Jeff Lehman

Tools Still Require a Craftsman

If someone were to ask me to name a favorite convention, I might select takeout doubles or negative doubles.  But if those were excluded, I think I would choose splinters, one of the most useful tools to aid hand evaluation.

But any tool works best when wielded by a craftsman.

At a recent club game, responder was favored with a very nice hand opposite a partner who had opened the bidding with 1.

S
South
KJ6
AK
AQ84
8653

 

 

Playing 2/1, responder began well by choosing to bid 2 (where high cards by partner will help develop extra tricks) rather than 2 (where high cards by partner could well be wasted).  Opener rebid 2.

Responder now bid 2.  By partnership agreement, the 2 bid shows three card spade support and requests opener to describe his distribution.

Opener rebid 3, showing  a fragment in clubs.  3 is, in effect, a splinter in diamonds.  Opener has shown either 5=4=1=3 or 5=4=0=4 distribution.

3 is not, or at least should not be, the bid responder wanted to hear.  3, on the other hand, would be the magic bid.  (Opener’s other rebid choices: 3 shows a sixth spade; 3 shows a fifth heart; 2NT shows doubletons in each minor suit.)

Still, with 17 HCP, much more than promised by the sequence to date, responder is worth a control bid and chose now to bid 3, probably hoping to hear 4 from his partner.  Instead, however, he heard a (non-serious) 3NT from his partner, evidencing a minimum opening bid.

Even a control-rich maximum for his previous bidding, say, AQxxx, xxxx, x, AQx, would not provide an adequate play for slam, and so responder should sign off now in 4.  Perhaps not exhibiting the craftsmanship for operating the club fragment/diamond splinter tool used by the partnership, responder nonetheless control bid 4.  Perhaps more unadvisedly, responder then bid keycard over opener’s subsequent 4 bid, reaching 6 on this collection.

N
North (decl
AQ1094
QJ87
6
KJ2
 
S
South (dumm
KJ5
AK
AQ84
8653

 

 

Please notice how good would be slam had opener (hand marked North) shown a diamond fragment, rather than a club fragment, (that is, showing club splinter, rather than diamond splinter) by reversing opener’s minor suit holdings.

Continuing the building trades theme of this post, the opening leader East, having received an explanation of the declaring partnership’s bidding agreements (in effect, a blueprint), can be considered to be the building inspector, ready to identify the weakness in the hand construction.  With a minor suit cross-ruff being expected, leading a trump seems like a good choice.  Or, perhaps more trickily, leading a diamond to require declarer to make an early guess in that suit and complicating transportation between the two hands, might be considered.  Alas, opening leader East failed at exhibiting craftsmanship, too, and led the T.

(As an aside, which suit might be an attractive lead had opener shown a diamond fragment at his third turn?  I think then a club would be best, because when the declaring side has shown not only a spade fit but also a diamond fit, defense should attend to the risk that a losing club can be pitched on an extra diamond winner.)

The A by declarer’s (North’s) RHO West won Trick 1 and a heart was returned.  Declarer was fairly certain that he would find the Q onside and make the slam, but had nothing to lose by playing for a minor suit show-up squeeze just in case.  If West held Qx and Kx in the end position of declarer’s x, x, KJ opposite dummy’s AQ, xx, West would have no good answer to declarer’s play of the last spade and the pitch of a club from dummy.  Declarer would next play a diamond to the ace.  If the A does not fell the K, then a subsequent club from dummy will fell the queen.

As the hand lay, both minor suit finesses were onside and the J became the lucky declarer’s twelfth trick.

 
24
None
West
N
North (decl
AQ1094
QJ87
6
KJ2
 
W
West
632
5432
105
AQ97
10
E
East (leade
87
1096
KJ9732
104
 
S
South (dumm
KJ5
AK
AQ84
8653
 

 

But … both responder South and opening leader East need to refine their craftsmanship!


2 Comments

bobby wolffJune 22nd, 2015 at 2:38 pm

Hi Jeff,

Usually with my allocated time having to be spent on my own bridge endeavors, I am sometimes deprived of being able to view other contributions.

However fate dealt me the opportunity to view the above, and I, in response, will jump to throw many deserved bouquets directly at you.

First, the above is beautifully organized, extremely well presented, bursting with proven bridge theories and above all, very entertaining.

Second, when one adds, providing a major service to all aspiring bridge players (and also crazies) we have a real bell ringer.

Congratulations on a perfect, or if not, very close to a flawless presentation.

Please continue to provide bridge knowledge to all who desire, and at the same time present it with a spoonful of sugar to let that bridge medicine do down very smoothly.

In other words, I liked, no, loved it!

Jeff LehmanJune 22nd, 2015 at 6:43 pm

Wow, I am pleasantly stunned by your comments, Bobby. Thank you.

Leave a comment

Your comment