promising a major-minor two suiter.    Over this West could easily bid 4♠ but now East had to ask - was this enough?

In practice East chose to bid 5♥ next, clearly a slam try and agreeing spades.  A bid of 5♣ might have been more informative, but it was likely that partner knew which was the second suit, and it was better not to introduce any doubt as to the denomination in which to play.  At this point things went wrong and the pair ended up in 6♠.  

You might think it was all over then but propsects were improved when North led a heart.  Now dummy's diamond was discarded and declarer was given an entry to hand.  The best play in the spade suit, with no informaiton about distribution, is to cash the ace and king.   Here, when South is known to have seven hearts to North's three, the odds change and - given no opportunity to cash a top spade first - the best odds are a first round finesse of the jack.   Sad to say, declarer was aware of this and took the finesse and when it lost the contract could no longer be made.

Could the defence have avoided that heart lead?  One option would be for South to double the 5♥ (or even the 4♥) bid by East.  Since partner was by default leading a heart, this is not a lead directing bid but an anti-lead-directing bid - suggesting to partner that they might be disappionted in this suit and there is an alternative which might work better.   While this might get the diamond lead you want - look what happens if North, as they might, finds a club lead.  Decalrer has no choice but to play the spades from the top, find an entry to hand with the ♠T, and dispose of the diamond on the ♥A.  The slam now makes!

All 11 tables played this hand in 3N, and whether it was easy or not came down to the opening lead.  Declarer has one top trick in hearts, and four in diamonds, and two in clubs.  When a spade was led by the spade bidder round to the king the total is eight and declarer should try clubs next - but when they were found to be 4-1 offside, there was only two club tricks.  The fall back is to play hearts - so come to a top diamond and play a heart to the ten and when that holds, you now have nine tricks.

But only six declarers got a spade lead - the record shows one defender led a club, one led a heart, and three led diamonds. The problem is much the same with any of these leads - you test the suits and find you have two hearts, four diamonds, and two clubs.  So you need to manufacture a trick out of spades.  Can you do that?

This hand proved troublesome to a number of teams on Monday. It represents an unsound slam, as with a spade loser you need to find the club king onside and the diamond king onside (usually) and that's only a 25% shot before you factor in not losing two spades.

After the opening bid the responding hand will always be thinking about slam possibilities, but the opening bid shows limited values and that means slam is uncertain. The answer is for responder to consult opener. After the sequence above reaches 3♠ the West hand can show interest in two ways. Bidding a natural, invitational 4N as shown is one (ace asking would cue bid then bid 4N), and cue bidding and then stopping in 4♠ is the other.  But the fact is that four pairs could not stop before the 6-level.

But now to the play. The three potential losers are in clubs, diamonds and spades and you can only afford one.  There are two ways to tackle the spade suit; if you cannot afford a loser you must find doubleton QJ or North with a singleton honour - and starting with the king on the first round is best. If on the other hand you can afford one but not two losers in spades, the best play is different.  

How do you tell what to do?  The answer is to test the minor suits first.  If you try them both and find both finesses working, the best play in the spade suit is to start with small to the ten. This allows you to pick up all 3-2 breaks and all 4-1 breaks except for singleton honour with South.

None of those in slam found the winning line. One declined the club finesse at trick one, convinced that nobody would lead away from the king.  Another started the spades by leading the ace.  It is very important that if you bid 23% slams, that you do succeed on the 23% of occasions when the cards are lying just right!

There was a variety of results on this board, even though everyone played in spades. There were 6 tables in 4♠, 5 tables in 3♠, and just one stopped in 2♠.  The results were all 9 or 10 tricks with most of those in game making it when it can or should go down one.

First to the bidding shown. The third in hand 2♥ opener is stronger than usual but was chosen as a 2♥ rebid was likely on this hand and starting at the 2-level can make life difficult for the opponents. Here it goaded South into stretching with 3♥ showing spades and a minor.  North had been expecting a bit more and also stretched to game, but it turned out that every high card was playing a useful part and the game was viable. Opening 1♥ would have made it easier for North-South to stop in a part-score.

Over to East for the opening lead. Given partner would have little, East had to look to a ruff ruff to gain a trick, so out came the ♦J.  West won trick one with the ace and now needed to stop and think.  After the top diamond and a ruff, there were still two tricks to find, and this meant East having either two aces or one ace and the ♥KQ.   Two of these three need East to hold the spade ace, and from that thought Mark Rogers spotted a third more attractive alternative, needing just the spade ace with East.

He switched to his singleton heart. Now when partner won the ♠A there would be a heart ruff, and after that could come the diamond ruff. Really neat, and he beat the game by doing this. The other table took the diamond ruff at trick two, after which the only successful defence would be to lead away from the long hearts (so as to give partner a heart ruff after winning the♠A) but this was not found.

The key to getting this hand right is to be thinking in terms of all the tricks you need to beat the contract, and not just thinking one trick at a time.

This hand provided an interesting choice in the play of 3N, after West led a diamond. The first diamond was ducked and the second taken. Declarer at this point has seven sure tricks and needs two more.  East is the danger hand and you expect the ♠A to be with West. How do you find two more tricks?

There are two suits which might provide it - one is hearts and the other is spades.

To make two extra tricks in spades you need East to hold either ♠QT(x)(x)  or  a singleton ♠Q or ♠T - and, given the assumption West holds the ace, this is about a 20% shot.

There are two approaches to hearts. One is to cross to dummy and run the ♥7, gaining when East holds the queen but not the ten. This gathers four tricks in 44% of the cases. and means you never lose a trick to the danger hand. The other approach is a simple finesse for the ♥Q, finessing into the danger hand - and this delivers four tricks in almost 50% of cases. 

What about one extra trick from each suit?  In spades either the ♠Q or ♠T onside will give one extra trick, so that is coming 67% of the time (when you allow for vacant spaces in diamonds).  You can work for this after finding you have only three heart tricks, adding to that 50% chance. Using a dummy entry to run the ♥7 gives you one less entry to play spades, and that helps less.

So the best line is simply to finesse in hearts and play on spade if and when that fails to deliver.

You cannot be expected to work out these percentages at the table, so the choice you make will depend on your gut feel, but looking at these numbers afterwards will help calibrate that gut feel for next time.  Who'd have thought that the best line was a simple finesse into the danger hand!  The reason it is so is because of the vacant spades - making the finesse more like to succeed and making it less likely East has the heart ten.

The first hand on Monday produced a bidding problem for West. This was the start to the auction at 8 of the 15 tables (other Wests passes except for the one who opened 3♦). The big question is what to do now?

The vast majority fell into a trap which permeates the game; they had a conventional 2N enquiry to use, so they did this. They found themselves bidding 3N on the next round. There were two who found a better choice - they bid 2♥. The key point to remember about a bid like 2♥ is that as well as showing partner something about your hand, it gives partner to tell you something about how good a hand they have - which is all you get from the 2N convention. 

