Free at the Bridge Table

Defeating an unbeatable contract

2009-12-29T11:06:00.003+01:00

This is a story I got from a friend of mine, Alon Amsel.

You hold the following hand:
♠ AQ9
♥ 98532
♦ Q6
♣ K85

LHO starts the auction:
1♦ - pass - 1♥ - pass
1NT* - pass - 2♥ - pass
pass - pass
(1NT shows exactly 4♣s)

What's your lead?

Alon thought as follows:
Declarer and I have 11♥s combined, which suggests dummy is short and probably has 3♠s. Also declarer's HCPs are all in ♥ which doesn't leave much room for HCPs in other suits. Moreover partner passed throughout, so he won't have lots of ♠s, which means declarer doesn't have singleton ♠. I expect to see the ♠K in dummy (which will make it difficult for declarer to make the right decision) or with partner (take 3 quick tricks).

As a result of this reasoning, he lead the ♠Q. This is the full hand:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	J872
♥	J
♦	KT92
♣	Q764

♠	K64
♥	4
♦	AJ853
♣	AJ93

♠	T53
♥	AKQT76
♦	74
♣	T2

♠	AQ9
♥	98532
♦	Q6
♣	K85

As expected, the ♠K was in dummy. Declarer played small (asuming South lead from QJ9 or something similar), and Alon continued with ♠9. Again declarer played small (still asuming South had QJ9) so North took the trick with ♠J. This was followed by a high ♠ asking for a ♦ return. After taking his Ace, South continued with ♦Q as requested. This made 3♠ + 1♥ + 1♦ + 1♣ = 6 tricks for 1 down.

Non simultanious double squeeze

2009-12-12T10:25:00.005+01:00

Here's a hand from a while back, on a club evening.

The auction went:
2NT - 3♣!
3♥! - 3NT
(3♣ asks about 4 or 5 card M, 3♥ denies)

LHO leads ♦6 and you get the following dummy:
♠ J863
♥ 752
♦ AQ43
♣ A6

♠ KQ7
♥ AKT
♦ K8
♣ KQ872

RHO produces the Jack which you take with the King. First step is to develop the ♠s, so I lead ♠K which held the trick. I continued with ♠Q which LHO took with the Ace while RHO played the T. After some thought LHO continued with a ♠.

Now what? Do you finesse or do you play for the drop? This is a pure psychological problem imo. After the ♠T from RHO chances are big that I'll go for a finesse. So playing a ♠ now could be a desperate attempt to change my mind. On the other hand, RHO is a known false carder, with T9 he'd always play the T. So LHO may anticipate this, think that I'll go for the drop anyway, and try to change my mind by playing ♠. Against these opponents it was around 50-50, so I just played the Jack and dropped RHO's ♠9.

Ok so far so good. At this moment you have 11 tricks, opps have 1 trick, and you may have some chances of making a 12th on the ♣s or by means of a double squeeze. It's clear that LHO has ♦s so it's very well possible that RHO has ♣, in which case I can use the ♥s as a double menace. If ♣s are 3-3 then I'll still have my 12 tricks anyway.

For a simulanious squeeze, I can use the 13th ♠ to squeeze both opponents at once (after playing the top tricks of both minor suits, ending in dummy). For some reason I cashed the ♠ immediately, so that was no longer possible. However, a non simultanious double squeeze was still in the picture. Squeezing LHO would require a ♣, and squeezing RHO would require a ♦. Since I have ♥K squeezing RHO is the last step.

So after cashing the 13th ♠ (discarding a ♣) I played ♥A and ♣AK. Now I lead ♣Q in the following diagram:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	MP

♠	-
♥	75
♦	AQ4
♣	-

♠	-
♥	Q9
♦	T97
♣	-

♠	-
♥	J84
♦	-
♣	J9

♠	-
♥	KT
♦	8
♣	Q8

On the play of ♣Q, LHO is squeezed in ♥ and ♦. He bares ♥Q and dummy lets go a ♦. Now I continued with ♦AQ and RHO is squeezed in ♥ and ♣. He decided to bare the ♥J so I dropped both ♥Q and ♥J with my King.

The entire deal:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	MP

♠	J863
♥	752
♦	AQ43
♣	A6

♠	A52
♥	Q963
♦	T9762
♣	4

♠	T94
♥	J84
♦	J5
♣	JT953

♠	KQ7
♥	AKT
♦	K8
♣	KQ872

My luckiest hand ever

2009-09-27T10:05:00.006+02:00

Last week I encountered a hand which is probably the luckiest hand I'll ever encounter. It was the first hand of a club evening, and lady Luck clearly had choosen sides.

It reminded me about hands played by the Hideous Hog in the book "Bridge in the Menagery" by Victor Mollo. He ends up in slams where he seldom has an 8 card trump fit, needs a poor trump break, and where opps have an important decision to make at trick 1 or 2.

This was my hand:
♠ x
♥ AKJT9
♦ xxx
♣ Qxxx

LHO started the auction:
1♦ - Dbl - pass - 4♥
pass - 4♠ - pass - ...

When ♥ is trumps we play Kickback RKC (4♠ is RKC, so you save a step and can always ask for the trump Queen). I wasn't sure if 4♠ was natural, but if it was we surely had slam. If it was Kickback, I should show my keycards. So I bid 5♦ showing 2 keycards without ♥Q. Now partner bid 5♠, again, it could be 2 meanings. He could be running away to his own suit again, but it could also ask for Kings. Looking for grand slam after an opening is rare, but it was still possible. And my first argument still counts, so I responded to the King ask with 6♥, denying any outside Kings. Partner passed.

1♦ - Dbl - pass - 4♥
pass - 4♠ - pass - 5♦
pass - 5♠ - pass - 6♥
pass - pass - pass

LHO lead ♣A and dummy came down:
♠ AKJxxxx
♥ x
♦ Qx
♣ KJx

One can hardly call this a GOSH. Anyway, that would be a discussion for after the game.

RHO played ♣2. LHO now started thinking, and eventually continued a ♣. Ok, take it from here.

Since he continued ♣, LHO couldn't have ♦A. If that's the case, he should have the rest of the HCP (♠Q, ♥Q, ♦KJ and ♣A = 12HCP), maybe not the ♦J. The only way to win, was if ♥Q would be doubleton, so trumps splitting 5-2. If we got that far, we still needed a 3-2 ♠ break. Chances were slim, but they existed.

So I cashed ♥AK and saw the ♥Q drop. First success! I drew the rest of the trumps (luckily I had JT9, although JT8 would be enough for a ruffing finesse), and took the ♠ finesse. 2nd success! Now ♠A, fingers crossed for the 3-2 break. 3rd success, 6♥ made in a 5-1 fit with an A, AK and trump Q outside. :-)

Afterwards we agreed that the Double was clearly wrong, and also that in such situations we better don't play Kickback RKC.

"Either-Or" squeeze (2)

2009-09-19T13:07:00.003+02:00

Here another Either-Or squeeze:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	n/a
Scoring:	MP

♠	AQ542
♥	5
♦	65
♣	AK965

♠	963
♥	J43
♦	984
♣	QJ43

♠	KJ87
♥	KQ7
♦	KQT7
♣	T7

♠	T
♥	AT9862
♦	AJ32
♣	82

The auction went:
1♠ - 1NT!
2♣! - 2♦!
2♠ - 3♥
pass
(1NT was semi forcing; 2♣ Gazzilli; ♦ shows 8-11HCP)

This wasn't a great auction. I was sitting South and had a problem when partner showed <15HCP and (2)3+♣. I decided to just go for 3♥ and see what happens (this is less than invite, otherwise I would've started with 2♥ instead of 1NT). With the North hand I'd have rebid 3♣ instead of Gazzilli since it's 2 good suits and a perfect distribution for it.

Anyway, we got to a playable contract.

West lead ♦9 to the Queen which I ducked smoothly. ♥7 came back to T and J, and another ♦ was played to my AJ. East decided to play the T for my J.

Now I played ♥A (East dropped the King), followed by ♣AK and a ♣ ruff (East discarded ♠J). I exited a trump to East's Queen. This was the situation:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	n/a
Scoring:	MP

♠	AQ5
♥	-
♦	-
♣	96

♠	963
♥	-
♦	4
♣	Q

♠	K87
♥	-
♦	K7
♣	-

♠	T
♥	86
♦	A3
♣	-

East played his ♦K but everything was already lost. I had a ♣ tenance against West and a ♦ tenance against East, so whoever held ♠K would be squeezed.

An "Either-Or" squeeze is technically a simple squeeze (against 1 opponent), but you play it like a double squeeze. Cash your 2 trumps. On the last trump you can squeeze either opponent if he holds the ♠K:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	n/a
Scoring:	MP

♠	AQ
♥	-
♦	-
♣	9

♠	K?6
♥	-
♦	-
♣	Q

♠	K?8
♥	-
♦	7
♣	-

♠	T
♥	6
♦	3
♣	-

3♥+1 was a cold top. West should've played ♠ as soon as he won a trick to break up all communications. I don't know why he didn't.

Strip squeeze

2009-09-14T09:55:00.005+02:00

During a MP tournament I picked up the following collection:
♠ K6
♥ AQT42
♦ KQT4
♣ K6

The auction went (uncontested):
1♥ - 1♠
2♣! - 2♦!
3NT
(2♣ Gazzilli ; 2♦ shows 8+HCP any)

I decided to make the practical bid of 3NT, instead of 3♦ which would show my distribution.

LHO lead the ♦3 and dummy comes down with:
♠ AQJ2
♥ K7
♦ 8652
♣ T93

♠ K6
♥ AQT42
♦ KQT4
♣ K6

Suppose RHO takes ♦A and returns a small ♣. What do you do?

Your best chance is to play the King. Whenever the Q or J is in West's hand, you're losing 4+ ♣ tricks if you play low. When you play the King you only lose 4+ ♣ tricks if LHO has ♣A.

At the table however, RHO won ♦A and returned ♦7 for my King (LHO playing the 9). I played a ♥ to the King and a small back only to find out that RHO shows out! ♥s are 5-1. Now what?

We have 10 tricks on top. Suppose we give LHO a ♥, what will he do? He may play a ♣ in which case we make 11 tricks unless they cash the Ace, but he could also play something else.
We can also take the ♥, return to dummy and play a ♣ to our King. But that's dangerous.
Our 10 tricks and the 1 trick opps already have makes a total of 11, that's 2 tricks remaining, which is good for an endplay. We can clear the ♠s and the ♦s, keeping count of the ♥, and eventually endplay LHO with a ♣ so he has to play in our ♥QT. If LHO has ♣A he won't be able to defend against our line of play, and we have an additional chance he has ♣QJ (in which case RHO will win ♣A but will have to play to dummy's T9). This is definitely a better and safer way of getting a second overtrick.

So I played ♥A, 4 rounds of ♠s discarding ♥4 and ♣6, followed by the rest of the ♦s.

On the last ♦ LHO was squeezed:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	MP

♠	-
♥	-
♦	8
♣	T93

♠	-
♥	J9
♦	-
♣	A5

♠	-
♥	-
♦	-
♣	QJ87

♠	-
♥	QT
♦	T
♣	K

If he discards a small ♣ I'd still lead my ♣K just in case LHO has any honour (if it's the Jack or Queen, I'll still make my 10th trick in dummy). This would only lose if LHO had no ♣ honours. In reality, LHO would be endplayed and would have to play ♥ into my QT.
If he discards a ♥, my ♥s are high.
So his only chance was to discard ♣A, which didn't help.

3NT+2 obviously was a great score.

This was the full hand:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	MP

♠	AQJ2
♥	K7
♦	8652
♣	T93

♠	T43
♥	J9853
♦	J93
♣	A5

♠	9875
♥	6
♦	A7
♣	QJ8742

♠	K6
♥	AQT42
♦	KQT4
♣	K6

Notice that if RHO would've returned a small ♣ at trick 2, we would've gone down 3!

Gazzilli

2009-08-08T17:09:00.003+02:00

I haven't posted anything on Gazzilli before. It's one of my favorite conventions which occurs when the auction starts 1M-1NT or 1♥-1♠. It's a very simple convention with big advantages, few disadvantages, and it comes up frequently.

A 2♣ rebid from opener is a 2-way bid, showing one of 2 hand types:
- 16+HCP, any distribution
- <16HCP, natural (or semi-natural if that fits your system)

Responder has only 1 strong response: 2♦ shows 8+HCP, any distribution. Any other bid shows less than 8HCP and is natural. In this case a preference should be given to a doubleton Major support.

Opener will now clarify which hand type he's holding:
- After 1M-1♠/NT-2♣-2♦, opener rebids 2M with the weak version. Any other bid shows 16+HCP and makes the auction GF. Bidding 2OM usually shows a 3 card suit, which makes finding 5-3 and 6-2 fits a lot easier.
- After any weak bid, opener will usually pass with the weak version. With 16-17HCP and misfit he'll also pass. With a very strong hand he can bid a new suit. With fit he can still invite or bid game.

Basic structure after 2♣:
2♦ = 8+HCP
...2M = <16HCP, (semi)natural ♣
...2OM = 16+HCP, any hand with 3OM
...2NT = 16+HCP, balanced, no 3OM
...3m = 16+HCP, natural, no 3OM
...3M = 16+HCP, natural, no 3OM
...3OM = 16+HCP, 4OM
2M = <8HCP, 2-3M
2OM = <8HCP, natural, 0-1M
2NT = <8HCP, minors, 0-1M
3m = <8HCP, natural, 0-1M

There are some specific exceptions:
1♥-1NT-2♣-2♠ = <8HCP, 3♠ (1NT already denied 4♠) and both minors (5530 or 5431).
1♥-1NT-2♣-2♦-2♠ = 16+HCP, 4♠ (showing 3♠ is useless).

Obviously you can modify this structure a bit, for example use 1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦-2♥ to show 3-4♥. As a result, 1♠-1NT-2♣-2♦-3♥ will now show 5♥.
You can also use 1M-1NT-2♣-2♦-2OM as various handtypes (this saves space!).
If you play Kaplan inversion, it also has implications to rebidding 2OM after a 1♥ opening.

As usual there are a few (pretty rare) problem hands: <8HCP with 1=4=4=4 and the auction starts 1♠-1NT-2♣. Usually it's best to just bid 2♥ and hope for the best. Another one is after 1♥-1♠, when responder has a strong hand you may have some difficulties.

Playing Gazzilli frees up a few rebids for opener:
- Jump rebids (like 1M-1NT-3m) show a 5-5 with 2 great suits but less than 16HCP. If responder has honours in both suits, 4M in a 5-2 fit can be possible. A typical example is AKxxx-AQxxx opposite Qx-Kxx. 10 tricks are for the taking if both suits behave a little bit.
- 1♥-1NT-2♠ shows a minimum hand with 6♥-5♠.
- 1M-1NT-2NT: you can use this to show a GF hand with 6M-4m. Since these are difficult to bid anyway, you might as well make it easy using this tool.

In my current 2/1 system we play Gazzilli. The weak version can be with only 2♣s (5M332 or 4=5=2=2) because we prefer to have our 2♦ rebid natural with 4+ cards. Only exception we have to the 2♦ rebid is when we have 4=5=3=1 exactly. Playing 2♦ or 3♦ is acceptable since we have true ruffing value.

A new approach (2)

2009-08-01T10:24:00.004+02:00

2/1 GF except rebid is imo the way to go. Playing jumps as invitational loses too many options, and bidding 1NT with an invitational good 6 card suit can sometimes make it difficult to show your true strength later on. It also makes a semi forcing 1NT response possible, which can be a winner over forcing 1NT.

