My biggest frustration lately is making mistakes that I feel that I shouldn't be making.
Playing in a very close team match, the last hand looks like this:
Get it right, you win. Get it wrong, you lose.
At the table, my mind went "if partner doubles, I have to pull - I have less controls than I've shown, and double will just be showing extras". So I pulled.
This is of course completely wrong. That thinking is the old me, back before I started reading, asking questions, and thinking. What's really going on? Opponents are likely no better than 4-4 in hearts. With my short hearts, partner rates to have some hearts. Also, my 4 diamond bid didn't show anything more than what I have really, even vulnerable. And while I had never played with this partner before, 11 previous hands had shown him (her?) to be completely competent.
All I have to do is trust partner, not rescue him/her, and we win.
The team captain was very gracious after the match, but our opponent, my Monday partner, had some sage advice. Just play more often.
There are a thousand good reasons why I can't play 100 hand a week, or devour a bridge book a month to further my game. All that is fine, but maybe, just maybe, I know enough now that in order to jump to the next level I need to play a few hundred (thousand?) hands. I feel like I'm becoming more aware, and that my head has much more good bridge knowledge in it than it did a year or two ago. Maybe if I just start playing, and playing with confidence rather than fear, the patterns that I should already know will influence my thinking at the table, for the better.
Monday, October 26, 2009
No Chance
My bidding judgment is being refined as time goes on. There's a time where I would never have accepted a game invite after opening 1NT with 4333 and 15 HCP.
I never said my bidding judgment was getting BETTER....
The jack of diamonds was led. Not bad - we're light point wise, but the extra trump means that if hearts are 2/2 I'm making.
LHO showed out on the second heart.
Ok, so there's no chance. I look it over. No chance. No chance.
Well, some chance.
I eliminate diamonds, and lose my first club. LHO wins and fires back a spade to partner's jack, and my ace. That spade return was a huge help.
Now, I know that RHO has the last trump. If he's got the queen of spades, maybe, just maybe, I can get endplay him into leading spades for me.
On the second club, LHO played the king, and RHO overtook with the ace. (Yay!) RHO played his jack of hearts, then exited a low spade.
Well, it was only ever a faint hope. I duck, and win with the ten.
Yay me.
Well, sort of. Turns out RHO still had the ten of clubs. If he exits with the club, I'm down 1, which maybe I deserve to be. Still, I made a plan, watched the spots carefully, and gave myself an extra chance to make.
It's something.
I never said my bidding judgment was getting BETTER....
The jack of diamonds was led. Not bad - we're light point wise, but the extra trump means that if hearts are 2/2 I'm making.
LHO showed out on the second heart.
Ok, so there's no chance. I look it over. No chance. No chance.
Well, some chance.
I eliminate diamonds, and lose my first club. LHO wins and fires back a spade to partner's jack, and my ace. That spade return was a huge help.
Now, I know that RHO has the last trump. If he's got the queen of spades, maybe, just maybe, I can get endplay him into leading spades for me.
On the second club, LHO played the king, and RHO overtook with the ace. (Yay!) RHO played his jack of hearts, then exited a low spade.
Well, it was only ever a faint hope. I duck, and win with the ten.
Yay me.
Well, sort of. Turns out RHO still had the ten of clubs. If he exits with the club, I'm down 1, which maybe I deserve to be. Still, I made a plan, watched the spots carefully, and gave myself an extra chance to make.
It's something.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Cookie
What would you do?
My partner, given this problem, passed, and earned himself a cookie (and 100% of the matchpoints).
Friday, September 11, 2009
Blind Spots
Thanks to some excellent comments on an earlier post, as well as a simple defense problem posted on the BBF Beginner/Intermediate forum, it's becoming clear to me that I've got a blind spot - namely, overtaking on defense.
I've put aside Kelsey's Killing Defense, as I felt like it was a little over my head. Maybe it just required more effort than I was able to put into a read just now.
I'm going to have to find a way to address this problem.
I've put aside Kelsey's Killing Defense, as I felt like it was a little over my head. Maybe it just required more effort than I was able to put into a read just now.
I'm going to have to find a way to address this problem.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Knowledge is Power
Even though I still have a lot to learn, every so often a hand comes along that I just seem to know what's going on around the table. I'm finding that these types of hands are a lot of fun.
Opening lead: Ten of diamonds
So why didn't west lead a spade? Well, if east has 7, that leaves none for west!
Ok, so west has AKxxxxx in spades. Any chances he has either of the minor suit kings? Unlikely, as he might have opened 1S with 10 HCP and a 7 card suit.
I decide (rightly or wrongly) to try for a 3-3 diamond split with the king on my left, so I won in hand and led a diamond towards the 8. It held, but RHO showed out.
I continued with the jack, LHO winning. A diamond was returned to the board. I lost a spade and the ten of hearts from my hand.
Ok cashing the ace of diamonds would be catastrophic, as I'd squeeze myself. I'm still guaranteed a club entry to dummy, though, so I'm still ok. Expecting that the finesse would fail, and knowing that a holdup could cause me problems, I led a club to the ace, then a low club back, which was covered by west. When the ten of clubs fell out of east's hand, I was guaranteed 3NT+2, for 100% of the matchpoints.
Opening lead: Ten of diamonds
So why didn't west lead a spade? Well, if east has 7, that leaves none for west!
Ok, so west has AKxxxxx in spades. Any chances he has either of the minor suit kings? Unlikely, as he might have opened 1S with 10 HCP and a 7 card suit.
I decide (rightly or wrongly) to try for a 3-3 diamond split with the king on my left, so I won in hand and led a diamond towards the 8. It held, but RHO showed out.
I continued with the jack, LHO winning. A diamond was returned to the board. I lost a spade and the ten of hearts from my hand.
Ok cashing the ace of diamonds would be catastrophic, as I'd squeeze myself. I'm still guaranteed a club entry to dummy, though, so I'm still ok. Expecting that the finesse would fail, and knowing that a holdup could cause me problems, I led a club to the ace, then a low club back, which was covered by west. When the ten of clubs fell out of east's hand, I was guaranteed 3NT+2, for 100% of the matchpoints.
Gutted
You win the third round of hearts, and immediately attack clubs.
I'm completely gutted that I did not duck the first club trick. This is a play that I would expect to make.
After his hand, I (somewhat melodramatically) messaged the following to my mentor: "Apparently I have no idea how to play bridge."
Monday, September 7, 2009
VuGraph Tricks
I seldom watch VuGraph, but yesterday decided to try to watch a few hands from the Bermuda Bowl. Thanks to one of the commentators, I learned a new trick yesterday.
I happened to observe the open room between Germany and Bulgaria. West (the dealer), Andreas Kirmse, played in 3 spades, after a competetive auction in which all four players bid. If I had to guess, I would say that east opened and south overcalled along the way.
The opening lead was the 5 of hearts. While I don't recall exactly how things went, south presumably took the ace. For the sake of illustration, we'll say that south, Bulgaria's Diyan Danailov, returned the 9 of clubs. North cashed his two club winners, and returned a third club, which south ruffed.
At this point, my feeling was that it didn't matter, much, what south returned. His ace of diamonds should always be cashing (the Germans don't appear to have a running side suit for discards).
Danailov cashed his ace of diamonds before exiting. One of the commentators pointed out that he was pretty much marked with the king of spades from the bidding (his partner has already shown all 6 of his points). Cashing the ace of diamonds can be seen as an attempt to show all his points, to give declarer more of a guess as to the location of the king of spades.
Alas, declarer Kirmse wasn't to be fooled. He won, and led a low spade to dummy. After a moment's consideration, he correctly rose with the ace, dropping the king.
I happened to observe the open room between Germany and Bulgaria. West (the dealer), Andreas Kirmse, played in 3 spades, after a competetive auction in which all four players bid. If I had to guess, I would say that east opened and south overcalled along the way.
The opening lead was the 5 of hearts. While I don't recall exactly how things went, south presumably took the ace. For the sake of illustration, we'll say that south, Bulgaria's Diyan Danailov, returned the 9 of clubs. North cashed his two club winners, and returned a third club, which south ruffed.
At this point, my feeling was that it didn't matter, much, what south returned. His ace of diamonds should always be cashing (the Germans don't appear to have a running side suit for discards).
Danailov cashed his ace of diamonds before exiting. One of the commentators pointed out that he was pretty much marked with the king of spades from the bidding (his partner has already shown all 6 of his points). Cashing the ace of diamonds can be seen as an attempt to show all his points, to give declarer more of a guess as to the location of the king of spades.
Alas, declarer Kirmse wasn't to be fooled. He won, and led a low spade to dummy. After a moment's consideration, he correctly rose with the ace, dropping the king.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
A Deeper Example
Partner opens 1 diamond. RHO overcalls 1 heart, which LHO raises to 2.
A diamond lead seems obvious, and I see this:
Declarer wins the 9, cashes the ace of hearts, then runs the ten of spades around to partner's jack. Partner cashes the king of clubs and ace of diamonds, then leads the 5 of diamonds to us for a ruff.
I was taking my time, and had a decent idea what was going on. Partner had both the queen of clubs and king of spades, and was likely out of hearts. I felt like there was a chance that declarer could rise with the ace of spades and run out, so I underled my ace of clubs. Partner rose with the queen, and returned the two of diamonds. Declarer discarded a spade, and I ruffed for down 1.
...earning roughly 45% of the masterpoints. I was crushed, after all the analysis I'd done.