How did the various choices work out?  Those who bid 2N all ended in 3N and this left North on lead, rather blind as to what the West hand held. Three Norths chose a heart and three chose a club.  The latter was very much what declarer wanted and here the defence promptly set up two club tricks for declarer making the game trivial. The heart lead left declarer very short of tricks and in those three cases it was only at the table where North later attacked clubs that declarer succeeded.

The Easts who heard a 2♥ took different routes.  One didn't realise that the bid has to be forcing, and passed to collect +170. The other continued and ended in 4♥ and declarer made the nine tricks that were available.

What do we learn from all this?  Deep Finesse tells us that the highest makeable contracts are 2♦ and 3♥.   We have a mis-fitting 24-count between the two hands and that would argue for a part-score rather than game.  The problem with bidding 2N is that the only choice of contracts it offers you is 3♦ with a singleton in dummy, or 3N - and neither of those can be appealing to West. Starting with 2♥ gives you a chance of a plus score, but stopping out of game will then take a lot of restraint. A successful diamond finesse to discard the spade loser would make 4♥ very playable - so maybe we should not complain about getting to that game.  Passing 2♦ has a lot to be said for it.

This hand produced a significant swing in the match between the two teams which had been leading the series so far.

The auction shown led to a contract which needed some luck, as well as some good play.  After a diamond lead, declared should start on clubs immediately as the top spades are needed as entries to ruff out that suit.  The key play comes when East wins the club ace and plays the heart queen.  Diana Nettleton, sitting North, paused to consider the implications. While the contract initially looked like it depended on the heart ace being onside, surely here was a strong suggestion it was not (if held by East it looks like East had an opening bid but had passed on the first round).

So the indicated play is to duck, and to duck the next round too. When that sets up the king and the trumps break 2-2, the contract is straightforward. So 4♠ made happily.

At the other table the contract was 3♠ this time by South (North, very reasonably, had doubled the 1♦ overcalled).  Again the first trick was a diamond and then came the ♣K to the ♣A and East switched to a heart. But this time, with the sight of four hearts in dummy, East did so with a sense partner might be short in the suit. So out came ♥3 and declared had a new worry. If the ace was onside, then ducking this trick might get a heart returned to the ace and a third round ruff, so she went up with the king, losing to the ace. Back came the ten to the jack, and then the queen, and then the nine. This generated a trick for the ♠Q and the part-score was now down one.

Tricky game this!

There were a few instances last night of little used but but useful techniques.  Here it was Morton's Fork.

Good judgement was shown all round in the bidding, with East-West stealing all the bidding space that was needed for a sensible slam auction. The 5♥ contract was never in doubt, but the game is matchpoints, so the overtricks all matter. There seems to be a "sure" diamond loser and the spade finesse to take, but many declarers did better than that. Here's how...

After winning the club lead in dummy, declarer led a diamond towards hand. East could not jump up with the diamond ace, or the club king, diamond king and the fifth diamond would take care of declarer's losing spades. After the ♦Q won, declared was able to play heart ace and a heart to the jack, after which the club king took care of the ♦6.  Now declarer was able to take the spade finesse for a possible 13 tricks. 

The boards at Stroud last night were hand dealt, a less common occurrence these days, but they had plenty of shape and interest.

Here the 1♦ opener was standard, and East now had the chance to rob North-South of bidding space and duly did so.

South supported partner with a 5♦ bid, but this bypassed the best contract. What was missing from South's armoury was a takeout double at the 4-level.  Even over a 4♠ overcall a double needs to be primarily takeout, given the level of preemption which happens in competitive bridge today.

Against 5♦ East has a lead problem; with a lead from either king possibly giving away a trick, she chose the ♠Q.  This saved declarer a guess but when dummy went down with KJT of the suit it felt like the queen had always been doomed.  Declarer had no problems with the major suits now, but had two potential losers in each minor.

Since the lead had all the hallmarks of a singleton, the first concern was drawing trumps. After cashing the ♥A to eliminate that suit, North played a diamond to the ace, thinking of putting East on lead with a second diamond and getting a club back into the AQ5. When East showed out that plan was shelved, but the idea of an endplay was still valid. So the next play was a second and a third spade, followed by a low club from dummy. When West played low, declarer ducked and now East was endplayed. The heart return was ruffed while the ♣Q was discarded, and a small trump towards the ten kept the trump losers to two and the contract was one off.

It felt bad at the time, having mis-guessed the diamonds, but even after a diamond to the ten at trick two, there are still two diamond losers.  More of concern was what happened to 4♥ when that was the contract. A diamond lead allowed declarer to play the jack forcing the ace. The next trick was the heart ace and when the defence didn't find the spade switch now, declarer could throw a spade on the ♦K and use the two heart entries to lead clubs up to the KJx to make the heart game.

Anyway, I'd rather be in the spade game.

While bidding, and in particular slam bidding, seems to dominate the swings and potential swings in most games, there are still some interesting play problems around. On today's hand you get the ♣2 lead against your 4♥ game.  You can draw trumps in three rounds if you wish, playing the ace then the queen and then the jack.  What then?

For all your high card points, there are three top losers and you are in danger of losing a club too. You cannot be sure at this time whether there is a club loser - the suit might be breaking 3-2 or either hand could have a singleton. Can you tell?  The fact that West had only one heart gives a strong hint that West has four clubs, and it is best to proceed on that basis.

As often when you have nothing positive to do, the right thing is to get off lead.  So exit with a diamond.  If the defence cash two diamonds and then play spades you are home.  If West leads from the ace you can make the queen and then the king provides a discard for the losing club.  If East leads the suit then either West gives you two tricks or West ducks; in the latter case, if declarer diagnoses the position (and they should) then the answer is to cash the remaining trumps  and this squuezes West down to ♠A ♣Q83 and that hand is then end-played with the spade, to lead a club.

Can the defence do any better? They can get closer but can't quite do it.  When the diamond is led from dummy East can see the problem coming, and did at one table rise with the diamond king to play the ♠J.  If declarer ducks this then East must either win the ace or be subject to an end-played later to lead a club. If declarer covers with the queen, then the defence can succeed by winning the ace and cashing the ♦A before playing a second spade.

It is worth noting that in positions where East rises with the spade ace, declarer needs an entry to dummy to reach the king after the queen has been unblocked. You need to be careful therefore in cashing your three trumps , ending with 9 opposite K5.

This hand proved intersting as every table reached the same contract (4♥, 12 by South and 4 by North) and of those ten succeeded and six went off.  

In some cases it was the opening lead which determined the result. Three times (twice when West had shown the minors, and once for pure inspiration) East led the ♣K and was able to take a club ruff quickly after which declarer had no chance.  One West found the inspired lead of the ♣5 which led to the same result, and the other black suit lead was the ♠T which set up the defence's spade trick and again declarer had no chance. 