However there's always that 1 difficult auction: 1♠-2♥. With my new partner we respond as follows:
2♠ = any minimum without 4♥
2NT = 16+HCP, no singleton or void, not 4♥ (so 5332/54m22/6322/7222)
3m = 16+HCP, 4+m (not 5422, not 3♥)
3♥ = 16+HCP, 4♥ / 3♥ + singleton/void
3♠ = 16+HCP, 6+♠, 0-1♥, no side suit
3NT = not used!
4m = minimum, 4♥, 0-1m
4♥ = minimum, 4♥, 5422

3NT isn't used, but a useful agreement could be 5=4=2=2 with values in the short suits.

The 2NT rebid is a little homegrown tool, useful to find 6-2 or 5-3 ♥ fits while you know opener doens't have immediate ruffing value. This also makes our 3♥ rebid better defined: it always shows potential either by ruffing value or because of an extra trump.

After 1♠-2♥-2♠ (this is forcing for 1 round btw - opener can have up to 15HCP and can still have a 3 card ♥ fit), responder can just rebid 3♥ to show the invitational variant. With a GF responder can bid natural (except 3♥), or use 2NT as a relay to ask about opener's shape.
After any other rebid from opener the situation is GF.

There is 1 hand which may be difficult: opener is minimum, and responder has a GF with 6♥ and no ♠ fit. In this case, you can't find a 6-2 ♥ fit.

These days some pairs reverse the meaning of 2♦ and 2♥ responses over a 1♠ opening, to avoid similar problems. Although it has merit, it also brings many problems.
- For starters, there's no well defined structure after 1♠-2♥ showing ♦ (as an example, in IMP magazine there was an article on the switch: a few pages on continuations and theory after 2♦, and just one column on 2♥). Opener lost a lot of valuable space! Should he still be looking for a ♥ fit? Should he support ♦ with minimum hands? Etc. In my previous post I mentioned that we have described our 1♠-2♦ very well (usually 6+ cards), so we could get away with the switch.
- On the other hand, 1♠-2♦ (showing ♥) isn't perfect either. Do you want to be able to stop in 2♥ or not? If so, you'll need to find a way to show your 14-15HCP hands with 3 card support. But this will make things harder to support when you have 18-19 with a 4 card support! So while you're creating more space, you should actually give up on being able to play 2♥ and use this to show minimum hands with 2-3♥.

My conclusion on the switch is mainly that it doesn't fit well in a "2/1 GF except rebid"-structure. If 2/1 is an absolute GF, then it may make sense. I've also seen people include weak hands with 6+♥ instead of invitational ones. This is probably playable, since 2♥ rebid from opener isn't forcing anymore, but probably brings up some problems elsewhere in the system.
Either way, since you have to give up a lot (response structure + 1♠-2♥ continuations), it's imo not worth the trouble.

A new approach (1)

2009-07-28T21:06:00.002+02:00

It's been a while since I posted, but I decided to start over again. I'm not sure about the frequency, but it won't be as much as before.

The reason why I've been away for so long is that I started working almost 2 years ago. It's been a huge change for me! Before, I was studying, had much free time and played a lot of bridge. These days I'm working long days and play a lot less bridge. It took me a while to get used to it, but these days I'm playing more bridge and I have formed a new partnership.

I've always been a great fan of all sorts of exotic systems. My experience with them is that you can win bigtime when opps are silent, but usually you're badly placed in competitive auctions. MOSCITO for example is a great system if opps are quiet (you have relays and natural bidding available), but when they intervene you can have a hard time figuring out if opener has a 4 or a 5 card Major. Same goes for precision 1♦ openings, or Polish 1♣.
That's why my preference goes to natural openings these days (my friend Misho told me 6 years ago that I'd go back to natural, and I must admit that he was right), while continuations may be more complicated. With my new partner we decided to play some sort of 2/1 GF with many useful modifications. It's a combination between American, Italian and Dutch styles.

The natural openings prepare us well for a competitive auction. There's a lot of material on this subject, lots of people to ask for advice if something went wrong,...
Continuations are sometimes quite artificial.

Our 2/1 responses over a 1M opening are as follows:
2♣ = GF with ♣ / GF with fit / GF bal / INV with good 6+♣
2♦ = GF with 6+♦ / GF with 5+♦ and fit / INV with good 6+♦
2♥ = GF with 5+♥ / INV with good 6+♥

As this structure suggests, 2/1 is GF except when the suit is rebid.
More and more people are using the 2♣ response for more than just ♣s. With strong hands without a good 5 card minor, or with strong balanced hands, or even with a 3 or 4 card fit they prefer to stay low and see what opener has. This is exactly why we use 2♣ as a GF relay.
2♦ is a special case. Opener doesn't have as much space available as after a 2♣ response, so we prefer to define 1M-2♦ a lot better. Basically you need a 6 card suit, although with fit in the Major a good 5 card suit is sufficient (you'll show your hand with your next rebid and let opener evaluate his hand).

After both 1M-2m responses, opener uses similar rebids in steps:
step 1 = minimum, not 4OM
step 2 = any strength, 4+OM
step 3+ = maximum, not 4OM
This saves space, and avoids ambiguity when responder rebids his minor.
When opener has shown his strength and/or shape, responder can decide if he's going to continue relaying (yes, also after 1M-2♦), describe his own hand, or just signoff.

Using relays combines natural systems with the best method for slam bidding. Although we don't have full relays (2♣ relay is mathematically too high so don't bother trying) we can handle most hands and have a pretty accurate picture of opener's hand. Responder can always break relays and go back to natural bidding, so this gives us a lot of flexibility.
I've found the relay structure with the Italians, although the Dutch also use very similar structures. You can make this as complicated as you want, for example with specific relays to show fit at low levels, but I won't go into detail at the moment. The basic 3-step scheme is the most important part.

An example hand:
♠ Axxx
♥ AKxxx
♦ AKxx
♣ -

♠ Kx
♥ QTxx
♦ QJxxx
♣ Ax

North starts the auction:
1♥ - 2♣
2♥ - 2♠
2NT - 3♣
3♠ - 4♣
4♦ - 4♠
4NT - 5♦
6♦ - 7NT

1♥ = value of 12+HCP, 5+♥
2♣ = GF relay except rebid
2♥ = any strength, 54+M
2♠ = GF relay without ♠ fit
2NT = 5440 or 6-5
3♣ = relay
3♠ = 16+HCP, 4=5=4=0
4♣ = since this can't be natural, it sets ♥
4♦ = cue
4♠ = kickback RKC
4NT = 1/4 keycards (void is already known)
5♦ = K ask
6♦ = only ♦K
7NT = you can count 13 tricks

Taking a break

2007-11-27T19:24:00.000+01:00

At the moment I'm too busy with all sorts of stuff to post on a regular basis. I've decided to take a break. Depending on work I might return soon, in a few months, or even stop forever.

Greetz,

Free

Toying with voidwood

2007-11-17T09:57:00.000+01:00

Yesterday I had following hand:
♠ AJ9x
♥ AKJT9x
♦ xxx
♣ -

Playing a natural system (pretty basic actually), partner opened 1♠ in 1st seat, Vulnerable. What's your plan?

I thought of several possibilities:
2♥ = natural, forcing for 1 round
2NT = GF with fit
4♣ = splinter
5♣ = voidwood

Normally I prefer to bid 2♥, but with this partner I wasn't sure I could set up a GF at 3-level if he rebids 2♠. After 2NT we play pretty standard responses, so with a minimum hand he'll rebid 4♠ which we don't want! I thought my hand was too strong for a splinter, so voidwood was the only thing left. However, if partner doesn't have a control in ♦ we may already be too high... Nothing was really satisfying. Then I thought a little further, and found a response that was imo better than all the rest. Can you find it?

I bid 5 Diamonds, voidwood. This solves the problem in ♦ (who will lead this suit now?) and lets us play 6♠ pretty comfortable. The auction continued as follows:
1♠ - pass - 5♦! - 6♣
pass! - pass - 7♠ - pass
pass - pass

Partner's pass should show 1 keycard (not counting ♦A), so I made a gamble and bid the grand slam.

Partner's hand was:
♠ KQTxx
♥ Q
♦ Axx
♣ Jxxx

The slam is laydown, but the trumps were 4-0! After a ♥ lead you'll have to count on a 3-3 ♥ split so you can play some kind of dummy reversal ruffing some ♦s. Otherwise you can only make 12 tricks...

While I was dummy, I was thinking about these Zia voidwoods (I've seen him do this several times as well, voidwood with another void). Actually they work amaizingly well, although this hand doesn't illustrate this completely. For example, partner has ♦A: without it, the killing lead would've been avoided. He also has ♥Q, a lucky card. Playing 6♠ (this was my initial plan) while partner had ♦xxx obviously would've been a better example, but I don't like to change the hands.
Nevertheless the Zia voidwood works in the sense that opponents don't know there's a suit wide open, and the hand should practically be over once they've lead the wrong suit. I think it's less useful if you have a ♦ control of your own.

Unlucky? Yes!

2007-10-23T14:27:00.000+02:00

The new competition season has started 4 weeks ago. At this moment we're not scoring the way we would like to. Most of the time we all play well, but "luck" is not on our side! Many imps are lost because of extremely bad splits (5-0 trump splits for example), or opponents playing 1♠ with 24HCP while our teammates go -2 in 3NT. The following hand is a perfect example.

Opponents blasted blind to slam as follows (we were silent):
2NT! - 3♦!
4♠ - 6♠

2NT = either weak with both minors, or strong with one Major
3♦ = to play when opener has the minors
4♠ = GF with long and solid ♠s

The hands were:
♠ T8
♥ AKTxx
♦ 9xxxxx
♣ -

♠ AKQ9xxx
♥ x
♦ -
♣ KQTxx

North can't know they won't lose a single trick in ♦, but still bid slam because he had "2 tricks".

The contract may not be as easy as it looks. A trump lead for example is annoying, but not fatal. Can you construct possible holdings in ♣ for EW?

At the table, my partner lead ♣A so declarer made +1. However, even if he leads a trump the contract is still laydown thanks to amazing splits. Look at the full hand:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	T8
♥	AKTxx
♦	9xxxxx
♣	-

♠	Jxx
♥	J9xxx
♦	KTx
♣	Ax

♠	x
♥	Qx
♦	AQJx
♣	J9xxxx

♠	AKQ9xxx
♥	x
♦	-
♣	KQTxx

After a trump lead, declarer can ruff a low ♣ and later on let the ♣A come down on another low ♣. His ♣T can be discarded on ♥K. This line only makes when one of the EW players has a doubleton with the Ace, and guess what: that's exactly the way the suit split in our hands... What are the chances?

Triple squeeze

2007-10-09T16:42:00.000+02:00

I encountered the following hand this weekend:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	T876
♥	J
♦	K82
♣	Q9752

♠	J543
♥	A82
♦	AT63
♣	JT

♠	92
♥	T97654
♦	95
♣	843

♠	AKQ
♥	KQ3
♦	QJ74
♣	AK6

The auction was pretty standard, ending in 3NT played by South. LHO started with a small ♠. 11 tricks were easy, but perhaps 12 were possible by means of a squeeze. So I took ♠K and played a low ♦ to the K. LHO hesitated, so we know where ♦A is. Next was the ♥J, which is necessary to rectify the count for a squeeze. With normal layouts and if the ♥J holds, we have 3♠s, 1♥, 3♦s and 5♣s = 11 tricks, perfect for a squeeze.

♥J held, so I played a ♦ to my Q and LHO took the Ace (mistake). He returned a ♠. After cashing all my ♠s, I ran the ♣s. This is the position in the end:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	T
♥	-
♦	2
♣	52

♠	J
♥	A
♦	T6
♣	-

♠	-
♥	T976
♦	-
♣	-

♠	-
♥	KQ
♦	Q7
♣	-

On ♣5 I discarded ♥K, and LHO was squeezed in 3 suits. 3NT+3 won us a full imp, it's not much, but in MP it would've been a top.

I have no idea why LHO didn't take his Aces. From the auction he should've known his partner had nothing, and creating a third trick was impossible.

Note that if you don't play ♥J, the squeeze doesn't work. When LHO holds up his ♦Ace one more round the squeeze also doesn't work, because the communication to my hand is broken.

2007 World Championships Shanghai

2007-10-02T16:57:00.000+02:00

The 2007 World Championships started a few days ago. Australia's captain David Stern uses the following blog to give daily news:
http://worldbridge.blogspot.com/

Transfers after 1-level intervention

2007-09-14T14:41:00.000+02:00

It's been a while since I posted, but I've been quite busy. Don't worry, I keep coming back! ;-)

This is about a method I play when opponents intervene at the 1-level. Beginners learn that, for example, 1♦-(1♥)-1♠ shows 5+♠s, while Double would show exactly 4 ♠s. This is useful in some cases, but too limited in other situations. What do you bid with 8-9HCP without ♠ and without a ♥ stopper? Is the distinction between 4 and 5 card Major really that important? Doesn't opener ever raise 1x-1M-2M with only a 3 card support in an uncontested auction? So why shouldn't he do it now?

Obviously you know what I'm getting at by now. Reserve only 1 bid to show the Major, while the free bid can now be used to show some values without a good bid.

One problem remains: should you bid natural, or in transfer? I think transfers are by far superior than natural bids because they leave space (just in case your opponents shut up) to investigate the best fit. Opener can accept the transfer with only a 3 card support, responder will know what to do.

Here's a scheme I like:
1♣ - (1♦) - ?

Dbl = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper

1♣ - (1♥) - ?

Dbl = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper
2♦ = natural, F1

1♦ - (1♥) - ?

Dbl = 4+♠
1♠ = some values, no biddable suit, no stopper
1NT = standard, with stopper
2♣ = natural, F1

You see I use the 1♠ bid as trash bin. It's a consequence of the transfers, and in fact has some pre-emptive effect. Also, it's no problem for us, we don't need the 1M bids since we seem to have no Major fit anyway. The 1♠ bid can be described as some sort of takeout Double without a biddable suit, usually without a fit as well. The hand is very well described!

After 1X-(1♠) I use normal takeout Doubles. Transfers are no use, and usually there's no big problem anyway.

You might wonder what to do when opponents Double. Well, I prefer a very similar approach, but now we use an entrire level of transfers:
1♣ - (Dbl) - ?

RDbl = 5+♦
1♦ = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = good ♣ raise
2♣ = poor ♣ raise

1♦ - (Dbl) - ?

RDbl = 4+♥
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = good ♦ raise
2♦ = poor ♦ raise

1♥ - (Dbl) - ?

RDbl = 4+♠
1♠ = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = 5+♦
2♦ = good ♥ raise
2♥ = poor ♥ raise

1♠ - (Dbl) - ?

RDbl = transfer to 1NT
1NT = 5+♣
2♣ = 5+♦
2♦ = 5+♥
2♥ = good ♠ raise
2♠ = poor ♠ raise

In all of the above cases, other bids are fit jumps, and 2NT shows at least an invitational hand with 4+ card support.

The biggest advantage of all the transfers is that you now have different kinds of support, which can be very valuable in competitive auctions! Another advantage is that the strong hand can declare most of the time, and the player that doubled has to lead away from strength. This increases your chances for success.
The biggest disadvantage is that you can't ReDouble for penalties. Obviously you can pass and hope you get the opportunity to penalize your opponents later on (which can really happen), but if you look at the frequency of penalizing your opponents opposite the frequency of handling a competitive auction, the latter is most important.

