Suffolk Contract Bridge Association

SUFFOLK’S BIGGEST EVENT?

With 144 players, Café Bridge in Bury St Edmunds on Thursday attracted one of the biggest entries ever for a bridge event staged in Suffolk.

The popular format involved the 72 pairs playing eight three-board rounds in a selection of a dozen cafés and restaurants in the town centre, with scoring done via an a mobile phone app - and lunch taken at half time.

Café Bridge started in this country in south west London and made its debut in Bury St Edmunds only 12 months ago, organised brilliantly by Derek Brinkley.

And the winners were Dorothy and Alaric Cundy, photographed below with their prizes presented by Victor Lesk (left), the brains behind the Café Bridge concept.

Click RESULTS to see all the scores

Switch to Desktop

Release 2.19r

Pages viewed in 2025

NTL Wednesday, 20/3/24.

Slam Bidding.

In my opening article entitled ‘Under new management’, I mentioned my intention of reporting on the NTL matches as well as the county matches. I had not intended to start immediately but the match on 20/3/24 raised a very important issue. Slam bidding is so very important at teams because, if you lose a slam swing, you may not be able to recover from it.

All 3 of our teams were playing this week and Amethyst and Emerald were drawn against each other. Agate managed to lose by 1 imp and the whole match revolved around slam bidding. On boards 7 and 8, our team mates bid a slam on 8 and stayed in game on 7. Unfortunately, they should have bid slam on 7 and stayed in game on 8 but, to be fair, these were not straightforward hands.

Board 7 North

All vul.

Dealer South ª J2

¨ J1074

§ J1073

West East

ª AQ853 ª K1074

¨ AKQ3 ¨ 9652

§ 5 § AKQ98

South

ª 96

¨ 8

§ 642

South opened with 3© and, from then on, bidding the slam was going to be problematic, but not impossible. West doubled probably so that he can show a big hand on the next round. However, East jumped to 4ª and this left West with a problem because he could easily imagine that North could have a heart singleton and was about to obtain a ruff. Quite understandable really.

At my table, the auction started in the same way but, over the 4ª bid, West bid 4NT (RKCB) and, after a response showing 2 card keys, the slam was bid as if there was no problem. At no time was the heart void shown and so the slam is a bit on the speculative side.

Unfortunately, I think that this had an effect on board 8 because there was a temptation to try to make amends for the previous hand.

Board 8 North

None vul.

Dealer West ª

¨ J9

§ 10763

West East

ª AJ1092 ª K87653

¨ 108654 ¨ K732

§ AK5 § 9

South

ª Q4

¨ AQ

§ QJ842

Unfortunately, at my table, I decided to overcall the 1ª opening bid with 2©. East cue bid 3© and Ralph jumped to 5©. This was good tactics at least most of the time but, on this occasion, it made it virtually impossible to bid a slam.

At the other table, our team mates had no interference to contend with and sailed into 6ª. This was an impossible contract with the ace and queen of diamonds lying over the king. It is difficult to spot the 5-4 fit when you have already found a 6-5 fit and so it is not too surprising that the diamond losers were overlooked. The auction went like this :-

West North East South

1ª pass 2NT pass

4© pass 4NT pass

5© pass 6ª all pass

2NT was a good spade raise and 4© was a splinter. 4NT is RCKB and that was followed by the slam. I cannot say that I am happy with this auction. There is an horrendous duplication of values in the heart suit. AQ opposite a void is a terrible waste of values and would suggest that there is a ‘hole’ somewhere else. I do not like RCKB after a splinter, cue bids usually work better. I would have bid 5§ over 4©. Then West would have to sign off in 5ª because he has no diamond control. Then East might have felt that 6ª was a step too far.

In the Amethyst/Emerald match, Paddy Lockwood and David Allen did well to bid the slam on board 7, although they had it a little easier than might have been the case, when the opening bid was 2©, rather than 3©. As the South hand only held 4 points, the hand is not technically strong enough to bid 3© especially at the vulnerability and so it would seem to be reasonable to play the hand as a weak 2. However, as is so often the case, the technically accurate bid can be less effective than the ‘tactical’ bid. The 2© opening bid gave David the opportunity to bid 3© to show a strong hand with sufficient bidding space to find a fit. Blackwood looks far more useful from the West hand, but it prevents any chance of bidding the grand slam, but that would be very difficult after any opening bid made by the opponents.