Twice - despite the bidding strongly suggesting that partner had no values - West led a diamond round to the queen at trick one.  This gave declarer a good start, but only brought the total up to 9 tricks. All the other leads were a trump. When declarer drew three rounds of trumps a strong expectation should have grown that most of the missing honours were with West - otherwise why would someone lead a singleton trump here? This makes playing the pointed suits bad news, so declarer has to think about clubs. The lack of a top club lead makes it very likely that the honours are split, so the only chance of avoiding losing three clubs is to lead clubs first through a hand with doubleton honour, so that you can duck on the way back. Which hand is more likely to have a doubleton honour?  Surely the hand with the three trumps.  So the best choice is to win the third heart in North and lead a club to the jack and ace.  All West can do is win and play back a club, which you let East win with the king. East will now switch to either pointed suit and you are at the crossroads. Would they be leading this suit if the suit was working for declarer?  Surely not. The winning answer is to preserve the queen and win with the ace. You can now collect two club tricks and throw the third card in the suit they led, before exiting with the queen to West's king, and at this point West is endplayed in the other pointed suit.  Marvellous play by Joe Angseesing to do exactly that on this hand.

Six declarers with a trump lead drew trumps and tried to find the ♦J onside. This is useful as it lets you discard the spade loser on the third diamond - but it still leave you needing to play clubs successfully. On two occasions West played a spade away from the king at this point, and when declarer lost only two clubs that was game making.  In the other cases, West exited safely and declarer then tried the spade finesse and was off.  The two with a diamond lead at trick one had less work to do - one got the clubs right and lost two clubs and a spade, the other got the clubs wrong but was gifted a spade trick to again make the contract.

This hand from Monday has some interesting points in the bidding and the play.  The first question is whether you would rather play in 3N or in 4♠?  Looking at just the two East-West hands, you would favour 4♠  as the 8-card fit is less troubled by the defence attacking hearts. Yet four tables missed the spade game.  The case in which a cheeky South overcalled 1♠ gives a very solid reason in on instance, but the others all started with the auction shown. The question is what comes next? Their answer was 3N.

One pair did however solve the problem after this start to the auction, by bidding 3♣ at this pioint as checkback. They found the spade fit andf played in 4♠.  Over this 2N rebid, it is advisable to have some sort of conventional follow-ups.  The most effective - and a very simply option - is to play all bids as transfers to the suit above. Here it would be a 3♥ transfer showing four spades (and denying a fith heart as with that you would first transfer to hearts and then show the spades). This scheme gives responder the chance to stop in three of a suit, or to show length somewhere and then bid 3N to offer partner a choice of contracts.  The same scheme shoud dapply after 1suit-1N-2N.

But what about the play?   The computer tells us that both games can be defeated, but in practice 3N made on all four occasions and 4♠ made once. Against 3N three suits were led; the spade lead at one table (leading from AQ into a very strong hand is never recommended) was welcomed by declarer. who could knock out the top spades while ducking two hearts to get 9 tricks. The club lead was the interesting one - how should declarer proceed?  There is a weakness in hearts, and spades have to be tackled from the West hand, so the simplest choice seems to be to win the ♣A and run the ♠8.  South wins and now comes the crunch point. A heart switch is needed, but the fact that North encouraged on the club lead led to a second round of that suit.  The spotlight was now on East; if the clubs are breaking 4-4 then winning the seocnd club and knocking out the ♠A guarantees the contract. Can East tell?  The lead of the ♣3 could have been from four or five (even three)  but if North has been seen to play the ♣2 (small to encourage at trick one?) then it cannot have been a lead from a five card suit. In practice East ducked and moved the spotlight to North. North needs now to deduce - from partner's failure to overcall 1♠ with five - that East's shape is 4243 and that a heart is therefore a safe switch.  That would have beaten the contract but it was missed. On the heart lead at the other 3N table, the contract can go off but North has a tricky play at trick two - exercise for the read to find the one card which beats 3N at that point.

The defence to 4♠ tended to be simpler as declarer was laid open to a force if they took a club ruff for the tenth trick. The spade game would have been easy if the spades had broken 3-2, something which would not have affected the 3N game.

One Cheltenham team has done well in the EBU's National Inter-Club Knock-Out (NICKO) over many years - reaching the final three times but losing then to Southampton(1995), Manchester (2007) and Cambridge (2012).   This year they cruised through their quarter-final and semi-final matches and their opposition in the final will be determined by a match this coming Friday.  In Sunday's match, Richard Butland found himself at the helm in this 4♠ contract.  The opening bid had shown hearts and a minor, less than an opening bid, and it all looked easy until he won the heart opening lead and played a top spade to find out the bad break.

There are now 3 trump losers looming but it is always wrong to give up.  The next step was clear - if the club finesse works the only losers are those trumps and the contract is secure.  So over to the ♦A and cash the ♥K to throw the losing diamond, and run the ♣Q.   West won that with the king and tried a second diamond ruffed in hand.  Ricahrd now cashed the ♣J and the ♣A and led out the ♣T.   What could West do?  He ruffed with the ♠T and led another diamond, but Richard ruffed that again in hand.  Now holding  ♠K7 ♣9  opposite  ♠98 ♥4, he played his last club.  West was down to ♠QJ4 and could ruff with the jack but then had to lead away from the queen.   Contract made, and I forgot to say - it was doubled too!

The defence could have done better - can you see how?

This hand from Monday was the most interesting of the play exercises. Thirteen pairs played in the 4♥ game with 11 of these by North.  At two tables a diamond lead from East made the contract a trivial make, and at a third a spade lead from West gave the defence an easy route to defeat the game - but at the remaining tables the lead was a club, high from East and once a low club from West.  What should happen now?

The best choice was for North to duck this lead and it was then up to East to decide on what to do at trick two. There were four declarers won trick one and the defence was then in charge at their table - and succeeded in the three cases where East led a top club at trick one, but when West had led a club East discarded a club when trumps were drawn and left himself with ♣KQ bare which was fatal (see below for why).

The fact that the lead of the king holds, tells East that a club continuation is safe (surely with ♣ AJ declarer would win trick one). The issue is which one to lead.  There are dangers in continuing with a high club (partner might have doubleton jack) so most continued with a low club. This gave declarer a key play to make but only Roiger Schofield (playing in 5♥, sadly for him) found it - and this was the play of the ♣T forcing away West's entry.  The others all played low but each East had led the ♣8 rather than the nine, so West felt constrained to play the jack - giving up their entry anyway.  What happened from trick three was now  that declarer drew trumps and played a third club which East was forced to win. East could exit in diamonds but then declarer would lose only a spade - or exit in spades which declarer would win and then play ace and another of one pointed suit, to get a trick back in the other.  And so we find the three declarers in Division One and Angelos Agathangelou produce a multiple end-play position to make their 4♥ game. 