2Sx? No, we prefer 3D

2007-08-24T14:30:00.000+02:00

Take a look at following auctions:

Open room:
pass - 1♣ - pass - 1♠
pass - 2♠ - Dbl - pass
3♦ - pass - pass - pass

Closed room:
2♦! - pass - 2♠! - pass
pass - Dbl - pass - 2NT!
pass - 3♣! - pass - 3♦
pass - pass - pass

Yes, these are the auctions from 1 board played at 2 tables! It was the match we played against one of the Danish teams (Blakset). At both tables we were doubling our opponents in 2♠ (both down), and at both tables our team ended up in 3♦!
The board was not fouled, everybody was sitting in the right direction, nobody was psyching,...

Here it is:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	863
♥	Q864
♦	AK
♣	A862

♠	QT952
♥	95
♦	J63
♣	Q94

♠	J
♥	AKJT
♦	Q842
♣	KT53

♠	AK74
♥	732
♦	T975
♣	J7

In the open room, the auction started pretty standard. The raise to 2♠ seems unnecessary to me because there are lots of values in the doubleton. Nevertheless the North player decided to raise. Now East had a clear Double, showing his values, red suits, length in ♣ and shortness in ♠. West was afraid to leave it in and decided to play 3♦.

In the closed room, West started with a "trash mini-multi", showing a poor hand with at least a 5 card Major. North (me) couldn't double that, because we play Dbl as takeout opposite a 2♥ opening. Whatever action we want to take opposite a 2♠ opening can usually wait a round. So East bid a 2♠ P/C which went back to me. Now I had a takeout Double, although my ♦s were a bit short. South was too afraid to leave that in, and started a Lebensohl sequence to 3♦.

Our team mates in the open room made 7 tricks, we only made 6, for a nicely combined total of 13. Christina Mortensen (= West in the closed room) claimed they defended better! :-)

So where did it go wrong? I'm not entirely sure (and my opinion is biased anyway), that's why I posted 2 polls on the Bridgebase forums:
Open room
Closed room

At the moment, it seems like people agree with Gert's decision to run, while they don't agree with the decision in the open room.

Maybe some will not agree with my takeout Double, who knows? An auction like 2♦ - 2♠ usually points out the weakness of the ♠ fit, so I really thought my partner would probably pass 2♠x. Well, he didn't, but I can't blame him.

Psychs I've seen in Bruges

2007-08-22T21:39:00.000+02:00

1. First of all, one I've heard from a friend:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	AT87
♥	K632
♦	J654
♣	2

♠	KQ94
♥	A854
♦	AK8
♣	A7

♠	J3
♥	97
♦	Q92
♣	KQJT96

♠	652
♥	QJT
♦	T73
♣	8543

The auction started:
pass - pass - 1NT! - ...

Now West had a problem: he couldn't Double because that promissed either ♣ or both red suits. So he tried 2♣, showing either ♦ or both Majors! Ofcourse, East did what he thought was best: Pass!

pass - pass - 1NT - 2♣!
pass - pass - pass

EW made some overtricks...

Once again you get proof that Dbl should not be too artificial, especially after a 3rd seat favorable 1NT opening! With Gert I play Dbl as 4M-5m or strong distributional, so we can easily Double. If partner passes, great, but if he bids we can still find 3NT (next best thing).

2. One of our opponents did this at our table:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	KJ975
♥	Q5
♦	A2
♣	KJ53

♠	3
♥	987
♦	QT864
♣	A862

♠	AT42
♥	J43
♦	KJ95
♣	QT

♠	Q86
♥	AKT62
♦	73
♣	974

The auction went as follows:
1♦! - 1♥ - 1♠! - 1NT?
2♠ - pass - 3♦ - Dbl
pass - 3♥ - pass - pass
pass
(1♦ usually shows 5♦s, opps play Polish ♣)

I bid 1NT because I didn't suspect a psych at that time, and partner could've overcalled a bit light. After the 3♦ bid however, I was shaken awake, as was my partner. But how many ♠s did I have? Hard to find 4♠ now imo.

West started his singleton ♠ to his partner's Ace but didn't get his ruff (apparently East was the only one who didn't realize the psych). We made 2 overtricks, but 4M makes if you can guess the ♣s.

3. I couldn't help it, the last day against our friends from Oxford:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	J765
♥	J3
♦	A9
♣	T9752

♠	2
♥	AT9842
♦	K42
♣	QJ8

♠	AKT8
♥	75
♦	QT86
♣	A64

♠	Q943
♥	KQ6
♦	J753
♣	K3

The auction went:
1NT! - pass - 2♦ - 2♠!
pass - 3♥ - pass? - 3♠
pass - pass - 4♥? - pass
pass - pass
(1NT = weak; 3♥ = invite+ with ♠ fit)

I lead ♦A and got an encouraging signal. Partner thought I lead from AKx and wanted me to cash the suit before declarer's losers would go away on ♠AK. I don't think I'd ask for attitude from AKx, rather count (by leading the K), but ok, we forgive him because it was the last day and we weren't 100% concentrated (nothing to win or lose anyway). After the ♦ continuation (I thought I'd get a ruff) declarer made 4♥ by discarding his ♣ losers.

Another missed slam

2007-08-14T17:06:00.000+02:00

I forgot one where I made an easy 12 tricks, because it's just crazy to bid slam on this hand. We didn't even reach game, and it needs too many well placed cards to actually make a chance. Here it is:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AJ4
♥	84
♦	AT2
♣	AJ975

♠	K3
♥	Q72
♦	KJ96
♣	T862

♠	T85
♥	KJ9653
♦	Q74
♣	Q

♠	Q9762
♥	AT
♦	853
♣	K43

The auction was quickly over:
pass - pass - 1NT! - pass
pass - pass

(weak NT)

After a ♥ lead, I immediately took ♥A and finessed ♠J. When the K drops under ♠A and ♣Q drops under ♣K, an easy 12 tricks are for the taking...

Slams we missed

2007-08-14T12:48:00.000+02:00

Apart from the 2 grands we've missed (we bid only small slam) we only missed 2 slams. Coincidence or not, both contained a void. Note again that these were also 26-point-slams, just like the ones we bid...

1.

Dealer:	East
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	AKQ
♥	KJT98632
♦	63
♣	-

♠	J83
♥	-
♦	KQT87
♣	AJ742

♠	76542
♥	4
♦	J54
♣	QT53

♠	T9
♥	AQ75
♦	A92
♣	K986

pass - 1NT! - pass - 2♣!
pass - 2♦! - Dbl - 4♣!
pass - 4♥? - pass - pass
pass

1NT = 12-14, balanced or semibalanced (4441/5422)
2♣ = puppet to 2♦, many hands
2♦ = obligated
4♣ = shows a splinter, good ♥ and no ♦ stopper.

The question whether South should've bid 4♦ remains unanswered. South claimed that a splinter bid is an "evaluation bid" (and with Kxxx he should refuse), while North claimed that South should just show his ♦ cue, because showing a good ♥ suit without Ace and Queen is very suspicious to say the least. North also claimed he's endplayed if no ♦ cue is shown by the opener.
Both players agreed that North must have very long ♥ from KJ with slam interest. Since he doesn't hold anything in ♦ or ♣, he must have solid ♠s as well. But that doesn't guarantee that we won't lose 2 or 3 tricks. 5-level is probably safe, so percentage wise South might've just cuebid his ♦A, but still it's a borderline decision.

2.

Dealer:	North
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	AK7
♥	AJ943
♦	5
♣	QT74

♠	Q52
♥	Q6
♦	KT97642
♣	6

♠	T84
♥	72
♦	AQJ83
♣	982

♠	J963
♥	KT85
♦	-
♣	AKJ53

1♥! - pass - 2NT! - 4♦
4♥ - 5♦ - 5♥ - pass
pass - pass

1♥ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2NT = fit, either invitational, or GF with a void

Afterwards South admitted he should've just bid 6♥ instead of 5♥. Opener shows a non-minimum hand by his 4♥ bid.

Slams we bid

2007-08-13T10:56:00.000+02:00

Dealer:	East
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	Q8762
♥	-
♦	AQ8753
♣	T3

♠	JT3
♥	J842
♦	J92
♣	J84

♠	A94
♥	AKQ63
♦	64
♣	972

♠	K5
♥	T975
♦	KT
♣	AKQ65

1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠?
pass - 4♥ - pass - 5♠
pass - 6♦ - pass - pass
pass

Result: 6♦=

A sharp one on the first day. We weren't sure about the 3♠ bid, but we both considered it to be natural. We have numerous ways of supporting partner's ♣s, and an autosplinter wouldn't make much sense.
Bidding 2♠ followed by another cuebid and 3♠ wouldn't necessarily show 5-6, so we agreed (afterwards) that this sequence above should be natural with 5♠ and 6♦.

2.

Dealer:	South
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	63
♥	AJ9872
♦	AJ
♣	Q62

♠	T9842
♥	T654
♦	K3
♣	84

♠	QJ7
♥	-
♦	QT87642
♣	J95

♠	AK5
♥	KQ3
♦	95
♣	AKT73

Opponents were silent:
1♣! - 2♥!
3♥! - 3NT!
4♣! - 4♦!
4NT! - 5♦!
6♣! - 7♥

1♣ = 14+ natural or 15+ balanced (no 5M), F1
2♥ = GF, 6+♥
3♥ = sets, 3+♥
3NT = minimum hand, no ♠ cue
4♣ = ♠ cue and ♣ cue, slam interest
4♦ = cue
4NT = odd number of keycards (3 or 5 in this sequence), ♠ cue
5♦ = 1st round cue, no 1st or 2nd ♣ cue
6♣ = shows trump Q, interest in grand slam if I have a 3rd round control ♣

Result: 7♥=

Always fun to bid a sharp grand slam on vugraph against the team that would eventually win the tournament.

3.

Dealer:	North
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AKQ942
♥	7
♦	T9
♣	AJ75

♠	5
♥	Q92
♦	KQJ83
♣	KT42

♠	J86
♥	T853
♦	65
♣	Q963

♠	T73
♥	AKJ64
♦	A742
♣	8

1♠! - pass - 2♥! - 2NT!
Dbl - 3♣ - 3♠ - pass
4♣! - pass - 4♦! - Dbl
4♥! - pass - 4NT! pass
6♠ - pass - pass - pass

1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2♥ = GF, natural
Dbl = ready to penalize
4♣ = cue, serious slam interest
4♦ = cue
4♥ = cue (yes we cuebid singletons in partner's suit), no ♦ cue
4NT = shows even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
6♠ = poor bid

Result: 6♠= (7♠ makes however)

I pushed a bit (showing serious slam interest) when I found out opps had a ♣ fit. This was justified, but for some reason I didn't investigate grand anymore. I must have been distracted because I'm always mad if my partner bids like this opposite an unlimited hand...

4.

Dealer:	North
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	-
♥	QJ6543
♦	AQ96
♣	K87

♠	T6543
♥	9
♦	JT83
♣	Q52

♠	KQ982
♥	87
♦	K754
♣	J9

♠	AJ7
♥	AKT2
♦	2
♣	AT643

Opponents were silent:
2♥! - 2♠!
3♦! - 3♥!
3♠! - 3NT!?
4♣! - 4♦!
4♥! - 4♠!
5♦! - 5♥!?
6♥?

2♥ = 10-13HCP, natural, unbalanced
2♠ = relay, usually GF
3♦ = natural, 0-2♠
3♥ = sets trump, at least light slam interest
3♠ = cue
3NT = light slam interest (???)
4♣ = cue
4♦ = cue
4♥ = also light slam interest
4♠ = even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
5♦ = cue
5♥ = no ♥Q

We had a bit of a misunderstanding here. Showing only light slaminterest with South's hand is imo an underbid. After this, North never gave South 4 keycards, especially when he bid 5♥ later on. North showed slam interest with only 1 keycard, so South could've done more by bidding 5NT. This should show lots of keycards without the trump Queen, why else bid like this? 6♥ was a gamble, since North gave South only 2 keycards, but didn't know if he had ♠A or not.

Result: 6♥+1 (7♥ could've been bid imo)

5.

Dealer:	South
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	KT965
♥	AQJ6
♦	QT42
♣	-

♠	7
♥	T532
♦	J53
♣	Q8764

♠	43
♥	K984
♦	K7
♣	T9532

♠	AQJ82
♥	7
♦	A986
♣	AKJ

Opponents silent:
1♠! - 2NT!
3♣! - 4♣!
6♠

1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2NT = invite with fit, or GF with a void
3♣ = relay
4♣ = void splinter
6♠ = didn't think grand slam was possible

Result: 6♠+1 after a weird ♣ lead! Otherwise ♥K has to be found to make grand slam.

6.

Dealer:	n/a
Vul:	n/a
Scoring:	n/a

♠	QJ
♥	KJT98
♦	KQ8743
♣	-

♠	A986
♥	Q63
♦	5
♣	K8654

♠	72
♥	542
♦	AJ62
♣	J732

♠	KT543
♥	A7
♦	T9
♣	AQT9

Opponents were silent:
1NT! - 2♦!
2♥! - 3♠!
3NT - 4♥?
6NT

1NT = (11)12-14HCP, balanced or semi balanced
2♦ = transfer, 4+♥
2♥ = no good hand with 4♥
3♠ = GF, 4♥, 5+♦
3NT = no fit
4♥ = North thought he showed 5♥ and 6♦, while South thought he showed an even number of keycards with ♦ as trumps

This was bid on the final day, where we didn't have anything to win or to lose. A bidding misunderstanding made sure we were in a ridiculous contract, but that didn't mean we didn't made the best out of it. When my hand came down, I told partner to play a bit fast if he was going down for sure. I knew the chance of success was pretty small, but this feeling got confirmed when partner immediately started playing with an enormous tempo!

Conclusion: we went down in only 1 slam which we bid without much concentration, but we missed some (lucky) grands as well. Note that all of these slams made on distribution rather than HCP! This proves yet again that evaluating the hand is the most important, and points are only useful to a certain degree.

European Championship for University Students

2007-08-11T10:25:00.000+02:00

This week the European Championship for university students took place. It was organized in Bruges, which is very close to where I live. I competed with Gert Vandyck, with teammates Willem De Visschere en Rutger Van Mechelen. We are a decent team, but our results were a bit disappointing. Lots of (stupid?) mistakes were made at both tables, but that didn't mean we couldn't make fun! The atmosphere was great, opponents were friendly most of the time, people were relaxed,...

There were 32 teams. The organisation wanted to play an incomplete round robin, followed by semi finals and finals with the best 4 teams. There wasn't enough time to play against all teams, so we only played against 28 or so. Nevertheless, we got to meet a lot of people this way.

The matches consisted out of 8 boards (tight schedule if you have to play 30 matches in 4 days), with quite an agressive VP scale. Going down in a vulnerable game could easily mean a 19-11 loss! Every mistake was translated in your VP's, even overtricks from time to time...

With so many teams, a round robin was a bad idea in my opinion. Halfway in the tournament, most teams don't stand a chance to get to the semi finals, so they're just playing for fun and let their concentration slip. The organisation has some ideals they want to accomplish, like creating a certain atmosphere between all players. Still we see all people from the same country stick together most of the time. This means the social contacts aren't actually made, so it might be better to try to give all teams something to play for and give the "university spirit" a lower priority.
Imo starting with groups of 4 would've been a lot better. Half of the teams get to play side tournaments, the rest plays a knock out. Every knocked out team joins the side tournaments, every day there are some winners. If you have an off day, no problem, tomorrow you get a new chance to beat your opponents. This way you can also make lots of new friends, and the teams with a real chance for the big title will have to beat their opponents face to face.

