Romanian Bridge Portal
·· 2017-11-21 ··

· Dupa autor
· Bishop Auckland coup si variatii pe tema
· SAYC Romania (IV)
· SAYC Romania (III)
· SAYC Romania (II)
· SAYC Romania (I)

 

 

  Fat scores in bidding the game  
Louis Stift

Untitled Document

Bucuresti, 29-1-2005

The story of 3 boards in the team-match at Atomic from last Friday, 28-01-2005.

Theme: Fat scores in bidding the game, although little chances.

In teams the premium of bidding game scores. It is the difference with the other table(s) that counts. Even if the percentages of making the contract are below 50.

To illustrate this theme 3 idiot boards, all from the third match.

6 E/EW

North Louis

North

East

South

West

Q653

-

p

1

p

A6

1

p

2

p

QJ65

2 i

Dbl

3 ii

p

West

A65

East

3NT

Ap

A

J10984

109742

KQJ3

i

Stopper

K10972

-

ii

No -stop

74

South Truus

10982

K72

Lead

8

85

A843

KQJ3

Trick1: 8 - 2 - A - 3

Trick2: 10 - 6 - J - 8

Trick3: K - 5 - 2 - A

I thought: play sneaky J, if not covered play low, then to the A and it wins if H is 2nd

Trick4: J - 2 – A - 2

Then came 4 times , Q en to the K and from dummy.

West discarded all his because he missed Q. Then 3NT was made.

The other 2 tables 3NT -2 and 5 dbl down, which scored for us +11+15 = 26 imps.

This board has a story at the end. West hurried away very quickly after this last board of the evening. He was thinking: do I catch the last bus or shall I miss it? He should have mentioned this problem. We would have brought him home, probably not a great effort, and we prefer to win at a normal way. Also now that he gave us the contract we gladly would have brought him home.

8 W/-

North Louis

North

East

South

West

A10

-

-

-

1 i

96532

1 ii a

2 iii a

4

4NT

973

p

5

p

5

West

732

East

p

6

ap

K93

J75

Lead

9

K

87

AKQJ1086

52

a

alerted

A6

South Truus

J109854

Q8642

AQJ104

4

KQ

The bidding needs some explanation.

EW play a system where 1 promises 17 points or more.

NS defend with Rainbow-transfers, where bidding is obligatory.

ii 1 promises 4+ card and 0 points or more.

After this the bidding becomes not clear.

iii 2 promises 5 controls, but West said in Rumanian he wasn’t sure after interference.

If he was sure I think bidding 7NT is simple. 5 controls is A+A+ K

To be certain he took 4NT. This cannot be asking for aces, the 5 controls he already knows. But if 2 is real, then it is Blackwood.

Many pairs play modified RKCB (answers: 5 1 or 4 and 5 0 or 3 aces).

If this is the system, he has to bid 5, and West can pass.

With good defence the result will be -1. East answered 5. West called 5. If East didn’t hear the explanation of 2, he has to pass. Unless this asks for trump Q or kings. Then 5 is the correct answer.

East answered 6. In my opinion (referee with the diploma) this is not allowed.

East has had his 2, with or without explanation and is supposed not to have heard the comment of his partner. The result, 6 -4, NS couldn’t double.

The lead 9 for the A

to K and A (pity, the wrong decision). 10 continuation to Q and a -ruff.

This board has also a final story

6 -4 is a better result for EW then 4 contract in NS.

Because K is bare (easy because West has 17+ points, so don’t finesse K) the tricks that are lost: 1+1+1. Crazy with NS holding 17 points.

Another board.

7 S/All

North Louis

North

East

South

West

QJ1098763

-

-

1

p

5

1 i

2

p

p

543

2

ap

West

10

East

K5

A4

Lead

A

64

A9873

A1072

K986

65432

South Truus

AK

2

KQJ102

QJ

QJ987

i Promises 6+ points, but with an 8-crd I couldn’t say pass.

Trick1: A - 7 - 2 - 10

Trick2: 6 – J – A – 3

Trick3: 2 – 4 – K – Q

Trick4: K ruffed

Trick5: ruffed.

Trick6: Q and 5 discarded, to make the contract?

No, aaah, East ruffs with 4. After that I lost 2 -tricks.

Also this board has a comment at the end.

-1 is a good result for NS against 3NT for EW.

If this contract is reached, and declarer supposes North has -length with a few -points, South must have a few -spots because he opened the bidding.

When you treat the -suit beginning with K then declarer makes: 4 -tricks and 5 tricks in the other suits with aces and kings. 5 can also be made after K lead and starting with A, then K and play 9. The following J is ruffed with 10, cross with 7 to 8 and give away a . The last is higher then the 2 from South.

There are variations of play which lead to 5 contract, to make 4 is sure. So 2-1 was a good result against that for NS.

Did we score on this board? Yes and no.

On the first table NS went 3 -3

On the second table the bidding was completely different.

North

East

South

West

-

-

2 i

p

p

Dbl

p

3 ii

ap

i 5- card and something else.

ii Preference

This 3 contract went -4.

After a weak 2 there is a convention, Lebensohl, to tell the difference in points after the dbl from your partner.

With 7+ points West bids his suit, slightly encouraging.

(Except 2, which is to play)

With 0-6 points West bids 2NT.

East bids 3, and West can pass (with ) or call his preference.

If East does not bid this 3 he has a good suit of his own.

With this convention it was possible to reach the 3NT.

The game-playing Louis.



alte articole de acelasi autor

· Invatati bridge in limba romana
· Concurs de articole apr. 2006
· Turnee Romanesti pe BBO
· BRIDGE in 41 de povestiri vesele

:: ATOMIC BC
:: Club 7
:: IASI BC
:: alte linkuri
© 2002-2006 bridge-club.ro