Was the trap avoidable?  One trap was - leading the ♣9 rather than the ♣8 at trick two would have much improved the defence's chances - even through declarer can counter that.  In fact the only certain defence is for East to continue with the ♣Q at trick two.  Can this be found?  It depends a lot on the bidding - if North is known - as they were at a number of tables - to hold around 20 hcp, then East should be very cogniscant of the danger of endplays.  And if partner had the dreaded doubelton club jack, then declarer might well have won tricks one to produce some different sorts of endplay - suggesting the high second club is a safe option.

The two slam boards on Monday came together with B5 and B6 and were both North-South hands; it was curious to note that the only pairs who stretched slightly to the slam on B6 had also bid the slam on B5.  Across the two boards there were six pairs bid neither, two bid one slam, and two bid two slams.

The play in this slam turned out to be very easy after a spade lead ruffed out the queen, and various Easts were wishing that they had led the ♦A first, as then the danger might have been more visible to them. The interesting question is would declarer make the slam on the lead of a diamond and then a club?

The answer is yes. The secret is for declarer to cash all the diamonds and watch the discard carefully. There is no loss of opportunity in the heart suit by delaying the play of that - and when you reach the four card ending you have four hearts as South and dummy has three hearts and one black card. There is a choice here of keeping a spade or a club in dummy but there are a number of indicators that East has the ♠A, so you keep the ♣Q.   What can West do?   The squeeze delivers the twlefth trick even without a spade lead.

On B6 the lead also had the opportunity to make the play more demanding. Attacking spades at T1 put declarer under pressure by limiting dummy to effectively one entry - and now the better odds line failed. Without that pressure, the slam was an easy make.  What made the difference to the lead - one East doubled a spade cue bid and the other East didn't!

Well done to Somerset pair Harry Anoyrkatis & Rob Lawy who were the only pair on the right side of both (and commiserations to Roger Williams & Mike Wignall).

[Production delays this week, but hands will appear]

This hand from Monday was consistently (well, 13 out of 16 times) played in spades but it was curious to see the level chosen vary from 2♠ through 3♠ to 4♠, and the number of tricks made varied from 7 tricks through 8 tricks and 9 tricks to 10 tricks. What was happening?

Every table but one started with 1♦ and 9 of the 15 Easts overcalled 1♥ - the others taking the sensible view that opposite a passed partner the danger of being caught for a penalty outweighed the benefit.  South showed spades after the overcall with a takeout double (or showed hearts if East had not bid). All paths led to North bidding spades and South now had the question of what level of support to show.  With an opening bid in their own hand South would insist on game, and this hand is at most one trick less than that - so a 3♠ raise looks to be the value bid and the majority found this although a surprising number (about 40%) just showed a raise to the 2-level.  And why did three tables end up in game?  One was a mix-up over partners response to South';s takeout double; it is now common practice to bid 1♠ in these positions with three card support and bid 2♠ to promise four cards; the only player who invoked this found that his partner did not expect a minimum hand for the 2♠ bid (but he should). The other three cases were North taking a rosy view after partner's raise.

Against most auctions East was on lead.  The position where the opponents have found a 4-4 fit in the third suit mentioned in the auction cries out for one thing - a trump lead, and that was found at 8 out of the 13 tables. This is what made all the difference - we find that the tables with a non-trump lead, and the table which led a trump but never played a second one, these are the tables which made 9 or 10 tricks.

It might seem boring just to lead a trump and continue the suit when you get in, but boring wins a lot of bridge matches!

This was another hand from Momday where 3N should have gone off but eight of the ten playing in no-trumps made 9+ tricks and only two declarers were defeated. How did it hapen?

There were two cases of a major suit lead which in practice avoided giving away a club trick but somehow made life easy for declarer.  That leaves eight cases of a club lead from East - in each case givng declarer a trick one winner with the ♣K. At this point declarer will count up two spade tricks, five diamonds and a club - and so needs one from hearts. The contract is perfectly safe if clubs break 4-4 but if the suit breaks 5-3 then success depends on the long club being discarded or being able to sneak a heart trick before the opposition realise that this matters.

Six of the eight declarers started off by playing diamonds. It was therefore evident to the defence that declarer had eight tricks outside hearts and that only clubs and hearts could contribute to beating the contract. Despite that, when declarer led a heart from South two Easts ducked giving declarer nine tricks, two Easts rose and cashed the clubs to hold declarer to eight tricks, and two Easts rose but managed not to cash out and declarer got 9 and 10 tricks in those cases. We can only suggest that the defence in four cases out of six was asleep. It does feel like this approach to making nine tricks should have been doomed.

Two tables produced a much stronger attempt at the contract. What they did was at trick two they crossed to the ♠A in dummy and led a heart towards the closed hand. West did not have a count on the tricks at this point and ducked, but declarer had no guess to make and won that trick and cashed out to make 9 tricks overall. Well done Jack Armorgie and Rob Lawy. 

Should those two declarers have succeeded? It's a close call. There are a number of scenarios wherein it is right to rise with the ♥A. On this hand, the question for West to ask is why declarer is not starting by attacking their long diamond suit. The failure of declarer to do this in 3N is often a sign that the suit is running.

Seven tables on Monday got away with a beatable 3N on Monday, and the result was primarily determined by the choice of bid by North at this early point.

It is worth noting first that there were two auctions which did not start with 1♣, and three in which South passed over the 1♣ opening. The former we'll skip past, but ifor the latter group, it is worth noting that the real value in overcalling 1♦ isn't the chance of playing in that contract - it is the fact that the bid encourages partner to get involved in the auction and then benefits come up in positions like this.

Back to North's choice here - clearly the most important message is diamond support and there is a possibility of seriously disrupting the oppnents' auction. The simple choice was a raise to 2♦ found at two tables, but slightly more useful was a jump to 3♦ found at three others.  But none of these worked as the next step was 3N by East and a diamond lead from partner, giving declarer their ninth trick. The other two Norths had a better understanding of the importance of the "boss" suit - so they showed their spades. They had two options and one chose 1♠ while the other found a better (more disruptive and guaranteed diamonds) jump to 2♠.  In neither case was this able to steal the contract from East-West but for those concerned it earned a swing (gainin 6 imps in one case, 8 imps on the other).  It was the third aspect of the bid that mattered here - the lead directing value.

Once again - bidding more is the answer!

Not everyone was playing a strong 1N opener on Monday, but table 9 was and this is the auction from that table. The 2♥ bid showed hearts and a minor; overcalling at the 2-level (whether over a suit opened or over 1N) is never appropriate on a 5332 shape, and this pair were using a 2♣ overcall to show the majors and 2♦ to show a single suited major hand - so this was a two-suiter.

Against 2♥ South sensibly kicked off with ♠A, since this was the one suit declarer did not hold!  Partner encouraged and three rounds were played, declarer ruffing the third.  From declarer's perspective there were two minor suit aces and the heart king still to lose, so making the contract was well in sight. The play, however, in spades has created a problem.  If declarer plays ♥A and a heart to the jack losing to the king then a fourth spade might set up the ♥T for south.  The same trump promotion happens if declarer plays ♥A and ♥Q losing to opener's king.  What about if South has the heart king?  Now ace and queen will run into a possible trump promotion, but ace and small to the jack works out OK. 