Turns out some people put 2 hearts down 2. Reviewing their play, the key play was to return a spade, NOT a club. It turns out that declarer was 3433. The club trick was never going away, but the spade could. I had feared that declarer was 2533 and would simply rise with the ace if I returned a spade, and never lose the king. As it turned out, if declarer did rise with the ace, he would wind up stuck on the board, and would be forced to either lose an extra club, or the trump trick that I wound up with anyways.
I'm pleased when I take the time to analyze hands like this. I just need to keep thinking, and not stop when the process gets a bit deeper, a bit more complicated.
A diamond lead seems obvious, and I see this:
Declarer wins the 9, cashes the ace of hearts, then runs the ten of spades around to partner's jack. Partner cashes the king of clubs and ace of diamonds, then leads the 5 of diamonds to us for a ruff.
I was taking my time, and had a decent idea what was going on. Partner had both the queen of clubs and king of spades, and was likely out of hearts. I felt like there was a chance that declarer could rise with the ace of spades and run out, so I underled my ace of clubs. Partner rose with the queen, and returned the two of diamonds. Declarer discarded a spade, and I ruffed for down 1.
...earning roughly 45% of the masterpoints. I was crushed, after all the analysis I'd done.
Turns out some people put 2 hearts down 2. Reviewing their play, the key play was to return a spade, NOT a club. It turns out that declarer was 3433. The club trick was never going away, but the spade could. I had feared that declarer was 2533 and would simply rise with the ace if I returned a spade, and never lose the king. As it turned out, if declarer did rise with the ace, he would wind up stuck on the board, and would be forced to either lose an extra club, or the trump trick that I wound up with anyways.
I'm pleased when I take the time to analyze hands like this. I just need to keep thinking, and not stop when the process gets a bit deeper, a bit more complicated.
Trickery
Ok, so this isn't exactly a story of brilliance, but sometimes you can't get lucky unless you give yourself a chance.
In a strictly-for-fun total points game, parnter opens 1NT, and you raise to 6 clubs. Opponents lead a small spade:
Obviously not the best slam I've ever bid. It looks like I need to guess diamonds right, AND pick up hearts for no losers. At first blush, it would seem that if east has the king of hearts, I have no chance. That's now QUITE true, though.
The key play, I think, is trick one. I won the spade lead with the ace on the board. When trumps split 2/2, I led the jack of hearts. East won with the king (a holdup would have been bad for me).
At this point, if I'd won trick 1 with the king, the ace sitting out on the board would have made a diamond switch crystal clear. Since I'd won with the visible ace, east had to chose between the diamonds (with KJx visible) and spades, with no honours visible. Note that west's opening lead was spades.
Back came a spade, and now all I needed was for the ten of hearts to fall on the AQ. When it did, my slam was home.
Again, I was mostly lucky, but sometimes by hiding the situation from the defenders, a bit of luck can come your way.
In a strictly-for-fun total points game, parnter opens 1NT, and you raise to 6 clubs. Opponents lead a small spade:
Obviously not the best slam I've ever bid. It looks like I need to guess diamonds right, AND pick up hearts for no losers. At first blush, it would seem that if east has the king of hearts, I have no chance. That's now QUITE true, though.
The key play, I think, is trick one. I won the spade lead with the ace on the board. When trumps split 2/2, I led the jack of hearts. East won with the king (a holdup would have been bad for me).
At this point, if I'd won trick 1 with the king, the ace sitting out on the board would have made a diamond switch crystal clear. Since I'd won with the visible ace, east had to chose between the diamonds (with KJx visible) and spades, with no honours visible. Note that west's opening lead was spades.
Back came a spade, and now all I needed was for the ten of hearts to fall on the AQ. When it did, my slam was home.
Again, I was mostly lucky, but sometimes by hiding the situation from the defenders, a bit of luck can come your way.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Thinking Deeper
I'm currently reading through Kelsey's Killing Defense at Bridge. Some of the bidding is strange, but even though I've only gotten through one chapter I'm already appreciating the book.
By and large, each problem, I seem to see part of the problem, but I don't quite think deeply enough. Maybe I'll analyze the suit distribution, but I'll miss a key point about the high card locations. Or maybe I'll figure out the general layout, and figure out the correct suit to lead/continue, but I'll overlook that the specific card I play matters.
It's like there's a big well of laziness in us. We push against it, gain some information, and then stop. None of the logic in this book is overly complicated. The trick seems to be to keep thinking even when you think you've already got the answer.
This is going to take some practice, but it's also going to take some discipline.
By and large, each problem, I seem to see part of the problem, but I don't quite think deeply enough. Maybe I'll analyze the suit distribution, but I'll miss a key point about the high card locations. Or maybe I'll figure out the general layout, and figure out the correct suit to lead/continue, but I'll overlook that the specific card I play matters.
It's like there's a big well of laziness in us. We push against it, gain some information, and then stop. None of the logic in this book is overly complicated. The trick seems to be to keep thinking even when you think you've already got the answer.
This is going to take some practice, but it's also going to take some discipline.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Change of Plans
Playing in a dicey 3NT, I needed to bring clubs home with no losers. Dummy held:
T965
I had:
AKJ74
I had lots of entries, so I ran the ten towards my ace. LHO hesitated noticeably. When I later ran another club towards hand, LHO hesitated again.
8 ever, 9 never, but time to change plans? I did so, and was rewarded with 70% of the matchpoints when the jack held the trick.
Ok, so I felt a bit cheap for winning this way, but it's a good reminder for me - always plan out your play ahead of time, and play in tempo!
T965
I had:
AKJ74
I had lots of entries, so I ran the ten towards my ace. LHO hesitated noticeably. When I later ran another club towards hand, LHO hesitated again.
8 ever, 9 never, but time to change plans? I did so, and was rewarded with 70% of the matchpoints when the jack held the trick.
Ok, so I felt a bit cheap for winning this way, but it's a good reminder for me - always plan out your play ahead of time, and play in tempo!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Moments of Clarity
In my eternal quest for improved counting, my partner and I played a few hands against the robots on BBO last night. The goal was to take our time.
The most interesting hand of the night was this one:
At this point, I knew the location of every single high card. Yay me! Unfortunately, I couldn't see a way forward.
From the bidding, partner has precisely 6 or 7 HCP. The king of diamonds on trick 2 was 3, so that leaves 3-4.
Trick 1 showed me that partner had no spade higher than the 7. When partner later played the 4, that left declarer with AJT9 of spades.
The heart play on trick 5 was bizarre. Clearly, partner had something in hearts, but what? With the ace, declarer would have KQJ..., which wasn't consistent with his play. If partner had the king, the finesse seemed obvious. The only holding that seemed to make sense for partner was KJ. With me having the ten 9, declarer held either AQx or AQxx, and thus had an unavoidable heart loser.
This accounted for all 7 of partner's possible points, so declarer had Axx or Axxx in diamonds. (Admittedly, I didn't have the exact distributional count until the end of the hand.)
Clubs was also a big clue in my deductions. I knew declarer had at least 2 clubs, and I now knew that declarer had the AJ. With AJx, declarer would have attacked clubs long ago, seeking to establish the suit. Thus, declarer had to be AJ bare.
This was just about the limit of my vision. I felt like I couldn't lead back clubs, because that would establish the suit for declarer. I wanted to entice him to misguess the suit, leading towards the king, then back towards his AJ, finessing the Queen rather than playing for the drop. This is of course impossible, but I couldn't quite visualize the play well enough.
I also didn't want to finesse partner's heart holding. Yes, it I had the T9, and yes declarer could cross to dummy and finesse hearts himself, but I didn't want to do it for him.
Knowing declarer had both hearts and spades stopped, I just returned a spade.
It turns out there was nothing I could do.
On the second round of spades, partner discarded a club, and declarer ran clubs to make an overtrick.
Partner lamented his club discard, but it turns out that, at this point, partner is squeezed. Partner holds the stops in clubs, hearts AND diamonds, and declarer can run his two spade tricks, making him discard twice. Partner will be obligated to either discard a club, promoting the clubs, a diamond, promoting the two of diamonds, or a heart, promoting the queen of hearts.
If there's a way to stop the overtrick, it must come up before trick 5. I certainly didn't see it.
All that said, if I saw every hand with the clarity that I saw this hand, I'd be improving by leaps and bounds.
The most interesting hand of the night was this one:
At this point, I knew the location of every single high card. Yay me! Unfortunately, I couldn't see a way forward.
From the bidding, partner has precisely 6 or 7 HCP. The king of diamonds on trick 2 was 3, so that leaves 3-4.
Trick 1 showed me that partner had no spade higher than the 7. When partner later played the 4, that left declarer with AJT9 of spades.
The heart play on trick 5 was bizarre. Clearly, partner had something in hearts, but what? With the ace, declarer would have KQJ..., which wasn't consistent with his play. If partner had the king, the finesse seemed obvious. The only holding that seemed to make sense for partner was KJ. With me having the ten 9, declarer held either AQx or AQxx, and thus had an unavoidable heart loser.
This accounted for all 7 of partner's possible points, so declarer had Axx or Axxx in diamonds. (Admittedly, I didn't have the exact distributional count until the end of the hand.)
Clubs was also a big clue in my deductions. I knew declarer had at least 2 clubs, and I now knew that declarer had the AJ. With AJx, declarer would have attacked clubs long ago, seeking to establish the suit. Thus, declarer had to be AJ bare.
This was just about the limit of my vision. I felt like I couldn't lead back clubs, because that would establish the suit for declarer. I wanted to entice him to misguess the suit, leading towards the king, then back towards his AJ, finessing the Queen rather than playing for the drop. This is of course impossible, but I couldn't quite visualize the play well enough.
I also didn't want to finesse partner's heart holding. Yes, it I had the T9, and yes declarer could cross to dummy and finesse hearts himself, but I didn't want to do it for him.
