Hand #11 was very puzzling to me. We did not arrive at the optimal contract, and then we missed the play that makes it possible. It was humbling that three of the other four East-West pairs both found the the best contract and made it. To make matters worse, the pair that ended up in the wrong strain also bested us. What did we do wrong?
Board #11
South dealer
Neither side vulnerable
| | North
♠ J 10 3 2
♥ 10 8 7 6 4
♦ A K
♣ 7 5
| | West
♠ A K 8
♥ Q 3
♦ J 9 7 3 2
♣ A K 9
| | East
♠ Q 9 7 6
♥ K J 9
♦ 8 5
♣ Q 10 4 3
| | | South
♠ 5 4
♥ A 5 2
♦ Q 10 6 4
♣ J 8 6 2
| |
|
| | | | |
| South | West | North | East |
| P | 1♦ | P | 1♠ |
| P | 1NT | P | P |
| P | | | |
I was sitting East. My partner opened 1♦. I responded 1♠, and he bid 1NT, which showed a balanced 15-17-point hand. We play that an opening bid of 1NT shows 10-12. It was now my job to evaluate the strength of my hand as if I were responding to an opening bid of 1NT. It appeared to me that we did not have game, and since he did not raise my spades, I knew that we did not have a spade fit. So, I passed.
When the hand was over, we discovered that three of the other four pairs had played in 3NT. If I had invited with a 2NT bid, anyone would have bid 3NT with West's hand. I found it hard to believe that everyone bid 2NT with my lackluster assortment. For many years my policy has been to invite with nine points or an eight-pointer with a five-card suit.
Was I wrong? I asked my wife, who also sat East on this hand, how the bidding at her table went. She said that she thought that she bid 2♣ (Stayman). West bid 2♦, and she had little choice except 2NT. Maybe that is what happened at the other two tables as well.
Larry Cohen's article in in the "Newer Players" section of the February 2018 issue of the Bridge Bulletin says "If we have less than 9 balanced point, we will want to be in a part score." However, a little later on he says that a Stayman sequence ordinarily requires "8 decent HCP or 9 HCP." I wonder whether LC would counsider East's hand, which has a king, two queens, and a jack "decent". There is a doubleton and slightly better than average intermediates, but to me this hand seems unpromising.
Many internet discussions advise inviting with eight points, but they do not say why. One article (posted here) included a study on the subject and concluded: "If you've been in the habit of responding with 8 HCP, here's how much you have been costing yourself, compared with passing out partner's 1NT—a quarter of a board at matchpoints, and at least half an imp a board at teams (MP percentages are good to ±1% at the 95% confidence level)." With the shape of East's hand on this board, the chance for gaining is only 13 percent. The chance of doing worse is 39 percent. This hand happened to fall into the former category.
One other factor should perhaps be mentioned. Unlike the other Easts, I already knew that my partner did not have four spades. So, when they bid Stayman they still had some hope of finding a spade fit.
This is as close to solving the bidding mystery as I can get. The second mystery is why Ken, who is a very good declarer, found only eight tricks while the other Wests and Deep Finesse all were able to make nine.
Spades should produce three tricks, hearts two, and clubs three. The diamond suit is the only one with five pieces, but on this hand it is a mine field. I studied this hand for several minutes before I disovered a way for West to take nine tricks before North-South takes five: Declarer must take the finesse of the ♣J fairly early in the play.
Maybe North-South helped. At our table I think that the opening lead was a low heart. This began the assault on the heart suit without sacrificing an entry. Leading the ♦K would also be productive because it tells South the location of every card in the diamond suit. However, it also tells North that the diamonds are split 4-2, which makes South twice as likely to hold the ♣J. This knowledge might well have influenced West's line of play.
Leading a black card, however, would be disastrous for North-South. Both provide the ninth trick via a free finesse.
Why would North choose a black card? I don't know. If East used Stayman, North would know that West had at most three cards in both majors. East, on the other hand, probably had four cards in at least one. I would have considered leading the ♦K, but, unless I was really tired, I would have certainly led a heart.
I can understand why Ken put off attacking clubs and then decided not to take the finesse, but it still bothers me that the other declarers did better. Without more information, however, it will remain something of a mystery. Maybe one of the other players will enlighten me.