Skip to main content

Protect partner's entry beta3.0

It seems to talk about defense when you see the title at first glance. However, it is a blogger about the plan of play. Fortunately, I am the declarer and bring the contract home by the defender's mistake. Writing too much about protecting partner's entry in defense these days, which reminds me of the first deal which I have played in the National Youth Bridge Championship.

Board 1
Vul: None
Dealer: North
East               North     East     South     West
♠ 9                    Pass     Pass      Pass       1♠
♡ J732            Pass      1NT      Pass        3♠
♢ KJT53         Pass       ?
♣ QJ6         
Pass or 3NT? Pass? I am reluctant to accept. 3NT? It is really too high. Finally, I choose 3NT, a little bit high contract.
Lead: ♡8



Trick     North     East     South     West
   1           ♡T        ♡J       ♡8        ♡6
   2          ♢2        ♢3       ♢8        ♢Q
   3          ♣8          ♣J         ♣A          ♣2
   4          ♡5        ♡2       ♡4        ♡A
   5          ♠4          ♠9         ♠5          ♠A
   6          ♠6        ♡3         ♠7          ♠K
   7          ♠T        ♡7         ♣3           ♠Q
   8          ♢A        ♢5       ♢7         ♢4
When my partner said good luck to me, I realized the difficulty of the contract. I was despaired when I saw the cards on the table.
The leading is quite strange. 8? What ♡ does South hold? 11-8=3. If North holds either Q or K, South should lead T rather than 8. Will South hold KQ98 or 98XX? So I follow a small a heart on the table and North follows T. I win with the ♡J in hand. Oh, what a nice surprise! If the distribution of ♠ is 3-3, there are 9 tricks in hand. I try to drive out ♢A first and it is easy to know who holds ♢A. When I play a small ♢ to dummy's Q, North follows a small ♢ in a hesitation. And now how to play? Drawing ♠ at once and hoping 3-3 in ♠? Is that too sloppy? If the distribution of ♠ is 4-2, is there any chance to make? If I play a small ♣ from table to hand, is it dangerous? Obviously, NO!!! And there is an extra chance. If the distribution of ♠ is 4-2 and South holds 4♣ with A or K and South doesn't duck or North doesn't play K immediately, I will lose 1♠, 1♢ and 2♣ at all. So I play a small club after winning with the ♢K on table and South really wins with the ♣A and then continues to play ♡. Then I draw three tops of ♠ and South discards a small club on the third trick. And now the contract is safe. South doesn't have any entry to cash in heart. North has to play ♣ or ♢. As long as one of defenders calculate carefully, I could not success forever...

  • Do not follow a small card casually! 
  • Do not forget to calculate carefully!
  • Please remember to duck!
  • Do not give up in any situation! Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart!😂

The full deal
Board 1
Vul: None
Dealer: North

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NOTICE: Suspension of publication

Dear readers:     For some personal reasons, I am sorry that the blogger would not be updated for a long time, at least one month. Thank you for your understanding. Best Wishes!                                                                                                  X. Li                                                                                             2018.9.30                                    ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Online training: An unexpected but reasonable ducking

HAHAHA, after one month off bridge, I'm back!!! This deal happened in our weekly online training, Nov 5th, 2018. First of all, I have to admit my mistake. Hahaha, to be honest, the training was quite boring. After 12 boards, the scores were still 2:2. Although I knew X was not allowed and I would be fined if 3♣X was brought home, I still couldn't help to doing that. Board 13 Dealer: North Vul: Both North    East    South    West  Pass     Pass      1♢         2♢*   2♡*      2♠       Pass       Pass   3♣         X         AP 2♢: Michael 2♡: ♣ suit, better than 3♣ Lead: ♡3 (if hasn't raised, count has a priority. That is to say, xxx lead the smallest card) Table followed ♡9. Normally, you would play ♡Q causally. Would it be correct in this case? Leading analysis: Eas...
Post a Comment
Read more

Interactive Hand Testing

Fu Bo shared this deal with me. This deal happened in the open pair qualify of the 15th Would Bridge Series. She asked me could you find out the defense even if you saw 4 hands. Interactive hand analysis was interesting and played an important role in improving bridge technique. Although double-dummy analysis always stood on a God view, it was essential in a post-mortem analysis. This was first time to show a interactive hand analysis here. I'd appreciate if you could share any interesting double-dummy with me. How to defend 4♠? In this case, defenders should prevent declarer from ruffing ♣ or from winning 3♢. How to cut the connection between table and hand became a serious problem. Timing and speed were the crucial point. 1. Leading ♣     A slow step, losing an upper hand. Declarer could win with the ♣A and sent out small ♣. Even if the defender shift to trump, the declarer was a step ahead. (a) Returning small trump, won by North, ruffing a small ♣ and finessing ...
Post a Comment
Read more