Seven Notrump

Ingenious robot bridge player

2011-10-26T17:34:00.002-04:00

From Popular Science, January 1936.

Rescue bidding

2010-07-30T12:32:00.003-04:00

It's part of the delightful nature of bridge that sometimes the bidding goes awry. There is simply too much information to be able to always communicate unambiguously.

When there's a little slip in bidding communication, though, there's often a way to nudge the auction at least partway back on track. In this hand, where I sat South and partnered with a very nice beginner, North bid 2C, forgetting that 2C was earmarked for the Stayman convention, an inquiry about my majors. That was an error, but one that could have been amended.

North

x x

Q x x x

K Q x x x x

South

K Q J x

A J x

K J

x x x x

When you see that the bidding has gone off track, it's easy to get flustered and just try to bail out in the lowest contract possible, as North did here by passing my spade bid. But when there's an opportunity to rectify the situation rather than abnegate, it's best to seize that opportunity, which may land you in a contract that, if not optimal, is at least better than one you'd otherwise get into. In this case, a rebid of 3C by North would have indicated to me that my partner genuinely liked the club suit. I might have also concluded that her Stayman bid meant she had four hearts, but I wasn't likely to support that regardless.

As it happened, we only went down one trick, undoubled; but making a contract in clubs would have been preferable.

Bridge murder in England

2010-07-19T16:25:00.003-04:00

Not the first bridge murder, and unlikely to be the last.

The couple were said to be "enthusiastic" members of Lytham Bridge Club.

"Over some couple of years he firstly got into the habit of drinking to excess and secondly being vociferously critical towards his wife when they were playing cards."

From the BBC, Lytham couple's bickering over Bridge 'ended in murder'

A third gamble

2010-04-05T16:44:00.000-04:00

If my partner had bid her 10 high-card points preemptively, I might have at least leapt us into a spades slam. But I went for good old 6NT again.

North

A K Q J 9 7 3

10 6

4 3

7 6

South

8 7

A Q J 9

A K J 6 2

K 10

This one was pretty straightforward after the dummy came down. Lost the first club trick, won the second club trick, crossed over to partner's lovely spades and cashed the lot, discarding three hearts and two diamonds. In lieu of finessing, I then inelegantly played my top red-suit winners, diamond diamond heart, and the winning queen of diamonds happily fell on the ace of hearts, both opponents opting to guard the club suit instead. My jack was a winner and the slam was good. Did I learn my lesson? Not quite yet.

Taking more chances

2010-03-31T13:13:00.014-04:00

The day after my perhaps undeserved success with my bold bid, I found myself transformed into an aggressive bidder. After all, that one jump to game had worked; how could there ever be any consequences for a big bid?

I sat South in a hand that went something like this.

North

10 7 6

A Q J 5 4

A 5 3

Q 8

South

A K Q 3

9 8 7 3 2

K Q

K J

I thought my partner might pass a raise in hearts or NT, and I figured with his opening bid he ought to have at least one of the missing aces.

After the defenders won the first trick with the club ace and returned a losing club, the contract rested in the hands of the heart king. The finesse was 50-50, but could those odds be improved? With only three hearts out on the street, there were six possible situations:

West

1. Kxx

2. Kx

3. K

4. x

5. xx

6. -

East

Kxx

I played three rounds of spades and, when both opponents followed suit on all three, led a fourth. East discarded a diamond and West threw a heart. That ruled out a few possibilities: West hadn't started with a void or with a singleton king, and it was unlikely she'd discard from Kx either.

I led a heart from my hand, and West threw another low one on it. I paused mid-trick. The only outstanding heart now was the king, and it could be with either opponent. Knowing my enemy, I guessed that if West had started with Kxx, she would not have discarded in that suit at all, preferring to keep the honor behind the ace doubly guarded. Therefore she had started with a low heart doubleton, and the singleton king lay with East! I played the ace from dummy.

And I was wrong; East, who had been dealt a heart void, followed with a club.

Taking a chance

2010-03-27T18:55:00.005-04:00

You open 1S and partner responds 1NT. What do you rebid?

South

A K J 10 4

8 3

A 10 4

A 7 2

2S? 2D? 2NT? None of them were greatly appealing to me with an unfamiliar online partner, so I jumped to 4S, hoping partner had a couple of spades.

She didn't, and diamond and spade finesses were both offside, but her long diamonds made good anyway, to the tune of one overtrick. Boldness rewarded!

The complete deal:

North

J 7 2

Q 9 8 5 3 2

K Q 3

West

Q 8 6

A Q 10 4

K J

J 9 6 4

East

9 7 5 2

K 9 6 5

7 6

10 8 5

South

A K J 10 4

8 3

A 10 4

A 7 2

Hearts Are Trump

2010-03-12T15:28:00.002-05:00

by Trio, from the 1983 album Bye Bye aka Trio and Error

Secrets of the Sperber coup

2010-02-20T10:30:00.006-05:00

In the whole culture right through until the Nazis turned out the lights, talk was a way of being, and it was universally understood that the best talkers had the right to talk it all away. When the distinguished and wildly eccentric legal advocate Hugo Sperber played cards, people would take turns to stand behind him so they could overhear his running commentary: The queue would stretch down the aisle between the tables all the way to the door of the cafe.

From Clive James' article (adapted from his great book Cultural Amnesia) on doomed Viennese actor, raconteur and author Egon Friedell.

This post is lifted verbatim from gentleman Mark Slutsky's non-bridge blog The Uses of Disenchantment -- thanks.

Do the writers of bridge books get better hands than I do?

2009-11-11T12:21:00.003-05:00

I just casually re-skimmed an intro bridge book, prior to lending it to a new player, and I was reminded of how my group's little system has diverged from the standard American we were taught.

One significant shift is in the way we handle powerful hands (also fondly known as rockcrushers, bunker-busters, and other compound nouns that suggest their unstoppable strength).

Classically we're taught to open 2C with a strong hand of 22+ points; 2NT with 21-22; and 3NT with 24-26 points. With fewer than 22 points, open at the one level.

Now, in all my years of playing bridge, I think I've held a 22-point hand once or twice, and never anything stronger. I'm sure it's a fine thing to be able to deal with these beauties when they come up, but if they are so rare, I don't quite see the sense in having so many calls dedicated to magical hands that occur so rarely, when those could be applied to more common situations.

As a result, our little group currently bids:

1NT: 15-17 points and a balanced hand
2NT: 18-20 points and a balanced hand
2C: 20+ points -- can be shaded toward 18 points if you have an especially nice suit, or two nice suits

It seems to work quite well. The potential downsides, I guess, are that it becomes a little more difficult to find the perfect contract when you hold a real atom-smasher, but I have not been blessed with that particular problem much.

What do you think? Are we missing out by adjusting our system this way?

Running score tally

2009-10-31T14:43:00.000-04:00

full page view

The WSJ notices bridge

2009-10-25T02:03:00.002-04:00

There's not a great deal of meat in this wry appreciation of the game written by Alexander McCall Smith for the Wall Street Journal's "Life & Style" section, but it's not wrong, I'd say.

Send the link, perhaps, to non-playing friends as a way to explain where we all disappear to so often.

To force or not to force

2009-10-04T14:37:00.005-04:00

I've learned a lot since I wrote about The 18-21 Problem, but I'm still somewhat plagued by hands like this one, which I held last night.

A 5

A K Q J 7 5

Q 8

Q 9 7

I dealt and have to bid. With 18 high-card points and a solid major suit, I suspect we have a shot at game even if partner's hand is weak. In our Standard American variant, there's no realistic way to force my partner to respond. I opened 1H and was left to play it there. Here's the complete deal:

North

K J 10 6 4

9 8

4 3

J 8 6 5

West

Q 9 7

10 3 2

A 10 9 6

K 10 4

East

8 3 2

6 4

K J 7 5 2

A 2 3

South

A 5

A K Q J 7 5

Q 8

Q 9 7

Perfect defense would have scored four minor tricks off the top, but their communication faltered. With that luck and the successful spade finesse, I made four overtricks: a total of 5H, if only we had bid it.

What's to be done with hands like these? Leave them alone, because on the whole they are settable? Or push harder to get good results when good results are possible?

Healthy nerves

2008-12-13T17:27:00.008-05:00

Here's a photo of a Camel ad that I snapped at New York's Science, Industry, and Business Library's exhibition of cigarette ads. Click the thumbnail above to see the whole thing.

A friendly game

2008-12-12T16:25:00.005-05:00

This is a photo from Life magazine; click it to see it full-size.

Four people playing a bridge game at the Goldings as others look on.
Location: Westchester, NY, US
Date taken: April 24, 1888
Photographer: Wallace G. Levison

Two of hearts

2008-10-03T17:53:00.003-04:00

All the kids are doing MP3 blogs, I hear, and when a new pop hit concerns questions of card-playing, I do not mind joining them.

Remember Stacey Q? Annie does.

Bridge in a browser

2008-09-20T20:37:00.002-04:00

At last, Bridge Base's browser-based online bridge software is out of beta! Now anyone -- that means you, Mac people -- can play online with a world-class community of bridge players, any time, totally free.

Check it out!

Some doubles

2008-09-19T10:13:00.017-04:00

"What did her double mean?" is one of those questions that gets tossed around the casual bridge table. (I'll get to "is that forcing?" another time.)

Here is a look at some popular doubles, where they are found, and what they mean.

Takeout double

This is a double, early in the auction, that asks -- nay, forces -- the doubler's partner to bid a suit. The doubler has opening points and support for the unbid suits.

Takeout doubles apply after a preemptive opening just as they do after a 1-level opening. You may pass your partner's double of a preempt only if you are rather sure you can set the contract.

If a player's first bid is a double, chances are that double is for takeout. If the player has bid already in the auction and then doubles on a later round, chances are that double is not for takeout.

Strength-showing double
This is still a takeout double but I'm giving it its own section to call attention to it. Whenever you overcall, you indicate your point count. A jump overcall is the weakest bid you can make that's not a pass. A non-jump overcall is stronger, promising 10+ points. If you have a whopping hand in overcalling position, regardless of your suit distribution, double. This is the strongest bid you can make. It forces your partner to bid.