The organisation mentioned that they weren't planning on playing a round robin next time, so I guess they already realise it's not the best solution. We'll have to wait and see, but it should be an improvement.

Enough with the rant...

Congratulations to the French team "Paris Sud" who won!

In this week I encountered lots of interesting problems, which I will try to share with all of you. To warm you up, I'll give you one where I really fooled my opponents after an awful bid from Gert:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	T6543
♥	Q743
♦	54
♣	74

♠	98
♥	T862
♦	A862
♣	J92

♠	AJ7
♥	AKJ9
♦	QT
♣	AKQ8

♠	KQ2
♥	5
♦	KJ973
♣	T653

The auction started:

pass - pass - 2♦! - Dbl
pass - pass - RDbl - pass
pass - ...

I was sitting North, so I had a problem. 2♦ was any GF, the RDbl was explained as a strong balanced hand. 2♦xx and made is a game score, so I should try to find some contract which will go -2, maybe -3. If I would bid 2♠ and partner had a singleton, it would be problematic. Since I didn't have a RDbl available, I choose to bid 2♥! If partner has a 3 card support he'll pass, with a singleton he'll RDbl. The auction continued:

pass - pass - 2♦! - Dbl
pass - pass - RDbl - pass
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - RDbl
pass - 2♠ - Dbl - pass
pass - pass

My LHO made it clear that I would die in 2♥ with a strangling gesture. I was happy to get a RDbl from partner, because it meant we probably had a ♠ fit!

East started with ♣A and switched to ♦T, really hard for me to read that card. I played the King which was taken with the Ace. The ♣ return was for East's Queen, she took ♦Q, and continued with a small ♣ which I ruffed. Now I played a small ♠ to the King which held, and ruffed another ♣ (West discarding a ♥!). I had a chance now (to go only -2), so I played a small ♠ to East's Ace.
She gave the hand some thought, she thought I had 4♠ and 5♥ (what I was hoping for), so she could give her partner a ruff! ♥AK followed by ♥ went to my Queen (you really had to see the look on my screenmate's face when her partner still followed suit!), a ♠ to dummy and my ♦s were high. Result: 2♠x-2 and 5 imps to the good guys!

The double on 2♦ was awful and plain useless (he was probably on lead anyway, so there's no lead directing purpose), but it got me a nice story and it won us some imps. Luckily Gert realised his mistake and refrained from doing such things again.

The defense wasn't much better than the Double, but I think both my opponents thought I had 4♠ and 5♥ and misjudged the hand completely. They probably tried to shorten me in trumps, which is obviously a reasonable idea, but it didn't work. A ♥ return from West however would've been fatal, but how could they know that I bid my 4 card suit first? In the end, East was endplayed and there was nothing left to do than giving me my 6th trick on a plate.

More stories will come for sure!

Psyching vs strong Club

2007-08-01T10:04:00.001+02:00

It's been a while since I posted, but I've been very busy, haven't played much, so didn't encounter any interesting hands. So I decided to dig a little into the past, around a month ago, where we had a funny auction after a strong 1♣ opening. Here's the hand:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	K872
♥	J9
♦	972
♣	Q542

♠	J64
♥	QT75
♦	8
♣	KJ986

♠	AQT953
♥	8
♦	AJ63
♣	T3

♠	-
♥	AK5432
♦	KQT54
♣	A7

South opened a strong 1♣, and looking at the vulnerability and the strength of my hand, I thought that a psych would probably work out just fine. So I intervened with 3♦! North, having some values and some defense, but no shape decided to pass. East had a great hand, thought game might be possible. So he bid 3♠, showing good ♠s and a ♦ fit (a fit non-jump). South somehow decided to pass with this monster, which turned out to be a good decision. The auction ended abrupt:
1♣ - 3♦! - pass - 3♠
all pass

The play was easy, and we made +1. We lost imps however! Look at the scoresheet below:

Some people got in realy ridiculous contracts... Nevertheless, we all enjoyed the way we got to our contract. :-)

The European Championship for university students starts this weekend, 15km from my house. I'll be competing which will make sure I'll have some good material to post afterwards. You might be able to follow my actions on vugraph from time to time.

Safety or gamble at MP?

2007-07-13T09:49:00.000+02:00

Saturday I played a marathon as preparation for the upcoming EK for university students. Concentration for a long period of time could be one of the biggest problems we'll face, so we played in a good field for an entire day with MP scoring. Imp tournaments are more relaxed imo, so MP is a great training.
We didn't do great, but it wasn't bad either. Some silly mistakes mainly in carding, but our bidding system and competitive agreements work.

The most interesting hand I declared was the following:
♠ AQ9x
♥ AQxxxx
♦ Axx
♣ -

♠ KT8x
♥ K
♦ KJx
♣ AJTxx

We were on the way to grand slam, but partner missed in number of keycards (it was late), so we ended up in 6♠ instead of 7. Not that it's such a great grand slam anyway, so I didn't complain (it would probably make, but that's not the important issue imo).

LHO leads ♣K. Imo the best way to make lots of tricks is to play on ♥s. I discard a ♦ in dummy and take my ♣A. Now comes ♥K of course, followed by a ♠ to the Ace. When you play a small ♥ RHO shows out (doesn't ruff ofcourse, since that's pointless).

Back into the tank! Is there still a way for +1? Is my contract in danger?

Trumps are 3-2 or 4-1. 3-2 is no problem. So what about 4-1? If RHO has 4 ♠s we'll probably go down. If LHO has 4 of them, we need to unblock ♠s when ruffing out our ♥s, and take the ♠ finesse later on to keep control of the hand. That's a safe line when LHO has 4♠s, but may still be dangerous if LHO has 3 ♠s and a singleton minor! We will have played ♦A to ruff a ♥...

Anyway, I choose to unblock the ♠s, ruffing with ♠T and ♠K (keeping ♠8 opposite ♠Q9x). When I played ♠8, LHO played the ♠J and I made +1.

I was quite surprized that scored a top! Since 6♠ is a normal contract, and ♠ are divided Jx-xxx, any line you choose will get you an overtrick as long as you play on ♥. LHO didn't have a singleton ♦, so the lead doesn't matter much. EXCEPT: the lead of a small ♠ will make it harder on you, because they take away an easy entry for ruffing out the ♥s. I guess you'll need even better unblocking there, and you'll need to play on a 3-2 split for sure. Still, you can always make the contract.

Funny game yesterday

2007-07-05T16:19:00.000+02:00

Yesterday I played some games with Gert against Ed and Rob. It's always fun, they like to psych from time to time, they don't mind if we do it too (so it's a good training in "who to trust"), you can fool them, they can fool you, and nobody really cares that much about the scores.

Not long ago we made some changes to our intervention handling after 1NT openings. Because most worldclass players advise us to be able to play 1NTx, we abandoned the forcing pass. It came up, with success. I opened 1NT, LHO doubled, partner passed, and RHO held following hand:
♠ T982
♥ 98
♦ K3
♣ T9732
What is he supposed to do? Penalty doubles can be anything, and he holds a K! So he passed. 1NTx+1 was the result.
The non-forcing pass puts pressure to your opponents: do they have to pull or not? If pass obligates partner to ReDouble, opponents get a second chance, and he will pull to 2♣ (probably -1).

A few hands later there was time for some fantasy. I held:
♠ AKQJ87
♥ J653
♦ 94
♣ 5
Nobody vulnerable, I could open 2♠ showing 10-13HCP with 5+♠, unbalanced. However, I thought the hand was just too strong for that, so I opened 3NT, which shows a normal 4-level preempt in one of the Majors.
Partner asked me to bid my suit, and RHO bid 4♠! Easy Dbl ofcourse, for a telephone number.

A while later I get the following hand:
♠ A873
♥ Q962
♦ T942
♣ 7
Unfavorable, the auction went (we were silent):
1♣ - 1♥!
3♣ - 3NT
(1♥ shows 4+♠s)
What do you lead?
Here's the full hand:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	J
♥	A53
♦	K8
♣	AQJT842

♠	A873
♥	Q962
♦	T942
♣	7

♠	6542
♥	JT4
♦	AQJ3
♣	53

♠	KQT9
♥	K87
♦	765
♣	K96

Only a ♦ lead or switch can defeat this. No idea if I could've found this one...

A few boards later, I held favorable in 1st seat:
♠ 873
♥ T75
♦ T96
♣ QT43
I psyched a 1NT opening (11-14). Opps ended up in 6♣ when they knew they had a double fit (5-3♥, 4-4♣). We already had a board where they had a double fit, and the 4-4 was better, so I guess they remembered that one. Ofcourse, it was the other way around now: partner had ♣J stiff, and my RHO had AKxx, so no chance at all. 1 down is good bridge.

Now look at this one:
♠ -
♥ A97
♦ AQJ98742
♣ KJ
What do you do, favorable in 1st seat?
RHO got creative and passed! I opened 1NT, partner transfered ♠, and NOW he bid 5♦. What was I supposed to do with:
♠ J6
♥ QT63
♦ KT
♣ AQ653
I doubled, he made... Nice maxipsych!

And our last interesting hand was the following:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	A6
♥	K8653
♦	QJ9875
♣	-

♠	KJ753
♥	942
♦	32
♣	JT7

♠	T982
♥	Q
♦	T6
♣	AQ9843

♠	Q4
♥	AJT7
♦	AK4
♣	K652

The auction went:
pass - 1♣ - pass - 1♠!
pass - 2NT - pass - 3♥
pass - 4♣ - pass - 6♦
pass - 6♥ - ...
(1♠ shows 5+♦s)
I thought this would make, and gambled by doubling. Opponents may play the trump suit completely wrong. How was I to know lefty had 5♥s and partner ♥Q stiff... :-(

Late sacrifice

2007-06-26T17:22:00.000+02:00

Friday I held the following collection:
♠ QJ98xxx
♥ xxx
♦ xx
♣ J
We were favorable, RHO was dealer. The auction starts with 1♥. Do you bid anything?

Although I usually preempt with garbage, this particular partner prefers decent action. So I passed, because the hand is just too weak on both offense as defense. Partner may easily double opponents for penalty and then we'll have a real problem. So the auction continues:
1♥ - pass - 2♣ - pass
2NT - pass - 3♦ - pass
3♠ - ?

Do you double? Since the chance of cashing some ♠ tricks is very small, and because it's an automatic lead anyway, I decided to pass.

1♥ - pass - 2♣ - pass
2NT - pass - 3♦ - pass
3♠ - pass - ...3NT - pass
pass - ?

LHO hesitated for a very short time (playing with screens, you wouldn't even notice the hesitation), and bid 3NT. Do you bid anything now?

From the auction, I thought it was clear that my partner would have some ♠ support, probably honour-small, and in case it's Ax we know where the K was. 3NT would probably make (if declarer ducks ♠ he'll block the suit), so I bid 4♠ with confidence it wouldn't go more than 3 down.
LHO definitely wanted to play, and she bid 5♣ which ended the auction:

1♥ - pass - 2♣ - pass
2NT - pass - 3♦ - pass
3♠ - pass - 3NT - pass
pass - 4♠ - 5♣ - pass
pass - pass

Here's the full deal:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	MP

♠	KT
♥	Jxxx
♦	Kxxx
♣	Kxx

♠	Ax
♥	x
♦	AQJx
♣	Qxxxxx

♠	xx
♥	AKQxx
♦	T9x
♣	ATx

♠	QJ98xxx
♥	xxx
♦	xx
♣	J

4♠ would've gone for -500 while opps had an easy 620 or 630. My LHO however misplayed the ♣s (she started with the Ace) so they only collected 600.

6H-7C

2007-06-13T11:14:00.001+02:00

Friday at a club evening, we had some wild distributions. I want to share the wildest one. I held this fine collection:
♠ -
♥ AKJxxx
♦ -
♣ KJT9xxx

The auction was quite interesting (RHO dealer, we're at favorable):
pass - 1♣ - pass - 1♦
1♠ - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3NT
4♠! - ...

My RHO passed first but now went Vulnerable against not to 4♠! What the hell was going on? I only need to know about ♥Q and ♣AQ. However, partner already showed a minimum hand with values in ♠ and probably in ♦ as well. So I decided not to bid slam, but just a simple 5♥. Partner thought about this a bit, but passed.
I think it's better not to bid 5♣ (although that contract is laydown) because it doesn't show the hand's full potential.

LHO leads ♠Q and I get the following dummy:
♠ K98x
♥ Q6
♦ KQ98x
♣ xx

Pretty useless, but I'm already happy with ♥Q.
We now have to find a safe line. If opps keep playing ♠s and ♦s I'll get short on trumps and lose control. In the worst case, they'll let me ruff on every occasion, and I might lose 2 ♣s, so 4-1 trump split will be hard to handle.

This means that you may want to just play 3 rounds of trumps ending in my hand, and play ♣s. This line of play works only with 3-2 ♥ split, but I get burried alive when they split 4-1. So I thought I'd need a helping hand in ♣ and played ♣9 out of my hand. Theoretically the King is better, you'll see later. LHO played the ♣Q and RHO showed out! It's not easy to see for my LHO that he should duck, and when playing the King it would be even more difficult (this isn't even the reason why the King is better). This was the end of the defense.

The full hand:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	K98x
♥	Q6
♦	KQ98x
♣	xx

♠	QJx
♥	9xx
♦	JTx
♣	AQxx

♠	ATxxxx
♥	Tx
♦	Axxxx
♣	-

♠	-
♥	AKJxxx
♦	-
♣	KJT9xxx

After taking ♣Q, LHO gave his partner a ♣ ruff. RHO played ♥T which I took in dummy, I ruffed a ♠ and played ♣ "en passant".

On this deal I made it myself difficult, but I don't think a 4-0 ♣ split is one to try and take care off, when a 4-1 trump split is way more frequent. But then again, I can't handle a 4-1 trump split when ♣s aren't helpful anyway, so it's a choice between:
- dropping ♣A
- dropping ♣Q
- play trumps for 3-2
This is why ♣K is better: if the Q falls, your ♣s are all high. If you catch a stiff Ace, you still have to remove the Q...

Note that if ♣s don't behave the way you want them to, you can still play for a 3-2 trump split.

At the other table they managed to go -2 doubled, but I don't know what happened exactly.

Use Romex, not Puppet Stayman

2007-06-06T17:30:00.000+02:00

A popular convention after 2NT openings is Puppet Stayman, because it's easy and it finds 5-3 Major fits. The 3♣ bid is used to ask for 4 or 5 card Majors, and you won't miss a 5-3 or 4-4 fit (except when responder has a 5 card and opener has 3 card support, but in this case responder will usually bid something else, like transfer).

There are however hands which become problematic because of this convention: 5♠ and 4♥ for example. Using regular Stayman, you can use Smolen (2NT-3♣-3♦-3M) to show a 4 card M and a 5 card OM, but this isn't possible anymore when using Puppet Stayman.

So how do you solve this? There are many ways:
- use the 3♠ bid for such hands. It's quite a waste however. Since 2NT is a huge preempt for your own partnership, you better keep as much space available as possible for slam investigation.
- use 3NT for such hands. Problem here is that it's not forcing, so when you have slam interest you have a new problem. And ofcourse you can't bid 2NT-3NT, so the defense will have more information available.
- treat it as 4-4, or transfer and just ignore the 4 card suit. Problems are obvious: you usually miss the fit in the suit you ignore.
- use Romex instead of Puppet Stayman. This is my preferred method, since it keeps 3♠ and 3NT bids free to show various types of hands.
- there probably are a lot more solutions...