An alternative was to cross to dummy in diamonds and take a heart finesse.  Can one tell where the heart king lies?  The spade honours are known, and the ♣A is placed with North to give a trick for the club king. There are ten points not accounted for, and North has promised 5-7 of them. So the answer is no.  But there was another catch with the heart finesse - using dummy's diamonds to do that means that there is no further guarantee of getting to dummy to play clubs.

With that in mind, declarer duly chose to play ♥A and a heart towards the ♥J. South won the heart king, but all there was now for the defence was the minor suit aces, and East-West scored +110 and rather a poor score for North-South. What can North-South do about this?

As illustrated, there was no more they could do in defence, provided declarer thinks things through.  But what about the bidding?  They did indeed miss the boat there; the 1N opener needs to look carefully at their shape when the opposition have come in, and be ready to make a takeout double with the right sort of holding.  Here a double would have given South an uncomfortable feeling but either 2♠ or 3♣ as a contract would work out fine.

This was an interesting hand on Monday and only one declarer managed to read the hand correctly. Many played in 3N after East had bid spades, and the common lead was the ♠J.  How should declarer proceed?

There are clearly six tricks in the red suits, so declarer needs three more. The easy option is to play small from dummy one guaranteeing a trick for the spade queen, and that is what most Norths did. When this was chosen, West won trick one and switched to hearts and now the contract had no play. 

The winning choice was looking a bit further forward than just setting up the eighth trick. Playing low from dummy at trick one will make the contract a trivial game if East has the king, and make it impossible if West has the king. The key is where you think the spade king lies.

The fact of the overcall suggests it might be East, but there are a few hints that might not be true. One check to be done is on the conventions East uses in making leads; for some the jack denies a higher honour and the system lead from KJT is the ten (strong tens).  Another thought is that leading from the KJT sequence, there is a strong case for leading the king - winning if you find a singleton queen in any of the other three hands, and costing nothing if (as expected) North-South hold both the ace and the queen. 

But perhaps the over-riding factor  is that you are putting all your eggs in one basket. Even if East has led away from the king, you can still make the contract by setting up two tricks in clubs - and if you lose a club to East they may well continue spades.  Well done to Angelos for playing the spade ace at trick one.

They key on this hand is to realise at trick one the implications of ducking the opening lead.

This hand offered large swings on Monday and there were serious swings in all divisions. 

The first dividing action across the field was the choice of opening bid; it is a close call with a 5-card major and a 6-card minor, but there are three arguments for opening the major in this case (a) it will be easier to get both suits into the bidding, (b) opposite a passed partner clubs is a much less likely game than hearts, and (c) for many the club opener does not promise clubs.  Across the field there was one opener by North, and of the Easts who could open six chose 1♣ and four chose 1♥. 

The choice had a knock-on effect on South - giving South an advantage over a 1♥ opener because now South could bid 2♥ to make a more complete description of their hand.  Only two of the four took advantage of this, and for one this was the prompt for North to bid 5♠ over the opponents' 5♣ , earning +650 in the process. (There was only one other pair bid to 5♠)

The play in 5♣ is quite interesting. A number of declarer survived by ruffing the spade lead, drawing trumps and then finessing the ♥Q; this line is doomed but half of the Souths in this position panicked at this point and cashed the diamond ace.  Jack Armorgie got very close by eliminating spades while he drew trumps and now he could exit in hearts to endplay the opponents. Sadly he chose to exit with the ♥Q where cashing the ace and then playing a heart would have made the contract by force. 

The club game can be made by force as long as declarer can set up enough hearts to discard two diamonds from dummy.  The question is how?  The finesse of the ♥Q works on all 3-3 breaks and the 4-2 breaks with the king onside.  Finessing the ♥9 and then ruffing a heart will work on all 3-3 breaks and the 4-2 breaks with the king doubleton. A priori, this is clearly lesser odds but you could well be influenced by the bidding on this hand, particularly if South doubled the final contract. 

After eight sessions, in seven of which they were in the top two in Division One, the pair of Dan McIntosh & Filip Kurbalija have won series two of the Pairs League (having shared frst place in series one in the autumn with two others).  On this final session, a login glitch left Filip out and Tim Gauld stepped in to play with Dan. This was one of their top gains on Monday, earned by Dan.

The contract was normal and the opening heart lead was neutral. Declarer checked that the suit did not break 5-1 and played a third round followed by a spade to the ♠QJ losing to the ace, and then a spade came back. At this point declarer has 6 tricks in the majors, and at least one diamond - so he went after clubs running the ♣Q.  When this won the trick he continued with a club to the jack - only to find that Dan had smoothly ducked the queen. When he now won the second club, Dan led a diamond and declarer took the difficult route by rising with the ace.  With declarer having two stranded club winners and a stranded spade winner in hand, East won and continued diamonds - to the ten, jack and ... 

When declarer won that trick he had to give up two diamonds and suddenly 3N was down. 

Should declarer have done better?  Yes.   When the ♣Q won the trick, declarer had seven tricks in the bag and ♦KQ and ♣A to come.  Guess which one he should have been playing?   Later, when he got the diamond switch, he could have solved things by playing low from dummy.  And finally when the second diamond went to the ten and jack there was another way out - to duck the jack, endplaying West.  Giving the opponents all these chances to go wrong is the way to win events!

There was a serious swing in all but two matches on this board from Monday. There were interesting aspects to the bidding and the play.

The first is the choice of opening bid and there were a serious number opened 5♦ but this seems unnecessarily high and obstructive to partner, when one of the opponents has already denied an opening bid.  The most common opening was 1♦; after that opening, there were variations in the choice now by East, with a number choosing 2♠. With such poor spade pips and a useful heart suit on the side, this is not the sort of hand on which to pre-empt, so the 1♠ bid shown it the better choice.

What to do after West's cue bid is more intersting. There were some minority choices but the value bid seems to be 4♦ and that was found at a number of tables. What should South do after that?  It is very hard to say and we would not quarrel with pass or 5♦, but the raise is very appealing with a very useful diamond holding for partner. 

The play in 5♦ is very interesting.  There were 8 Norths played this contrsact and 5 were successful, despite Deep Finesse telling us that the contract should not make.

The very easy opening lead for declarer was a heart which happened once. The next easiest opening lead for declarer was the ♣Q and the two declarers with this lead pushed back a club at trick two, setting up a trick in that suit and that was the eleventh trick. The other declarers faced a diamond (twice) and a spade (three times).

The spade lead rufffed is a very revealing start as it marks West with the the AQ and East with the K. Why can we say this? At least on normal play, the ace from West denies the king, and with the king-queen East would surely have led high rather than low.  The consequence of noting this is a high likelihood that the king of hearts is with East.  For the team which eventually won Division One, Ollie Burgess noted this and decided to cash all his trumps to see what happened.  As happened at two other tables (one of which gave back the trick), East-West found the right choice of discards too difficult and gave away a vital trick in the ending. 