In the next round, with 13 or so points, pass your partner's suit unless it's awful. If you bid a new suit after your double -- especially at a higher level -- that indicates you have more points.

Responsive double

This is a double in response to partner's takeout double. Partner has support for the unbid suits and wants you to pick one -- you have points too, and want him to pick a suit.

It also works when partner has named a suit you don't like, to say you have points but no support for that; can he name his second suit please?

Business double
This is the original double, the double they were doing in the 16th century, also known as the penalty double. It comes when the opponents' auction is drawing to a close and you don't think they can make it; e.g. if you have four trumps in your hand, or if they seemed to be struggling to find a fit.

Matos double
This is a version of the business double. Its actual origin is lost in history, but it's named for Michaelangelo Matos, the dearly remembered founder of this site. A Matos double is a penalty double issued by a player who has a void in the trump suit, having deduced that his partner probably has a lot of trump. The declarer will assume the doubler is the one with the excess of trump, and misplay the hand.

Negative double

This form of takeout double occurs after partner has bid and the opponent has overcalled. It says: "I have some points and a suit, but thee opponent got in the way of my naming it." In the diagram, the doubler has spades but fewer than 10 points, so can't bid 2S.

Lead-directing double

This is an opportunistic double, usually in the middle of the opponents' auction. It's clear that the opponents have all the points and are going to play a game or a slam. You double a suit they happen to mention en route, as a way of indicating that this is the suit you'd like led to you if you have a chance of defeating the contract. In the diagram, South wants North to open with a diamond. 4NT is Blackwood, of course.

Lightner double

This is a conventional double. It is a double of a slam bid that sounds like a penalty double (and functions as one, because it's the final bid) but has the conventional meaning of requesting that partner choose an unusual lead, not what he would have led otherwise. The doubler may have a void in a side suit, or honors in dummy's suit, such that a non-standard lead may be the only way to defeat the slam. Sitting North in the diagram, I would lead a heart.

There are plenty more doubles where those came from. What's your favorite?

The dos of DONT

2008-06-06T10:39:00.000-04:00

We've been getting along okay without using any of the multitudinous conventions that exist for communicating after the opponents open 1NT, but it is starting to feel like a rather gaping hole in our system.

A convention called DONT -- Disturb Opponents' No Trump -- has the advantage of a charming name, as well as being elegantly easy to remember and deploy. In brief, when overcalling opponents' 1NT, a bid of a suit means you have two suits, with at least 5-4 length: the suit you bid plus another higher-ranked suit.

2C: clubs and another suit
2D: diamonds and a major suit
2H: hearts and spades
2S: just spades, not many points

If you have a single suit, double. Assuming the intervening opponent passes, your partner will bid 2C, after which you bid the suit you like, or pass if it's clubs.

Responses to a suit bid
Assuming the intervening opponent passes, the responder bids like so:

Pass: support for the suit bid
2 of the next suit up: wants you to name your second suit (or pass if this is the one)
2 of another suit: natural, showing 5- or 6-card length
Raise in your suit: likes it, with some strength, but non-forcing
2NT: strong hand, wants to go to game in your second suit. This is unusual.

Here's an example. After West's 1NT opening, North overcalls 2C, meaning he has length in clubs as well as a higher suit. South responds with the next suit up, meaning she doesn't favor clubs but has probably 3-card length in the other suits. North then bids his second suit, and the contract lands there.

BridgeBase improved

2008-06-04T21:56:00.006-04:00

BridgeBase's Flash interface, which I've praised in the past, just got significantly better. The new interface is prettier, faster, and does almost everything the old Windows download used to do, all in your browser and all, still, for free.

Try it out. Please. I need good partners on there.

A helpful tip for players and non-players alike

2008-05-13T11:04:00.004-04:00

Can you believe this blog has been going, such as it goes, for almost two years? Pretty soon I'm gonna have to start writing a "100 Years Ago In 7NT"-type feature.

Way back when, I complained about the issue with Mac browsers displaying suit symbols as lines. Remember?

Today I stumbled across a fix for the bug!

Change all your default fonts for the Japanese character set to 'Osaka'. I have no idea why this works.

For me this is Preferences: Content: Advanced: Fonts for [Japanese from the drop-down menu].

Hooray!

Keeping fit and winning games

2008-04-11T13:37:00.003-04:00

"...by the time a session of bridge is over, a recent study showed, most participants have a faster heart rate and have lost more weight than a professional football player in one game."

I emailed the author of that quote, trying to get a citation for the study, but never received a response. It seems a little dubious to me.

And to others: lately Bryan has been cutting out of games early to go to the gym. Clearly he doesn't think he's getting enough of a workout lifting the cards.

Hence my brilliant idea: round-the-block bridge. It's played like normal rubber bridge, except each dummy, immediately after laying down his or her hand, takes off running around the block. If the dummy hasn't circled the block and come back by the time declarer has finished playing the hand, the team takes a 300-point penalty. To discourage egregiously slow play, there's also a penalty incurred if dummy comes back and has to sit around while declarer finishes the hand -- say, 100 points per 30 seconds.

Idea gently lifted from Alan Turing's rather more brilliant invention round-the-house chess.

One hundred honors

2008-03-27T14:01:00.005-04:00

Everybody please bow your heads in bemusement -- that last post, on the subject of which suit to lead, was the 100th post on this blog!

May there be 100 more.

On this happy day, I'd like especially to thank my dedicated co-bloggers, Matos (the site's venerable founder and idea man), Jeff, and Lisa. Without you, we'd only be up to, what, 97?

Defense basics: Which suit to lead

2008-03-21T12:55:00.004-04:00

Many a contract stands or falls based on this one decision. But you're shooting blind -- you haven't seen the dummy yet. Making inferences from the bidding and from your hand is a fine art, but here are some basic guidelines, in rough order of preference.

Against no-trump contracts:

Lead your partner's suit. A good suit is always more powerful when led to, rather than led from.

Lead your own longest suit, unless it's one the opponents have bid.

If you have to lead a suit that opponents have bid, lead dummy's, not declarer's, suit.

DON'T lead a short suit that partner hasn't bid.

Against trump contracts:

Lead partner's suit.

Lead a singleton if you have a chance of developing a trump winner. There's little point in leading a singleton if you have, say, KQ of trump, since you have an inevitable trump winner there anyway.

Lead an unbid suit, especially one in which you have an honor sequence.

Lead dummy's suit.

Lead trump if it might prevent dummy from ruffing; e.g. if declarer has shown a long side suit.

If you have significant trump length, lead your longest other suit.

DON'T lead a suit headed by a lone honor or by a tenace.

DON'T lead declarer's side suit.

Six spades

2008-03-18T00:15:00.000-04:00

Paul

10 9 7

K Q 9 4

A K J 6 5 4

Adam

4 2

J 7 3 2

A 9 7 6 5 3

Bryan

Q 5 3

A 10 6 5

Q 10 8 7

J 4

Nils

A K J 8 6

3 2

K Q 10 8 2

The importance of signaling

2008-03-11T11:29:00.006-04:00

This is a hand from last night, as best I remember it -- let me know if I'm misremembering any important details.

North

x x x

K Q J 10 x

J 9 x x

West

A x x

x x x

A 7

Q 10 x x x

East

Q x x x

x x x x

South

K x x

Q J x x x x

A K x

Sitting East, you might feel you don't have much of a role to play in the defense of the hand -- try to duck a spade finesse maybe, and return partner's suit.

In fact, the card you play on the first trick can have a dramatic impact. Declarer has an entry problem: if the defense times its cards right, he can never get to all those juicy hearts. On the second trick, he tries to get to dummy by leading his low club. West would naturally play second-hand low on this trick -- which guarantees 9 tricks for the declarer -- but if West realizes that South doesn't have any more hearts, West can go up with the queen to block the entry.

The trick is for East to signal high-low on the first heart trick, to indicate an even number of hearts. West knows that if South had three or more hearts, he probably would have supported North's bid; so he can deduce that the even number of hearts that East has = 4, leaving South with a singleton ace and no way to reach dummy's winners.

6NT

2008-03-11T11:22:00.003-04:00

I'm just jotting this deal down here for my own record. I played out the diamonds first (wasting my beer card) to get a sense of the hands, then located the missing honors successfully (two kings West, queen East).

North

Q J x

A J x

Q x x x

K J x

South

A 10 x

Q x

A K J 7

A x x x

Making inferences

2008-03-06T03:06:00.002-05:00

Here is a deal from Marshall Miles's book All Fifty-Two Cards (p. 26), an interesting guide to reading what's in the other players' hands.

North

A Q 8 5

Q 10 8 6

7 5

A Q 6

South

J 7 4 3 2

A J 3

A 6 3

8 4

West leads the king of diamonds. Sitting South, how do you approach the hand? There are three finesses that you can take. Can you improve your odds?

Updated with hint: You're wondering where all the kings are. West's king lead means he has the diamond queen as well. That's 5 points; his opening bid promises ~13 points, so maybe he has all three other kings. At minimum, he's got to have two of them.

How do you play the hand to maximize your chance of success, given the knowledge that East has either one king or no king? Try on all the possibilities in your mind. Please show your work for full credit.

Tally tweaking

2008-03-04T00:53:00.002-05:00

Well, spreadsheet programming is harder than bridge, but I added a little feature to the running score tally up there ^ just now: a delta calculator, which shows each person's cumulative score in the last session. I think that's kind of interesting to see.

If anyone has further ideas for ways to visualize this mass of data (or better, expertise on how to make it happen), please chime in. Marya was talking about trying to figure out which partnerships seem to be the highest-scoring, but no progress has been made in that important research.

Honor without victory

2008-03-03T22:54:00.003-05:00

Adam mentioned in passing tonight that he always thought declarer gets the honors bonus whether or not the contract is made. That's not how I learned the rules of rubber bridge, but upon returning home, it seems sources like Wikipedia say I'm wrong: bonuses "are awarded in rubber bridge for particular holdings in one hand, regardless of the outcome of the deal."