Unfortunately, they were not as successful on board 8 but anyone who bids a slam on this hand should not be too upset. The difficulty with the hand, as described earlier in this article, is the diamond suit and, unless you play a relay system such as Ralph and I play, and unless there is no interference bidding, it is so very difficult to get this one right. In fact, you need to be a good guesser.

Finally, the last slam of the match was board 16. At my table, I was rather surprised when our opponents failed to bid the slam. I put in a 2§ overcall but it was more to secure a decent lead if Ralph became the opening leader than to achieve anything in the auction. It hardly seemed to be a big problem for them to overcome, but neither opponent felt that they were strong enough to make a move towards slam.

At the end of board 15, we had fought back and recovered 12 of a 13 imp half-time deficit. I had high hopes that our team mates would be able to find the slam and win the match for us. But it was not to be. They received far more interference bidding than Ralph and I put up and so they settled for a ‘safe’ game.

But in the Amethyst/Emerald match, Richard Evans and John Bloomfield conducted a fairly simple auction and bid the slam. However, this hand intrigues me a little because the strength of the hand lies in the double fit. If it could be possible to determine that East/West held a solid 9-card spade fit and a solid 8-card diamond fit with aces in both short suits, it would be easy to bid the grand slam. It is possible to get close to it using a system such as the one that I use if there had been no interference. The hand was :-

Board 16 North

E/W vul.

Dealer West ª 65

¨ 63

§ KQ9873

West East

ª J10987 ª AKQ3

¨ AKJ52 ¨ Q108

§ J § A106

South

ª 94

¨ 974

§ 542

With no interference, Ralph and I would bid :-

West East

1ª 10-15 pts, 5+ spades 1NT relay

3¨ 5+ spades & 5 diamonds 3© game forcing relay

3NT precisely 5251 dist. 4§ control ask

4ª 5 controls 6ª/7ª?

East knows West’s precise distribution and that he holds 5 controls (ace= 2 controls, king = 1 control), which can only be 2 aces and a king and not 3 kings and an ace because East has a king and singleton kings do not count as a control. Unfortunately, the grand slam depends on which king West holds. If he holds the heart king, the grand is dependent on a finesse whereas, as it is the diamond king, the grand is a lay down. As grand slams should not be bid on a finesse, we would be obliged to settle for the small slam.

However, there is a way that this grand slam can be bid. There is a little known asking bid that would supply the answer. In the sequence above, 4NT over 4ª would ask for queens but a bid of one of West’s short suits immediately over the 4ª bid would ask about the suit bid. Responder is obliged to show if he has anything more in the suit than has already been shown. Therefore, East bids 5© and 5ª would show nothing more than the ace already shown and 5NT would show the king. When West bids 5ª, East knows that West’s king is the king of diamonds.

Unfortunately, an elegant sequence such as this one is impossible when there is any interference and so we would have had to settle for the small slam. Slam bidding is so important at teams because one slam missed could cost you the match particularly when playing only 16 boards. There are so few boards available to make up for it. Bearing in mind that the reason for us joining the National Teams league was to improve our performances, it might be worthwhile looking at your slam bidding methods to see what might be done to improve in this area. I am not expecting anyone to change to my methods, but many slams simply cannot be bid with any accuracy if you rely solely on Blackwood.

To some extent, the same arguments can be applied to games at teams. We cannot afford to miss one because a game swing takes a lot to recover. However, bidding games is so much easier than bidding slams. In fact, it is often good tactics to adopt a bullish philosophy and just jump to game when there is any chance of success at all. The odds change, though, when a slam is a possibility. Whereas, if you punt a game, there is every chance that your opponents at the other table would also bid the game, that is not necessarily the case when considering a slam. It is more important that the slam should make.

Therefore, slams require careful consideration of the pair’s full assets and, if you are not sure, you will often be better off settling for game. Certainly, just bidding Blackwood will often not be enough, particularly when there are singletons and voids about. Blackwood is only there to check that key cards exist and gives no indication of overall strength, and how many of you have the methods required to show queens other than the queen of trumps? This can be vital when considering a slam in no trumps.

Of course, I am not the best person to be giving advice on how to bid slams using a natural system. I only use natural systems when there is no alternative. But I feel that a fairly easy natural sequence would be sufficient on this deal :-

West East

1ª 2NT strong raise to 3ª at least.