Some of you might wonder what Romex is exactly. It basically combines the merrits of Puppet Stayman with the possibility to show 5♠ and 4♥. All it requires is a different response structure after 3♣:
3♦ = <4♥, <5♠
3♥ = 4-5♥, <4♠
3♠ = 2-3♥, 5♠
3NT = 4-4 in the Majors

- After 3♠ and 3NT responder knows enough.
- After a 3♥ response you can use 3♠ to search for a 5 card ♥ (opener bids 3NT with 4♥ and cuebids with 5♥s)
- After a 3♦ response, you can search for a ♠ fit using 3♥, and you can show that precious 5♠-4♥ hand with 3♠.

It's a bit more complicated, but it gets the job done. You can even save space for cuebidding in a lot of situations where the fit is obvious:
2NT-3♣-3♦-3♠-4♣+ cues with ♠ fit (♥ fit is impossible)
2NT-3♣-3♥-3♠-4♣+ cues with ♥ fit (shows 5♥)
2NT-3♣-3♠-4♣+ cues with fit (this is an agreement, can be used for other purposes however)
2NT-3♣-3NT-4♣ sets ♥, start cuebids
2NT-3♣-3NT-4♦ sets ♠, start cuebids

Around half of the worldclass players use regular Stayman for various reasons, and the other half of them uses some kind of (modified) Puppet Stayman. What's best? I have no idea, and apparently even the topplayers don't agree on this matter.

Safety play?

2007-05-28T15:28:00.000+02:00

I haven't had much time lately to post new messages, but I've finally found a moment to write something. It's about a hand I played yesterday:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	8
♥	KQ94
♦	T7
♣	QJ9873

♠	K762
♥	T753
♦	KJ2
♣	T4

♠	QT5
♥	AJ862
♦	A93
♣	K6

♠	AJ943
♥	-
♦	Q8654
♣	A52

Playing with my fantunes-partner against a pair who plays a very similar system, the auction went:
2♠! - pass - pass - Dbl
pass - 2NT! - pass - 3♣!
pass - 3♥ - pass - pass
pass

2♠ shows 10-13HCP with 5+♠, unbalanced.
2NT was Lebensohl.

My partner lead ♣Q to dummy's King and my Ace. After some thought I returned ♣ to my partner's Jack, who switched to ♠8. Dummy played low and so did I, LHO taking with his ♠K. Now it was his turn to make the best out of it. There's no way he can make the contract (thanks to the auction he knows that ♠s don't behave), so it's damage control: ♦Q better be onside, and there's a sure ♥ loser. Better not make that 2!

It basically comes to this: what is the safest line of play for 1 loser with following holding:
AJ862
T753

You think you know it? Ok, read on then.

At the table, LHO played ♥A, completely ruining his chances for one down. I checked with "suitplay" to figure out if there isn't a better way here, because the J, T, 8, 7 and 6 are all great cards. Suitplay proved me right: it says that you should start with ♥5 and just cover anything LHO (North here) plays! If it loses, you should finesse again.

This is a remarkable different line from when you have AJxxx and Kxxx, so these middle cards are really worth something.

On the current layout, this line of play would've succeeded. There's a clue however that finessing twice is probably better: with my opening bid of 2♠, I told everyone I have 10-13HCP. West knew about ♠AJ and ♣A, it's impossible for me to hold ♥KQ. It is possible however that I have a void, in which case you better finesse.

If you want ♦Q to be onside, I can only have ♥Q as well. This implies that if West would lose his ♥ finesse to the King, he knows the location of ♦Q as well.

Too late

2007-05-14T23:55:00.000+02:00

Here's one I messed up last week:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	K5
♥	Txxxx
♦	K9xx
♣	xx

♠	Jxx
♥	QJx
♦	xxxx
♣	Txx

♠	AQTx
♥	AKxx
♦	QJxx
♣	Q

♠	9732
♥	x
♦	A
♣	AKJ9xxx

The auction went (I was very cautious here):
1♦ - 2♣ - pass - pass
Dbl - 3♣ - pass - pass
pass

LHO started with a small ♦ to the J and my Ace. I played a low ♠, LHO played the 4, the K in dummy to RHO's Ace. While she was thinking about what to play next, I realised I missed an extra opportunity here. She switched to ♣Q for my Ace, and I continued ♠ to LHO's Jack. He played a ♣ as fast as he could, and I went -1.

What went wrong? Double dummy, nothing went wrong, I simply can't make it. However, if I played ♠5 in trick 2 (and not the K), I can bring RHO on lead later on, who will have a hard time underleading ♥A (probably holding the K or Q as well). This way I improve my chances if RHO has only 1 ♣ (which you actually have to hope for). I guess I was just hoping too much on a defensive error or luck in ♠...

Nice one for the defense

2007-05-06T17:52:00.000+02:00

Friday we encountered a nice hand, but opponents fell asleep. Put yourself in their shoes.

You hold:
♠ Kxxxx
♥ Kx
♦ Jxx
♣ xxx

Everyone Vulnerable, your partner opens 1♣, RHO (= me) intervenes 1NT, and everyone passes.

What do you lead?

The player at the table started with a low ♠ which worked out the best possible way, but they didn't realise it. In dummy you get:
♠ Txx
♥ Q9xx
♦ Q9xx
♣ Tx

Partner takes ♠A, continues with the ♠Q and a small ♠ to your K. Declarer discards ♥T. You continue with 2 more ♠s. Partner asks for a ♣ switch (playing Odd/Even signals, he plays ♣5 and discards ♦T), while declarer throws away a ♦ and a ♥ from dummy while discarding a ♣ and a small ♥ from his hand.

Your turn again: what do you play?

At the table, a ♣ was played and I claimed 7 tricks.

Here's the full deal:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	MP

♠	Txx
♥	Q9xx
♦	Q9xx
♣	Tx

♠	Kxxxx
♥	Kx
♦	Jxx
♣	xxx

♠	AQx
♥	Jxxx
♦	T
♣	AQxxx

♠	Jx
♥	ATx
♦	AK8xx
♣	KJx

I got triple squeezed on the 5th ♠, so I had to bare my ♥A (baring ♣K would be a disaster, and discarding a ♦ is throwing my 7th trick away).

How could West know what to do? Well, it's pretty simple imo. I don't discard any ♦ in my hand, so I must have 5 of them. With 4 I would keep them in dummy and discard one from my hand. I showed 2 ♠s, I must have 3-4♥s and 2-3♣s. Either I have ♣Ax and ♥ATxx, or ♣Kxx and ♥ATx. Looking at my discarding, I think it's clear that I only have 3 ♥s (the unblocking T at first opportunity), a 5332 is more likely to overcall 1NT rather than a 5422 with a good 5 card suit, so the best chance for defeating the contract should be to play a low ♥ from Kx and hope your partner has ♣A. Another clue that might strengthen this idea is that partner would probably act with a good 6 card ♣ (AQJ9xx or KQJ9xx is good enough to either double or rebid the suit), so he'll only have 5 of them.

Interesting DD hand

2007-04-24T12:47:00.000+02:00

First I'll pose this as a single dummy problem, since it's quite interesting as well. A bit further down I'll show it as double dummy, but I suggest you try to solve it single dummy first.

You hold:
♠ KQJ762
♥ 6
♦ QT6
♣ QT4

Nobody vulnerable, you open 2♠ and the auction continues:
2♠ - pass - pass - 4♥
pass - 5♥ - pass - 6♥
all pass

You obviously start with ♠K and you get the following in dummy:
♠ AT854
♥ JT5
♦ A54
♣ J9

Declarer ducks, your partner and declarer both following. Now it's up to you: how will you try to defeat this contract? (you can count on declarer's playing skills)

Hint: your first thought should be WHY declarer ducked the first trick.

I won't give you the solution just yet, but I'll point you into the right direction. Declarer is probably rectifying the count for a squeeze. Having done this, he's now on schedule to perform a squeeze if there is one. This leaves out a ♠ or a ♥ switch.

Another option may also be that both you and declarer are quite smart, so he's trying to fool you into a minor suit switch. This is not the case here however.

Ok, so you know you have to switch to a minor. Which one?

If you think you know it, have a look at the entire hand:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AT854
♥	JT5
♦	A54
♣	J9

♠	KQJ762
♥	6
♦	QT6
♣	QT4

♠	3
♥	Q7
♦	J972
♣	K87632

♠	9
♥	AK98432
♦	K83
♣	A5

Are you still sure about what you have to play at trick 2?

I asked on the Bridgebase Forums what people would play, and most said they think a ♦ is necessary. Lets consider all options:

- we continue with ♠Q:
declarer will ruff, draw trumps (unblocking), ruff a ♠ if necessary and come to the following ending:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AT
♥
♦	A5
♣	J9

♠	J7
♥
♦	QT
♣	QT

♠
♥
♦	J97
♣	K87

♠
♥	98
♦	83
♣	A5

On the play of the last 2 ♥s West will have to abandon a minor suit while dummy discards a ♦ and a ♣. Now ♦A is played and West has to leave with his other minor, while on the play of ♠A East is squeezed in both minors.

- we continue with a ♥ or a ♦:
The same ending can be reached as above.

- we continue with ♣Q:
This will get us to a double squeeze: West has to guard ♠, East has to guard ♣, and both opponents need to guard ♦s:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AT
♥
♦	A5
♣	J

♠	QJ
♥
♦	QT6
♣

♠
♥
♦	J97
♣	K8

♠
♥	2
♦	K83
♣	5

- we continue with a small ♣:
This is the only way to defeat the slam! There is no way declarer can make West discard something he doesn't want to. East just needs to keep his ♦s:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AT
♥
♦	A5
♣	J

♠	QJ
♥
♦	QT
♣	Q

♠
♥
♦	J972
♣	8

♠
♥	2
♦	K83
♣	5

The funny part of this hand is that if you swap ♦9 and ♦8, the squeeze will function again, because you'll be able to finesse ♦ on the way back to your hand. In that case, you better lead a minor instead of ♠K, otherwise you gave away the slam...

Bridge Documentary

2007-04-20T14:10:00.000+02:00

A while ago there was a documentary "In the cards" about professional bridge, following Gavin Wolpert around at tournaments. It has been put online on YouTube, but was removed because of copyright problems. I've found a new link, but I don't know if they respect the copyright of the contents...

To watch it, use following link (sometimes not synchronized!):
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=2849318575072074556

You can download the entire documentary here (175MB):
In the cards

To watch the downloaded file, you can use the "Total Video Player". You can easily find a link using Google.

Hope you enjoy!

"Worldclass" on BBO

2007-04-17T10:45:00.000+02:00

At BBO you can set your own skill level in your profile. Many people just put "expert" or even "world class" while they can't play a single card right. Yesterday I encountered a "world class" on this hand:

Dealer:	East
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	AK86
♥	AJT8
♦	T63
♣	Q2

♠	92
♥	974
♦	9875
♣	AJ74

♠	Q43
♥	KQ3
♦	KQJ42
♣	63

♠	JT75
♥	652
♦	A
♣	KT985

We were bidding quite agressively:
1♦ - pass - pass - Dbl
pass - 2♠ - pass - 3♠
pass - 4♠ - pass - pass
pass

Our WC needed a long time before he passed this out. I think he wanted to double... GIB says the contract can only make after a ♣ lead (which is very unlikely), otherwise it's always -1.

So LHO starts with a small ♦ which immediately takes away an entry to set up ♣s. Still they are our source of tricks, so after taking ♦A I immediately play a low ♣ to the Queen. LHO hesitates a moment but plays low. Now I cash ♠AK and play a small ♣ to my T which loses to the Jack. LHO correctly continues ♦, but a ♥ would also have worked. I ruff, and play ♣K, covered by the Ace which I ruff in dummy. Now we get our world class action: RHO overruffs without a thought! 4♠= and 12 imps for the good guys.

All our WC player had to do is count some HCP and some trumps, which is the biggest step from beginner to intermediate. If he would've done that, he'd know that I can only have ♠J in my hand, without another trump. So that's the entry to my hand. If you think for a second you'll realise that you need to discard and ruff the next ♣, just in case I have 5 of them (why would I accept the invitation with 8HCP?). There's no way to my hand anymore, I can only discard 1 ♥ in dummy, and you still have ♦ for exit cards. I'm going down -1 for sure.

2 grand slams in 5 deals

2007-04-12T00:27:00.000+02:00

This afternoon I was playing a bit online and we had some pretty interesting deals. It's not at all common that you get dealt 2 grand slams in a short period of time, especially at the same suit. I once bid and made 2 grand slams right after each other (7NT and a 7♥), so my record still stands.

These were played today:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	84
♥	KQJ52
♦	AQJ5
♣	A6

♠	QT93
♥	87
♦	84
♣	KQ752

♠	75
♥	43
♦	9732
♣	JT984

♠	AKJ62
♥	AT96
♦	KT6
♣	3

The auction (playing 2/1 GF, opponents silent):
1♥ - 1♠
2NT - 7♥

Who needs science? I think playing relays I'd make like 10 rounds of bidding to end up in the same contract with a bit more accuracy. The contract is almost 100%.

I'm not always sure what's best with such hands: either 1♠ or 2NT (GF with fit). I would never splinter immediately since the hand is too strong, but I'm almost sure that the contract will end up in some number of ♥s... Does anyone have some good ideas why one approach would be better than the other?

The other slam was not as good:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	KQ642
♥	AK642
♦	AQ
♣	6

♠	JT
♥	97
♦	KJ953
♣	J843

♠	987
♥	QJ
♦	T862
♣	K975

♠	A53
♥	T853
♦	74
♣	AQT2

The auction (still 2/1 GF, opponents again silent):
1♠ - 2♠ (constructive raise)
3♥ - 4♥
4NT - 5♥
7♥

The auction was better, but ♥s have to split 2-2 so it was a poor slam. Partner knew we had a double fit and all the Aces, so WITH ♥Q it would've been a great grand slam. On the current layout we were lucky enough to bring it home.

Funny one from friday

2007-04-09T10:40:00.000+02:00

I've had a lot of work lately and I didn't get any really interesting hands as well, so I skipped a week to post...

Friday we had a funny one again. The auction went:
1♣! - pass - 1♦! - 1♥
2♦ - 2♥ - Dbl - pass*
3♦ - pass - 3♥** - Dbl
5♦ - all pass
(1♣ is 15+HCP any hand, 1♦ is negative)
(*) This pass is a poor choice imo, at the ** moment LHO clearly showed she was ready to bid 3♥, so she better did it right away.

Now we get following hands:
♠ Tx
♥ x
♦ AJT9xxx
♣ AKQ

♠ AJxx
♥ xx
♦ Qxx
♣ Txxx

LHO starts with ♥A, gets a high ♥ from partner, so switches to ♠Q. This is really annoying since I don't have a safety play anymore (♣J will probably fall somewhere on AKQ, so cashing ♦A would be the best play if LHO continued ♥).

So here we are, at the crossroads. Our communications have just been destroyed, and you need to play ♦ for no losers. 2 lines of play possible, only 1 will work, one of them is percentage (let ♦Q run) while the other one is not (cash ♦A). However you get the feeling that ♦K is stiff offside, and I trust my intuition pretty much since I know I'm more right than wrong in such situations (I once read - I guess from Fred Gitelman - that you should test if you can trust your feeling, and never trust it if it fails you too much, or trust it when it's right most of the time). If this is one of those few times that I'm wrong, I better have some argument to play like this...