That sort of sheer windfall seems quite counter to the skill-based spirit of the game. If you've already got A-K-Q-J-10 of trump in your hand, you should be able to make some use of it. Do you really need 150 points too?

I don't think I'll be claiming my honors bonuses from now on.

Never rebid a preëmpt

2008-02-27T21:55:00.005-05:00

Any questions?

If you open or overcall with a weak two or three (or four, or five) bid and your partner passes or raises your suit, your next bid should be a pass. Your bid already described your hand quite explicitly, giving captaincy of the auction to your partner, whose decision it now is where the game should be played.

Bridge in rock lyrics

2008-02-22T22:21:00.003-05:00

Post your examples here.

In "Suddenly It's A Folk Song," Future of the Left sing:

Make a living from contract bridge
Boring, but magnificent
Surely you're amazed by it
Suddenly these processes
Do not seem significant
Now we are not worthy of friends

Any others?

Bridge Luuuhs the Kids

2008-02-21T11:34:00.002-05:00

Or rather, a couple of very rich men plan to make the kids luuuuh bridge. (HT: Kate Silver)

P.S. I owe everyone else involved w/this blog an apology for longstanding noninvolvement. Moved to Seattle, started freelancing full-time, and though there's apparently a floating Thursday-night game at a good pub/restaurant I could walk to, I've gotten lazy. That will remedy itself in time, especially if Gates and Buffett have anything to say about it.)

Bridge mysteries

2008-02-20T09:58:00.005-05:00

These novels -- Murder In Duplicate and others -- appear to be self-published, available from Amazon or from bridgemysteries.com. I'm curious.

Browsing the bridge section of the NYPL (and then, just now, obviously, the web), I've noticed quite a bit of bridge-themed fiction. I refer not to "Five Weeks to Winning Bridge" and other such pipe dreams, but actual novels that hinge on cards for their drama. I have read none of these:

Bridge Below the Belt

The Bridge Adventures of Robin Hood

Richelieu Plays Bridge

Death By Contract

and many more.

Watch this space for my own serialized bridge fiction, Clever Pun TK.

New crew member

2008-02-06T02:00:00.000-05:00

I know sometimes it's easy for you to forget that this is a group blog, but it is. Please (with the enduring silence that I've come to understand as your warm approval) welcome new poster Lisa, weighing in with a West Coast view of things bridge! You've seen her coasters.

The Bridge Game (2003, not rated)

2008-02-01T23:10:00.000-05:00

Don't bother renting this movie for the bridge content. The ladies are ostensibly there for a game, and they even deal out some cards, but they get sidetracked talking about their lives and problems and never even play a hand!

Anyone have a good juicy card movie to suggest?

When to hold up a trump winner, pt. 2

2008-01-21T20:35:00.001-05:00

North

J 8 6

10 8 4

K 4 5 2

K 3 2

Bryan

5 2

A 9 7

Q 10 8 3

J 10 6 4

A 10 9 4 3

K 5

J 9 7 6

9 8

South

K Q 7

Q J 6 3 2

A Q 7 5

I won the lead with my ace of spades and returned a spade, which South won. South then led trump from his hand. Should Bryan, holding the ace of trump, play it now, or should he perhaps hold onto it?

If he plays it now, we win three tricks but the opponents make their contract.

If he holds it up, I'll win with my king of trump and lead another spade for Bryan to ruff with his 9. Then his heart ace, held up once but played in due course, takes the setting trick.

Flash of inspiration

2007-12-07T14:31:00.000-05:00

For a year or more (though not lately, I must confess) I've played bridge online at Bridge Base Online, which is really great, but requires Windows-only software, thus excluding many lovely people of my acquaintance, or making them jump through emulation hoops.

Until now -- BBOFlash, a beta version of which is available here, runs in a browser window on any computer you happen to have. On Macs, it seems to work least crashily using Explorer.

Check it out, people! I'll see you online.

When to hold up a trump winner

2007-12-07T13:49:00.001-05:00

Bryan wondered: If, as defender, you have the ace of trump, and declarer starts pulling trump, is there any situation when you wouldn't want to win with your ace on the first round?

My instinct was yes, of course there is, but I couldn't think of one in the heat of the moment. On reflection, though, I whipped up a quick example. Tell me if you find a flaw.

North

5 4

K 8 2

K 10 5 3

Q 9 7 5

West

K 9 7 3

10 9

Q 8 7 4

A 10 8

East

Q 10 6

A 7 4

J 9 6

J 4 3 2

South

A J 8 2

Q J 6 5 3

A 2

K 6

South wins the spade lead in her hand and starts to pull trump. If East wins with the ace, he can return a spade to West's king. The club ace will be the defense's third and last trick.

However, if East ducks the trump lead, it puts declarer at a disadvantage. When East wins the next round of trump, he can lead his last trump, removing the dummy's ability to ruff a spade, and giving the defense another eventual spade trick.

Bridge in the news

2007-11-14T12:36:00.000-05:00

angry bridge players have accused the women of "treason" and "sedition."

The enigma of Bryan (and others)

2007-10-30T12:20:00.000-04:00

Bryan has been playing bridge longer than I have. He's a more rigorous bidder, a quicker-thinking declarer, and all in all I believe a better player than I am. When I set up the running score tally nine months ago, I didn't have any particular expectations; but it has revealed a mystery. My score has steadily pulled ahead by miles, while Bryan's has lingered very close to zero for months and months.

(I'm taking Bryan as an example, but the low scores of others puzzle me equally.)

With no false modesty, I'm quite sure that I'm not the best player of our crew, and certainly not by such a margin. (Nor do I falsify the scores.) I am probably the best memorizer of conventions, but that doesn't confer a great advantage with a series of randomly rotating partners. The main difference in style between Bryan and I is Bryan's requirement of a sound 13 points to overcall, while I'll jump in with 9 good points if I think it'll do any good. And I'm perhaps more eager to shoot for slam than most people; I suppose that could be a factor.

Any theories?

Rusty bridge

2007-10-09T11:42:00.001-04:00

After playing bridge in the flesh every week for a year or so, as well as online almost every day, trips and other people conspired to put the weekly games on seven-week hiatus, at just the same time that I got bored by the online game. The result at last night's game might have been more obvious to myself than to others, although (skillful new guy) Adam noticed when I foolishly trumped low during my one stint as declarer.

It feels as though I've been keeping all my bridge skill in short-term memory, where it was readily accessible as long as I was playing frequently, but after weeks off, it's decidedly no longer at my fingertips. Adam, who hadn't played in a couple of years, seemed to have much better access to his brain's bridge archive. Perhaps his is in a different type of memory; or, more likely, he's just sharp.

Nils won the evening's prize for point winner: a copy of Louis H. Watson's classic book on the Play of the Hand at Bridge.

Bridge Play, by Alfred Sheinwold

2007-09-02T11:18:00.001-04:00

Buy this book

2007-08-07T10:52:00.000-04:00

On sale today, The Backwash Squeeze and Other Improbable Feats by the estimable Mr. Edward McPherson. He doesn't explain how, when, or why to execute a backwash squeeze, or any other type of squeeze, but he does tour the world learning bridge and interviewing the game's luminaries. It's a great resource for learning about bridge's wider context beyond the short horizon of your personal table, and a good gift too for the non-players in your life who wonder where you disappear to a few nights a week.

Unexpected slam

2007-07-31T11:53:00.000-04:00

When Wendy passed my 2S bid, I figured her for a bare minimum with spade support. When she laid down the dummy I was alarmed:

Wendy

10 3

Q 9 4

A 7 2

A Q 9 5 2

Paul

A K J 6

K J 4

10 8 6 4 3

But I made the best of it. After Edward's merciful diamond lead to Kathy's queen and my king, I traveled to the diamond ace in dummy (my only chance was that Edward hadn't led a singleton) and played the 10 of trump. Everyone followed low, as they did again on the trump 3 to the jack, and again on the ace. Finally Kathy dropped the queen under the king on the fourth round. A very felicitous split of the seven outstanding trumps!

I opted to press my finessing luck and led a low club to the queen, on which Kathy played her bare jack. Edward's club king fell to the ace on the second round, and the rest of the clubs were winners. The diamond jack won the twelfth trick, and I just had to lose a heart.

(This is to the best of my recollection. Please tell me, someone, if I'm misremembering any detail of the red suits.)

Neither my partner nor I had opening points, the opponents had more trumps than we did, and I didn't make a single ruffing trick. All in all a very surprising slam.

With DJ Slam on the decks

2007-07-30T15:43:00.000-04:00

I had a dream I was in a rock band called the Three No Trump. Anybody want to join me?

Bridge movie

2007-07-16T23:28:00.000-04:00

Sometimes you feel like the hero of a cheesy bridge movie. On Sunday I played for four hours and made exactly zero contracts. Not only that: my partners also made exactly zero contracts while they were sitting across from me. That's the penultimate scene of the movie. How will our hero survive?

Then, the next day, it's a tense rubber at the bar. Both sides are vulnerable. My partner passes, right-hand opponent bids three spades, and I bid four hearts, holding 22 points -- my first opening hand of the day. With my partner passing the whole way, I'm bid up to five hearts, then six, then doubled. The music swells as the dummy comes down:

Dummy

9 8 6 4 2

K 9 8 7 5 3

- -

A K Q J 9 4 3

A Q 7

A Q 4

I only have to lose a diamond trick, and I manage to avoid even that by leaving the low spade in dummy and pseudo-squeezing the opponents, who both guard spades, to make the 7 of diamonds win the last trick -- the beer card! The team gets 360 for the doubled 6H, 200 for a doubled overtrick, 750 small slam bonus, 50 for the insult, 100 honors, and 500 for a slow rubber. Combine that with an earlier 800 for a doubled contract set by four, and it's the biggest rubber I've ever won: 2720 points. It didn't quite make up for my 3000-point loss the day before, but it was exhilarating.

Never give up

2007-07-12T15:47:00.001-04:00

Whenever I start to feel like I'm picking up some skills at the bridge table, I come across a bridge story that makes me realize I'll never master the game. The hand below was played by Oscar Irawan, age 17. He made what looks like an unmakeable contract. How would you approach it? (Hint: from the double, the declarer correctly inferred that East held all four outstanding trumps.)