Knowing declarer had both hearts and spades stopped, I just returned a spade.
It turns out there was nothing I could do.
On the second round of spades, partner discarded a club, and declarer ran clubs to make an overtrick.
Partner lamented his club discard, but it turns out that, at this point, partner is squeezed. Partner holds the stops in clubs, hearts AND diamonds, and declarer can run his two spade tricks, making him discard twice. Partner will be obligated to either discard a club, promoting the clubs, a diamond, promoting the two of diamonds, or a heart, promoting the queen of hearts.
If there's a way to stop the overtrick, it must come up before trick 5. I certainly didn't see it.
All that said, if I saw every hand with the clarity that I saw this hand, I'd be improving by leaps and bounds.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Progression
I'm coming to one of those moments in my progression where I question whether I'm really moving forwards at all.
I'm largely over the triathlon timeout I had in the spring. I'm back, more or less, to where I was in the early winter. Maybe what's getting to me is that there's still so far to go.
I'm counting, but not as often as I'd like. The hands were I count deep into the hand are always rewarding - I know what's going on in the last few tricks, and can see how it's all going to play out. Alas, this doesn't seem to happen as often as I'd like, and sometimes, I stare blankly as trick after trick rolls by. Maybe it'll come with more time and more work.
Most of the mistakes I'm making lately are on "easy" subjects, at best. Some of them are completely idiotic - miscounting trump, not ruffing a loser in dummy before drawing trump, stuff like that. Stuff I wouldn't bat an eyelash at it if were a bridge problem, away from the table. Ok, yesterday I drew a complete blank on a basic 2/1 auction (I couldn't recall if 1H/2D/2H promised 5 or 6), but even that kind of thing will come with repetition.
Granted, I probably won't be able to play 100 hands a week for a good long time (BBO says I've logged 67 in the last 7 days, which is high for me). My reading has slowed to a crawl. Really, I have no real reason to think that my game should be growing by leaps and bounds.
I'm still hungry, though. I (rightly or wrongly) believe that I have the ability to be world class at this game, someday. Someday. My ambition (hubris?) makes me want to get on to the difficult lessons, rather than screwing up the easy stuff over and over again, like I am now.
I'm not getting very many results right now, but that's not the source of my frustration. Results have come in the past, and will continue to come. Today more than most days, it seems like the road ahead is very long, and I'm not exactly sure what the next step is.
I'm largely over the triathlon timeout I had in the spring. I'm back, more or less, to where I was in the early winter. Maybe what's getting to me is that there's still so far to go.
I'm counting, but not as often as I'd like. The hands were I count deep into the hand are always rewarding - I know what's going on in the last few tricks, and can see how it's all going to play out. Alas, this doesn't seem to happen as often as I'd like, and sometimes, I stare blankly as trick after trick rolls by. Maybe it'll come with more time and more work.
Most of the mistakes I'm making lately are on "easy" subjects, at best. Some of them are completely idiotic - miscounting trump, not ruffing a loser in dummy before drawing trump, stuff like that. Stuff I wouldn't bat an eyelash at it if were a bridge problem, away from the table. Ok, yesterday I drew a complete blank on a basic 2/1 auction (I couldn't recall if 1H/2D/2H promised 5 or 6), but even that kind of thing will come with repetition.
Granted, I probably won't be able to play 100 hands a week for a good long time (BBO says I've logged 67 in the last 7 days, which is high for me). My reading has slowed to a crawl. Really, I have no real reason to think that my game should be growing by leaps and bounds.
I'm still hungry, though. I (rightly or wrongly) believe that I have the ability to be world class at this game, someday. Someday. My ambition (hubris?) makes me want to get on to the difficult lessons, rather than screwing up the easy stuff over and over again, like I am now.
I'm not getting very many results right now, but that's not the source of my frustration. Results have come in the past, and will continue to come. Today more than most days, it seems like the road ahead is very long, and I'm not exactly sure what the next step is.
Morale/Concentration
I played 4 spades in a 4/2 fit last night.
I should have made it, too. I conceded an early spade to maintain control. They ruffed at one point, but I got back in, drew trump, and, when I saw that trump were splitting 5/2, I kind of gave up.
Of course, I'd forgotten that they'd ruffed in. Trumps were 4/3, and with long running diamonds outside, we were home free. Instead, I tossed diamonds, and kept my losing hearts, hoping to promote a heart honour after they ruffed in and switched to hearts. Imagine my surprise.
One of my big problems seems to be keeping my morale up. I was very defeatist on this contract. My concentration lapsed for a second, and I compounded my error by tossing winners, in a very dejected mentality.
Obviously, the bigger problem is that I need to bid a bit better. Still, disasters do happen, and will continue to happen no matter how good I get at this game. It would be nice to be sharp and focused when they do. I think 4 spades would have been a top instead of a bottom.
I should have made it, too. I conceded an early spade to maintain control. They ruffed at one point, but I got back in, drew trump, and, when I saw that trump were splitting 5/2, I kind of gave up.
Of course, I'd forgotten that they'd ruffed in. Trumps were 4/3, and with long running diamonds outside, we were home free. Instead, I tossed diamonds, and kept my losing hearts, hoping to promote a heart honour after they ruffed in and switched to hearts. Imagine my surprise.
One of my big problems seems to be keeping my morale up. I was very defeatist on this contract. My concentration lapsed for a second, and I compounded my error by tossing winners, in a very dejected mentality.
Obviously, the bigger problem is that I need to bid a bit better. Still, disasters do happen, and will continue to happen no matter how good I get at this game. It would be nice to be sharp and focused when they do. I think 4 spades would have been a top instead of a bottom.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Almost
I had flawless count, both point-wise and distribution-wise. I knew that RHO could have either red king.
Somehow, I convinced myself to play for hearts being 3-3. /facepalm
I even played the last two tricks to try to "get count". Gah!
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Card Combination
There is only one (immediate) outside entry to dummy, and I start in my hand.
What's the best way to tackle this? Obviously, the balancing double may be a clue - I expect west to have longer hearts, but was unsure whether to expect east to have the better hand or not.
I crossed to dummy, and led the queen. When the ten appeared from RHO, I ducked. When the king won, I could clear the suit with the ace, 8 covered by the J9.
If RHO can be expected to hold the balance of power, then this seems ok. If, in a balancing situation, the points may be evenly distributed, but I expect short hearts on my right, maybe low to the Q is right?
Two Declarer Problems
Two from today. One, I think I played correctly, but got a defense error to help. The other, I misplanned.
(Sorry, I haven't the energy to rotate these and whatnot.)
1.
Potentially 5 losers, though the spade finesse should work. The key will be to only lose 1 trump trick.
Not sure what's right, but I led low to the jack, planning on cashing the ace next, and putting anyone with a doubleton honour in a bit of trouble. North rose with the queen before the jack, making 4 hearts straightforward.
Is there a better line?
2.
Ace of diamonds was a hugely helpful lead. I decided to try for 2/2 trumps, and to toss spades on the promoted diamonds. If they're 2/2, I think I can ruff hearts twice, and make on a 3/3 or 4/2 heart break. When trumps were not 2/2, I found that I needed hearts to be 3/3, which they weren't.
I guess I might have had extra chances if the short hearts had also been short on trump, but that seems unlikely.
This feels like a really good puzzle hand, but I'm not sure that I see a winning line here.
(Sorry, I haven't the energy to rotate these and whatnot.)
1.
Potentially 5 losers, though the spade finesse should work. The key will be to only lose 1 trump trick.
Not sure what's right, but I led low to the jack, planning on cashing the ace next, and putting anyone with a doubleton honour in a bit of trouble. North rose with the queen before the jack, making 4 hearts straightforward.
Is there a better line?
2.
Ace of diamonds was a hugely helpful lead. I decided to try for 2/2 trumps, and to toss spades on the promoted diamonds. If they're 2/2, I think I can ruff hearts twice, and make on a 3/3 or 4/2 heart break. When trumps were not 2/2, I found that I needed hearts to be 3/3, which they weren't.
I guess I might have had extra chances if the short hearts had also been short on trump, but that seems unlikely.
This feels like a really good puzzle hand, but I'm not sure that I see a winning line here.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Easy Squeeze?
One of the things that may motivate me to count more consistently is the idea of pulling off a few squeezes.
Red vs white, MPs, we bid to an unopposed 3NT via 4sf.
A spade lead drew the jack from RHO, and the king from my hand.
I saw no harm in trying the club finesse. All the suits are stopped, and the contract is already secure, even on a 5-0 diamond split. Plus, if the finesse loses, RHO might decide that I'm trying to set up some winning clubs, and switch suits. This could give me a trick.
Alas, the finesse failed, and RHO returned the jack of clubs. Interesting.
Seeing no reason to duck, I won, and led a low diamond towards dummy, trying to maximize my chances of picking up a 5-0 diamond split. Both followed, but when I continued the queen, LHO discarded a small spade.
With 8 tricks remaining, I have 6 winners. This shouldn't be squeeze territory, but it turns out the Jack of spades on trick 1 was from a QJ doubleton. Ergo, my ten of spades is the 7th trick, but I don't know that yet.
What I do know is that RHO has the ten of clubs, which is boss. I also know that hearts are going to be interesting, so I make a point of watching LHO's discards carefully.
LHO throws 2 hearts as I run the diamonds. I throw one myself off the board. RHO throws the queen of spades on my final diamond. Yay!
Sadly, I didn't give it too much more thought at the table, but I probably should have. RHO held, before discarding:
At first glance I would have said that that 4 of clubs is the clearly correct discard, but on reflection, I can see why that would be bad. If east discards the small club, I can cash a spade then endplay him in clubs, making him lose his heart trick. (Assuming, of course, that I know what's going on.)