While I'm thinking about what I'm going to do, I hear my RHO sighing cause she's bored. So imo she knows that the contract will either go down anyway, or that it doesn't matter, or she just hopes that I start to play and take a poor decision. I know both my opponents pretty well, so I guess she has the ♦K. Not good enough for an argument obviously, so I decide to let LHO help me out a bit. I play ♦Q and LHO hesitates a bit before playing a low ♦. I still know my opponents, so I'm quite sure she would never hesitate with Kx. So I took my ♦A dropping the King! :-) The rest was easy: ♣ 3-3 and I still had a ♦ entry to discard the ♠ on ♣T. 5♦+1.

Afterwards we had lots of fun at the bar because of the fact that I based my decision on RHO sighing. In Dutch we call a stiff King a "naked gentleman", so the dual interpretation caused a lot of laughter.
I think next week everyone will start sighing against me. :-)

Cup of Flanders

2007-03-26T11:23:00.000+02:00

Yesterday me and my team played a great tournament. Swiss movement, playing at table 1 and 2 the entire afternoon, but lost our final match 25-5 and finished 8th. One can say the afternoon was 1 round too long... Anyway, we had a great time and played solid bridge against good players all day long.

Here's one of the more spectacular hands:
♠ KJ
♥ Axx
♦ AKQxxxx
♣ x

♠ Axxxx
♥ -
♦ T9x
♣ Axxxx

Playing MOSCITO, my partner started the auction:
1♣! - Dbl! - 1♥! - 2♥!
3♦ - pass - 3♥ - pass
3♠ - pass - 4♦ - pass
4NT - pass - 5NT! - pass
7♦ - all pass

1♣ showed 15+HCP any hand
Dbl showed either ♦s or both Majors
1♥ showed GF with 4+♠
2♥ was P/C
5NT shows an even number of keycards and a useful void

Nothing really spectacular imo, but somehow I didn't hear anyone else say they found grand on this hand. I think they got heavier competition in ♥ than we did, a result of the opponents' defense against a strong ♣. If they would've been able to show both Majors without the possibility of a ♦ suit, we probably would've started with finding our fit at the 5-level... We got lucky here.
Suction has it's disadvantages, especially if your partner doesn't have a fit for the possible 1-suiter.

Another one, we got lucky here:
♠ xx
♥ Ax
♦ QJxx
♣ KJTxx

♠ Jx
♥ KQxxx
♦ Ax
♣ Q9xx

Funny auction, the board contained 50hcp:
1♠! - 2♠ - Dbl - 3♦!
pass - 3♠ - Dbl - pass
4♣ - pass - 4♥ - pass
pass - pass

1♠ shows 9-15HCP, 4+♦, can have longer ♣, unbalanced.
3♦ was invite+ with a ♠ fit.
Both doubles were takeout.

LHO started with ♣8 (from a doubleton) and the defense was over since ♥ were 3-3 and ♣ were 2-2. If he leads the normal ♠, I would've gone off since a ♦ switch through my Ace is deadly if ♣A is still in play.

Hand which caused some discussion

2007-03-17T15:59:00.000+01:00

Here's a hand from a club evening. I was kibitzing since we were bye, and I saw a good player mess up the hand. Lets see if you can do better.

♠ AKxxx
♥ Qx
♦ KJxx
♣ xx

♠ x
♥ K98xx
♦ Ax
♣ AKQxx

Opponents were silent, the good player (but usually not 100% concentrated on club evenings) sitting in South, playing with his wife. He likes to gamble a bit on club evenings, which explains the auction:
1♠ - pass - 2♥ - pass
2♠ - pass - 3♣ - pass
3♦! - pass - 6♣ - pass
6♥ - Dbl - 6NT - pass
pass - pass
(3♦ is natural, NOT 4th suit forcing)

After the 6♣ bid, North was thinking and sighing before bidding 6♥. Anyway, you're in 6NT and you get a small ♦ as lead. Plan the play.

Declarer made a few errors. He started with ♦J which held the trick. However, this blocks the hands completely. Next he played a ♥ from dummy to his King, knowing RHO has the Ace. This makes sure you can't even rectify the count for a squeeze. In the end he had to concede 2 tricks for -1.

If you give the hand a good look, you should be able to find a good line of play. You have 11 tricks if ♦Q is onside (good chance after this lead) and ♣s behave. This is your only chance anyway... So suppose all minor cards are nicely divided, you need one more trick. You have the perfect setting for a double squeeze, and you can rectify the count easily by conceiding ♥A. You'll have a ♦ menace against West and a ♥ menace against East, with ♠ working as your double menace. The biggest problem will be communication. That's why you shouldn't finesse ♦ at trick one, but just play low to your Ace. Now you're not in trouble whenever opponents play ♠. Next, as planned, we play ♥ to the Q, giving RHO a choice: either he takes and rectifies the count, or he ducks and you have your 12 tricks by playing a low ♥ back to your King (still only when the minors behave).

It's probably more easy to follow if you can see all the hands now:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	n/a
Scoring:	MP

♠	AKxxx
♥	Qx
♦	KJxx
♣	xx

♠	Jxx
♥	Jx
♦	QTxxx
♣	Jxx

♠	Qxxx
♥	ATxx
♦	xx
♣	xxx

♠	x
♥	K98xx
♦	Ax
♣	AKQxx

1) Suppose RHO takes ♥A and returns a ♥:
You can't come back to your hand in the end, so the squeeze card should be in South. This means you should play ♦s first, followed by the ♣s, ending with
♠ AKx
♥ -
♦ x
♣ -

♠ x
♥ 98
♦ -
♣ x
On the last ♣, LHO has to part with a ♠, you discard the small ♦ which has done his work, and RHO can't keep his high ♥ and 3 ♠s. A simultanous double squeeze gives you your 12th trick and a top score.

2) What if RHO takes ♥A and returns a ♠:
Now the cards lay a bit different. You can't go to dummy, except with ♦. This means you should play your ♣s before your ♦s! This will result in a non-simultanous double squeeze. West will be squeezed first, East will be next. The position where West has to surrender is quite early:
♠ Kx
♥ x
♦ KJx
♣ -

♠ -
♥ K98x
♦ x
♣ x
West still has ♠Jx, ♥J and ♦QTx. He can't part with a ♥ or a ♦, so he discards a ♠. Since LHO didn't discard his ♦, we throw one from the dummy. Now we still have to squeeze RHO in both Majors. Finesse the ♦J, and on the play of ♦K RHO is caught in a simple squeeze in the Majors.
♠ Kx
♥ x
♦ K
♣ -

♠ -
♥ K98x
♦ -
♣ -
RHO still has ♠Qx and ♥Tx and has to unguard one of the suits.

I was convinced there was always a double squeeze, but not everyone agreed. I checked with GIB and I was proved to be right. Now that you know how to play the hand after a ♦ lead, can you figure out what to lead with West's hand to defeat the contract?

Only a spade lead will kill the squeeze, because EW can ruin all communications required for the squeeze. If South tries to rectify the count by playing ♥Q, RHO should take his Ace and return ♥ immediately. Now declarer can't go from one hand to the other after the squeeze card, and this means there can't be any squeeze anymore.

My first "Zia cuebid"

2007-03-16T11:37:00.000+01:00

Yesterday I was training for the upcoming Belgian Championship for university students. There were a few interesting hands, but this one was my favorite:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	AK64
♥	A
♦	K98
♣	J7542

♠	JT5
♥	J9643
♦	Q43
♣	T8

♠	9732
♥	KQ87
♦	T76
♣	K3

♠	Q8
♥	T52
♦	AJ52
♣	AQ96

The auction went as follows (opponents silent):
1♣ - 1NT (14+ nat or 15+ bal - GF relay)
2♠ - 2NT (5+♣ 4+♠ - relay)
3♦ - 3♥ (14-17HCP, 5431 - relay)
3NT - 4♣ (4-1-3-5 distribution exactly - sets trump)
4♦ - 4♥! (even number of keycards - fake cuebid!)
4♠ - 6♣ (cue - woohoo)

It's not a pure Zia cue since it didn't ruin the opponent's lead. Because of our methods however, I had to make a fake cuebid to figure out if partner had a ♠ cue, because otherwise I would give him a much bigger problem. This is due to the kickback Turbo. If I would bid 4NT to deny a ♠ cue and show a ♦ cue, then partner has to go past 5♣ to show a ♠ cue, but he doesn't have the ♣Q which sort of forbids partner to go past 5♣ as well. This dilemma is quite unsolvable, and I can foresee it since I hold the ♣Q myself. So why make it hard on partner when you have a bid which makes it easy for him?

Note that partner already showed a singleton ♥, so we already know that we have a ♥ cue. No harm done. Nobody else in the main bridge lobby (BBO) found this slam. :-)

Tight defense

2007-03-06T10:20:00.000+01:00

Playing imps, the auction went (West dealer, EW vulnerable):
1NT - 2♣* - pass - 2♦*
pass - pass - Dbl - pass
2♠ - pass - pass - pass

2♣ shows either ♦ or both Majors
2♦ is "Pass or Correct"

Partner leads ♦J and you see following dummy:
♠ 6542
♥ KQ7
♦ 5
♣ Q8653

You hold:
♠ A83
♥ JT953
♦ A8
♣ T92

Obviously you take ♦A at trick 1.

How do you plan the defense?

Question is how you'll defeat this contract. EW have 22-24HCP, this leaves partner with 7-9HCP. You already know partner doesn't have ♦K or ♦Q. LHO might have passed with 4 ♦s from KQ, so he probably has only 3 ♦s. This also explains partner's intervention: a poor but long suit. So his values must be somewhere else. The only way to defeat this contract seems if he has good trumps and an Ace. Partner will have 2 trumps at most, so chances are low. However, ♥A or ♣A or ♣K won't run away on declarer's ♦s. We can overruff dummy, so I think the best opportunity we have is to continue a ♦ and hope.

Here's the full deal:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	KJ
♥	62
♦	JT97643
♣	A7

♠	QT97
♥	A84
♦	KQ2
♣	KJ4

♠	6542
♥	KQ7
♦	5
♣	Q8653

♠	A83
♥	JT953
♦	A8
♣	T92

This is what should happen: declarer plays a ♥ to the K and plays a low trump. You play low and declarer inserts the Ten for partner's Jack. Partner also knows you don't have any ♦s left so he'll play his lowest remaining ♦ to show a ♣ suit preference. You can ruff with the 8, return a ♣ to partner's Ace who returns another ♦ (to promote his ♠K if you have the Q) which you ruff with the Ace. Even better!

Only a dummy reversal for the defenders gets this contract down. ♦A, ♣
A and 4 ♠ tricks is just enough.

Safety first

2007-03-01T10:29:00.000+01:00

This is one that came up at a partnership bidding table (we were practicing for an upcoming tournament with imps scoring):
♠ 3
♥ A
♦ JT984
♣ AKJ632

♠ AKT4
♥ K95
♦ 653
♣ T98

The auction is irrelevant, we ended up in 3NT played by South. There are some blockages, and if opponents start with a ♠ lead, all communication has been destroyed. So what are your thoughts?

A 4-0 ♣ split is deadly, but any 3-1 split you should try to handle. Meanwhile you need to get to dummy after unblocking ♥A, and you'll need to get back to your ♣s as well, without losing control of the hand! Any plans?

After taking ♠A there's 1 line which is safer than all others: you start by unblocking ♥A and you play a low ♣ to dummy! Whoever has ♣Q gets a trick, but 9 tricks are assured: 2♠s, 2♥s and 5♣s. Opponents can't make 5 tricks before us, because the ♦s will only produce 3 tricks, plus ♣Q. 3NT laydown.

Note that even if ♣s are 2-2 and you're planning to cash ♣AK, unblocking ♥A makes sure the ♣s block (you can either stay in the hand or go to dummy, but that's the last thing you'll do)! So you would need to cash ♠AK, which is full of risks, and you can only get to 9 tricks anyway...

Only one question remains: how do you play this at MatchPoints? Initially I thought you can make 10 tricks only if you catch ♣Q singleton, all other splits make you go down after cashing ♣A. So I thought you should still go for the safety of 9 tricks. However, Michael (see the comments) got me to realise I was wrong, cashing is better in more than 50% of the hands (unless my calculations were wrong).

Nice breaks

2007-02-27T10:21:00.000+01:00

Here's a funny one from a club evening:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	MP

♠	xxxx
♥	AJ9xxxx
♦	x
♣	J

♠	K
♥	Kxx
♦	AKQJxx
♣	xxx

♠	AQJxxx
♥	QTx
♦	-
♣	AQxx

♠	xx
♥	-
♦	T9xxxx
♣	KTxxx

I was sitting South and saw the opponents mess up the auction. They ended up in 3NT by West. Partner lead a ♥ and they made +3. When we saw the scoresheet somehow we got a bottom: opponents usually got to 6♠ which is easily defeated...

Those were some really poor breaks in 6♠, and West only has 1 entry to try his luck in ♦. However, these poor breaks mean 6NT is laydown, whatever partner leads! Even if he leads ♣J, declarer can make it if he plays ♣A, ♠K, ♦AKQJ discarding his ♣s and ♥ to the Q to finish off with the ♠s. Partner can't return a ♣. Question remains if ♣Ace at trick one is the right play...

"Either-Or" squeeze

2007-02-20T11:37:00.000+01:00

Here's an interesting hand from Friday:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	MP

♠	xx
♥	AQJxx
♦	A9xx
♣	AT

♠	Jxx
♥	xxx
♦	KQTx
♣	9xx

♠	Kxx
♥	Txxx
♦	xx
♣	Q8xx

♠	AQT9x
♥	K
♦	Jxx
♣	KJxx

We had a relay auction where I showed a 5-1-3-4 distribution and GF opposite 15+HCP. I ended up playing 3NT by South, and LHO lead ♦K.

I thought it was a good idea to duck, since it's almost a real "bath coup". LHO switched to ♣ after considerable thought. It's quite obvious to play the T, for the Q and my King. The switch didn't matter much, since there's only 1 useful way to finesse ♣ anyway. Now I tested the ♥s: ♥K, followed by ♣A and 2 more ♥s. Both opponents follow nicely, so it's time to think about overtricks.

I was considering my squeeze possibilities, and played a small ♠. RHO played his ♠K leaving me no choice than to play my Ace. Now I cashed ♣J (LHO playing the 9) discarding a ♦, ♦J (covered) to the Ace and ran my ♥s. This is a simple squeeze played like a double squeeze, also known as an "Either-Or" squeeze. Whoever has ♠J will have to concede it, since LHO has to guard the virtual ♠Jx and ♦, and RHO has to keep the virtual ♠Jx and ♣. We don't care who we squeeze, but it works with both opponents.

Also interesting would it have been if RHO played small. Now there are 2 possible lines:
1. play the Queen, and if it works use a double squeeze to get to 12 tricks
2. play the T hoping for RHO having ♠KJx
Obviously line 1 is better. If RHO has ♠KJx he'll be caught in a simple squeeze later on anyway.

By playing ♠K my RHO gave me an opportunity to add this one to my list.

