Control Freak
Sometimes in bridge it is OK to become a control freak. Points can be won and lost by controlling the defense.
A recent club duplicate presented two hands for taking control of the defense by limiting partner’s options and a third hand for not ceding control of a key suit to declarer.
We extracted the maximum from some overzealous opponents on this hand.
Dealer: N
Vul: N-S |
North
♠ KJ64 ♥ AK ♦ A2 ♣ KQT43 |
|
East
♠ 9872 ♥ 64 ♦ KQ76 ♣ A65 |
West | North | East | South |
— | 1♣ (a) | P | 1♠ |
3♥ (b) | 4♥ (c) | 5♥ (d) | P |
P | Dbl | All pass |
(a) I wanted to be able to show both my suits and so risked being passed in 1♣. I had planned on making a game forcing jump shift rebid of 2♠ had partner responded 1of a red suit.
(b) weak jump overcall
(c) after hearing my partner’s 1♠ response, I was concerned that my anticipated rebid of 4♠ would actually understate my values, but the overcall bought me another round by enabling me to cue bid.
(d) perhaps confusing “favorably not vulnerable” with “invulnerable”?
On lead against 5♥X, I cashed two high trumps and then switched to ♣K. The ace was won in dummy, partner and declarer following with the 7 and 8, respectively. A small diamond was played to ♦J of declarer and my ♦A. (Ducking one round might have been better defense.) Wanting partner to win the next trick and return a club, I tried to control the defense by leading my ♠J. Partner would probably have found the right defense anyway, but this play made it easier for him to win the ♠A and return a club. Two club tricks gave us six tricks overall for a four trick set and a top board of +800, beating spade games our direction.
The whole hand was:
Dealer: N
Vul: N-S |
North
♠ KJ64 ♥ AK ♦ A2 ♣ KQT43 |
|
West
♠ Q ♥ QT98753 ♦ J5 ♣ J98 |
East
♠ 9872 ♥ 64 ♦ KQ76 ♣ A65 |
|
South
♠ AT53 ♥ J2 ♦ T9843 ♣ 72 |
A similar situation arose on another board, but with a much less satisfying matchpoint result.
Dealer: S
Vul: Both |
North
♠ Q62 ♥ KQJ852 ♦ T74 ♣ K |
|
West
♠ KJT984 ♥ T ♦ KQ953 ♣ T |
East
♠ 3 ♥ 76 ♦ AJ2 ♣ QJ97643 |
|
South
♠ A75 ♥ A943 ♦ 86 ♣ A852 |
West | North | East | South |
— | — | — | 1NT (12-14) |
2♠ (spades + minor) | 4♥ | P | P |
4♠ | Dbl | 4NT (tell me your minor) | P |
5♦ | Dbl | All pass |
After the spirited auction I led the ♣K, holding the lead. Not being sure how many rounded cards declarer holds, I decided to pass the buck to partner by leading the ♥J at Trick 2. He would win the ♥A, I thought, and might be in a better position to control the defense by deciding whether to force declarer or give me a club ruff. Well, partner knew the rounded suit distribution exactly: he had heard me show at least six hearts and so “knew” declarer had only the one heart just played. And he had a view of all thirteen clubs. Between that information and the auction, he could pretty well guess the total distribution. Partner decided that our best chance was to negotiate a club ruff while he retained control of that suit with the ace. Accordingly, he chose to lead back a small club. Declarer considered this trick for several moments and then decided to ruff with the ♦9. I overruffed for our third trick. (That might be a mistake, since allowing declarer to “draw trumps ending in dummy”, when dummy has a good suit, is not often a good strategy for defense.) With trumps now splitting 2-2, declarer could draw trumps, set up dummy’s clubs, lose a spade and then reach dummy with a spade ruff to run the club suit. A two trick set for +500 result (perhaps other defenses would lead to the same result) was a poor matchpoint result when compared to pairs going +620 with our hand.
The third hand, companion board to the one above, represented a different form of defensive control, the failing to relinquish control of declarer’s long side suit.
Dealer: W
Vul: None |
North
♠ A8752 ♥ K94 ♦ KJ52 ♣ J |
|
West
♠ KQJT6 ♥ AQT83 ♦ Q ♣ K7 |
East
♠ 9 ♥ 76 ♦ AT973 ♣ A8654 |
|
South
♠ 43 ♥ J52 ♦ 864 ♣ QT932 |
West | North | East | South |
1♠ | P | 1NT | P |
3♥ | P | 3NT | P |
4♥ | All pass |
I tried a forcing defense – too many diamond ruffs in declarer’s hand might cause her to lose control of trumps, I had hoped – by leading a small diamond. Fortunately for my partnership, declarer decided to win the lead in dummy rather than let the lead run around to her stiff ♦Q. She next led the ♠9 from dummy, overtaking with a higher honor in hand. With declarer marked with at least five spades on the auction, I knew the ♠A was going to win a trick eventually. Thinking that retaining control of the side suit would complicate play for declarer, I ducked. The duck must have been smooth because declarer played as if she were trying to ruff out partner’s ♠A. Declarer next led ♠6 from hand. I covered with the ♠7, allowing her to ruff in dummy as partner followed with his last spade. Now declarer ruffed a diamond to hand. She played a spade and I ducked again. Declarer ruffed in dummy with dummy’s last trump but partner overruffed with the ♥J. Partner might have continued the force with a diamond here but he chose to return a club which declarer won in hand. Declarer now led the ♥Q from hand and I won the ♥K (our second trick). I continued the force with the ♦K, ruffed by declarer in hand, reaching this position:
Dealer: W
Vul: None |
North
♠ A8 ♥ 94 ♦ J ♣ |
|
West
♠ QJ ♥ AT ♦ — ♣ 7 |
East
♠ — ♥ — ♦ T9 ♣ A86 |
|
South
♠ — ♥ 5 ♦ ♣ QT93 |
Declarer forced out my ♠A for our third trick and I returned ♦J which declarer ruffed with the ♥T. Declarer could cash the other high spade, but my long heart was going to take one of the last two tricks for a one-trick set. The analysis is pretty complex (at least too complex for me!) but I think that declarer’s success revolves not around the spade suit — the defense has an answer to her spade plays — but around the diamond suit. If declarer can avoid being tapped twice in diamonds, she can, I think, make her contract. Basically, that would require declarer to have bravely/dangerously ducked the diamond opening lead to her stiff ♦Q; even if I had led the ♦K to pin the ♦Q, we could only tap her once because the ♦T in dummy would be master of the third round of the suit. At any rate, keeping control of the spade suit by not playing the ♠A prematurely made declarer’s play difficult. Pleasantly, the one trick set was also a top board for my partnership.
So … being a control freak in bridge can pay off!
Nice post.
“being a control freak in bridge can pay off! ”
Defense is an intricate dance. Sometimes you should lead and sometimes you should follow and this can shift back and forth. This is what makes bridge such a beautiful game.