With the queen of spade tabled, I take my 2 spades. RHO discarded the a small heart on the ace, and the ten of clubs under the ten of spades (which I completely overlooked - oops!). Even if it had been the 4, the end result would still have been the same, as LHO was down to a small spade and 2 small hearts. A small heart to the ace, then back to the king will clear the heart suit, dropping the queen and promoting the jack, for the 12th trick.
I wish I could say that I counted it out just like that, but I didn't. I did know, though, that there was still a club out against me, and I knew that RHO was out of spades and diamonds. Once west had followed under both the ace and king of hearts, the finesse was never going to be right.
In the post-mortem, the squeeze was extremely easy to read. Hopefully, as time goes on, that understanding will creep into the pre-mortem.
Red vs white, MPs, we bid to an unopposed 3NT via 4sf.
A spade lead drew the jack from RHO, and the king from my hand.
I saw no harm in trying the club finesse. All the suits are stopped, and the contract is already secure, even on a 5-0 diamond split. Plus, if the finesse loses, RHO might decide that I'm trying to set up some winning clubs, and switch suits. This could give me a trick.
Alas, the finesse failed, and RHO returned the jack of clubs. Interesting.
Seeing no reason to duck, I won, and led a low diamond towards dummy, trying to maximize my chances of picking up a 5-0 diamond split. Both followed, but when I continued the queen, LHO discarded a small spade.
With 8 tricks remaining, I have 6 winners. This shouldn't be squeeze territory, but it turns out the Jack of spades on trick 1 was from a QJ doubleton. Ergo, my ten of spades is the 7th trick, but I don't know that yet.
What I do know is that RHO has the ten of clubs, which is boss. I also know that hearts are going to be interesting, so I make a point of watching LHO's discards carefully.
LHO throws 2 hearts as I run the diamonds. I throw one myself off the board. RHO throws the queen of spades on my final diamond. Yay!
Sadly, I didn't give it too much more thought at the table, but I probably should have. RHO held, before discarding:
At first glance I would have said that that 4 of clubs is the clearly correct discard, but on reflection, I can see why that would be bad. If east discards the small club, I can cash a spade then endplay him in clubs, making him lose his heart trick. (Assuming, of course, that I know what's going on.)
With the queen of spade tabled, I take my 2 spades. RHO discarded the a small heart on the ace, and the ten of clubs under the ten of spades (which I completely overlooked - oops!). Even if it had been the 4, the end result would still have been the same, as LHO was down to a small spade and 2 small hearts. A small heart to the ace, then back to the king will clear the heart suit, dropping the queen and promoting the jack, for the 12th trick.
I wish I could say that I counted it out just like that, but I didn't. I did know, though, that there was still a club out against me, and I knew that RHO was out of spades and diamonds. Once west had followed under both the ace and king of hearts, the finesse was never going to be right.
In the post-mortem, the squeeze was extremely easy to read. Hopefully, as time goes on, that understanding will creep into the pre-mortem.
Simplicity
Ok, I know this seems simple, but I actually took the time to think this through yesterday:
Unless I'm completely misreading this, there's a clear best way to play for 3 tricks. (And yes, I've gotten this wrong in the past, and so have others that I've seen.)
The thing that can be difficult in bridge is that the correct play often goes unrewarded. Last night, though, RHO showed up with Kx in clubs, and I was rewarded for my effort.
Unless I'm completely misreading this, there's a clear best way to play for 3 tricks. (And yes, I've gotten this wrong in the past, and so have others that I've seen.)
The thing that can be difficult in bridge is that the correct play often goes unrewarded. Last night, though, RHO showed up with Kx in clubs, and I was rewarded for my effort.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Hunting for a Squeeze
Spade led, won in hand. A diamond towards dummy drew the ace from LHO. A club came back, won with the jack.
I cashed the KQ of diamonds, LHO discarding a heart on the queen. A club to the queen drew the ace from LHO. Finally, a spade came back, to the queen.
I have 5 of the remaining 6 tricks. There's a heart finesse there, but I stopped and tried to puzzle out a possible squeeze. (What didn't occur to me is that, if there's a squeeze on, that would mean that the finesse is on, too. Alas.) I'm still not good at puzzling out squeezes, mostly because my counting isn't all that great. I knew what suits RHO had played, so I counted out RHO's distribution as I cashed the club and spade winners, ending by cashing the ace of hearts. When the jack of diamonds didn't fall, I ran a heart to the king.
Turns out west had 5 hearts to the queen, so there was nothing there. I guess the point here is that I at least thought about things, and had count. I'm still missing some of the basics, though.
Blame?
Maybe there's no blame here, but 4 hearts made.
For my money, I think north is worth a stronger move than 3 spades. If you trust south to count pearson points, then the denial of 3 card spade support would tend to indicate that south has a better than minimum hand.
Agree? Or should south make a stronger move over the 3 heart interference bid.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Taking Care
After the 5th trick, I stopped to consider. Assuming the clubs split, I have the remaining tricks. However, what if the clubs don't split?
RHO has a 5 card spade suit, and had longer diamonds than LHO. Certainly, having clubs be 4-1 seems possible. Ergo, I led the ten of clubs to the ace, then low back to the queen. Sure enough, RHO showed out.
This left me with an easy finesse on the jack of clubs.
Of course, having taken the finesse, I beleatedly realized that I needed to cash my winners in hand, as I no longer had an entry back to them. Oh well. Bye bye hard earned overtrick.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Back at the club.
Played a 55% game. Not bad. Too bad 55.63% was in the money.
Got dealt: xx AKQJxx xx xxx. I guess this is why weak 2s go as high as 10 points. :)
I did get to play an interesting spades distribution
A83
KTx
The ace was the only entry to the board. I had finessing positions in both hearts (xxx vs AQx in hand) and diamonds (forget exactly what I had there). The nice thing is that LHO (who had bid, while RHO had not) led the 9 of spades.
While I would otherwise have claimed the ace, the lead of the 9 gave me extra chances. I ducked, and RHO put in the jack. I led away from diamonds, rather than finessing. (Think I had T98xx on board, AQxx in hand). When LHO won the singleton king (I underled the ace, but clearly it does not cost if the king is singleton), LHO returned a heart (yay!).
Later, when I led the ten towards the Ace in spades, LHO covered, promoting my 8. Nice to collect 3 tricks from that spade holding.
Got dealt: xx AKQJxx xx xxx. I guess this is why weak 2s go as high as 10 points. :)
I did get to play an interesting spades distribution
A83
KTx
The ace was the only entry to the board. I had finessing positions in both hearts (xxx vs AQx in hand) and diamonds (forget exactly what I had there). The nice thing is that LHO (who had bid, while RHO had not) led the 9 of spades.
While I would otherwise have claimed the ace, the lead of the 9 gave me extra chances. I ducked, and RHO put in the jack. I led away from diamonds, rather than finessing. (Think I had T98xx on board, AQxx in hand). When LHO won the singleton king (I underled the ace, but clearly it does not cost if the king is singleton), LHO returned a heart (yay!).
Later, when I led the ten towards the Ace in spades, LHO covered, promoting my 8. Nice to collect 3 tricks from that spade holding.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
I Think I Made a Mistake
Bidding still in progress.
It belatedly occurs to me that I should have bid 3 hearts on the way to 3NT, to show 3 card heart support. I'm betting partner is 3514, and that we've now bypassed our best contract(s).
It belatedly occurs to me that I should have bid 3 hearts on the way to 3NT, to show 3 card heart support. I'm betting partner is 3514, and that we've now bypassed our best contract(s).
Deciphering the Bidding
Just played a hand against GiB, and was faced with the task of trying to picture the opponents' hands.
Obviously, partner has the ace of diamonds. Beyond that, though, what's going on?
4 diamonds was a splinter for spades. GiB alerts 4 hearts as a help suit slam try, but that seems ridiculous. It should be a control showing cue bid. Does it show extras, though, or is it just a courtesy, to show heart control below game?
My first instinct was that 4 spades showed the lack of a first or second round club control. If not that, why not just bid 4 notrump?
East passed. Partner led the 6 of clubs, and dummy came down.
Ok, that's NOT what I was expecting. Maybe, then, 4 hearts was a courtesy, and neither opponent has much more than an opening hand? Granted, if partner has the ace of diamond we already have 11 hcp, but with 9 of those tied up in diamonds, which they've splintered, I don't see the problem, yet.
I'll play out the hand now, and see what it all looked like. From my perspective, though, it sure looks like 6 spades should be making.
...
And the final analysis? Thanks to a void in diamonds and a long running club suit in west, 7 spades is always there.
Interestingly, 5Dx is only down 2, and a good save at all white against 4S+3. Maybe I should have thought of that.
Obviously, partner has the ace of diamonds. Beyond that, though, what's going on?
4 diamonds was a splinter for spades. GiB alerts 4 hearts as a help suit slam try, but that seems ridiculous. It should be a control showing cue bid. Does it show extras, though, or is it just a courtesy, to show heart control below game?
My first instinct was that 4 spades showed the lack of a first or second round club control. If not that, why not just bid 4 notrump?
East passed. Partner led the 6 of clubs, and dummy came down.
Ok, that's NOT what I was expecting. Maybe, then, 4 hearts was a courtesy, and neither opponent has much more than an opening hand? Granted, if partner has the ace of diamond we already have 11 hcp, but with 9 of those tied up in diamonds, which they've splintered, I don't see the problem, yet.
I'll play out the hand now, and see what it all looked like. From my perspective, though, it sure looks like 6 spades should be making.