North

6 4 3

- -

10 9 8 5 4 2

10 9 6 3

South

A K J 9 5 2

- -

A K

A J 7 5 2

- - - - - - - - -

SOLUTION:

Well, nobody seems to want to take a stab, so here's the answer. Irawan used an invaluable principle: when you can visualize only one possible way the opposing cards could lie that would enable you to win, assume that the cards do in fact lie that way, and play for the best chance.

West's 4H overcall showed some length in hearts, but the only way the contract could be made was if West in fact had nine hearts, leaving him with four cards in the minor suits. Moreover, those four cards would have to be divided 2-2, AND they'd have to be the highest outstanding cards in their suits. Playing for this slim possibility, Irawan trumped the heart lead in the dummy and undertrumped it in his hand. He led a trump from dummy and finessed in his hand -- East played the 7 and South the 9, West discarding a heart. Then declarer cashed the A and K of diamonds, on which West played the J and Q; and then A of clubs, on which West played the Q; and finally exited with the 2 of clubs.

The distribution was exactly right. West won with the K of clubs but now he had nothing left in his hand but hearts. He led a heart, which was trumped in dummy and again undertrumped in declarer's hand. Now declarer just had to keep playing winning diamonds from dummy, discarding clubs from his hand, until East trumped, at which point declarer would overtrump and win the rest of the tricks.

If declarer hadn't undertrumped on those two heart tricks, discarding clubs instead, he would have been forced to trump one of dummy's diamonds (since he'd have no clubs left to discard on them), which would leave East with a winning trump. The play shows a dazzlingly impressive combination of foresight, imagination, and luck. This was the full deal:

North

6 4 3

- -

10 9 8 5 4 2

10 9 6 3

West

- -

K Q 10 9 8 6 4 3 2

Q J

K Q

East

Q 10 8 7

A J 7 5

7 6 5 3

8 4

South

A K J 9 5 2

- -

A K

A J 7 5 2

Bidding quandaries

2007-07-10T10:39:00.000-04:00

Last night I got a run of hands that gave me a few moments' head-scratching. First:

A K J 9

J 9 5 4

9 8 6 3

This one seems straightforward, and I had high hopes for it, until my partner opened 1C and opponent overcalled 1S. Suddenly my hand was revalued. What would you bid?

The very next deal, I received this one:

Q 8 5 4

A 10 6

K 9 7

A 6 2

Nice and balanced. My right-hand opponent opened 1S. A 1NT overcall would show 15 points, a double would show shortness in the opponent's suit, and a minor-suit overcall would promise five cards in that suit. What would you bid?

Then, a few hands later, I held 21 points and the opponents' preempt nicely stymied my bidding:

A K

A Q 10 9 4

A 10 8

A 6 2

My double had forced my partner, so I didn't know if she held zero points or a decent number. Should we be in slam? A Blackwood sequence would be unhelpful, since I knew exactly where the aces were. 5H would have been a good invitational bid, but I didn't think my partner would understand what I meant by it -- even more so with 3S. So I settled in the safe 4H contract, and partner made two overtricks.

A mistake gone good

2007-07-07T16:15:00.000-04:00

The majority of bridge-related stranglings occur after partner passes a bid that's clearly artificial, leaving you to play a contract in a suit you don't have. On this hand, sitting East, I bid Michaels, a bid of the opponents' suit showing 5-5 length in the unbid suits.

North

9 8

K Q 4 3 2

K Q 7

A K J

West

Q 7 6

9 6 5

9 8 6 4

10 9 6

East

K 10 4 3 2

8 7

Q 8 7 5 4

South

A J 5

A J 10

A J 10 5 3

3 2

My bid of 2H indicated my length in the black suits. When South didn't overcall, my partner, Anne, was forced to bid -- but she didn't, and North schemingly left me in a doomed contract of 2H. The opponents didn't even double, because that would have given me a chance to escape. With just five trumps in the combined hands, I managed to take only two tricks out of thirteen, going down six tricks non-vulnerable for a loss of 300 points.

However, the joke was on the opponents! They could have made a foolproof grand slam in hearts or no-trump or even diamonds, worth 2210, 2220, and 2140 points respectively, so our unintentional sacrifice turned out to be a rare triumph, to the tune of 14.5 IMPs.

Getting off the Blackwood-go-round

2007-07-06T13:19:00.000-04:00

I've seen it happen more than once: you know that you want to play in no-trump, but wonder if it should be a game or a slam contract. You initiate Blackwood with a 4NT bid, and partner's response tells you that slamming is not a good idea. Now you'd like to stop in 5NT, but bidding 5NT sounds like an inquiry about kings, and lands you in 6NT anyway.

The simple solution, so simple it's easily overlooked, is to bid a suit in response to partner's ace-count bid. This should be corrected by partner into 5NT.

^* Blackwood.
^† Let's stop this madness.

Another unblocking adventure

2007-07-05T09:48:00.001-04:00

As long as we're talking about defensive unblocking, here's another hand I played online last week. I sat South (my favorite seat) and bid an optimistic 3NT, imagining that my partner's massive hand must include a spade control.

North

9 4

J 9

A K Q J 10

A K Q 7

West

K Q J 10 6 3

7 6 4

4 3

9 6

East

A 5 2

A Q 10 8 2

8 7 2

5 3

South

8 7

K 5 3

9 6 5

J 10 8 4 2

In the West seat I might have overcalled in spades (2S or 3S), or at least doubled the final contract, but our opponent did neither. We had no spade stopper. The opponents could have neatly taken six spade tricks off the top, but they blocked themselves. East played low on the king and queen of spades, then won the third round with the ace. Her ace of hearts won the fourth trick, but she couldn't get back to her partner's good spades, so I claimed the rest: nine solid tricks in the minor suits.

If only East had overtaken the first spade with her ace, and then led back a low spade to West's remaining winners (possibly cashing the heart ace first), we would have gone way down. Remember to unblock, people! Win with the high cards on the shorter side first.

Defense basics: the Rule of 11

2007-07-03T17:15:00.001-04:00

Every bridge novice learns that it's her moral duty to lead the fourth down in her longest suit when defending against a no-trump contract, and some even learn why, but in the heat of battle, remembering to put the why into practice is often overlooked.

For those who forget, the Rule of Eleven allows you to deduce thusly: assuming the first card led is the fourth down in a suit, subtract its face value from 11; the difference is the number of cards higher than the led card in the other three hands. So, if partner leads the 8 of hearts, subtracting 8 from 11 means that there are exactly 3 hearts higher than the 8 in your hand, dummy, and declarer put together. Doing that math should become automatic for a defender -- sometimes it won't help you much, but in contracts like the following, which I defended a few days ago, it makes all the difference.

North

A 10

J 8 3

K 10 8 7

Q J 5 3

West

9 8 5 4 3 2

Q 10 7 5

6 3

East

K Q 7

K 9 2

9 5 4 2

K 10 6

South

J 6

A 6 4

A Q J

A 9 8 7 2

Imagine you're defending this contract, sitting East, and your partner leads the 4 of spades, which dummy wins with the ace. The natural, quick play is to throw your losing 7 on it, secure in the knowledge that your K and Q are going to win two tricks. But let's look at what happens next. Say declarer finesses in clubs twice, leading the Q, on which you play low, and then the J to your K to the ace. Now your 10 is the highest club, and it wins the next round. You play your two winning spades, and that's the end of your run. Declarer has four diamond tricks, three club tricks, a spade, and a heart for the win, no matter what order he takes them in.

However, if you do a quick calculation on the first trick, the outcome could be different. Your partner led the 4 of spades. Eleven minus 4 is seven: there are seven spades higher than the 4 in the other three hands. Dummy has two of them, you have three of them; therefore declarer must have exactly two. Your best chance to defeat the contract is to throw your Q of spades under the ace on the first trick. Then, when you win a trick later, you can cash your K of spades and then play the 7 to your partner's 9. All of partner's remaining spades are good, and as he plays them off, the contract goes down by two tricks at least.

The same applies if your partner is the one to get the lead, with his Q of hearts. If you're hanging onto your K and Q of spades, he can't run his good spades: the suit is blocked. But if you threw off one of your honors on the first trick, keeping a low one to lead back, there's no problem.

Control bidding

2007-06-26T16:56:00.004-04:00

Blackwood is awfully nice, but it's not always the best way to find a slam; in fact, it's deficient in quite a few ways. Its original intention was not to help bidders fumble their way to a slam, but rather as a method to help them stop short before slam if too many important cards are missing. Blackwood omits any information about voids, and also can leave the asker wondering just which aces have been promised.

Much more useful in a number of circumstances is control bidding*. Control bidding takes place after a trump suit has been agreed upon. After the agreement, a bid of another suit shows a control in that suit. A control is a stopper: aces and voids are first-round controls (they can win the first round of the suit); kings and singletons are second-round controls.

To make a control bid, bid the lowest suit you have a first-round control in; partner will respond with the lowest first-round control he has, and so forth. So directly bidding diamonds denies having a control in clubs, since clubs is lower than diamonds. A bid of the trump suit denies having any more controls, or just shows no interest in slam.

After you've bid your first-round controls, typically at the four level, you can continue bidding at the five level to show second-round controls if it seems like you want to go for slam.

Here's an example. You have:

A K J 8 3 2

7 5 2

A Q 10 8

Partner opens 1D, you respond 1S, partner bids 3S to agree emphatically and invite game in spades. Slam is a possibility if partner has control of hearts, so you bid 4C to show your cheapest control and initiate a control-bidding sequence. Partner bids 4H, telling you that he doesn't have a first-round diamond control (which is fine, because your void controls the suit) but he does have a heart stopper -- either the ace or a void. A return to the trump suit would have denied the relevant controls.

You can now bid 5D, showing your diamond control, reasserting your interest in slam, and denying second-round control of clubs. If partner has second-round control of hearts and thinks slam is a possibility, he'll bid 5H to show that, and you can bid 6S, knowing that you have all the suits stopped; otherwise 5S is a denial bid.

