Slam spelled backward
Has anyone noticed that “slam” spelled backward, with an added apostrophe, is “mal’s”. “Mal” is Spanish for bad. And that was an apt description of my side’s results when I played slams at Monday morning’s club game.
On Board 6, vul v not, I opened 1♣, LHO overcalled 1♥, and partner made a negative double. RHO decided to pass.
What is your call?
Envisaging something akin to Qxxx, xxxx, xxx, Kx, plus, I chose to leap to 6♠. Alas, partner had a queen special.
Down 2, -200, 3.5 mps out of 11. (3 NS pairs managed to make 420 in hearts and one pair went down one doubled in 4♠.) (I would say something about that cagey pass by North — wouldn’t 3♦ be appealing as a lead director? –, but I suspect the pass was just caused by having counted up to only four HCP.)
On Board 9, partner took an aggressive view of his balanced 15 count opposite a strong notrump, again vul v not, forcing to slam after learning that my hand had three card heart support. We ended in 6NT, receiving a diamond lead.
How do you play this hand?
My thinking was that if I have five heart tricks, then I can make a twelfth trick from either a club finesse or a fourth spade; and if I have only four heart tricks, then I need both a fourth spade trick and the club finesse. Spades is obviously a suit you can wait on in case you receive distributional clues suggesting you finesse against the ♠J. And so, after winning a diamond at Trick 1, I played a heart to the A (all followed, but not with the queen), and took a club finesse losing. A second diamond was returned. Upon winning that trick I took a losing heart finesse. Diamonds were cashed out and I scored up -400, sharing a bottom with another pair in 6NT for 0.5 mps.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
“Has anyone noticed that “slam” spelled backward, with an added apostrophe, is “mal’s”. “Mal” is Spanish for bad.”
Cute observation.
On #1, I might bid 2H and see what partner has to say. That should be enough for my 5-loser hand. Partner has 8 losers, so he will attempt to sign off in 2S and now, I can raise to 4S.
On #2, it is a question which would help you more: their forced discards on the hearts or the ability to take both club and spade finesses. I would take the heart finesse first, then play two rounds of spades before taking the club finesse. My line would be down 2, I think, since South would have to throw one of his diamonds on the hearts.
Lak
Interesting thoughts, Lak.
On the first hand, I do believe that I overbid my hand … especially because I know partner has only four spades. At a minimum, I think I need the CT as my third best club. OTOH, there is merit in getting to 6S quickly, without inducing the opponents to lead a diamond. I am not sure what helpful information will be produced by 2H, for two reasons. One, is it clear that 2H is agreeing spades, or might my hand bid 2H on some huge minor two-suiter? Two, might partner, with no heart control, tend to downgrade a hand with, say, three or more small hearts over a 2H call? The key cards I need from partner are the SQ and the CK. That might be too much to ask. Another choice I considered was 4H, clearly a splinter in support of spades, but can partner tell that so little as the SQ and CK are so valuable to me?
As an aside, with such a distributional hand, I don’t think that looking at loser account is the best evaluation approach. Qxxx, xxx, xxx, KQx is a nine+ loser hand for partner, and yet one wants to be in 6S opposite that hand. As I know readers recognize from my many entries on this subject, Culbertson’s Rule is a better approach.
On the second hand, do I want to give up a small technical chance of making the contract (HQ stiff offside)? Seems pretty good bet that my target should be to make my contract; probably not many matchpoints in saving undertricks. Still, this is the type of “I can add our HCP and get to something over 30” hand that the club players like to bid to slam, and so perhaps I should be more judicious about risking undertricks. I agree with the inference you drew, but did not expressly state, that my LHO is not likely to stiff the CK in order to keep diamonds: After two rounds of diamonds, two rounds of spades and five rounds of hearts, she is quite likely to reduce to two clubs and only two diamonds. I think that amounts to down three, however, not down two, because I have already lost one heart, and I will never enjoy my last spade winners. Running the heart suit might give me a table read that the club finesse is going to lose, however, and in that case I can cash my last two spades and then concede down one. One would have to be quite confident in table reading to give up a legitimate chance to make, however!
On the first hand, another second call worth considering with my hand is 4C. “Standard” for such a call is six or more clubs and four spades, in a game forcing hand. I think I am a little under in my suit strength but over in my general strength for that call, because I might bid that way with AKJx, xx/x, x/xx, AKJTxxx. It would be hard for partner to go on over 4C with no red suit control; he can hardly guess that I have second round control of one and first round control of the other red suit.
Edit above comment to show six clubs, not seven.
On the first hand, 4H seems to stand out as the obvious rebid by East. You have shortness in hearts, support for spades [presumably you aren’t playing negative free bids so double is supposed to have four of them], and a game force. If partner is enthusiastic about slam (not this time), he cue-bid or ask for keycards.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment about North. Of course he should bid 3D but that would be a fit-showing jump (forcing to the three-level at least) and most people don’t play those, even over a negative double when the need for a good lead is so great. Still, the auction is unlikely to end at three diamonds so there really isn’t much danger of missing the good heart fit.
[…] In an earlier blog entry, I referred to some bad luck in reaching good slams, only to discover that an unfriendly lie of the opponents’ cards doomed the slams to failure. http://jeff.bridgeblogging.com/2012/12/04/slam-spelled-backward/ […]