August 2010 - 53

advanced players section

My Bridge and Yours
In a sectional Swiss teams, neither
side is vulnerable, and as West I pick
up:
J 10 3 A 8 3 Q 3 2 A 10 7 3.
East, the dealer, opens 2, and
South jumps to 4, leaving me with
a close competitive decision. South
has made a strong bid: there are no
"preempts over preempts," and any
bid would have promised high-card
values.
I doubt that we can make 4, but
it might be a good save. Involuntarily, my thoughts stray to the Law
of Total Tricks. I'm not a fan of the
Law. It's not a Law, after all, and deals
are played at the table, not in theory.
But let's see. We have nine spades. If
North-South have nine hearts, there
should be 18 total tricks. If South can
make 4, we'll be down two at 4
(doubled, presumably).
Insurance at IMPs can be expensive, and the odds here look poor. If
we're minus 300 against when our
teammates are plus 420, we gain only
4 IMPs. Even if my total-trumps estimate is correct, both 4 and 4
may be down one, and if North-South
have only eight hearts, we might be
minus 300 at 4 doubled while our
teammates are minus 50 at 4 for an
8-IMP loss.
If I bid 4, is there a chance the opponents might push to 5? I doubt
it. East has a few values, South has
a good hand, and I have 11 high-card
points. North has little or nothing.
If North-South do have only eight
hearts, I'm willing to bet on our
chances of beating 4. I pass, so do
North and East, and I lead the J.

 J 10 3
A83
Q32
 A 10 7 3

K64
65
 J 10 5 4
QJ64

Frank Stewart

My jack wins, as East plays the 8.
I can see two more tricks. If South
has all the missing high cards, I must
hope he has a diamond loser. Is there
any danger if I continue spades? The
notion of a possible throw-in flits
across my mind, but I dismiss it. I
seem to have adequate exit cards, so I
continue with the 10.
South ruffs and leads the K, I
duck and East follows with the jack.
When the Q comes next, I take the
ace and return a trump.
South wins and leads the K. I
know South has seven hearts and one
spade. If the K is a singleton, I must
win and exit with my last spade, but
I guess to play low, and East signals
with the 2. Now I know South has another club, and I think we're safe. But
South runs his trumps. On the last
trump, the position is:

3
-
Q32
A

K
-
 J 10 5
Q
N

W E
S

-
 2 (led)
AK6
5

AQ
-
98
9

To discard a diamond or the A is
clearly fatal, so I pitch my last spade.

franks@WatVC.com
South then leads his last club and
endplays me to lead from my Q:
K64
65
 J 10 5 4
QJ64
 J 10 3
AQ8752
N
A83
J
W E
Q32
987
S
 A 10 7 3
982
9
 K Q 10 9 7 4 2
AK6
K5
"Nicely done," North compliments
his partner. I have to agree, though
I've a feeling I misdefended.
At the other table, East opened 2
again. South chose the same bold
jump to 4, but West bid 4. South
doubled. East took six spades and
one of everything else for minus 100,
and we lost 8 IMPs.
Was the Law of Total Tricks slightly
off target? The deal contained 18
trumps, but East won nine tricks at
spades, and South won 10 at hearts.
In fact, the Law was accurate this
time since I could have beaten 4. At
trick two I must shift to a low club!
When I get in with the A, I cash my
A and exit, and South loses a diamond. That was too tough for me. r
August 2010 Bridge Bulletin

53
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of August 2010