North

Q 10 7 6

A K

K Q 10 9 8

9 3

South

A K J 8 3 2

7 5 2

A Q 10 8

What a lovely slam. If, instead of control bidding, you had bid Blackwood, and partner told you he had one ace, you wouldn't know if it was the useful ace of hearts or the useless ace of diamonds.

*Note that control bidding is also known as "cue bidding," but that's a confusing usage, since the phrase "cue bidding" has another, unrelated meaning: bidding the opponents' suit.

Keeping an eye on the count

2007-06-21T15:38:00.000-04:00

Someone asked what the usefulness of count signaling is. One common use is when there's a long suit in dummy without external entries, like so:

North

8 3 2

4 2

K Q J 10 4

7 6 5

West

Q J 10 7

K 10 7 3

9 3 2

J 10

East

9 6

Q 8 6 5

A 7 5

8 7 4 2

South

A K 5 4

A J 9

8 6

A K Q 9

South wins the spade lead in her hand. She has four club tricks, two spade tricks, and one heart trick off the top -- two tricks short of her contract. She leads a low diamond toward dummy. East has to decide whether to win the trick with his ace or not. If he wins the first diamond trick, South wins whatever card is returned and leads to dummy's four established diamond winners, making 5NT. If East holds up the ace until the third diamond trick, South wins two diamond tricks in dummy, enough to complete her 3NT contract. The way to defeat the contract is for East to let dummy win exactly one diamond trick, then take the second with the ace. How to figure that out? Count signaling.

When South leads the first diamond from dummy, West plays the 2. This is the start of a low-high count signal, indicating to East that West started with an odd number of diamonds. East does a little mental arithmetic. Dummy has five diamonds and East has three. The odd number in West's hand is obviously not 5, since that would leave declarer with zero diamonds. It's probably not a singleton either -- if it is, there's no defense against South taking her diamond tricks. So the assumption is that West started with exactly three diamonds, so declarer must have exactly two. If West holds up the ace until the second trick, declarer won't be able to get back to dummy's diamond winners, because there are no outside entries. Declarer is held to eight tricks, and the contract goes down -- all because of counting.

Defense basics: Signaling

2007-06-20T14:26:00.002-04:00

By popular demand, here is a rundown of some simple defensive signals.

Attitude signals
When partner leads a suit, to encourage the continuation of that suit (if, say, you have an honor in the suit, or a doubleton with a chance to trump), discard high and then low.

To discourage the continuation of that suit, discard low and then high.

Count signals
When declarer (or dummy) leads a suit, or when attitude is obvious or irrelevant, we signal to show count, not attitude. This helps partner figure out how many cards in the suit declarer holds. Discard high and then low to show that you were dealt an even number of cards in that suit; discard low and then high to show an odd number.

Suit-preference signals
When leading a card to partner for her to trump, lead a low card to request the return of the lower of the two other side suits; lead a high card to request the return of the higher one.

For example: if spades is trump, and you know partner's out of diamonds, lead a low diamond to indicate that you have the ace of clubs (clubs being the lower outstanding suit). Partner will trump the diamond and lead a club to you, which you win, giving you a chance to lead another diamond for another trick. If instead of the club ace you have the spade ace, you should lead a high diamond instead of a low one.

Lavinthal
Lavinthal is a special suit-preference signaling convention. When you can't follow suit, you can indicate which other suit you prefer. It's used only the first time you can't follow suit and must make a discard (often when declarer is pulling trump). Discard a card from a suit you do not like. A high card indicates interest in the higher of the other two suits (not trump and not the one you're discarding); a low card shows interest in the lower one. For example, if spades is led and you are out of spades, discard a low club to show interest in diamonds.

After your first discard, a high card in a suit signals that you would like that suit led to you; a low card in a suit signals that you do not like that suit. So for instance if spades is led and you are out of spades and like diamonds, but can't part with a high diamond to show that preference, discard a low heart (and perhaps next a low club) to show your distaste for those suits.

Defense basics: What card to lead

2007-06-19T16:53:00.004-04:00

Let's standardize on some standard leads. This helps you win tricks as well as giving your partner clues as to what's in your hand.

Leads when defending against a no-trump contract

The top card of a three-card or longer sequence that includes an honor.
KQJ    109843    AKQ7

This includes broken sequences:
KQ1063    10975

and internal sequences:
AQJ10    Q109854

If your partner bid the suit, you can lead the top of a two-card sequence:
KQ4    109543

From a long suit without a suitable honor sequence: the fourth card down.
A98532    KQ87

From a doubleton: the top card.
76    K4

From three low cards: the middle card, then up, then down (aka MUD).
765    932

From three cards headed by an honor: the low card.
K98    AJ3

Against a trump contract, some principles are different.

Lead the top card of a two-card or longer honor sequence.
KQ4    109543    AKQ7

From three cards headed by an honor: the low card, unless that means leading away from an ace.
K98    AJ3

From a long suit without a suitable honor sequence: the fourth card down, unless that means leading away from an ace.
A98532    KJ874

Be good to your cards

2007-06-19T14:30:00.000-04:00

Mine were getting a little the worse for too many sandwich-fueled, greasy rubbers, so I gave them a bath.

Bridge reading

2007-06-01T14:15:00.000-04:00

Somebody dumped a trove of bridge books in the dollar racks at the Strand, and I've been spending my hard-earned dollars on them. There are still a lot of Goren paperbacks for anyone who's interested, but I've snapped up some classics, including Terence Reese on "Master Play" and Bergen on Bidding. The Dostoyevsky is a little disappointing though, with very few practical tips.

A nice psych bid

2007-05-30T16:26:00.000-04:00

North

Q 3 2

7 4 3

K 7 5

A Q 7 3

West

A K J 8 5

A J 10

Q 4 2

J 6

East

K Q 8 6 2

A J 6 3

8 4 2

South

9 7 6 4

9 5

10 9 8

K 10 9 5

Sitting South, with 3 points and a sense of foreboding, I made a rude and risky fake-out bid, very successfully derailing the opponents. Partner and I were set two tricks in our nonvulnerable 2C contract; the E-W pairs at several other tables made 6H, often with an overtrick. Would I do it again? I'm not telling.

First-round responses

2007-05-08T15:18:00.001-04:00

I deal and open 1H. The opponent passes. Here are the possible responses you can make, and what they mean to me:

Pass You have fewer than 6 points, no heart length to speak of, and don't think we can construct a worthwhile contract, even though I might have 18 points.

1S You have five spades or four excellent spades. I will bid again; every new suit named by responder is forcing for one round. Probably you have fewer than 10 points and don't have three hearts; at least, that'll be my assumption until your rebid.

1NT You have less than ten points and fewer than three hearts. You might have balanced distribution, or you might have length in a minor suit that you're too weak to mention.

2C You have 10 or more points. The surface meaning of this bid is that you have fewer than three hearts and prefer clubs, but you might have more hearts and make this bid as a coy way of showing your point count, since a simple raise in hearts would imply fewer than 10 points. You'll mention your hearts later.

2D You have 10 or more points. The surface meaning of this bid is that you have fewer than three hearts and prefer diamonds, but you might have more hearts and make this bid as a coy way of showing your point count, since a simple raise in hearts would imply fewer than 10 points. You'll mention your hearts later.

2H You have three hearts and fewer than 10 points. I will probably pass unless there's something cool in my hand I haven't told you about.

2S A jump bid showing possible power for slam. Probably you have 16+ points and 6+ spades. Forcing to game.

2NT Jacoby 2NT, showing 12+ points and four-card trump support. We'll almost surely play a hearts contract; let's figure out if it should be a game or a slam.

3C A jump bid showing possible power for slam. Probably you have 16+ points and 6+ clubs. Forcing to game.

3D A jump bid showing possible power for slam. Probably you have 16+ points and 6+ diamonds. Forcing to game.

3H An encouraging bid, showing more than 3 hearts and less than opening points.

3S A splinter bid, showing strength, trump support, and a singleton or void in spades. Looking for slam.

3NT ~~Intended as the final contract; denying possibility of slam.~~ Shows a balanced hand, with two hearts and 16+ points.

4C A splinter bid, showing strength, trump support, and a singleton or void in clubs. Looking for slam.

4D A splinter bid, showing strength, trump support, and a singleton or void in diamonds. Looking for slam.

4H Intended as the final contract; denying desire for slam.

4S I don't know -- maybe a splinter showing a spade void (not singleton), or sufficient spade power for an instant game in that suit.

4NT Blackwood, supporting hearts and looking for slam.

5NT "Grand slam force," asking me to bid 7H if I have two of the three top heart honors; you have winners everywhere else.

Suit bids higher than that are probably showing extreme length or bravado.

Please comment. These meanings are ripe for tweaking, especially the jump responses.

Weak jump overcalls

2007-04-16T15:44:00.000-04:00

With the onset of weak two bids, some ambiguity has been uncomfortably introduced regarding the meaning of an overcall at the two level. Following a 1S bid from the enemy, does 2H show 13 points and 5 hearts? 7 points and 6 hearts? Maybe 10 points and 4 hearts? Ambiguity has its inevitable place in bidding, but this is not a good place for it.

I propose that we standardize on the popular system of weak jump overcalls, though it might feel unintuitive at first.

A jumping overcall is the equivalent of a preemptive weak-two opening bid, showing say 7-11 points and a six-card suit; in the case of the overcall, though, the suit ought to be quite solid, without more than one missing honor.

A nonjumping overcall at the one level shows 10 points and a five-card suit (unless Bryan is the bidder; Bryan likes 13-point overcalls only.) A 1NT overcall shows standard 1NT opening, with the addition of a stopper in the enemies' suit. A nonjumping overcall at the two-level is strong, showing opening points and a good suit, except as spelled out below.

If you have a mammoth 18+-point hand, just double and bid your suit next round.

The quirk to remember

If you would have to jump to the three level -- e.g., opener bids 1H and you have six good diamonds and a weak hand -- don't jump, except to show seven cards. Your nonjumping overcall is thus either strong or weak, which will be clarified by your rebid.