Another "wrong" contract

2007-02-14T16:48:00.000+01:00

Here's one from a few days ago. Playing with an intermediate partner against intermediate players, we got this game:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	MP

♠	AKQxx
♥	ATx
♦	Ax
♣	8x

♠	7x
♥	xxx
♦	Qxxxxx
♣	Qxx

♠	Txx
♥	K
♦	Kxx
♣	AKTxxx

♠	J98
♥	QJ98xx
♦	Jx
♣	xx

The auction went:
1♠ - 2♣ - 2♥ - 3♣
3♥ - pass - pass - pass

You may disagree with the 2♥ bid, it's non-forcing and I thought the hand would play better in ♥ than in ♠. Partner somehow got scared and only bid 3♥ with this beauty. I didn't have much to say with my garbage...

Anyway, we ended up in 3♥ played by South, instead of 4♥ or 4♠. We had to play this contract, so lets make the best out of it. LHO started with ♠7, proving his poor skills.

It's typical in MP to go for the best score. Chances are low that we'll get a good score here since we're in the wrong contract (the field will probably bid 4♥) so the only possibility to score some big ones is when ♥K is offside and 4♥ can be defeated. That's why I started with ♥A, luckily dropping the K! A moment of joy, but the play is not over yet.

We have 12 top tricks now, so there might be a squeeze or fake squeeze in there. A real squeeze is quite hard with ♣8 and ♦J as menaces. Nevertheless, the best chance to fool the opponents was to go for a ruffing squeeze. Cashing all but 1 ♥, followed by 5 ♠s is probably the best shot. This is the end position:
♦ A
♣ 8x

♥ x
♦ Jx
Nobody discarded a high ♦, but they kept on discarding ♣. Ruffing the small ♣ and using ♦A as an entry got me to 13 tricks.

Obviously the opponents made critical errors, but the point of cashing ♥A is still valid after a ♣ lead. The ruffing squeeze didn't have much chance of success, but in function of the opponents you can always give them a chance to make mistakes. All RHO had to do is count the trumps and the ♣s, so she'd know that discarding a ♣ would be fatal.

Wrong contract isn't always a disaster

2007-02-08T16:02:00.000+01:00

I haven't had much interesting hands lately. This is the only interesting one, where we ended up in the wrong contract:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	Both
Scoring:	imps

♠	T875
♥	654
♦	A82
♣	A43

♠	KQ643
♥	KJ93
♦	T
♣	QT6

♠	J92
♥	AQ82
♦	43
♣	9852

♠	A
♥	T7
♦	KQJ9765
♣	KJ7

The auction went:
pass - pass - 1♦ - Dbl
pass - 1♥ - 3♦ - pass
3♥ - pass - 4♦ - pass
5♦ - all pass

I considered a 3♦ opening immediately since partner passed, but the hand was just too strong. On the next round, since partner passed (no RDbl), it was probably best to jump in ♦ for several reasons. Now partner came in action and later regretted he asked for a ♥ stopper instead of hoping for a 4-4 ♥ split. 3NT is laydown, 5♦ can be defeated. Anyway, after trick 2 I knew I was pretty safe.

LHO started with a ♥ to his partner's Ace. He made the wrong choice. Think about it: what is the best continuation and why?

He switched to a small ♠, after which it was pretty easy to squeeze LHO in ♠ and ♣. Thanks to the Double and the lead I knew RHO had some values left in ♥, so the ♣ finesse would not work.
A ♣ switch can ruin my communications for a squeeze later on, but I wonder how he could know to switch ♣ and not ♠. Even if he plays a ♣ now, he needs to overtake ♥J and return another ♣ in the next trick.

So I took ♠A and played my last ♥, rectifying the count. LHO took his J (which held) and tried ♠K which I ruffed. I only needed to ruff 2 ♠s to set up ♠T as a menace, to combine with my extended ♣ menace, ♣A and ♣K taking care of the communication. ♣K is not necessary, but the Ace is vital.

After ruffing one more ♠ and running ♦s, LHO got trouble. He had to keep ♠Q and ♣QTx. He tried the ♣, but that didn't help, the hand was an open book. ♣A, followed ♣K pinned the Q and 5♦=.

As you can see, I don't need ♣K in the end game because it's a positional squeeze: if LHO discards a ♣ my ♠T is high, otherwise I discard ♠ and pin the ♣Q.

Stiff Kings

2007-01-29T17:37:00.000+01:00

One of the more enjoyable moments at a bridge table is when you can catch a stiff King behind the Ace when you could've taken a finesse. It's not always easy to figure out the position of the King. But when you know for certain that it's wrong sided, cashing the Ace may be your only chance.

Here's one from a team match this weekend:
♠ Kxx
♥ A8x
♦ AKQx
♣ T9x

♠ Jx
♥ QJT9xx
♦ 87xx
♣ x

The auction went (RHO starting, all Vulnerable):
1♠ - pass - pass - Dbl
2♠ - 3♥ - pass - 3NT
pass - 4♦ - pass - 4♥
pass - pass - pass

LHO started ♠9 to RHO's Queen. RHO switched to ♣A followed by ♣K. I didn't see any reason to discard ♠J, so I ruffed.

Now we need to find ♥K... From the auction you may point in RHO's direction, but LHO hasn't shown a single point and can easily have the King. Are there any other clues?

Yes! For one, RHO tries to cash some tricks as soon as possible, without taking his ♠A, so RHO might try to avoid an endplay. However, there's an even better argument for placing ♥K in RHO's hand.

If he would not have ♥K, he would probably choose another line of defense. After ♣A he can count 3 tricks and the only chance for defeating the contract is when partner would be able to get a trump promotion (from the auction he knows ♦s are 4-4 so I can't discard any losers on a 4th ♦). So he'd switch back to ♠A and a ♠. This means RHO must have ♥K and has given up on the trump promotion. Obviously, if he would play ♠A and another ♠, and I'd ruff high, it would reveal the position of the ♥K immediately, which is why he avoided this scenario by playing ♣s.

It was a nice try of him, but it still revealed the position. I don't see any immediate way to hide the ♥K, perhaps playing a ♦, suggesting a singleton, may work better. But I'd still be able to make the same reasoning and play my ♥A anyway.

Bluffing

2007-01-22T16:31:00.000+01:00

Here's a hand from this weekend's competition:

Dealer:	West
Vul:	None
Scoring:	imps

♠	Q8
♥	AK7xx
♦	J
♣	KQT9x

♠	KJT9xxx
♥	QT
♦	QTx
♣	7

♠	Ax
♥	8
♦	xxx
♣	AJ8xxxx

♠	xx
♥	J9xxx
♦	AK9xxx
♣	-

An easy one you might think, and you'd be right ofcourse. However it surprised me that my RHO chose the wrong line of play and went down in a lay down contract.

Here's what happened: the auction is over quite fast, and some may disagree with North's bid. However, it worked ok.
3♠ - 4♣! - 4♠ - 5♥
all pass
4♣ showed a good 2-suiter with ♥ and ♣, aka "leaping Michael's". Technically the hand is a bit too weak for this (too many losers).

I was sitting West and lead ♠J. Partner took his Ace, thought for 5 seconds and returned a ♠ to my King. I figured that partner would have cashed ♦A before returning ♠ if he had it, and same goes for ♣A. So the only chance seemed to be a ♥ trick. Obviously we can only make a ♥ trick when we play in triple void and partner has ♥J or declarer ruffs high to avoid a trump promotion of singleton ♥Q. So I played ♠2, making sure declarer would know that my partner didn't have any ♠s left, and to face him with a problem.

Now declarer took 5 minutes to make a wrong choice. He ruffed with the Ace, played ♥K and was quite surprised to see the Queen in my hand!

I thought this was a wrong move, but my view was already biased, so I polled about what others would do. None went for ♥A. So I guess my analyse was right. What South should've thought about is "how does West know it's safe to play in a triple void?". If you can answer that question, then you'll know that West has ♥Q with a high probability.

Law of Symmetry: fact or fiction?

2007-01-15T16:05:00.000+01:00

Basically the Law of Symmetry states that a singleton or void is usually not alone in a bridge hand. It claims that the frequencies of bad splits are increased. So, for example, when you have 9 trumps and a singleton somewhere, the law suggests you play for a 3-1 split since the probabilities have increased.

You probably wonder if this is true, or if it’s just rubbish and superstition. From now on, never forget this: it’s pure rubish! And there’s mathematical proof. Here it is:
- suppose you give North and South a 4333 distribution, give North 4 ♦s, South 4 ♣s.
- from the NS perspective, you have pretty normal chances of splits in all suits.
- now you put 2 ♥s from the North hand to the South hand, creating a singleton. Put a ♠ and a ♦ from South to North.
- North now has a 4-1-5-3 and South has a 2-5-2-4.

Has anything changed to the existence of singletons? Yes.
Has anything changed to the probabilities from EW hands? No! They still own the exact same cards together, so the frequencies haven’t changed.
You can start with whatever hands you like, and the frequencies won’t change for opponent’s splits in the suits whenever you exchange some cards between North and South.

You might have the impression that when you have a freak distribution, you usually get bad splits. However, the reason why has nothing to do with the shortness you own. It’s about your long suits, the number of cards you control in another suit! For example, if you have a 10 card fit, it’s obvious someone will have a singleton. That however doesn’t change the frequency of 2-1 or 3-0 splits in the suit, no matter if you have a 5-5, 6-4, 7-3, 8-2, 9-1 or 10-0 fit.
To back this up: the more cards you have together with your partner in a suit, the more chance you get for opponents to have a singleton or void:
- 5 card fit: 7-1 or 8-0 split = 3,1%
- 6 card fit: 6-1 or 7-0 split = 7,3%
- 7 card fit: 5-1 or 6-0 split = 16,0%
- 8 card fit: 4-1 or 5-0 split = 32,17%
- 9 card fit: 3-1 or 4-0 split = 59,3%
- 10+ card fit: 100%
If you have monster fits, you have more chance to have some shortness yourself. And opponents have more chance to have some shortness as well. However, having a singleton or void doesn’t imply you have a monster fit with partner! So the law has no ground at all.

A final conclusion: a singleton or void in your or partner’s hand doesn’t increase the chance of a singleton or void in opponents’ hands. It’s your long suits that do the trick. But the absolute frequency of splits in a suit doesn’t change. So there’s no reason to choose a different line of play because of "the Law of Symmetry".

Dangerous Doubles

2007-01-08T10:49:00.000+01:00

Here's a hand from a while ago. I held:
♠ AK842
♥ 9875
♦ 5
♣ AK6

Partner North starts the auction (we're at unfavorable):
1♦ - pass - 1♠ - pass
2♣ - pass - 2♥! - Dbl
pass - pass - ???
(!) 4th suit GF

Now what? Partner doesn't have anything useful to mention over our 4th suit forcing (the Double gives us more possibilities), so partner will either have Ax or xx, perhaps even xxx imo. So I decided to pass, since it was unlikely we could get a game score ourselves, but we can probably manage 8 tricks in a 4-2 fit on hcp-power.

The full hand was:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	imps

♠	JT
♥	K4
♦	AQJT6
♣	J873

♠	Q963
♥	AJT62
♦	K
♣	542

♠	75
♥	Q3
♦	987432
♣	QT9

♠	AK842
♥	9875
♦	5
♣	AK5

According to GIB a small ♥ lead defeats the contract by 1 trick, all other leads let the contract make. Opponents made a mistake in their defense and I made 2♥D+1 for +570.
As the cards lay, 3NT is laydown, but I didn't expect ♥K in partner's hand. The Ace was possible, because partner may want to rightside the contract when I have Qxx.

Doubling on such low level is dangerous, especially if you don't see an immediate way to defeat the contract. With the West hand, you can hardly see 6 tricks coming in (♦K wrongsided, too many ♠s, and no great trump holding), so it's probably safer to pass and trust on partner's lead skills to defeat the contract. You might even get another chance at 3-level.

Worst bridge of 2006

2006-12-31T12:03:00.000+01:00

Since we're all celabrating, I thought it was time for a laugh and post the worst bridge hand I've encountered in 2006. It happened quite recently and it's unbelievable what errors happened. If you know the site poorbridge.com (the name speaks for itself), this is one which is even worse than what you get there!

Here's the hand, I'm sitting South as usual:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	EW
Scoring:	MP

♠	x
♥	QJ8x
♦	976
♣	T9864

♠	Tx
♥	K9xx
♦	Kxx
♣	AJxx

♠	QJ97xx
♥	Tx
♦	QTx
♣	Kx

♠	AK8x
♥	Axx
♦	AJ8x
♣	Qx

It looks pretty innocent, but wait until you hear what happened with it.

It all begins with the auction:
1♣! - pass - 1♦! - 1♠
1NT - 2♠ - 3♣ - pass
3NT - all pass

I have an easy opening, since we're playing a strong ♣ system. My partner shows 0-6HCP and RHO intervenes with ♠. I have no problem with a rebid, and here we get our first two blunders: LHO supports with ♠Tx while Vulnerable!!! Quite amazing since you know all ♠ finesses will be wrongsided and you don't even have an 8 card fit, but some people will do anything. Next mistake is the 3♣ bid from my partner. Since we play Lebensohl here, 3♣ shows a good hand while he intended just to fight the partscore battle. Dbl or 2NT would've done the job a bit better. Now obviously I like my ♣Qx and raise to 3NT since I'm quite confident that I'll make it when ♣s come in.

Now you better imagine (or put up) some music from horror movies.

LHO leads the ♠T and I duck. It's a hopeless contract, but why not try to make the best out of it. A ♠ is continued and I take my Ace. Next step was imo to try and cash some ♥s so I play ♥A followed by a small ♥. LHO hesitates, telling me where the K is, and decides to play low. This is the only thing that's done right, but includes the error of giving the position of the K. I'm in dummy and let ♦6 run for LHO's King.

Lets make it a bit of a quiz: can you figure out what card West played now?
For some reason she decides to return a diamond right into my finesse! Thanks, but I'm still nowhere. What else is there than to play another ♥? LHO takes her ♥K.

Here comes blunder number 5, can you guess it?
She returns a heart to my J in dummy! Dummy was completely dead, so that's another trick for the good guys. I discard a ♣ and RHO has discarded 2 ♠s by now. Still not home, I play my 2 remaining ♦s and RHO gets it in her mind to discard another ♠! Probably she trusted her partner's raise too much, but this meant my ♠8 got promoted to my 9th trick.

Unbelievable: it took 1 mistake from partner to get me to a hopeless contract, and it took 4 and a half blunders from the opponents to actually make it! Only 1 thing was done right, but if LHO made the mistake of taking ♥K immediately she wouldn't have had the opportunity to give dummy an unreachable trick. I prefer the latter for this article. Also my play was proven to be poor by GIB's double dummy analyzer.

Lets see how it went trickwise:
- If I duck ♠T I have a possibility to go -2. Otherwise I can go -5 according to GIB!
- 2nd trick has to be taken, what I did. That's 2 things right, but now it starts...
- My only chance for -2 is to go for the ♣s which I didn't do. This costed me 1 trick.
- ♥ to my Q was another trick I threw away.
- Now I got back a trick with almost every card I played.
So basically I should've gone -4 thanks to my poor play as well. However, taking the right line of play to go -2 would never bring my contract home...

All other tables made 1NT-1, I made 3NT= in the same direction.

That's it for 2006, I hope you've enjoyed my articles (why doensn't anyone sign my guestbook?), I'll probably keep encountering lots of interesting material to post on my blog next year, and you all have my best wishes for 2007!