...
And the final analysis? Thanks to a void in diamonds and a long running club suit in west, 7 spades is always there.
Interestingly, 5Dx is only down 2, and a good save at all white against 4S+3. Maybe I should have thought of that.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Matchpoints
By nature, I'm more of an IMPs player than a MPs player. Maybe it's my misspent youth playing rubber bridge. (Wait, how is that misspent?) Whatever the reason, I tend to have the "just make the contract" mentality.
I'm getting better at being trick hungry on defense. I'm always looking out for the extra undertrick, or at least to gobble up the overtricks. When I'm declaring, though, I seem to have a mental lull.
Last night, I had a hand where, after 4 tricks, I had the 3 remaining trump in hand, and a running 6 card diamond suit on the board. So why did I concede the club ace? By the cold light of morning, I have no idea.
A better (?) hand from me:
I got a diamond lead. I inserted the ten, which held.
The question is whether or not to try for more than 1 spade trick. The contract is safe - I can survive losing a spade finesse followed by a heart switch (barely).
The next question is how to play the spades. At the table, I played low to the Ten. West held the KJxx in spades, so nothing was ever going to work. Still, I think low to the Queen is the better play if I'm going to try for the extra trick. If I just cash out, I have 11 tricks. If I lose the spade finesse and they take 2 heart tricks, I'm down to 10 tricks. If spades work out for me I have 12 winners, but only if they don't cash out first. It would be small compensation to see the king played on the Ten, only to have the defense claim 2 heart tricks.
(Of course, defense returned a club. Sometimes, I think I'm that the weak/inconsistent opposition in the ACBL games isn't helping me at all....)
Ok, so I still got it wrong - assuming that the field is always taking 11 tricks (which I think they are, but you never know). Still, I can take solace that I was at least THINKING along the right lines.
I'm getting better at being trick hungry on defense. I'm always looking out for the extra undertrick, or at least to gobble up the overtricks. When I'm declaring, though, I seem to have a mental lull.
Last night, I had a hand where, after 4 tricks, I had the 3 remaining trump in hand, and a running 6 card diamond suit on the board. So why did I concede the club ace? By the cold light of morning, I have no idea.
A better (?) hand from me:
I got a diamond lead. I inserted the ten, which held.
The question is whether or not to try for more than 1 spade trick. The contract is safe - I can survive losing a spade finesse followed by a heart switch (barely).
The next question is how to play the spades. At the table, I played low to the Ten. West held the KJxx in spades, so nothing was ever going to work. Still, I think low to the Queen is the better play if I'm going to try for the extra trick. If I just cash out, I have 11 tricks. If I lose the spade finesse and they take 2 heart tricks, I'm down to 10 tricks. If spades work out for me I have 12 winners, but only if they don't cash out first. It would be small compensation to see the king played on the Ten, only to have the defense claim 2 heart tricks.
(Of course, defense returned a club. Sometimes, I think I'm that the weak/inconsistent opposition in the ACBL games isn't helping me at all....)
Ok, so I still got it wrong - assuming that the field is always taking 11 tricks (which I think they are, but you never know). Still, I can take solace that I was at least THINKING along the right lines.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Test post - handviewer
Oh wow. Handviewer is amazing.
I wondered if my second bid should be a double in retrospect, but I certainly felt comfortable NOT letting them play 3H. I also felt it was right to pass 4 diamonds, as partner could be awfully weak for the bidding, and in fact rates to be quite light.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Mental Stretching
If you're curious what drew me away from this amazing game, my triathlon report can be found on my other blog.
Last night I only played 5 hands, but it was enough to show how out of practice I really am. Take this hand, for example.
(I'm really going to have to figure out how to embed these.)
I counted points off the top. Dummy had 10, I had 11. I figured partner for about 8, so maybe as much as 11 for declarer.
I won the ace of hearts, and returned a heart, partner showing that she started with 2 hearts. Partner discarded a club on the second round of trumps.
Ok, so partner started with 1 spade and 2 hearts, my mind creaked. That means 10 minors. Since she bid clubs, I'll assume 6 clubs, 4 diamonds.
Now, I knew, I should stop and figure out declarer's opening distribution. Alas, I hadn't even thought to count out dummy's opening distribution. SIGH. My mind just wanted to shut down, and it was surprisingly difficult to make it reason it out. (I was just mentally waving "declarer has lots of majors" and getting bored.)
FINE. Declarer has to have 6 spades. So 6322.
Later, when declarer showed out on the second round of clubs, I just couldn't overcome my inertia. It was only after the hand that I thought "huh, so partner was 7321".
I have a lot of work ahead of me.
Last night I only played 5 hands, but it was enough to show how out of practice I really am. Take this hand, for example.
(I'm really going to have to figure out how to embed these.)
I counted points off the top. Dummy had 10, I had 11. I figured partner for about 8, so maybe as much as 11 for declarer.
I won the ace of hearts, and returned a heart, partner showing that she started with 2 hearts. Partner discarded a club on the second round of trumps.
Ok, so partner started with 1 spade and 2 hearts, my mind creaked. That means 10 minors. Since she bid clubs, I'll assume 6 clubs, 4 diamonds.
Now, I knew, I should stop and figure out declarer's opening distribution. Alas, I hadn't even thought to count out dummy's opening distribution. SIGH. My mind just wanted to shut down, and it was surprisingly difficult to make it reason it out. (I was just mentally waving "declarer has lots of majors" and getting bored.)
FINE. Declarer has to have 6 spades. So 6322.
Later, when declarer showed out on the second round of clubs, I just couldn't overcome my inertia. It was only after the hand that I thought "huh, so partner was 7321".
I have a lot of work ahead of me.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Stay Tuned!
Ok, my triathlon is now done. I'm dying to play bridge more consistently again, so stay tuned for more mistakes, gaffes, and lessons learned!
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Subway Stations
I once heard someone say that, as you start to improve in bridge, you feel like you're moving backwards. Whereas innocence bring ignorance, when you start down the road to enlightenment, you start to see all the mistakes you're making. While your play is no worse that before, it appears to be worse, because now you're starting to understand when you make a mistake.
Maybe, just maybe, I'm starting to come out of that. Oh, sure, I'm still making my share of dumb mistakes, but the frustration level seems to be dropping.
(Case in point for dumb mistakes - hand 1 in last night's ACBL against 4 spades, I lead my singleton heart, which holds. Trying to get to partner's hand for a ruff, I chose a diamond rather than lead to dummy's AKQJxx in clubs. Sounds reasonable, except that I also had 6 clubs....)
Granted, it might just be that I'm playing a bit less than before, and my overall card sense is slipping. Triathlon training is starting to suck a lot of my time and energy, and spring allergies are taking most of the rest. Still, my game feels ok.
My biggest problem by far seems to be that I'm too eager to shut my brain down. Having a partner or two who signal all the time is fantastic when you haven't always had it, but signalling is not a silver bullet. Sometimes, partner is going to have to drop the 8 of clubs or the 2 of clubs regardless of what they really want. If bridge logic dictates a certain action regardless of the discard, then blind adherence to signalling is wrong. All too often I shut my mind down when I shouldn't.
I need to really focus on counting and reasoning all the way through the hand.
The rest of the stuff, like forgetting what a certain bid means in a competetive auction, a rare application of Gerber, and not being afraid of the red card, and proper card combination play (for example) will all come with time and repetition.
EDIT: One more thing - I think I'm starting to rely a little too much on poor defensive play by my opponents. For example with Kxx opposite Qxx, I can almost always squeeze 2 tricks out of this if I can find the ace, because holder will never duck if I lead small towards the honour. In general, relying on poor defense is making it tougher to think about what the right line should be.
Maybe, just maybe, I'm starting to come out of that. Oh, sure, I'm still making my share of dumb mistakes, but the frustration level seems to be dropping.
(Case in point for dumb mistakes - hand 1 in last night's ACBL against 4 spades, I lead my singleton heart, which holds. Trying to get to partner's hand for a ruff, I chose a diamond rather than lead to dummy's AKQJxx in clubs. Sounds reasonable, except that I also had 6 clubs....)
Granted, it might just be that I'm playing a bit less than before, and my overall card sense is slipping. Triathlon training is starting to suck a lot of my time and energy, and spring allergies are taking most of the rest. Still, my game feels ok.
My biggest problem by far seems to be that I'm too eager to shut my brain down. Having a partner or two who signal all the time is fantastic when you haven't always had it, but signalling is not a silver bullet. Sometimes, partner is going to have to drop the 8 of clubs or the 2 of clubs regardless of what they really want. If bridge logic dictates a certain action regardless of the discard, then blind adherence to signalling is wrong. All too often I shut my mind down when I shouldn't.
I need to really focus on counting and reasoning all the way through the hand.
The rest of the stuff, like forgetting what a certain bid means in a competetive auction, a rare application of Gerber, and not being afraid of the red card, and proper card combination play (for example) will all come with time and repetition.
EDIT: One more thing - I think I'm starting to rely a little too much on poor defensive play by my opponents. For example with Kxx opposite Qxx, I can almost always squeeze 2 tricks out of this if I can find the ace, because holder will never duck if I lead small towards the honour. In general, relying on poor defense is making it tougher to think about what the right line should be.
Monday, April 6, 2009
One for the Rubber Players
Playing rubber bridge with my family this past weekend, the following hand came up:
AKQJ
AKQJ7
K6
AK
If you're curious, 6 hearts made. The ace of diamond was led. I had the Txx of hearts, and the QJxx of clubs (not that THAT mattered).
For those who have run out of toes, that's a 30HCP count. I *think* that's the highest I've ever seen.