Responder should bid if she has 10 points or good trump support. Raise partner in his suit to invite to game. A new suit is forcing for one round. NT is limiting, around 10 points and a stopper in opponents' suit.

When the bidding comes back around to you, the overcaller, pass or return to your suit cheaply if your initial overcall was weak. Any other bid implies that it was strong and forces to game.

Better minor

2007-04-14T20:39:00.001-04:00

What do you bid with 4-4-3-2? Bidding 1D, the "convenient minor" or "better minor," is a plague; what good does it do your partner to know you have maybe three diamonds and two clubs, rather than two diamonds and three clubs? Neither is much of a step toward an eight-card fit.

I far prefer opening 1C unless you have four diamonds. That way a 1D bid actually means something, and you can clarify whether the club bid is artificial or genuine on the next round. Responder, for her part, should not pass a 1C opening unless her hand is truly pathetic.

A corollary of this practice is that the 1NT response to 1C is not as limiting as a 1NT response to an opening bid of another suit: it shows genuine balance and up to 13 points, I'd say.

Some competitive bidding

2007-04-11T18:37:00.000-04:00

Here's an interesting hand. I think North was a little too encouraging. I sat West and I was surprised to see my opponents bid slam when I held half the deck's points.

North

8 4 3

J 10 7 5 4 3

Q 9 3

West

A K Q 8 5

Q J 2

A K J 6

East

10 9 7 4 2

9 7

K Q 9 8

10 8

South

J 3

A K 10 6 5

A 2

7 5 4 2

Anybody recognize this system?

2007-04-11T16:27:00.000-04:00

I just watched this game on BBO and the bidding is a little opaque to me.

North

J 10 9 7

J 8 3

Q J 7 4

5 3

West

A K 8 6

10 4

K 3 2

J 10 7 2

East

3 2

A Q 9 7 5

A 6 5

A 8 4

South

Q 5 4

K 6 2

10 9 8

K Q 9 6

The beast with five hands

2007-04-03T11:31:00.000-04:00

You may notice parenthetical entries in the running score tally. Those represent the nights when we had exactly five players, and do not contribute to the cumulative player totals.

The equitable system we've devised for playing with five people is a swiftly rotating ostracism. After your turn as declarer, you must sit out a deal. Ideally this happens around a round table, so that no physical shifting is required, but still it's problematic. Partnership lines are continually redrawn: for any given deal, your partner is whichever person of the five is not out and not sitting adjacent to you, though he or she may be facing you at an oblique angle. This also tends to guarantee that whoever does sit adjacent to you is never your partner; often for the whole of the night, since the every-man-for-himself scoring system required prevents proper rubbering, and hence the seating is never rearranged.

It's the scoring that's the main difficulty. Scores are tabulated in five columns, one for each individual, wherein above- and below-the-line points are stacked. Nothing is subtracted, so at the end of the night, everyone's score is positive. Uncomfortably, because of the rotation of partners, you can get into a situation where you're vulnerable and running a 90-point part-score, while your partner of the moment is non-vulnerable with no partial. Your two sets of bidding priorities are necessarily vastly different, and a pusillanimous player will be tempted to falsely underbid in order to make his own game while leaving his partner unfulfilled. This unpleasant nonmutuality goes hand in hand with other trickery, such as trying to make your partner play the contract, especially an ill-fitting contract, so that she and not you will have to sit out the next round.

There are other questions too, like Does a partial get cut off by an opposing game? Even if the holder of the partial is the fifth wheel during that game? and Ought the first column to reach two games receive a rubber bonus? If any math-minded person -- Matos? Anne? -- would like to weigh in on a better way to handle the scoring of these games, please do!

After typing this up, I'm starting to feel that the traditional way might be better, a slowly rotating ostracism, in which the fifth player sits out while four play their whole rubber, then randomizes in. What do you all think? It's a boon for the scorekeeper and for the comity of partnerships. The downside, of course, is just the fifth wheel's boredom during an interminable rubber, and the consequent vicious cycle in which the bored person chats with the players, thereby distracting them and protracting the rubber further, at the fifth wheel's own expense. Certainly we ought to work on our speed, but I for one am going to bring a book next time; perhaps this one.

Nothing to hide

2007-03-27T12:21:00.000-04:00

Welcome, reader from internet2.irs.gov! Incidentally, we've completely stopped playing rubber bridge for money, preferring the intangible joys of a running score tally instead, but I'm sure we're all planning to declare the small amounts we did earn.

Playing without a suit fit

2007-03-19T12:36:00.000-04:00

From Craigslist:

If you like to play cards and want to learn to play bridge, then this might be for you. I teach a beginners bridge class for guys on Tuesday night. It is closes optional. Nudity is not required. It is clothes optional. It is NOT a sex group.

There are currently 7 guys in the group; 4 gay, 2 bi, and 1 straight. The purpsoe is to learn to play bridge in a relaxed environment. If interested drop me an email and I'll send you more information.

Who's to say it might not improve one's game? Unfetter the body and you unfetter the bidding! It also opens up a new range of ways that a bored dummy can pester the other players. I like Marya's suggestion though that they play with giant cards to maintain modesty.

Clip and save

2007-03-19T11:21:00.000-04:00

For those of us who learned on the cheat sheet and want to keep abreast of the latest modifications, I've added a "printme" flag to all my posts here that directly refine our system.

Here is the collected works.

As always, everything is open to debate and discussion, but printing that one page might be handy if you forget certain conventional responses.

Shape recognition

2007-03-18T14:05:00.000-04:00

One of the prerequisites for keeping an accurate running card count in your head is to become very conversant with the various hand shapes, so you don't even have to think about them:

4333    4432    4441

5332    5422    5431    5440    5521    5530

6322    6331    6421    6430    6511    6520    6610

7222    7321    7330    7411    7420    7510    7600

8221    8311    8320    8410    8500

9211    9220    9310    9400

Nilsy's first slam

2007-03-13T11:31:00.000-04:00

Or, a rousing turn on the Blackwood-go-round

Avid followers of the spreadsheet up there ^ will notice that Nils's score leapt up last night by a dramatic 3,000-odd points. That was due in large part to a lovely small slam that I pushed him into semi-unwittingly. I opened strong with 20 points and AKJxx of hearts. After his 2NT, I should have had the sense to stop us in 3NT, but I wanted to show my hearts, and then he jumped past the stopping-point with his next bid of 4C, which I understood to be denying heart support (in fact he had Qxx in hearts and was just temporizing to show strength). I bid 4NT hoping we would play it right there, but the idea of playing in no-trump was thus far only in my mind, and Nils heard the bid as Blackwood ace-asking in a to-be-determined suit contract. Maybe he hoped I knew his secret hearts and would land us there. He showed the missing club ace, and I deposited him in a vulnerable small slam in no-trump, figuring that asking about kings would benefit the defense more than us, and that he wouldn't pass 5NT anyway, just as he hadn't passed 4NT despite my hopes. I had my eye on Wendy, the diamond overcaller, for the missing points anyway. Marya led a middling spade, which dummy won with the doubleton ace.

I clambered around to look at Nils's hand, which was a little sparse-looking, with no kings and one ace. I have no confidence that I would have made the contract. Wendy indeed had the kings of diamonds and clubs -- an opening diamond lead through dummy's A-Q would have set us -- but Marya had long spades topped by that suit's king, and she hoped to establish them. But Nils played it carefully and like the pro he is, losing an eventual trick to the club king, winning the heart return (a spade would've killed us then for sure, but I don't think Wendy had one to lead), and then establishing the long club suit in his hand and squeezing Wendy like a delicious organic tangerine till her errant diamond king fell under the ace on the last trick, winning the slam and the rubber.

Ogust

2007-03-06T11:06:00.000-05:00

After an interesting evening of exploring weak twos, I don't think we're at all ready to abandon the concept (as Caroline suggests) but one improvement at least is called for. The opener's rebid over a 2NT response to a weak-two opening, indicating a feature in a side suit, was not terribly useful. Mr. Harold Ogust agreed, and invented the Ogust convention (slightly modified below):

You open a six-card suit with a weak-two bid.

Your partner has 12+ points and likes the suit, and thinks you have a shot at game. To evaluate what a good final contract would be, she bids 2NT. This asks you to describe your hand as follows:

Respond 3C if you have minimum points and a poor suit (only one of the three top honors [AKQ] in your bid suit).
Respond 3D with minimum points and a good suit (two of the three top honors in your bid suit).
Respond 3H with maximum points and a poor suit.
Respond 3S with maximum points and a good suit.
Respond 3NT if you have all three top honors in your bid suit.

That information should allow responder to pick an appropriate contract in which to play.

Weak twos

2007-03-05T14:30:00.000-05:00

There's been a lot of buzz, but I believe it's time to give this a try for real. An opening bid at the two-level does not mean what it used to. Memorize what follows (or comment with quibbles and alternate suggestions).

Open 2D, 2H, or 2S if you have exactly six cards in the suit and ~~6-10~~ 7-11 points. Your points should lie primarily in the bid suit, and you should not have a four-card side suit (especially not a major).

With a strong hand, open 2C. This promises 20 or more points (or a couple less with a great strong suit) and says nothing about your club holding.

Responses to a weak-two opening

You're not forced to respond.

With a doubleton at least in partner's suit and 7-13 points, you can raise in the same suit. Opener should pass.
With a longer fit and greater than opening strength, jump to game.
With a five-card suit and good point count, bid that suit. To bid at the three level, you should have a six-card suit and/or 15+ points.
To invite partner to game, bid 2NT. This promises 14+ points and invites the opener to show a feature in another suit -- an ace, king, void, or singleton -- by bidding that suit at the three level. If opener has none of the above, she rebids the original suit. If the original suit is rock-solid -- headed by three honors, say -- she can rebid 3NT. See Ogust.
To invite partner to slam, bid 4NT: Blackwood!

Responses to a 2C opening

You are forced to respond.