It was surprising to see that this hand was played in spades at all tables last night, but that some made 8 tricks, some 9, some 10 and even one made 11 tricks.  The computer analysis says that there is 9 tricks there for the taking - so what should we have expected?

Bidding first.  Missing three aces and needing at least a club finesse means that game is odds against, and at matchpointpairs you really want every game to be 50% or better.  Looking at the bidding shown, it cannot be criticised until we come to the leap to 4♠.   Choosing 3♥ at this point would have been more descriptive, and could prove very useful if partner was a 5341 shape.  Today partner would have stopped in 3♠ since the news of heart values was bad news.

The opening lead against North's spades varied : every suit except trumps was led (after bidding which suggests a ruffing value in dummy that would be best removed!).  The four tables with the ♦T lead presumably did not have the bidding shown, for with a long suit trial bid from North a diamond would be deemed too helpful to declarer.  Witha diamodnlead, declarer would naturally try hearts, but there is then no way to avoid a diamond ruff which beats the game.

At other tables, after leading ♥A which held, East could see no attractive continuation and played a second heart.  Declarer liked that, and quickly tried ♥K and ♥Q, throwing clubs.  Since there were only two discards the losers which might go were a club or a diamond;  the instinct is to ditch clubs but in fact the ♣ A is onside 50% of the time, while the fourth diamond is a winner only 36% of the time - so it should have been a diamond which was discarded.  After East ruffed the third heart, it was a club to the ace, and declarer was left with a diamond and a spade still to lose.  Down two was not a good result.

After a less attacking club lead, West needs to switch to a spade at trick two to stop declarer making ten tricks.  Any other continuation allows declarer to both take a club ruff and reach the ♥A to discard the losing diamond.  Both clucb leads resulted in 9 tricks, so well done that defence.

This was a fascinating hand at some tables last night, but a very boring hand when West got to play in 3N as there were ten top tricks there. You have the same tricks in diamonds and the problem is, playing in 5♦, to conjure up an eleventh.

The leads found in practice were a small spade (twice) and a small diamond (six times) but both were equally passive and left declarer in charge.  The spade loser is inevitable and it comes down to how to avoid two heart losers (and make two tricks from heart plays).  The answer has to involve some form of elimination and then end-play. Declarer cannot waste too many dummy entries, but if clubs are played in time, two rounds can be ruffed and declarer ends with trumps in each hand and ♠J4♥J83  opposite ♠A6♥A72.   The start has to be the spade ace if that didn't go at trick one, and then another spade.

The bidding and the play makes you quite certain that North had two hearts and South has five. When the win the second spade and play hearts you have two options. If North has doubleton honour then ace and another end-plays that hand.  If North has a small doubleton, then when South is on lead they will be stuck. But which is it?

There are 10 ways North could have doubleton honour, and 10 ways they  might have doubleton small.  Problem not yet  solved. We have to look to the bidding for clues. We need to ask whether North would have overcalled 1♠ with a 6-count and 5224 shape.  The answer, at this vulnerability, is probably not.  So when West gets the chance, it should be ace and another heart.  North wins and gives you a ruff and discard.  You ruff in either hand,  and discard a heart from the other.  You deserve your +600 for doing that.

This board was a very respectable (73% say) slam from Monday which was bid at only one table, and the successful auction is shown.  The initial bidding from East-West seems inevitable and the only question is around the final raise to slam. From West's perspective, partner has chocen to contract at the five level in an unsupported suit, and so should have a good hand and a good suit - making the AAK in the West hand very useful cards.  One cannot be sure the slam is good but surely the odds favour a raise.

Other tables saw a similar start but at most North only raised to 3♠ (and one North didn't even do that). Over that five of the six Easts simply bid 4♥ and that usually ended the story.  One East found a double and then removed West's 3N bid to 4♥, which shows a hand that felt too good to bid 4♥ on the previous round.  That might have reached the slam but West decided to stop.

What is perhaps more surprising is that six Souths decided not to bid, and gave East-West a free run.  Did that help?  In practice it didn't.  The field divided after 1♥ - 2♣ between a 2♥ rebid (presumably forcing for those pairs) and a 3♥ rebid.  The 2-level bidders heard 2N and then East stopped proceedings with 4♥. (A winning choice would have been 3♥ then 4♥ to show a better hand).  The 3♥ rebidders got a raise to game except in one case, when West sensibly bid 3♠ to show the control there. That cue bid choice was a good start but East got too excited on the hand and later bid 7♥ and did not make that contract.

How many tricks should be made in hearts?  The vanilla play in the heart suit is to start with a top honour and when a top heart drops on the left, crossing to dummy to finesse is the best odds and that play will deliver seven heart tricks 46% of the time (as here). Having overcome that hurdle there are 12 top tricks and clubs is the only real source for a thirteenth. If you have used the diamond entry to dummy to pick up the trumps, there is little choice in clubs but to finesse. You only do this if you are in the grand slam, so you expect 6♥ to make 12 tricks and 7♥ to make 11 tricks. And that is exactly what happened to the two pairs who were in those contracts.

If we are giving out prizes on this hand do we give it to the West who raised partner to the small slam or to the South who avoided leading a club against the grand slam?  Or could it be we give out a booby prize to the North who raised to 4♠?

This hand divided the field on Monday, with eight tables playing successfully in 4♥ while there were six tables playing in 3N going down.  If you look at the two hands then the 4♥ contract looks impregnable, and the 3N contract looks playable but with only one stopper in spades it could be in trouble if spades were attacked and the ♥K was sitting badly.  And that was the case today.

Were the 3N contracts avoidable?   In some cases trivially. If you are not playing that 2♣ is game forcing, the 2♥ bid usually shows a weaker hand than this, and this East hand would normally rebid 3♥. After that bid West  has to make the final decision, and must raise, as they could be facing a singleton or void in either spades or diamonds, making 3N a very dicey prospect.  It is less clearcut when 2♥ is forcing, and a number of tables playing this style bid  1♥ - 2♣ - 2♥ - 2N.  For some that forcing 2♥ bid showed a sixth heart, but for some it was ambiguous about the heart length.  The key choice now was for East, and only one found a bid of 3♣, highlighting to partner a -6-3 shape (as a more balanced hand would just raise to 3N). The others all looked at the fairly balanced nature of the East hand and raised to game.

To be fair, 3N is not a terrible contract. It is only at risk if they do lead spades, if the spades break 5-3, if the long spades has an entry, and if the ♥K is badly placed. It might seem good odds but the second best choice cost 13 imps on Monday. There are advantages in keeping the bidding simple, but in many cases full exploration does pay off.

This hand was played in 1N at 11 of the 14 tables in play on Monday, and three different suits were led. The most common lead was a small club, followed by ♣7 twice, with one each for ♦5 and ♥Q.

