| 1NT (a) | Dble | Rdbl(b) | 2 
|
| Pass | 2  | All Pass |
| Home | Contents | Introduction | Chapter 2 | 03-20-2006 12:06:29 |
The checklist is for my benefit. Items 3 and 4 are more strongly worded than necessary. When a deal is discussed after the session, I know how the bidding went and I know what everybody had. I might as well commit these details to memory when they are useful.
The point of 3 and 4 is: When dummy appears figure out the information you are going to need in the defense. If you realize that specific low cards in only one or two suits are important, then watch for those spot cards.
My instructions are to do items 2, 3, 4, and 6 essentially at the time of the opening lead. This can be a big load when the dummy isn't what you expect.
1NT (a) Dble Rdbl(b) 2 Pass 2 All Pass
(a) 12-15.
(b) Shows a one-suited hand, and asks partner to bid 2 .
They did not alert, and made no explanations before partner
led the 
2. I did not expect this dummy:
J 9 8 3
I asked dummy if 2 was Stayman, and declarer if 2 was in
response to Stayman, and both said yes.
From the bidding, the lead, and the dummy I knew declarer's
distribution exactly and had a good idea of her point count. The
only suit in my hand you might want for this analysis is J-T-7-3.
There is a small chance my distribution model will be wrong.
Until I know better, I am going to defend based on the picture I
now describe.
Partner's 2 is consistent with three or four diamonds and
exactly one diamond honor. It is much more likely that declarer
has four diamonds than five diamonds. The outcome of the first
trick is that partner has the Q, and declarer has A-K. I
place partner with Q-x-x-2. If partner has only four cards in
his longest suit and has a one-suited hand, then his distribution
is 4-3-3-3, and I know declarer's distribution exactly.
Dummy has 8 points. If I give declarer about 15 points,
then partner and I have 17 points between us. There are 8
unknown points in declarer's hand and, depending on my point
count, partner has up to three points in addition to the Q. If
I have only 12 points, declarer could have 18 points. Finding
the best defense when they have 26 points is not relevant — they
have failed to bid a game. More worrisome is a declarer with
only 12 points, and I have to keep this possibility in mind.
None of this really mattered on this deal. The one thing I knew was that I was able to lead a diamond whenever I won a trick. The deal was such that anyone not afraid to tap dummy would have gotten the same result without visualizing the deal. They would have missed some of the beauty of the game.
Anticipate means to think about what you would lead during the bidding. You should also come up with a tentative idea of their distributions and their point counts during the auction.
There is a tendency to defend (or to play) the hand based on your thirteen cards and dummy's thirteen cards. You should put yourself in the other player's heads and infer what they have from what they bid, from what they did not bid, and from what they play.
Legitimate v. illegitimate information. If partner thinks
for a long time before playing, the fact that he has a choice of
plays is not legitimate. Suppose partner makes the very unsavory
opening lead of a spade from T-8-4-2. You have a table of leads,
which in reality, are leads as a function of your point count and
the bidding. The fact that partner led a spade means that all
leads are poor, and this is legitimate information. (A lead from T-8-4-2 is not always unsavory. If they told you to lead spades, then that is what you do. If you have all of the defensive points, then this passive lead is much higher on the list of leads.)
In the newspaper East saw something like this:
West North East South 1 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4
I changed East's hand to make the problem harder to see, and so
that declarer cannot make the hand against the newspaper's good
defense. West led the J, and "sooner" means that you should
identify the three South hands where you can defeat 4 , before
you play to the first trick.
I am sure you are going to win the first trick on this deal, but sometimes a thought out defense will require a duck of the first trick. They always advise declarer to think before he plays to the first trick, and this advice applies to third seat.
The declarer hands that you visualize look pretty much the same, but do require three different defenses.
Snatch your three aces, partner gets his trump trick, and you
beat 4 .
Give partner one or two diamond ruffs. Where does the lead of a singleton in one of their suits v.a lead of partner's suit appear on the table of leads when you have no points and they bid game voluntarily?
A B C
Tell me the defense. For this defense to work declarer must have
exactly three spades, and his spade holding cannot be better than
T-8-6. These defenses require the diamond count from partner. A
declarer, with A or B, should lead a diamond from dummy at trick
three. If this happens ask "Is A or B more reasonable on the bidding?" On C, declarer has played a small club on trick one,
and so must have a singleton diamond for you to defeat 4 .
The point is to visualize these possibilities, and determine which is more likely given the bidding and partner's opening lead. You may get it wrong, but you will have a justification for your chosen line of defense.
In the above deal East thinks at trick one. Other deals require the play to several tricks before the critical point is reached. If you play too fast to the first few tricks, you won't remember the information for the proper defense, and, in fact, you might just slop through the critical point of the defense.