With 7+ points and five diamonds, hearts, or spades, bid that suit at the two level.
With 7+ points and balanced distribution, bid 2NT.
With less than seven points and/or no particular suit you like, bid 2D. Opener will name her favorite suit. You are still forced to respond -- raise that suit to the three level if you like it okay and have five or more points, or bid 3C as a sign-off if you have very low points and nothing else to offer.

Bryan's asterisk

2007-02-13T15:16:00.000-05:00

We often seem to have six players for rubber bridge, which is not ideal. Alexa proposed a handy system for three-way rubbers, wherein the six players form into three partnerships, A, B, and C, and each partnership takes turns sitting out a hand while the other two compete.

Bryan improved upon this system with his invention of the asterisk formation, a way of seating three partnerships at an ordinary rectangular table, so that their axes intersect at sixty-degree angles. Each partnership can stay seated while not playing, while the other pairs comfortably play around them.

In order to keep the deal rotating properly, each partnership should sit out the hand immediately after the one which it deals. This means that the first partnership deals one hand and then sits out. After that, each partnership gets to play two consecutive hands (of which they deal the second) before sitting out. So, starting with partnership A dealing and C sitting out, the deal proceeds:

C team sits out, A₁ deals
A team sits out, B₁ deals
B team sits out, C₁ deals
C team sits out, A₂ deals,
A team sits out, B₂ deals
B team sits out, C₂ deals
etc.

The rubber scoring grid has three columns, headed with each partnerships' names, but otherwise functions normally. When tallying the rubber's total score, the winning partnership receives positive points and the other two partnerships receive negative points, so a three-way rubber, unlike a normal rubber, is not zero-sum. The only other lingering issue is the C declarer's long reach across the table to reach the dummy hand. Any suggested improvements to this system are welcome.

Money bridge

2007-01-23T15:48:00.000-05:00

Lately, as often as we can get a quorum for it, we've been playing penny-a-point bridge, which adds an interesting wrinkle to the grand game. It definitely seems to sharpen everyone's focus on the cards at hand. And we bid more ten-dollar slams, and we go down more often.

Clearly, because of the partnership aspect of the game, winning cash at rubber bridge is not just about playing to the best of your ability: you very much have to account for your rotating partners' quirks. Last night I lost $10, bringing my running total to -$1. I'm tempted to blame most of that loss on the sequence of killing hands dealt to Marya, who was my opponent for all three rubbers. But I wonder if there are smart strategies that could mitigate those losses, even in the short run. Any thoughts?

The infamous Gerber

2006-12-19T13:54:00.000-05:00

I set the lonely burden of this blog down for a while, sorry; I'd rather have it be more of a dialogue, with comments and contributions from you all, rather than me ranting about whatever crosses my mind. Perhaps that makes me a lousy blogger.

But anyway, the Gerber convention keeps coming up, so here it is. Blackwood, as you recall, is used after the partnership has found a trump fit. If the fit you've found is no-trump, Blackwood's 4NT will confuse the matter, so Gerber is used instead. It's quite similar: the asker bids 4C to ask for aces. Responses are:

4D: zero or four aces
4H: one ace
4S: two aces
4NT: three aces

If that satisfies the asker that the partnership has all the aces it will need for slam, 5C asks for kings. I don't believe there's any Roman Keycard Gerber in no-trump auctions. Gerber is on the cheat sheet.

Now it can be told

2006-11-29T14:50:00.000-05:00

Matos, the legendary founder of, and occasional contributor to, this site, has unveiled his latest flimsy excuse for not posting as much as we all want him to. Look for his triumphant return some time after the results are announced, I guess!

Meanwhile, we (I) need your contributions more than ever! You know who you are, and you know how the Post A Comment link works, right?

How about opening leads?

2006-11-27T14:16:00.000-05:00

Whew, it's going to take me a few weeks to collate all the responses to my informal survey, so meanwhile let's talk about opening leads. What would you lead in this situation?

West

A 9 8 6

9 7 4

Q 8

K J 9 2

Informal survey: room for improvement

2006-11-20T12:16:00.000-05:00

Where do you think your/our bidding could be better? I posted the Jacoby 2NT and Roman Key Card Blackwood conventions to help with finding slam contracts (still a little ways to go there), and we've been working on our Stayman, but there are still vast untapped areas.

What bidding moments do you find too ambiguous or difficult to communicate about? What contracts do you consistently have trouble landing in? What are you always wishing you could whisper to your partner?

Scoring reference

2006-11-17T14:01:00.000-05:00

Rubber Soul 1.3

2006-11-09T00:07:00.001-05:00

In response to popular demand, Rubber Soul, everybody's favorite rubber-scoring application, can now tally individuals' scores over a series of rubbers. Please let me know if you find any bugs or have any quibbles!

Responses #1

2006-11-08T00:32:00.000-05:00

Your partner opens one diamond, and your right-hand opponent passes. How do you respond holding each of the following hands?

9 8 6

10 5 2

8 6

A K 9 7 2

A 8

K Q 2

K 9 7 3

Q 7 5 4

A 8

K 8 2

K J 7 3

8 7 5 4

K J 8

K 7 6

A Q 3

J 7 5 4

Couldn't keep my mouth shut

2006-11-07T10:40:00.000-05:00

Opening bid #2

2006-11-03T18:23:00.000-05:00

Continuing Matos' idea (Hi Matos!), here's a hand I feel like I get dealt a lot:

K Q 5

A K Q 5

Q 8 7 4 2

How do you bid this one? And what do you rebid when your partner shows spade strength?

Plastic or paper?

2006-11-03T13:13:00.000-05:00

I like plastic cards, for their feel and their durability. Paper cards are just a dollar a deck, and easy to replace, but they get an awful swollen grubby feel as they age, and their corners get docked, and so on. You can find paper cards in a much more charming variety of vintage designs, though.

I'm fond of Kem cards, perhaps the most popular plastic card, but this poker site has opened my eyes, with evaluations of various plastic cards according to numerous criteria, including how loud they are when shuffled and the size of their pips. I'm not that obsessive, not yet. I do want to try out a set of sturdy Dal Negros, I think (brown/green Superstar backs, regular index, if you're looking for gift ideas).

Opening bid #1

2006-11-02T18:06:00.000-05:00

You are the dealer and your hand looks like this:

North

J 10 9

10 8 7 2

A K 2

A Q 8

You have 14 high card points. What do you open the bidding with?

My answer: an artificial one club. It indicates minimum opening points and guarantees nothing beyond that. One heart is too risky (no honors), and so is one notrump (puh-lease). What do you guys say?

Hours of fun

2006-10-31T12:55:00.000-05:00

Searching Google for "longest rubber" doesn't bring up anything bridge-related, but last night's might be a contender. It comprised 23 deals, and lasted somewhere around three and a half hours. It was also our first stab at playing for money, but I'm not sure that was a factor. Nobody was bidding particularly aggressively, but we (mostly We) kept racking up 50 cents at a time, above the line. Final tally: $16.80 for me and Jeff. The next couple of rubbers went by fast.

Yesterday at the farmer's market

2006-10-30T14:21:00.000-05:00

What bridge player could resist?

We are not alone

2006-10-27T14:54:00.000-04:00

The slam puzzle that stumped Bryan was solved today by VANG from Romania -- congratulations, VANG!

VANG has a bridge blog of his/her/its own, which mentions some interesting bidding conventions. The site also links to other bridge blogs (at a level above our own, I'd say), including The Beer Card, which looks alarmingly similar to this one here, and from which I learn that

The Beer Card is the Seven of Diamonds. It is not part of the official rules of Bridge, but there is a tradition among some players that if the declarer succeeds in making the contract and wins the last trick with the Seven of Diamonds, dummy must buy the declarer a beer of the declarer's choice. In the same way, if the opponents defeat the contract and one of them wins the last trick with the Seven of Diamonds, the opponent who wins the last trick is bought a beer by the other opponent.

Sounds like a good fillip.

Annoyingly, all these bridge sites use the "&spades;" style of HTML entities for displaying their suits, which displays very badly on many Macs of my acquaintance (see screenshot). That's why I use GIFs on this site and on Rubber Soul -- please let me know if any of that looks odd on your browser.

Runaway bidding

2006-10-24T13:58:00.000-04:00

Last night Marya and Kathy went for a wild ride. Holding 20 points, balanced distribution, and four spade honors, Marya opened the bidding and then jumped, having determined that, with Kathy's heart support, a no-trump game was in order. But, especially given her unbalanced shape, Kathy took the jump as artificially forcing and asking for a new suit, which she named. Marya, more determined than ever to brake the bidding in no-trump, rebid 4 -- but 4NT is the cue for Blackwood, and Kathy dutifully counted her aces. A 5NT response from Marya would have continued the Blackwood and the fugitive auction, so she leapt to 6NT and heroically brought the auction to an end with a resounding slam! After that, scoring 12 tricks was easy. Would you have bid it differently?

Doesn't my zero of rain muttonate your lobster?

2006-10-20T15:18:00.000-04:00

My one regret about learning bridge is that doing so took away a smaller pleasure: that of reading the newspaper bridge column in blissful befuddlement over novel terms like "vulnerable," "splinter bid," and "partner." I seem to recall that Swislocki, now departed for Browner shores, expressed the same regret.

Fortunately there's still Double Fanucci, whose 15 suits, multiple simultaneous dealers, and thousands of rules including Overpasses and the Balsawood Convention, provide ample obscurity for those of us who enjoy such things. As an added bonus, there's no risk whatsoever that one might learn the game's intricacies and render it non-opaque. Here is an educational deal.

Goulash tournament

2006-10-19T17:20:00.000-04:00

Really. This weekend, in Moscow, the world champions of goulash will face off! I wish I could be there. Maybe next year I will, as the site suggests, "Play goulash and get unforgettable impressions!"

Grand slam puzzle

2006-10-18T12:29:00.000-04:00

Here's a historic hand from the lovely Goren book that's fun to wrap one's mind around for a minute. It was played by Sidney Lenz (stern-looking chap over there-->), who sat South and confidently bid up to seven, holding 8 high-card points and no aces. The bidding is an educational marvel in itself -- that 2NT is reminiscent of Jacoby's.