The number of tricks made in 1N varied from 5 tricks to 9 tricks, and hit every spot in between.  How could it be so varied?

It is worth noting first that not all auctions were as shown; there were three instances of West opening 1♣ and rebidding 1N over partner's 1♠ , and one instance of a 1♦ opener and the same conclusion.

Let's look first at the cases where the ♣7 was led; it is clear to West that this is not fourth best, and is therefore likely to be second best from a bad suit - placing South with the queen and North with the ten. It is easy therefore to play low from dummy and scoop up the queen, and both declarer in this position did just that and ended with nine tricks.

The players facing a low club lead did not have the same insight - what should they do?  Of the seven, a slight majority (4/7) jumped up with the jack and this got beaten by the queen. This limited declarer to two club tricks where playing smalll woudl have netted four. Although two of these four succeeded, best defence now beats the contract. Curiously playing the ♣8 at trick one also costs a trick - playing ♣2 gets you four tricks, playing the ♣8 gets you three tricks and playing ♣J gets you two tricks.  What should declarer have done?  The correct answer is the winning answer; holding the 9 there are three tricks guaranteed by playing small, and the only time the jack gains on that is when LHO has led from ♣Qxx.  Against a blind auction there is no reason for a lead from a three card club suit.

It was curious to note that there is only one suit to lead to beat the contract by force, and that is a heart. It was found once, and for good reason - as at that table the opposition had bid both clubs and spades, so that North naturally looked at the other suits and hearts was more appealing than diamonds.

On this innocuous hand from Monday it looks like declarer is booked for success in 2♥ but when it came to the day 33% of the declarers went wrong - what happened?

All the declarers concerrned started off correctly - first thing it to set up the side suit, so win the minor suit led and play spades, with the return and to the same again. If they now play to another minor winner, you have lost two tricks and the worse that can happen is you lose three trumps.  Cashing the ♥A and running the spades guarantees the contract. But these declarer didn't; they played ace and another trump, hoping for a 3-2 break and an overtrick.  Disaster!   One pair of defenders produced a stronger start, playing only one minor suit and being able to make North ruff the third round. Bashing trumps would cut declarer off from the spades, so he played the ten away from his ♥AT9 to keep some control; East did well not to cover and West took the king but had to play a diamond.  Declarer won and crossed to the ♥A getting the news of the bad trump break, but now - needing one ruff in each hand to succeed, but with a glint of an overtrick from another line - went about it in the wrong order. 

Where they went wrong was not keeping their eye on the ball - when you can guarantee your contract, don't take another route unless you are sure it will succeed.

There were two slam hands on Monday, of which this one was the more interesting.  After partner opened, there was only one West settled for game; many of the others had to plan the bidding after this start to the bidding.

Of the thirteen slam bidders, six of them looked at the uncertainty which stems from having a void, and skipped any ace-asking bid.  Most of the six chose 6♥ but one chose the grand slam.

Those who chose to ask for aces were not expecting it to solve all problems, but if committed to bid a small slam at least, and in the absence of anything better, there was the possibility of some useful information.  And that is what happened - the response showing ♠A and ♥AQ and all three cards were useful, as declarer had a club loser which could be thrown on the top spade. Having had that good news - what comes next?   The paths diverged here;  one West chose to bid the grand slam, one West chose to bid the small slam, two Wests bid 5N to ask for kings, and three Wests bid 6♦.  The request for kings led nowhere as partner denied any - after which one asker stopped and one punted the grand slam, The 6♦ bid however is more interesting; most organised players use a new suit in this position to ask abou third round control in the suit (kings would emerge via 5N or cue bidding). In all three cases East was not on that wavelength and denied that control by bidding 6♥.  This was an important check as on the same high cards but with three diamond in East, the grand slam would have been unplayable.  So we are not able to report any confident auction to the grand slam.  :( 

The play in 6♥ was trivial, but in 7♥ was interesting; it looks too easy but only two of the four in the grand slam made their contract. The two who failed won the spade lead and decided that the safest ruffing of two diamonds was ruffing with the ♥AQ; in preparing for that they drew one trump with the king - and when the suit broke 3-0 tthey found there was no way of making the contract. The alternative was to cash the ♥A and then aim to ruff diamonds with the ♥Q9; this line would fail if the first diamond ruff was over-ruffed, which is when South holds a doubleton diamond and two hearts with the ten - which is about a 6% chance.  This is much smaller than the 22% chance of a 3-0 trump break.

This was an interesting start to the match on Monday, with quite a number of declarers trying hard to go down, but not all being allowed to!

The most common start (ten times) was a spade lead and in most cases West played three rounds.  Declarer ruffed the third and had nine top tricks and needed one more. There was always the possibility of the ♣Q dropping, but that could come as the last chance. An extra trick in diamonds was more promising. There were two options - cross to dummy with the ♥T and take the finesse, or bash out the ♦AQ to set up the jack and hope to cash it.  The latter depends on the third round of diamonds not being ruffed. How do the odds compare?

You might think that the diamond finesse was 50-50, but in many cases it was not. Where East had led unprovoked (unlike the auction shown) a spade from small cards, they might have just as easily led a diamond from small cards - and in that case the spade lead comes with implications that the ♦K is offside.  So let's settle for 40% chances there.  Bashing out the diamonds will work when the suit breaks 3-3, and on the 4-2 breaks where the short diamonds has short trumps. Tihis gives you 35% plus a bit under half of the 50% of 4-2 breaks, so that might all add up to 55%.  What's nice about this calculation is that it is not beyond what we can do sitting at a bridge table. 

The answer seems clear.  But that didn't stop a number of declarers going for a finesse. 

Some declarers actually were able to combine the two chances to make; or rather, the opposition offered to combine the chances for them, by playing a diamonds from West after cashing two spades. This saved declarer a vital entry to dummy, and on that defence no declarer could go wrong. The defenders who made it easy for declarer ought to record a black mark!

This hand from Monday produced quite a few swings, as only four of the nine declarers in the heart game made it.  Everyone had a diamond lead, and declarer could see a minimum of two spades and a club to lose.  How did the successful declarers proceed?

There are two approaches to the spade suit; lead small to king and hope the ace is onside, or lead up to the KT9 twice and hope to find at least one of the jack and queen onside. The latter is better odds but takes two entries from dummy.  One declarer started with two rounds of trumps (finding the bad break) and then led a spade, but when the ace appeared the choice in spades disappeared, and a second diamond was played. Declarer has to ruff this, and was now in a position to play king of spades and a third, setting up the long card in that suit. When a third diamond appears declarer has two choices - ruff or discard?  It's a curious position as declarer's discard is a club from ♣A97 and with the king in front of the ace, throwing away a club is a bit like throwing away a winner. But ruffing leaves East with the long trumps....  Declarer discarded and when West won an unexpected diamond trick they were endplayed. Chooseing either a club from the king, or a ruff & discard would give declarer the tenth trick while retaining the ability to draw trumps.  Game made.