AKQJ
AKQJ7
K6
AK
If you're curious, 6 hearts made. The ace of diamond was led. I had the Txx of hearts, and the QJxx of clubs (not that THAT mattered).
For those who have run out of toes, that's a 30HCP count. I *think* that's the highest I've ever seen.
Catching Up
I've been remiss is blogging my lessons learned of late, so here are a few that stand out:
1. On the lead of the Jack of Clubs, I pondered how to avoid counting the ten of clubs as a loser in a spades contract, holding the following:
Dummy: AQx
Hand: Tx
I had to have several people tell me it was a trivial problem before I spotted that it was, in fact, a trivial problem. Lesson: Pay attention to the lead!
2. I forget the hand, but with a really nice 12 or 13 point hand partner opened and RHO doubled. I didn't have immediate support, and wondered how to force. For some reason, redouble never occurred to me.
3. On the subject of not even occurring to me, 2 people have pointed out that a HSGT goes great with this hand:
J765
AT986
v
K842
after
1D P 1H 1S
2H P ?
Partner had AQJ of clubs. Two cards were well placed, and after I bid a meek 3H we made 3H+3. I couldn't figure out how to find 4, but 3 clubs makes total sense.
4. Another "2 people pointed out". Holding
K963
KJT74
4
AK4
P P 2D ?
I doubled, but 2H is probably clearly better.
5. Here's one of those "passive" hands I was talking about.
AKJT96
J2
AJ8
J6
P P 1C 1S
X P 2H ?
I passed, and it got passed out. Sheesh!
6. Last but not least. I apologize for being vague, but I don't have the hand in front of me. I played a contract where LHO had overcalled at the 2 level. Late in the hand, I needed to find one of two missing queens. LHO had shown up wtih 9 points so far, so I figured I had pretty good odds playing LHO for the queen in question. It turned out that RHO had all the remaining points, and LHO had overcalled at the 2 level with only 9.
Whether or not my judgement was correct (and there may have been other errors on the hand), I think that having that good a count late in the play and making decisions based on the count is a very positive sign.
It's been a while since I was over 50% in an ACBL game, but that all changes today!!!
1. On the lead of the Jack of Clubs, I pondered how to avoid counting the ten of clubs as a loser in a spades contract, holding the following:
Dummy: AQx
Hand: Tx
I had to have several people tell me it was a trivial problem before I spotted that it was, in fact, a trivial problem. Lesson: Pay attention to the lead!
2. I forget the hand, but with a really nice 12 or 13 point hand partner opened and RHO doubled. I didn't have immediate support, and wondered how to force. For some reason, redouble never occurred to me.
3. On the subject of not even occurring to me, 2 people have pointed out that a HSGT goes great with this hand:
J765
AT986
v
K842
after
1D P 1H 1S
2H P ?
Partner had AQJ of clubs. Two cards were well placed, and after I bid a meek 3H we made 3H+3. I couldn't figure out how to find 4, but 3 clubs makes total sense.
4. Another "2 people pointed out". Holding
K963
KJT74
4
AK4
P P 2D ?
I doubled, but 2H is probably clearly better.
5. Here's one of those "passive" hands I was talking about.
AKJT96
J2
AJ8
J6
P P 1C 1S
X P 2H ?
I passed, and it got passed out. Sheesh!
6. Last but not least. I apologize for being vague, but I don't have the hand in front of me. I played a contract where LHO had overcalled at the 2 level. Late in the hand, I needed to find one of two missing queens. LHO had shown up wtih 9 points so far, so I figured I had pretty good odds playing LHO for the queen in question. It turned out that RHO had all the remaining points, and LHO had overcalled at the 2 level with only 9.
Whether or not my judgement was correct (and there may have been other errors on the hand), I think that having that good a count late in the play and making decisions based on the count is a very positive sign.
It's been a while since I was over 50% in an ACBL game, but that all changes today!!!
Friday, March 27, 2009
Inaction Brings Passivity
Two games this week, two awful results. Both below 40%.
Honestly, we weren't that bad. Quite. In 24 hands, there were at least 3 very solid opportunities to acquire a partnership understanding. I welcome these, especially in games where we're not scoring well.
The biggest thing that not playing (hardly) for 2 or 3 weeks brought me is a return of the overly cautious, passive bidding style. I passed myself some (near) zeroes, in cases where I should clearly know better.
On the upside, my counting isn't horrible. I really thought that would go quickly. I also nailed a forum problem in seconds flat the other day, which could have come right out of Lawrence's How to Read Your Opponent's Cards. My respect for that book grows.
In the grand scheme of things, I'm not complaining. I have an excellent partner, whom I enjoy playing with, and who is probably slightly better than me, both at the table and in the post game analysis. We have excellent dialogue. I think we're already in the upper half of the ACBL slowball games we play in. We're ironing out our agreements.
I still totally believe that I have the potential and ability to succeed in bridge. That my life doesn't allow this to happen THIS WEEK is nothing to be concerned about. I will get there.
Honestly, we weren't that bad. Quite. In 24 hands, there were at least 3 very solid opportunities to acquire a partnership understanding. I welcome these, especially in games where we're not scoring well.
The biggest thing that not playing (hardly) for 2 or 3 weeks brought me is a return of the overly cautious, passive bidding style. I passed myself some (near) zeroes, in cases where I should clearly know better.
On the upside, my counting isn't horrible. I really thought that would go quickly. I also nailed a forum problem in seconds flat the other day, which could have come right out of Lawrence's How to Read Your Opponent's Cards. My respect for that book grows.
In the grand scheme of things, I'm not complaining. I have an excellent partner, whom I enjoy playing with, and who is probably slightly better than me, both at the table and in the post game analysis. We have excellent dialogue. I think we're already in the upper half of the ACBL slowball games we play in. We're ironing out our agreements.
I still totally believe that I have the potential and ability to succeed in bridge. That my life doesn't allow this to happen THIS WEEK is nothing to be concerned about. I will get there.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
54 Hands
Whatever momentum "How to Read Your Opponents Cards" gave me in counting is long gone. It's hard to hold on to when you're playing infrequently.
That said, I did play 54 hands this weekend - 18 in the Friday morning 299er club game, 24 in the competetive afternoon club match, and 12 in Saturday night's IAC teams match. The results were, perhaps predictably, a 53%, under 40%, and a narrow loss.
Friday was interesting in that, out of the 42 hands I played, I only declared 3. Make of that what you will. My play was not great, and mistakes were made.
In the morning session, I was unable to puzzle something out.
I overcalled 2 spades, which partner raised to 3 before the opponents settled into 4 hearts. I was on lead, and chose a diamond from Qxx rather than a spade from AJTxxx. Dummy came down with KQxx in spades, so I was glad that I did not chose a spade lead. Partner won the diamond lead and returned the nine of spades.
I thought and thought, but could not come to the correct conclusion. For whatever reason, it seemed impossible that partner wanted me to continue diamonds, the higher offsuit. I also figured partner had to have the doubleton spade, but this, it turns out, was incorrect. It should have been clear given that partner was establishing winners in dummy, but I couldn't wrap my head around the fact that partner had raised with a singleton.
Good problem.
Saturday night's match featured the worst back-to-back trick plays I have made in months, maybe years. A reasonable excuse might be that I was having trouble keeping my eyes open, but honestly, this was really really bad. As it turned out, RHO gave me the contract right back on the next trick. The ironic part was that I now had sufficient count to know which way to take the 2-way finesse in spades. Maybe counting to 40 is just easier than counting to 13.
A kind expert who happened to be kibitzing offered that I seem to do better at forum problems than at the table, possibly due to nerves. This is likely true, though maybe concentration is a better probable cause. That said, I probably average only part marks on forum puzzles, so it's still not a raving endorsement of my game.
The outlook isn't really all that positive in the short term, either. As the snow melts, I'm going to have to focus more time and energy on my other ambition, triathlon training. So, for the next few months anyways, I don't really see any more time for me to play regularly, and sort out these issues. Rather than via brute force, I'm going to have to use quality time to focus on improving my game.
Maybe I'll play some more with GiB, where I can focus on my counting, and take my time on the tougher reasoning problems. I'm probably not alone in playing a little too quickly when I'm in a competetive match.
That said, I did play 54 hands this weekend - 18 in the Friday morning 299er club game, 24 in the competetive afternoon club match, and 12 in Saturday night's IAC teams match. The results were, perhaps predictably, a 53%, under 40%, and a narrow loss.
Friday was interesting in that, out of the 42 hands I played, I only declared 3. Make of that what you will. My play was not great, and mistakes were made.
In the morning session, I was unable to puzzle something out.
I overcalled 2 spades, which partner raised to 3 before the opponents settled into 4 hearts. I was on lead, and chose a diamond from Qxx rather than a spade from AJTxxx. Dummy came down with KQxx in spades, so I was glad that I did not chose a spade lead. Partner won the diamond lead and returned the nine of spades.
I thought and thought, but could not come to the correct conclusion. For whatever reason, it seemed impossible that partner wanted me to continue diamonds, the higher offsuit. I also figured partner had to have the doubleton spade, but this, it turns out, was incorrect. It should have been clear given that partner was establishing winners in dummy, but I couldn't wrap my head around the fact that partner had raised with a singleton.
Good problem.
Saturday night's match featured the worst back-to-back trick plays I have made in months, maybe years. A reasonable excuse might be that I was having trouble keeping my eyes open, but honestly, this was really really bad. As it turned out, RHO gave me the contract right back on the next trick. The ironic part was that I now had sufficient count to know which way to take the 2-way finesse in spades. Maybe counting to 40 is just easier than counting to 13.