Newest MOSCITO verions

2006-12-28T11:15:00.000+01:00

MOSCITO is a completely artificial system, but it tends to show suits whenever it can. It's imo more "natural" than precision, because after every limited opening a 4+ card suit is known (precision 1♦ is usually 2+♦, but in some variations it can be even shorter). Australia's Paul Marston is the main ambassador of the system, his current CC can be found here

The latest changes are the following:
- 2/1 responses have always been a problem. He went from NF to GF and now he uses transfers (from 1NT and up). These are handy particular in constructive auctions where you want to show a side suit before supporting, or when you want a natural auction. It also gives the possibility of 2 kinds of 2-level raises: transfer to the Major is 9-11 and constructive, 2M is 6-9. Relays are great for slam investigation, but for games they don't have an edge. You can't find stoppers for 3NT, so sometimes you get to wrong games. This is imo a big improvement, because it still keeps the possibility to signoff (although I think he uses them only with good hands).
- He now uses the step-relay over 1♦ and 1♥ openings as 2-way: either GF relay or a normal 1NT response. He uses a natural relay scheme, which allows him to play this way. With an artificial relay scheme (like I play) it's nearly impossible to handle. What can responder do after 1♦-1♥-2♦ (showing a single suited hand with 6+♥) when you know 2♥ is a relay? With natural responses it's easy most of the time. The relay structure has lost some efficiency imo, but the tradeoff is probably worth it.
- 1♣-1♦ as any GF (except 5440's) and 1♣-1♠ as double negative, other responses are semi-positive. I always liked this structure, because you get lots of interference over 1♣ openings. When responder shows a negative, RHO can ruin the auction and cripple our abilities to fight partscore battles. When you know that opposite a 15+HCP 1♣ opening, responder has a semi-positive hand most of the time, and rarely a double negative, then it pays off to get those semi-positives in right away (I think it's GF 30%, SP 60%, DN 10% or similar). There's hardly a tradeoff, it's a pure improvement: the relays for GF auctions go 1 step up, but those for semi-positives go down at least 1 step. So percentagewise the relay structure improves.
- 4M-6m hands are now always opened in the minor. Before, you had a choice of opening the Major, usually it depended on the suit quality of the Major. I still like the MAFIA approach, but handling competition is probably one of the reasons why he changed. Missing a nice 6-3 minor fit to play in a 4-3M fit isn't always the best choice.

Kickback Turbo

2006-12-22T11:08:00.000+01:00

Since Fantoni-Nunes use Turbo for their slam investigations, many people wonder what it is exactly, and how it works. Short: it is a cuebidding method, where skipping the 4NT bid means you have an odd number of keycards, while bidding 4NT shows an even number of keycards (similar principle like serious 3NT). There are a lot of different situations where Turbo can be bid lower (like when a fit is established at the 2-level, 3NT will usually be the "Turbo-bid") but this doesn't change much to the method. Usually it's clear how many keycards your partner has exactly because of the auction. Finding the trump Queen is done in several ways. Usually you can just continue cuebidding and suddenly stop at 5-level. Now your partner knows you were looking for the Queen, otherwise you'd just signoff immediately. Another way is to bid 5NT, asking partner to bid grand slam if he holds the trump Q.

I've noticed there are some problems with the normal method, and I'm not sure how Fantunes cope with that. For example, if you set ♣ as trump with 4♣, you can't figure out if partner has the ♣Q when you are at the Turbo-stage. A simple auction, typical for their system:
1♦ - 3♠
4♣ - 4♥!
4♠! - 4NT*
???

3♠ shows 10-14 with 5+♠ and 5+♣
4♣ sets trump
! is cuebid
* is an even number of keycards

Opener can't know for sure to go past 5♣ with a keycard missing and not holding the ♣Q. Responder can't go past 5♣ because they might be missing 2 keycards.

The problem is typical for ♣ fits, and sometimes comes up with ♦ fits as well, if you can't bid a ♣ cue in between.

Me and one of my f2f partners have found a solution to this problem: we play Kickback Turbo. It uses the same principle but other bids to skip:
- With a ♣ fit: 4♦
- With a ♦ fit: 4♥
- With a ♥ fit: 4♠
- With a ♠ fit: 4NT
4NT becomes the cuebid in whatever suit the Turbo-bid was. So in our auction from above, we get:
1♦ - 3♠
4♣ - 4♦*
4♥! - 4♠!
4NT! - ?
Now, since opener kept cuebidding after knowing the number of keycards, responder should go past 5♣ if he holds the ♣Q, because opener was still looking for slam. If responder bids 5♣ he denies the ♣Q and opener can make the right decision.

We use some other slam tools as well. Once we have set trumps, we have 3 main stages:
- serious or no serious slam interest
- number of keycards (odd / even) = Turbo
- looking for trump Q
Whenever we're at a pretty low level, all these bids go down a bit. We use following bids whenever they are available: 2NT, 3 trumps, 3NT, Kickback-Turbo-bid, 5NT. So for example, if you set trumps with 2♠:
- 2NT is frivolous, no serious slam interest
- 3♠ = Turbo
- 3NT denies the ♠Q
if you set trumps with 3♠:
- 3NT is frivolous
- 4NT is Turbo
- 5NT asks the ♠Q

Kickback Turbo doesn't have an immediate disadvantage imo. It is more difficult sometimes, because you have to think about the cuebids in another order (if partner skips the Turbo-bid, it doesn't mean he doesn't have a cue in that suit, you have to wait until you hear 4NT or not). Once you get used to it, you don't make mistakes against that anymore.
The advantage is clear: you show your number of keycards lower, and can more easily investigate about the trump Q. By using this method, you don't even lose any cuebids before the critical level!

Declare or defend?

2006-12-18T14:34:00.000+01:00

A little quiz today. Look at following hand:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	KT765
♥	97
♦	J8
♣	9632

♠	-
♥	A32
♦	QT976543
♣	87

♠	AJ983
♥	J4
♦	K2
♣	QT54

♠	Q42
♥	KQT865
♦	A
♣	AKJ

Short question: when you're West, looking at all hands, do you want to declare 5♦* or defend 4♥, and why do you think you're right?

[edit:19/12]
Ok, the quiz has been solved. You want to declare 5♦* because 4♥ is laydown. In the comments there was suggested to endplay East. There are several ways to do this (basicly after you've played ♠ you'll run trumps and endplay East):
- you can start with a small ♠ to the King. Then you have 2 ways of endplaying him: either with ♠ or with ♣.
- you can also start with a small ♠ and let it run! Later you play ♠Q and East can't make a good decision.
The only thing you shouldn't do is start with ♠Q, since East can hold up and there's no way to endplay him anymore.

Lead directing psych

2006-12-12T10:41:00.000+01:00

Yesterday I was playing with some friends and at one point I got the following hand:
♠ A97
♥ Q987653
♦ -
♣ J52
We're NV vs V, RHO opens in 1st seat with 2NT (20-21). What do you bid and why?

I thought opponents might have 4♠ or a slam in ♦, so why not mess up their auction. If they bid to 4♠, the contract will be wrongsided and partner can immediately give me a ruff. Perhaps I can even reach his hand for another ruff for -1. So I bid 4♦ which turned out to be a success. If opponents don't double (unlikely) I'll be happy to go -9, otherwise I can safely return to 4H. It's always exciting to bid natural with a void, especially if you expect partner to have lots of support and he should have the discipline not to raise...

The entire auction went:
2NT - 4♦! - Dbl - pass
pass - 4♥ - Dbl - pass
pass - pass

Now the psych has been exposed, but opponents can't make things right. South did a great job not to bid 4♠ at any time, and take his money on 4♥x down as much as possible.

The full hand:

Dealer:	North
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	85
♥	AK
♦	AQT9
♣	AK973

♠	KJ
♥	J2
♦	J654
♣	QT864

♠	A97
♥	Q987653
♦	-
♣	J52

♠	QT6432
♥	T4
♦	K8732
♣

As you can see, when ♠ is played by South a ♦ lead will defeat the contract if I can manage to play low when declarer plays ♠ (I should be able to find that, but we'll never know for sure). 4♠ by North is laydown. 4♥x-2 cost us 300, which is way better than 4♠=. Some however got to 6♠ or 6♦, I've even seen a 6NT!

Guard squeeze

2006-12-11T10:22:00.000+01:00

This weekend I had a bad day in competition. Half the match I was asleep, got a game handed over to me but didn't accept their offer, and left lots of overtricks to opponents. We still managed to win 15-15 (0-3 in imps) but that no consolation price... Anyway, I still had some good moments now and then: a suicide criss-cross squeeze for -1, and here a guard squeeze, also for -1:

Dealer:	South
Vul:	NS
Scoring:	imps

♠	J4
♥	Q8
♦	QJ52
♣	T9764

♠	K97
♥	T9743
♦	A
♣	KJ83

♠	Q8652
♥	652
♦	K9763
♣	-

♠	AT3
♥	AKJ
♦	T84
♣	AQ52

I end up in 3NT by South. LHO leads a ♥ so I like it pretty much if ♣ behave. I take the first trick with ♥Q and immediately play a small ♣, but RHO shows out! Quite a disappointment, since I don't see an immediate way to 9 tricks now. 3♣ + 1-2♦ + 3♥ + 1♠ = 8-9 tricks, but losing 2♣, 2♦ and at least one in another suit will get their trick total to 5 more quickly...

I play the Queen to keep control which LHO takes the ♣K, and he continues ♥T. Now I'm in my hand and decide to make it a bit hard on LHO: I play a small ♣. GIB says I can make only 7 tricks if he takes the J, so here's a little mistake from LHO: he plays small! He didn't have much information and it looked like I needed 3♣ tricks at that time so he wanted to block my suit. Now however he has to guard the ♣Jx... I switch to ♦ to the Ten and Ace. LHO again plays a high ♥. So I continue ♦ to RHO's King (LHO discarding a ♠) who plays a small ♠. I already know everything I need to know: LHO has a 3-5-1-4 distribution, discarded a ♠ after asking them, so he has the ♠K. I can easily squeeze or endplay him, so I take ♠A and now it's time for some magic: the 3rd ♦ squeezes LHO. He has:
♠ K
♥ 73
♦ -
♣ J8
Here are his options:
- If he parts with a ♥, I'll endplay him in ♠ to bring me the final 2 ♣s.
- If he parts with a ♣ I can take my ♣ tricks.
- So the only alternative left is discarding ♠K and hoping his partner has ♠QT behind the J.

On one of the ♣s RHO discarded a ♦, so after I play ♣A and small ♠ to his Q, he still had to bring a last ♠.

3NT-1 still won us some imps, unlucky my squeezes were for -1 every time...

Quite an interesting holding

2006-12-05T12:05:00.000+01:00

Here's one from this weekend. Dummy holds:
♣ QT8x

You hold:
♣ K9x

Because of the auction you know that LHO (= declarer) has 5-6 ♣s. He leads ♣Q from dummy (fixed typo tnx to Binkley). What should you do?

I had a split second to decide what to do without giving away too much information, and played low because it just felt right. Afterwards I thought about the holding, and realized low was indeed the best. There are a few interesting holdings partner can have:
- ♣x or void: it doesn't matter, you won't make a ♣ trick.
- ♣A: if you cover, you give away a trick.
- ♣J: if you cover, you'll make 1 ♣ trick. If you don't cover, you'll make 1 trick as well, unless LHO decides to play the Ace dropping partner's Jack (but why would he play like that?).
So it only matters when partner has the ♣A stiff.

What about when LHO only has 4-5 ♣s? Then partner can be singleton or doubleton.
- ♣xx or ♣x: doesn't matter, you won't make ♣ tricks.
- ♣Jx or ♣J: doesn't matter, you'll make 1 ♣ trick.
- ♣Ax: again it doesn't matter.
- ♣A: if you cover you give away a trick.
So again, the only situation it matters is when partner has the singleton Ace, and you still shouldn't cover... Nothing changes!

There are even extra (small) advantages of not covering: in some rare occasions, you'll be able promote your ♣9.

One of those which can win matches

2006-12-03T18:53:00.000+01:00

Playing a team match, you pick up this lovely collection:
♠ A54
♥ Ax
♦ x
♣ AT98xxx
You're in 3rd seat, V vs NV, and you're playing a light opening system. The bidding starts:
pass - 1♦ - ?

I guess most will bid a simple 2♣. Bidding any higher with 3 Aces and such distribution is quite useless. So we continue:
pass - 1♦ - 2♣ - pass
2♠ - 3♦ - ?

Now what?
I know partner has less than 10HCP, and I thought partner had a good ♠ holding, and probably some ♣ tollerance as well. Since I have such control over all the suits, I decided to just bid 4♠, my partner can bring home tight contracts.

Here's the full hand:
♠ QJT9x
♥ KQxx
♦ QTx
♣ x

♠ A54
♥ Ax
♦ x
♣ AT98xxx

The play was quite easy, and we made 11 tricks. The other table didn't find 4♠ so we won bigtime with this board.

My partner decided not to open 1♠ with 10HCP although we usually open 5 card Majors with 10-14HCP with very few exceptions. I guess he didn't like his slow values, although he has both Majors and no bidding problems can occur. After a 1♠ opening I think I'll start slow but we'll still end up in 4♠.
I don't know why opponents didn't find it...

HEEMAN after 1NT

2006-11-27T15:01:00.000+01:00

After a 1NT opening, many players play Stayman and transfers (usually 4 suit transfers). There are some discussions if you should use 2NT as invite without Majors or not, do you have to go via Stayman to invite if you play 4 suit transfers,... What do you do with invites with 4M and 5+m, 5M and 4+m,... And what with GF hands? Do you include 5 card Majors in your 1NT opening, and how do you search for them? Can you show a weak hand with BOTH minors? How about both Majors? How can you have a decent slam approach?

Many more questions arise, and no system is perfect. One day I found HEEMAN and I immediately like it! You can find a full writeup in English at http://www.jackbridge.com/pdf/eheeman.pdf. There's a Dutch writeup here: http://www.jackbridge.com/pdf/dheeman.pdf.

The main advantages imo are:
- it has lots of possibilities and is VERY easy to remember!
- opener usually plays and there's not much known about his distribution.
- many invitational sequences are possible.
- you can find weaknesses which will cause 3NT fail. So you'll be able to play a better contract.
- easy for slam auctions, and there are many ways to show slam interest.
- you can show 5-5M below 3NT.
- because responder shows his hand, opener can deviate from the normal NT distribution.

The biggest (and only) disadvantage imo: you usually can't find a 5 card Major in opener's hand. The only possible time is when responder shows an invitational hand with the other Major. Now opener can bid 3M with a maximum hand only.
This however is not that bad, but sometimes you go down in 3NT while you had 4M, and sometimes you make 3NT while 4M goes down...

I play this with my Fantunes-partner, where 1NT (11-14) can be all 4333/4432/5332/4441/5422/6m322 shapes! I haven't had much problems, but sometimes it's not easy to know what bids will work out best.

We've made one little adjustment:
1NT - 2♦
2♥ - 2♠
???
(responder shows an invite+ hand with at least 4-4 in the Majors)
Here we show immediately if we have fit or not:
2NT = minimum without fit
3♣ = maximum without fit
3♦ = maximum with ♥ fit
3♥ = minimum with ♥ fit
3♠ = minimum with ♠ fit
3NT = maximum with ♠ fit
This makes it easier for responder to try for slam or not.

We also don't like the super accepts, because I don't see the reason why you have to play at least 3M when you have a minimum hand with a good 4 card support, or a 4333. We only super accept with maximum hands and show our shortness (so no super accepts with 4333's).