A second table made 4♥ when declarer ruffed the opening diamond and played a club to the queen (West ducked) at trick two. Rising with the king would have beaten the game.

The third and fourth successful table saw East get in with the spade ace and attack clubs, setting up the ♣Q while declarer still had trump control.

It was curious that so much depended on this hand on the play in clubs.  This was a suit that mattered to declarer more than the defence, and the defenders needed to be more careful about that.

This hand from Monday was interesting on a few fronts. The first point to note is that of the 12 tables, only one North decided to open on this 11-point 4333 hand.  In a sense llife was not comfortable for him, as after 1♣ - 1♠ - X - P   he had the choice of bidding 1N without a spade stop (recommened) or bidding 2♥ on a three card suit. On either path the layout of the cards delivers him nine tricks.  He got a top!

Everyone else passed and the auction displayed above was identicfal at all eleven tables - not something we often see. What also happened at all eleven tables was the lead of the ♣J.  The results however did vary - only 4 pairs made their contract, while 7 went off.  What should have happened?

The most common approach, chosen at 9 out of 11 tables, was to win the ♣A at trick one and lead a spade to the king or queen.  South won this and continued clubs.  Four declarers ruffed this and bashed out the other top spade. They were dependennt on the jack being singleton on doubleton and they went one off.  What this the best play in the spade suit?  Hardy. Finessing for the spade jack is a 50% shot and therefore better than cashing the second honour.

The other five tables aimed to do better. Two of them tried leading the ♦9 at trick four, but when North turned up with the ace this failed to provide an entry to dummy and they eventually had to bash out the top spade and go one down.

Three tables tried a bit harder - they pushed out the ♦K at trick four.  Twice this was won by the ace, and now the ♦J entry to dummy allowed a successful spade finesse and the contract made.  But Paul Denning was more awake that the other defenders - after declarer has shown a singleton club you know it is not a singleton king of diamonds, and you know that declarer wants you to win the ace. So you don't.  When Paul ducked there was no entry to dummy and this declarer too was one down.

Did it have to be so?  Not at all.  Of all the Easts, only John Arblaster reocgnised that a second entry to dummy was unlikely (it needed help from the defence) so he took a spade finesse at trick two, and when the jack was onside he was rewarded with an unbeatable contract.  Was this a clear choice to make?  With five unavoidable losers outside, the contract clearly hinges on finding the ♠J; clearly your best chance of avoiding losing a trick to it is to find it onside, so the finesse is clearly the best approach, and at trick two.

[The fourth successful table involved the defence giving declarer a trick with the ♣Q and I am sure those involved on both sides wish no more to be said]

This hand from Monday was a straightforward 3N to play once you had bid it, although only 9 of the 14 tables reached that contract. The 3N contracts (all but one) were played by South, and the fact that South held only J6 in diamonds caused no concern. In five cases South has opened 1N and diamonds were never an issue, and in the other cases South opened 1♣ and bid NT afterwards to show their hand type.

The one table which disrupted the comfort of North-South with 3N used a very simply device to do that. The West of that pair overcalled the 1♣ opener with 1♦. After that South was too worried about diamonds to bid NT, and North was too worried about hearts.  This gained the relevant pair 10 imps against each otehr table.

Why did nobody else find this bid?  It was because the West hand here ws so weak, and the suit was poor. Who is to say it was wrong?

The results on this board were fairly uniform on Modnay - with ten tables playing in 4♥ and making easily. 

Amongst the four which differed, three shared a common reason.  And that reason was that North got into the bidding.  For must of us the North hand - at this vulnerability - is out of range for a weak two bid. The effect of opening here was that South was comfortable leading ♠A and another, and after that start finding the club ruff was easy.

A few tables did managed to find the ♣A lead unpromoted but in only one case was the follow-up successful. Most of the Souths continued with a second club for partner to ruff, and the favourite card was the ♣8. Only in one case did North return a spade allowing the defence to cash their winners. In the other cases, North was scared to give away a trick leading from the spade king, and when they returned a red suit, declarer's spade loser got discarded.  Should they have read the suit preference signal better?  The key is what choices North expects South to have; if South's remaining clubs were J86 then this would be a middle card, suggesting nothing worthwhile in diamonds or spades. But we can rule this out - when would South ever choose to start with the ♣A from a four card holdiing - they would not as it is too likely to give away a vital trick.  The only rationale for the lead of the ace is either a short or a long suit.  So the ♣8 is a clear steer away from diamonds and towards spades. 

Could South have made life easier? One way would be to cash the ♠A before playing the second club, but that could also be creating a discard to let declarer throw a losing diamond - so it is not always safe to do that.

The easiest way to open to solve the problem?  For North to have been in the bidding!

There were three Easts who got to play this hand in 1N, but the other 11 tables were all either in 1N by South or in 2♥ by South.  Only two contracts by South we made and they both benefited from a heart lead from West at trick one.  With that suit led, declarer was able to cover the ten, or play the eight over the five, and in both cases the avoided losing two heart tricks to East. Playing in either contract this sufficed to engender success. 

All the other declarers failed to make their contract and the reason for this is that they all lost two heart tricks. Could they have done better? Yes,  Should they have done better?  Yes.  The heart suit combination is an interesting one to watch for; your best chance of avoiding two losers is to start the suit by leading small towards the J84 and playing the eight ot jack as required to cover West's card. When your play loses to an honour, your best (and here, winning) line is to lead the jack and hope LHO started with a doubleton ten. It works perfectly here. 

We used to believe that with this suit combination you could also gain if LHO held a doubleton KT or QT.  You lead towards the jack and if they rise, on the next round you lead the jack, running it if not covered, to pin the ten. That would be fine if the did rise, but the opponent here - if up to date with the thinking - will play the ten on the first round from honour-ten.  Why is that?  It is because your next play as declarer will be to run the jack aiming to succeed if it was a singleton ten - but here the defenders get their two tricks. To choose best, you have to know something about how LHO will react.  Tricky stuff!

This hand was most commonly played in the expected 4♠ (ten out of fourteen tables) but the play proved problematic with the majority, and only four out of ten made the game.

If we look at what happened to the tables which went off (and one which got lucky and succeeded) there is one common feature - they rushed to draw trumps. This meant that they later found themselves looking at two clubs losers and a diamond loser, in addition the king of trumps, and that was too many.

The solution - found at the other three tables - was to start at trick two on clubs. The safest approach is to cash one top honour and then lead up to the other, but importantly to play the third round while the possibility of ruffing the fourth in dummy was still present. When North turned up with the length in clubs, game was a trivial make. If North had been short in clubs you would be ruffing the fourth club with the ♠J which might win and if it lost would make the chance of another spade loser remote.

Well done to ANdrew Kambites, Filip Kurbalija, and to the Advanced Robot.

This answer is a very generic strategy - you only draw trumps when you don't need those trumps to ruff your own losers.  The general theme is to make sure your side suit is sorted out before tackling trumps. That is nearly always the right thing to do.