A kind expert who happened to be kibitzing offered that I seem to do better at forum problems than at the table, possibly due to nerves. This is likely true, though maybe concentration is a better probable cause. That said, I probably average only part marks on forum puzzles, so it's still not a raving endorsement of my game.
The outlook isn't really all that positive in the short term, either. As the snow melts, I'm going to have to focus more time and energy on my other ambition, triathlon training. So, for the next few months anyways, I don't really see any more time for me to play regularly, and sort out these issues. Rather than via brute force, I'm going to have to use quality time to focus on improving my game.
Maybe I'll play some more with GiB, where I can focus on my counting, and take my time on the tougher reasoning problems. I'm probably not alone in playing a little too quickly when I'm in a competetive match.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Friday at the Club
1. Always ask what the opponents discards are.
2. When there's only one way to make the contract, do NOT let opponents discards change your plan.
That is all.
2. When there's only one way to make the contract, do NOT let opponents discards change your plan.
That is all.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
How to Read Your Opponent's Cards
I simply can't say enough good things about this book.
One of my big falling down points as declarer was marginal hands - hands with lots of high cards out against me, and few controls.
This book gave me a methodology and approach, both to part score contracts and thin games, as declarer. It certainly won't apply to every hand out there, but the good habits picked up while working through the book can only help me going forward.
Now, I just need to play a bunch of hands, to reinforce good habits.
Next to be read, I think, is Thurston's 2/1 book. Time to stop "winging it".
One of my big falling down points as declarer was marginal hands - hands with lots of high cards out against me, and few controls.
This book gave me a methodology and approach, both to part score contracts and thin games, as declarer. It certainly won't apply to every hand out there, but the good habits picked up while working through the book can only help me going forward.
Now, I just need to play a bunch of hands, to reinforce good habits.
Next to be read, I think, is Thurston's 2/1 book. Time to stop "winging it".
Three From Saturday
I was back playing in the Saturday night IAC teams match. I was with a new partner who joined the team in January. We managed to eek out a 3 point win in a high scoring affair, 39-36, over 12 boards. Overall, I was generally pleased with our pair's play.
Hand 1:
The bidding caused partner some alarm, as she felt that she was competing, and not encouraging me. I could have let it hang at 1 heart, but felt that I might still have game on the cards. It turns out that 4 hearts had no play, off the AK of clubs, A of spades and with a 5-0 trump split. 5D had no play either, but only because diamonds were 4-1, if they'd been 3-2 I was cold.
This was a flat hand, as at the other table opponents wound up in 4 clubs down 1. (Good on our teammates for not bidding 4 hearts).
Hand 2:
Thanks to a partnership misunderstanding (as I said, partner was new, and we'd only played a few hands together before), I wound up declaring the exciting contract of 2 Diamonds.
The lead was the 9 of spades, and I was already under the gun. While the 9 doesn't look like an underlead of the king, there is an opportunity to pick up a valuable trick here. However, I rose with the ace, which turned out to be right.
In my head, almost right away, was that I needed hearts to be 3-3. I didn't have a firm trick count, but that seemed right.
I ruffed a spade, cashed the ace of clubs, returned to the board via the king of hearts, and ruffed another spade. Now, I exited a club.
By now, defense was on to me, and a diamond was returned, as expected. Thank goodness I had the ace! Unfortunately, a club to dummy was overruffed, and trump was drained. But I had my 6, and now I had to hope that the remaining hearts were 2-2. They were, and 2!D making unexpectedly brought home 4 IMPs.
Hand 3:
East opened 1NT, and played it. I led the 5 of hearts.
While I haven't been able to touch Lawrence's book in a day or two, this hand showed that I'm at least occasionally able to count out a hand. Let's see...
For starters, declarer had 15-17. I had 10, dummy 5, so partner was 8-10.
The ten of hearts won on the board, partner dropping the 3. Ergo, declarer started with Ax of hearts. The 6 of clubs came off the board, J, K, A. The King of hearts drew the Ace from declarer, as expected. The 4 of clubs went to the queen, partner discarding the 5 of spades, which looked like it might not be partner's lowest. I made a mental note to watch for the 2 of spades. I also noted that clubs were 4441 around the table.
The 3 of spades from dummy drew the queen from declarer, partner playing the 2. Aha. So partner had something. Maybe her king had just been finessed?
Declarer slapped down the ace of diamonds, and now declarer's hand was becoming clear. QS, AH, AD and KC had been played, for 13 points. If declarer had the AS, that was 17 points, and she was done.
However, declarer played the Jack of diamonds, which held. Clearly, declarer did not have the ace of spades! Had partner ducked from AK of spades?
All would be clear soon, as a club was led. I took my ten, and played 3 rounds of hearts. The spade jack was overtaken by partner's ace, and the King of diamonds in partner's hand was the setting trick.
Down 1 gained us another 4 IMPs. It also raised some fist pumping. It felt really good to know pretty much everything that was happening on this hand. If counting that carefully is that much fun, I may have to start doing it on every hand.
Hand 1:
 | ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| p | p | 1♣ | |
| 1♠ | p | p | 2♦ |
| 2♥ | 3♦ | 3♥ | 5♦ |
| p | p | p |
The bidding caused partner some alarm, as she felt that she was competing, and not encouraging me. I could have let it hang at 1 heart, but felt that I might still have game on the cards. It turns out that 4 hearts had no play, off the AK of clubs, A of spades and with a 5-0 trump split. 5D had no play either, but only because diamonds were 4-1, if they'd been 3-2 I was cold.
This was a flat hand, as at the other table opponents wound up in 4 clubs down 1. (Good on our teammates for not bidding 4 hearts).
Hand 2:
| ||||||||
 | ||||||||
|
Thanks to a partnership misunderstanding (as I said, partner was new, and we'd only played a few hands together before), I wound up declaring the exciting contract of 2 Diamonds.
The lead was the 9 of spades, and I was already under the gun. While the 9 doesn't look like an underlead of the king, there is an opportunity to pick up a valuable trick here. However, I rose with the ace, which turned out to be right.
In my head, almost right away, was that I needed hearts to be 3-3. I didn't have a firm trick count, but that seemed right.
I ruffed a spade, cashed the ace of clubs, returned to the board via the king of hearts, and ruffed another spade. Now, I exited a club.
By now, defense was on to me, and a diamond was returned, as expected. Thank goodness I had the ace! Unfortunately, a club to dummy was overruffed, and trump was drained. But I had my 6, and now I had to hope that the remaining hearts were 2-2. They were, and 2!D making unexpectedly brought home 4 IMPs.
Hand 3:
|  | |||||||||
|
East opened 1NT, and played it. I led the 5 of hearts.
While I haven't been able to touch Lawrence's book in a day or two, this hand showed that I'm at least occasionally able to count out a hand. Let's see...
For starters, declarer had 15-17. I had 10, dummy 5, so partner was 8-10.
The ten of hearts won on the board, partner dropping the 3. Ergo, declarer started with Ax of hearts. The 6 of clubs came off the board, J, K, A. The King of hearts drew the Ace from declarer, as expected. The 4 of clubs went to the queen, partner discarding the 5 of spades, which looked like it might not be partner's lowest. I made a mental note to watch for the 2 of spades. I also noted that clubs were 4441 around the table.
The 3 of spades from dummy drew the queen from declarer, partner playing the 2. Aha. So partner had something. Maybe her king had just been finessed?
Declarer slapped down the ace of diamonds, and now declarer's hand was becoming clear. QS, AH, AD and KC had been played, for 13 points. If declarer had the AS, that was 17 points, and she was done.
However, declarer played the Jack of diamonds, which held. Clearly, declarer did not have the ace of spades! Had partner ducked from AK of spades?
All would be clear soon, as a club was led. I took my ten, and played 3 rounds of hearts. The spade jack was overtaken by partner's ace, and the King of diamonds in partner's hand was the setting trick.
Down 1 gained us another 4 IMPs. It also raised some fist pumping. It felt really good to know pretty much everything that was happening on this hand. If counting that carefully is that much fun, I may have to start doing it on every hand.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Book in Progress: How to Read Your Opponents' Cards
I'm about halfway through this book now, and I simply can't say enough good things about it. I've always read that Lawrence is one of the best bridge authors around, and now I know why. His presentation is simple, straightforward, and easy to understand. There's absolutely no question, though, that if I can adopt the habits he's preaching in this book, I will become a significantly better player.
Reading books on play is about a million times more fun than reading books on bidding!
Monday, January 26, 2009
Bad Habit
I need to stop leading short suits when I have one or more natural trump tricks. Yesterday, this bad habit cost our partnership tempo, which in turn allowed the opponents to make a hopeless part score.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Another Book Down
Two books down now.
I bought this book because, while I'm I'm fairly familiar with the ACBL SAYC document, I wanted to make sure I had a full and complete understanding of modern SAYC. There are a lot of "extras" to the system that are nearly universal, and some truisms (such as that a 2/1 promises another bid) that are, well, less than explicit in the ACBL document.
Plus, SAYC really is the base for 2/1, so I wanted to take this one last step to make sure my foundation was firm before starting in on all the 2/1 books I've ordered.
System books, well, they're dense. This one contained, a bit surprisingly, some things that I wasn't familiar with (Jordan 2NT for example). Still, the book portrays itself as trying to describe the modern SAYC in use online, and I think it does an admirable job of doing so. I certainly did not absorb all of it in one read, but it will be a good reference, and if I'm still playing SAYC in a year or two, it maybe a good reread.
For my next read, I have chosen something a bit more...fun. Lawrence's How To Read The Opponents Cards. I can't wait.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Friday at the Club
I'm still really struggling with my stamina in long sessions at the club, which is disheartening given that I've run 3 marathons in my time. The longer a session goes, the more badly I fade out.