4¨ 5-5 in the 2 suits 4NT RKCB

5© 2 key cards 6ª

This does not show the king of diamonds, but West has nothing in spades and must have more than 2 aces for his opening bid so 6ª should be good. Any of you Acol experts who have a better sequence, please let me know. Unfortunately, at every table, North overcalled with 2§ and, at some tables, clubs were bid several times making it very difficult to bid the slam. However, East should bid 3§ (Unassuming Cue bid) or 2NT, if that is your method, to show a strong raise in spades. After that, it will depend on each pairs ow methods. Would 3¨ show a suit or is it showing slam potential and a top diamond control?

Some play that 3¨ shows a diamond control and denies a heart control and so 3© would show a heart and a diamond control and 3ª shows none of these and a minimum bidding 4ª with no outside control and a maximum. This seems to be a useful understanding to have.

Most Precision players use either Italian style asking bids or relays where the strong hand asks specific questions of his partner and partner gives specific responses. There is no need for ‘flair’ or expert ability because the work is done for you by the system itself. In natural systems, the main method for bidding slams is by using cue bids and these are open to interpretation and not everyone interprets them in the same way. Good partnerships need to work on this area together so that they are sure that both members of the partnership use cue bids in the same way so that the correct information is given and understood.

Under new management.

So, another season ends and the most significant thing about that is that we lose Rick Hanley as captain. His shoes will be difficult to fill. Many people have already complimented Rick on what he has achieved during his time as captain leaving me with nothing further to say except that I fully agree with all the good things that have already been said and to thank him for his assistance to me personally as I try to get to grips with this new role. I have been the captain of many hockey teams over the years but never a bridge team, until now.

I thought that I had better take this opportunity to introduce myself as I am very aware that I am not very well known around the county scene. There never seems to be the time for me to play many tournaments these days and, since Ralph and I started to play for the County A team, I have concentrated on that but mainly on playing rather than on organisation. I realise that I now have to pay as much attention to all 3 teams and I am looking forward to the challenge. Perhaps I have a masochistic streak in me somewhere.

I am sure that some of you might be wondering why I was selected for this role. To be honest, it came as a surprise to me when Rick asked me if I would be willing to take over from him. However, my bridge career does have it’s ‘interesting’ points. For example, Ralph and I have qualified for both the National Pairs and the Corwen and we managed to finish in the top 3^rd at our last attempt.

I started playing bridge in Yorkshire in 1971 while attending Leeds Polytechnic, where I met my wife. It was not long before I was playing with my father-in-line and, together, we manged to win the Yorkshire pairs tournament. Also, we played at Dewsbury bridge club for a short time where a number of international players would play from time to time, although few of them were actually members. However, the most famous of these was Tony Forrester, but he was only a junior international at the time. But I learned a lot from him, and from a couple of others like him, whose names I have forgotten now. It was a long time ago.

So, although I could never aspire to be anything like as good as some of the players that I rubbed shoulders with in the 1970s and 1980s, I do have some experience behind me, and I have been playing now for over 50 years. But the main thing that I bring to the table is competitiveness. I have always been a sportsman from being at school until I finally had to hang my hockey stick up shortly after my 70^th birthday. I have played cricket, table-tennis, badminton and hockey to a decent standard and I used to sail racing dinghies competitively as well. That competitive spirit will never leave me and Ralph finds it irritating because I always analyse every session that we play, in an attempt to avoid making the same mistakes twice and to improve our performance. I get almost as much pleasure from the analysis as I do from playing.

But I am sure that you are more concerned about the future of Suffolk County bridge, as I am. We are all aware of the difficulties that face us. We have a very limited pool of players to select from and we have recently lost many of our most experienced players. Several initiatives have been put in place to try to improve our situation but, I believe that the one that gives us the best chance of achieving anything is for us all to try to improve our own performances. This is not as easy as it might sound for various reasons.

Unfortunately, most of us that play in the county teams are well past our best years for learning and I can understand anyone who says that improvement is now beyond them. If you feel that you are one of those, do not think that you are unappreciated and please do not retire from bridge. We need you all. Also, in a recent conversation, I was told that many players would like to improve their performance but do not know how to go about it. If you are one of these, please contact me. Our entry into the National Teams League (NTL) is just one initiative that was made to try to address this issue and it has had an effect, but I think that there are other things that could be done.

I certainly believe that we should try to make it possible for less experienced players to play with more experienced ones. I have done some of this myself recently and so, if anyone would like to play with me (and can stand constructive criticism) please contact me and we can arrange something.

Some of you will have seen my column entitled ‘Raising the bar’. I am surprised that nobody has contacted me to discuss things that either they did not understand or just disagreed with. I am more than happy to discuss any issues that it might have raised. It is only by swapping ideas and discussing things that some problems and differences of opinion can be resolved. There are a few very interesting ideas in the column that may be new to some of you that are not difficult to learn but have provided Ralph and I with some good results over the years.