I said to pay attention to the first few tricks. At the start of the deal you can decide how far into the hand you have to pay close attention to specific cards, and at what point you can limit your attention to hand patterns.
On many hands declarer gets to run a suit either in his hand or in dummy, and you will be required to make some number of sluffs. Count how many discards you will have to make, then what they might be, and how they will be modified by sluffs of the other two players.
To summarize:
There was a Zia defense where a club was the natural return, and a spade was the obvious return without a club. I assume Zia thought before returning a spade. Declarer decided Zia had no clubs, and misplayed the hand. Declarer allowed Zia's non-club return to sway him from the percentage line. The clue is that Zia thought before he made the spade play, and Zia's thought was proper information for declarer to act on.
I occasionally pose a problem that goes like this: I give the bidding, the opening lead, and the dummy, and possibly a play or two after that. I ask for a third player's distribution. The key is you know the fourth player's distribution exactly from the bidding and his plays to that point.
Partner Me 1 Pass 1NT Pass 2 Pass Pass 2 All Pass
Partner led a heart, dummy had five hearts, I had two, and
declarer followed. I knew hearts were 5-5-2-1 around the table, and
that told me partner's distribution. I asked for declarer's
distribution. The fact that I (and maybe you) would have bid 2
with partner's hand is not relevant.
Jim Backstrom acts as a mentor to several players. He expects them to tell him declarer's hand at the end of the play. This is simply actively and routinely counting declarer's points and distribution.
The sum of the approximate suit lengths must add to thirteen.
West North East South 1NT 2 Pass 2 Pass Pass 3 3 All Pass
(a) Astro, showing spades and a second suit.
(b) Denies three spades.
(c) I should have reasoned: "Partner has at least four spades and at least five clubs. Wait! He has exactly five clubs. He would have bid 3 immediately with six."
It developed that partner had five spades. I also played him for five red cards. I should have known that declarer was most likely 1=4=4=4 or 1=5=3=4.
Ask about their high-frequency alerts at the time of the alert. They have their act together on these bids. This usually means that alerts of the opening bid and response are asked about when alerted. Questions about their low-frequency alerts are best delayed to the end of the auction. These bids can be in untravelled territory; do not ask about them unless it is necessary as part of anticipate. At the end of the auction, even an auction with no alerts, the opening leader should routinely ask a question such as: "Tell me what you have learned?" It is adequate that one player tells all, and the other player corrects if his bids meant something else. I do not consider "Key-Card" or "1430" an adequate answer. Tell me trumps and the number of controls shown.
Here are several big-club alert auctions that I might inflict on you:
1 Pass 1 Pass 1NT Pass 2 Pass 2NT (alert)
This is a common auction. You will not hurt yourself by asking for all four alerts.
A second auction:
3 Pass 4
(from Washington D.C. Standard) has not come up yet, so be leery about asking until the auction is over.
Partner RHO 1 2
Ask what 2 means when you need to know.
2
You think that 2 is a Bailey weak-two in diamonds, because that
is what that pair has been doing. Check.
Pseudo-Drury auctions are a problem:
Pass Pass 1 Pass 2
There is an alert or no alert. One of them is playing Drury and the other is not. The damage already has been done. I asked someone recently, and the answer was "inverted Drury." I don't know what that means. I do not feel stupid making them be explicit, and you should not either.
..... 4 Pass 4
I have an "Ask about bids in an inverted order" theory. 4
might be Gerber or Key-Card. Ask the 4 bidder what 4 means.
This way you find out what 4 meant. Then ask what 4 means.
My weakness in the checklist is the "Commit to memory the early plays." Somehow I know that I had the J-7-5-2 of a suit, but I fail to know the specific cards in an important suit held by dummy, partner, and declarer.
Often a hand develops in which declarer is going to have to find a card in a particular suit at the end. Know what declarer is looking for, and do not signal the possession or lack of possession of that card.
There are many combinations where you have to be prepared to play without apparent thought. An example is: Dummy has the ace-queen of a suit, and you have the king. Usually you will cover the declarer's jack. If it is right to duck, be prepared.
Often against a low-level contract the defenders, rather
than declarer, should be in charge. When I defend, this often
happens. When I declare, inexperienced players rarely take
charge. Against low-level contracts you should signal honestly
and never false card. I was playing a 2 contract, and led the
jack of hearts from my hand toward five to the ten in dummy.
LHO, with ace and king of hearts, won with the ace of hearts.
RHO should place me with the K-Q-J of hearts, and this increases
the chance that RHO will misdefend.
| Home | Contents | Introduction | Chapter 2 |