North

A Q 4

K 9 6 5

A 10 4

A Q 7

West

10 5

J 10 8 3

K J 7 2

9 6 2

East

9 7 2

A Q 7 4 2

Q 9 8 5

South

K J 8 6 3

- -

6 3

K J 10 8 5 4

If you bid that aggressively, you better be able to back it up on the table. Despite the apparently unavoidable loser, Lenz made his 13 tricks. How would you play the contract?

Homegrown refinements

2006-10-17T15:31:00.001-04:00

As a somewhat newish player, I'm hesitant to stray far from the precepts of the cheat sheet I learned from. But we have made a few deviations, largely according to the wisdom of Bryan, and I'd like to enumerate those for everybody, in part to avoid fouled-up Stayman contracts like the one I played last night.

1. STAYMAN
The cheat sheet says, for example, that you can respond to 1NT holding a five-card minor suit with 6 points, which is what screwed us up last night. That's great but incorporating four-suit transfers into Stayman seems to work better. If I may loosely quote myself, for the record:

To respond to a 1NT opening, you should have 8+ points. A response of 2D shows five hearts, 2H shows five spades, 2S shows five clubs and no four-card major, and 2NT shows five diamonds. To show a balanced hand, bid 2C and then rebid 2NT when it's your turn again. (Any of these bids can be made at the 3-level instead, which promises maybe 12 points and is forcing to game.) A 2C response is Stayman, showing at least one four-card major suit. Responses by opener to 2C are: 2D in the absence of a four-card major; 2H with four hearts (may also have four spades); 2S with four spades (implies fewer than four hearts). Memorize this.

2. OVERCALLS
The cheat sheet says you can overcall with 8 points; if you have opening strength, make a jump overcall. That's great but its primary usefulness seems to be gumming up the opponents; it doesn't give partner, who'll have his own chance to bid anyway, very much information. We've started requiring 13 points for an overcall. I'm happy to hear opposing views on this though.

3. MEDIUM TWOS
The cheat sheet says if you have 18-21 points, you must bid one of a suit and then jump shift. An opening bid of two of a suit promises game in your own hand. That's great but as I have complained before, I often get passed before I can jump. That's why we've been saying that you can bid two of a suit with 18-22 points, which is forcing for one round. Nobody's ever been dealt game-in-hand in my experience, not even Twenty-Point Jeff, so I'm not terribly worried about how to deal with that situation.

If you play with us and you see that I'm leaving something important off the list, please let me know. If you don't play with us and one of the things I'm proposing seems wrongheaded, please please let me know, gently.

A fine new trend

2006-10-16T23:54:00.001-04:00

David and Sabrina, enthusiastic new recruits to the bridge table, started what is sure to be an illustrious bridge career very well tonight -- with a gift to yours truly, of Goren's Sports Illustrated Book Of Bridge.

I don't think they even knew this is my birthday week. I can't wait to delve into such juiciness as "The greatest crime in bridge," "How much should you trust your partner," and awed references to Univac. Thank you, guys! I encourage all bridge players to, um, follow suit.

Playing right into my hands

2006-10-16T16:00:00.000-04:00

I don't have anything terribly profound to say about this fun hand that I played last night -- just wanted to get it written down before I forgot the details.

North

8 7 5 2

8 7 4

A J 4

K 8 4

South

A Q 10 3

A K 9 5

A J 9 3

I had to make three finesses, in three different suits, in order to make my 3NT contract off the top. I was afraid to lose any tricks early, lest the opponents run their long diamonds. So I played the jack on the nine of diamonds, which held the trick, led a spade toward my hand and finessed the queen, and crossed to the king of clubs in preparation for my last finesse. At that point I had to cash the ace of diamonds, my only stopper in that suit, since that would be my last opportunity to play from the board. (Emily, that's what I was nervous about -- giving up the ace meant that, if the club finesse lost, the opponents would gain control and win all those diamond tricks. I was trying to explain that to you discreetly, without letting the opponents know I had so few diamonds in my hand.) Then I led a club toward the jack for the last finesse.

And it worked! What are the odds of that? (Let's see ... each finesse has a 50 percent chance of success, so three finesses in sequence is 12.5 percent likely to succeed?) I could have cashed the club ace and king, hoping a doubleton queen would fall, but odds there were slimmer, I figured.

Second hand emotion

2006-10-11T15:26:00.000-04:00

Say you're defending a no-trump game, holding Q-7-6 in a suit nobody bid. Dummy leads the jack from A-J-10-8. Sitting second, do you play high or low?

Greetings to our readers from Romania, Ireland, and even Canada! And everybody please welcome new contributor Jeff. Over to you, Jeff!

Rubber Soul

2006-10-06T17:23:00.000-04:00

I forgot to post this! A couple of weeks ago I was looking around the web for a computer program that would keep score automatically, but all I found was BridgeKeeper, which only scores duplicate bridge, and only works on Macs.

I reused the scoring mechanism from BridgeKeeper to write a scoring program for rubber bridge: Rubber Soul. Try it out at home this weekend! Let me know if it gives you any trouble or if you have any suggestions for improving it. ~~(Oh, it doesn't work on Internet Explorer; sorry if that's a hindrance.)~~

Playing it safe

2006-09-21T17:40:00.000-04:00

This is based on a recent hand, loosely recalled.

North

A Q J 8

6 5 2

A 8

9 6 5 4

South

7 2

A K Q 8

K Q 7 5 3

Q 2

West leads the 3 of spades against a no-trump game. If the distribution's good -- if West has the king -- it's possible for declarer to take 11 tricks: finesse the queen in dummy, then (crossing first to your hand) lead again to dummy's spades, repeating the finesse. You'll make three spade tricks, five diamond tricks, and three hearts.

BUT if East has the king, playing the queen on the first trick gives up that trick, followed by a likely four club tricks, and the contract is set. You can draw your own conclusion regarding the relative virtues of locking in the contract versus risking your neck chasing after overtricks.

Gadget of the day: Roman Key Card Blackwood

2006-09-21T11:25:00.000-04:00

Here's another one. I for one know that I haven't been bidding slam nearly often enough, so pardon me while I try to rectify that a bit. We all know classic Blackwood, the 4NT slambound bid that asks partner about aces (what the Germans call Assfrage). In Roman Key Card Blackwood (named for the Italian bridge team that used it to win embarrassingly many international tournaments in the '60s), the 4NT bid after determining a trump fit asks not just about aces but about the five key cards, namely the aces plus the king of trump. This approach gives a more accurate sense of how high to bid the contract. So, as I learned it, responses to 4NT in RKCB go like this:

5C: 0 or 3 of the 5 key cards
5D: 1 or 4 key cards
5H: 2 or 5 key cards and not the queen of trump
5S: 2 or 5 key cards with the queen of trump

There are some possible additional steps after that, but methods vary so perhaps let's take it slow for now. What do you think?

Gadget of the day: Jacoby 2NT

2006-09-10T23:20:00.000-04:00

Seriously, though, there are a couple of gadgets I think we could usefully incorporate into our bidding that might help out in some hazy situations. We all know and revere Oswald Jacoby for his famous transfers, but he devised a forcing response system too that sounds very handy.

As I understand it: Opener bids 1 of a major suit. With 12 points (some say stronger) and 4 cards in opener's suit, respond 2NT. That is considered forcing to game, and asks for a clarifying rebid from opener along the following lines:

3 of the initial suit: no singleton, 6 or more trumps and 18+ points, slam-hoping
3 of another suit: a void or singleton in that suit
3 no trump: no singleton or length, but 15+ points
4 of the initial suit: no singleton, no more than 14 points, limiting
4 of another suit: 5 cards in that suit

That seems promising to me. I guess if responder really definitely wants to play NT she can bid 3NT directly. Talking about singletons so blatantly in front of the opponents is kind of begging for an ace lead, but I wonder how it would play out in practice. Anybody up for giving it a try?

Seven Notrump

Ingenious robot bridge player

Rescue bidding

Bridge murder in England

A third gamble

Taking more chances

Taking a chance

Hearts Are Trump

Secrets of the Sperber coup

Do the writers of bridge books get better hands than I do?

Running score tally

The WSJ notices bridge

To force or not to force

Healthy nerves

A friendly game

Two of hearts

Bridge in a browser

Some doubles

The dos of DONT

BridgeBase improved

A helpful tip for players and non-players alike

Keeping fit and winning games

One hundred honors

Defense basics: Which suit to lead

Six spades

The importance of signaling

6NT

Making inferences

Tally tweaking

Honor without victory

Never rebid a preëmpt

Bridge in rock lyrics

Bridge Luuuhs the Kids

Bridge mysteries

New crew member

The Bridge Game (2003, not rated)

When to hold up a trump winner, pt. 2

Flash of inspiration

When to hold up a trump winner

Bridge in the news

The enigma of Bryan (and others)

Rusty bridge

Bridge Play, by Alfred Sheinwold

Buy this book

Unexpected slam

With DJ Slam on the decks

Bridge movie

Never give up

Bidding quandaries

A mistake gone good

Getting off the Blackwood-go-round

Another unblocking adventure

Defense basics: the Rule of 11

Control bidding

Keeping an eye on the count

Defense basics: Signaling

Defense basics: What card to lead

Be good to your cards

Bridge reading

A nice psych bid

First-round responses

Weak jump overcalls

Better minor

Some competitive bidding

Anybody recognize this system?

The beast with five hands

Nothing to hide

Playing without a suit fit

Clip and save

Shape recognition

4333 4432 44415332 5422 5431 5440 5521 55306322 6331 6421 6430 6511 6520 66107222 7321 7330 7411 7420 7510 76008221 8311 8320 8410 85009211 9220 9310 9400

Nilsy's first slam

Ogust

Weak twos

Bryan's asterisk

Money bridge

The infamous Gerber

Now it can be told

How about opening leads?

Informal survey: room for improvement

4333 4432 4441

5332 5422 5431 5440 5521 5530

6322 6331 6421 6430 6511 6520 6610

7222 7321 7330 7411 7420 7510 7600

8221 8311 8320 8410 8500

9211 9220 9310 9400