I intend to use the ‘Captain’s log’ not only to provide a report on the county matches but also to comment on issues that arise during the NTL matches as well. This is with the intention of trying to improve the standard of our county players and I hope that much of what I write will give rise to discussions about the issues raised. I hope to learn something as well and I will not always be trying to supply the solution but to point out the issues and hope that we can find a solution together. My e-mail address is : whetton@btinternet.com.

By now, you must be getting fed up with my ramblings and so I will finish with a couple of hands. I have always played a fairly comprehensive, i.e complicated, Strong Club system and these 2 hands show why I feel that bidding is so important. I have often been asked why I always have to complicate things when it would seem that more ‘natural’ methods would often provide the same answer. My reply is usually to quote a couple of deals that occurred during a very tight teams of 8 match in Yorkshire about 40 years ago :-

ª 107 ª 32

¨ K76 ¨ QJ42

§ KQJ3 § A1095

At all the other tables, the bidding was quite simple, West opened 1NT, East bid 2NT and West went on to 3NT. This contract went 2 down losing 5 spade tricks and the ace of diamonds and the 3 pairs that bid this way believed that they had done nothing wrong and everyone would bid the hand in the same way. However, my partner and I bid like this :-

1NT 2§ Stayman

3§ 4 clubs 3¨ relay

It soon became obvious that 3NT would not make on a spade lead and so we bid game in the solid 4-3 heart fit. This contract made because I was able to take the spade forces in the short trump hand and, even though the trumps split 4-2, I was able to force out the ace of diamonds and draw trumps safely losing only 2 spades and the ace of diamonds. Later in the same match, this hand below turned up. We believed that we were behind in the match at this point and needed a good score :-

West East

ª 107 ª AK63

¨ AK109 ¨ QJ87

§ KQJ3 § A109

The other 3 pairs all bid to 6NT even though they are a point or 2 short of the 33 points normally expected for 6NT, but they soon found that there were only 11 top tricks and no play for a 12^th. There is a slight chance of a squeeze if one defender holds KQJ(x) of hearts and 5 spades, but that was not the case. We bid this hand like this :-

1NT 2§ Stayman

2¨ no 4-card major 3§ relay

4§ 4 controls 4NT queen ask

5NT club queen 7¨

A king is 1 control and an ace is 2 in this system so there are 12 controls in the pack and East knows, therefore, that West holds 1 ace and 2 kings. 7¨ was a bit of a gamble as responder could not be sure which 2 kings opener held. If he held the heart king and one other, then the grand slam would depend on a finesse. However, we needed something good to win the match and, as everything else seemed good and diamonds was going to be infinitely better than no trumps, we went for the grand. We could have won the match by bidding the small slam in diamonds as it happens but, what the heck, you cannot argue with success. The grand slam made by ruffing 2 spades before drawing trumps and then discarding the heart loser on the 4^th round of clubs.

I am not advocating that any of you should switch to a system like this, but I would be happy to help if anyone wants to know more, and it is not anywhere near as complicated as you might think. The system in use at the time, is not as difficult as the one that I use now but the relays after the 1NT opening bid are very much the same as they were 40 years ago, and they can easily be used in any system with any strength of 1NT opening bid. In fact, they are the easiest relay sequences that I use. However, these 2 hands are offered as an example of what can be achieved if you are prepared to work at the game and natural talent is not needed, just the capacity for a little study. Personally, I will never stop trying to improve my game until I have played my last card, but then most people that know me think I am weird. I prefer enthusiastic (or perhaps eccentric) rather than weird.

PLAYING BRIDGE ONLINE

Never played bridge on-line - and intimidated by what's involved? Don't be!

An A-B-C guide to playing bridge at BridgeBaseOnline (BBO) which covers the most basic points - how to get started, how to join a game - has been created for Suffolk Bridge by Peter Bushby, and even includes some very fancy film clips.

The big advantage of playing on BBO is that you can partner a real person (for example, your regular partner) - rather than a robot - and it can be free.

Don't feel left out...just click on HOW TO PLAY BRIDGE ON LINE.

In addition to the basics, the comprehensive guide also shows how you can enter Suffolk's regular Sunday evening duplicate, how to play a match between two teams of four, and much more besides.

The EBU has also produced a guide on how to play on BBO. Click on EBU to see.

This site is built with BridgeWebs, the easy web solution.