I played with a very good partner, but could only manage a 47%, breaking my streak of finishing in the points. It was a fair result, I think, as I certainly made my share of poor decisions.
Hand 1:
My partner called me a chicken. Probably correct. As it turned out, he only made 3, but he assured me that he would find the right line if I pushed to 4.
Hand 2:
Partner had Ax in spades, and spades were 4-1. Even the singleton king left no play. Partner liked the bidding this time, as he figured the slam was 50%.
Of course, in a weak field, this was a clear bottom.
Hand 3:
Unmitigated disaster, as they made 4NT. Dummy had 2 hearts - just enough to finesse my queen twice.
Hand 4:
I managed to go down on this one, when partner was afraid we were missing slam.
LHO cashed the AK of clubs. I ruffed the second round, went up to the Ace of hearts, LHO discarding the ten. When I came back to the King of hearts, LHO was out, and even a long think at the table, nor the diamonds being Qx on my left, could save me.
Maybe, if I think about this hand a little more, I'll see how everyone else made it comfortably.
I played with a very good partner, but could only manage a 47%, breaking my streak of finishing in the points. It was a fair result, I think, as I certainly made my share of poor decisions.
Hand 1:
 | ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| 1♣ | |||
| X | 1♠ | 2♥ | 3♥ |
| p | 3♠ | p | p |
| p |
My partner called me a chicken. Probably correct. As it turned out, he only made 3, but he assured me that he would find the right line if I pushed to 4.
Hand 2:
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| 1NT | p | 2♥ | |
| p | 2♠ | p | 4♥ |
| p | 5♦ | p | 6♠ |
| p | p | p |
Partner had Ax in spades, and spades were 4-1. Even the singleton king left no play. Partner liked the bidding this time, as he figured the slam was 50%.
Of course, in a weak field, this was a clear bottom.
Hand 3:
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| p | p | p | |
| 1♥ | X | 1♠ | X |
| 1 | 2♣ | 2NT | X |
| p | p | p |
Unmitigated disaster, as they made 4NT. Dummy had 2 hearts - just enough to finesse my queen twice.
Hand 4:
| ||||||||||||||||||
| |
| ||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| 1♦ | |||
| p | 1♠ | p | 2♥ |
| p | 4♥ | p | p |
| p |
I managed to go down on this one, when partner was afraid we were missing slam.
LHO cashed the AK of clubs. I ruffed the second round, went up to the Ace of hearts, LHO discarding the ten. When I came back to the King of hearts, LHO was out, and even a long think at the table, nor the diamonds being Qx on my left, could save me.
Maybe, if I think about this hand a little more, I'll see how everyone else made it comfortably.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Now, With Actual Cards
If I don't start including hands in this blog, it's going to quickly turn into an ego blog, not a bridge blog. Nobody wants that.
1. At the club yesterday, east bids 1 spade, west raises to 2. It's passed around to me.
I bid 3 clubs, on the principle that I once heard an expert say that you should almost always balance. Somehow, this propelled opponents into an unmakeable 4 spade contract. Not sure my bid was smart or right, but it did work I guess.
2. Partner bids aggressively, and you end up in a 24 point 3NT. Dummy has AKQ64 in spades, with no outside entries after the opening lead. You have the doubleton 53 in hand.
I felt pretty smart in immediately ducking a spade. I probably only needed 4 tricks from spades, and only 3 was going to need a lot of luck/bad defense to bring it home. As it turned out, LHO refused to promote my king of diamonds in hand, so I needed exactly 4 spade tricks.
Alas, spades were 5-1, so I went down 1. Still, I was reasonably happy with my play.
3. An amusing story from the club, at my own expense I guess.
Holding 0445 and 11 HCP, I opted to open 1 club in first seat. LHO overcalled a spade. Partner bid 2 spades, which I took to be limit raise. 3 clubs got me 4 spades from partner.
LHO is a very good young player. I wondered if he was psyching. I decided that if he was, he had me. 4 spades makes most sense as 7 or 8 strong spades, but I didn't think partner would bid 2 spades with that.
Spades were 6700 around the table. My 5 club bid was doubled, and good for a bottom. (I *think* we can make 3 spades, despite the 6-0 split).
(Note - it's possible that 2 spades was undiscussed. Partner was an expert, but knew I was rookie-ish.)
I wish I could remember more of the hands I played yesterday (24 at the club, maybe 15 or so later, online). I know I had lots of questions and uncertainties, but one of the problems with club play is that I'm forgetting what happened by the time I get to the end.
Maybe I need to start carrying around a score card, and writing questions on it.
1. At the club yesterday, east bids 1 spade, west raises to 2. It's passed around to me.
| ||||||||
|
I bid 3 clubs, on the principle that I once heard an expert say that you should almost always balance. Somehow, this propelled opponents into an unmakeable 4 spade contract. Not sure my bid was smart or right, but it did work I guess.
2. Partner bids aggressively, and you end up in a 24 point 3NT. Dummy has AKQ64 in spades, with no outside entries after the opening lead. You have the doubleton 53 in hand.
I felt pretty smart in immediately ducking a spade. I probably only needed 4 tricks from spades, and only 3 was going to need a lot of luck/bad defense to bring it home. As it turned out, LHO refused to promote my king of diamonds in hand, so I needed exactly 4 spade tricks.
Alas, spades were 5-1, so I went down 1. Still, I was reasonably happy with my play.
3. An amusing story from the club, at my own expense I guess.
Holding 0445 and 11 HCP, I opted to open 1 club in first seat. LHO overcalled a spade. Partner bid 2 spades, which I took to be limit raise. 3 clubs got me 4 spades from partner.
LHO is a very good young player. I wondered if he was psyching. I decided that if he was, he had me. 4 spades makes most sense as 7 or 8 strong spades, but I didn't think partner would bid 2 spades with that.
Spades were 6700 around the table. My 5 club bid was doubled, and good for a bottom. (I *think* we can make 3 spades, despite the 6-0 split).
(Note - it's possible that 2 spades was undiscussed. Partner was an expert, but knew I was rookie-ish.)
I wish I could remember more of the hands I played yesterday (24 at the club, maybe 15 or so later, online). I know I had lots of questions and uncertainties, but one of the problems with club play is that I'm forgetting what happened by the time I get to the end.
Maybe I need to start carrying around a score card, and writing questions on it.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Swimming With Sharks
I've been playing a bit less and reading a bit more this week. Last night, one of my IAC teammates pointed me to an excellent 2/1 tutorial online. While it included Bergen raises, which I glossed over, it also taught me a thing or two about FSF (Fourth Suit Forcing) that I hadn't been aware of.
Of course, cramming knowledge into your head does not make for instant and flawless execution - just ask any college student.
Nonetheless, this Sunday was a special brunch and game at the club, celebrating the Rookie/Master win. My Master level partner, Jean, had even offered to play with me again for the game.
Until now, all I'd played at the club were the rookie/master and 199er games. Now, I was playing against some of the top club players around. There were going to be far less gifts than usual.
I was nervous early, and it showed. I missed making a reasonable 1NT answer after RHO overcalled. I found myself in more tough bidding spots, and didn't always get them right. We pulled in a few zeroes, including a table of 3 boards of 0, 0, 0.5.
That said, my expert partner pulled out some great competitive bids that seemed to score well. I was declarer a fair bit (more than I was comfortable with, maybe), and at least some of those ended well. The only strong feelings that I had were that the field was much tougher, and that my partner was quite good.
The last table was one of our better ones of the day, and as we were finishing the director dropped by to tell us that going into the last round, we were first east/west by a smidge. I was a bit surprised, but our last table made us clear top east/west, and second overall, for 2.5 masterpoints (a very big haul for the likes of me!)
I'm on a run of consecutive finishes in the money, and the masterpoints are fairly well rolling in right now. My confidence is rising, especially with Sunday's game, but I think I need a bit of perspective. My bidding is going a bit wonky, due to all this reading/thinking I'm doing , and my counting is getting a bit weaker, due to the lack of practice.
Maybe the best thing I can take from all of this is that I'm not totally out of place in the typical club game anymore. It'll be some time, though, before I'm truly at the level of the better club players.
Of course, cramming knowledge into your head does not make for instant and flawless execution - just ask any college student.
Nonetheless, this Sunday was a special brunch and game at the club, celebrating the Rookie/Master win. My Master level partner, Jean, had even offered to play with me again for the game.
Until now, all I'd played at the club were the rookie/master and 199er games. Now, I was playing against some of the top club players around. There were going to be far less gifts than usual.
I was nervous early, and it showed. I missed making a reasonable 1NT answer after RHO overcalled. I found myself in more tough bidding spots, and didn't always get them right. We pulled in a few zeroes, including a table of 3 boards of 0, 0, 0.5.
That said, my expert partner pulled out some great competitive bids that seemed to score well. I was declarer a fair bit (more than I was comfortable with, maybe), and at least some of those ended well. The only strong feelings that I had were that the field was much tougher, and that my partner was quite good.
The last table was one of our better ones of the day, and as we were finishing the director dropped by to tell us that going into the last round, we were first east/west by a smidge. I was a bit surprised, but our last table made us clear top east/west, and second overall, for 2.5 masterpoints (a very big haul for the likes of me!)
I'm on a run of consecutive finishes in the money, and the masterpoints are fairly well rolling in right now. My confidence is rising, especially with Sunday's game, but I think I need a bit of perspective. My bidding is going a bit wonky, due to all this reading/thinking I'm doing , and my counting is getting a bit weaker, due to the lack of practice.
Maybe the best thing I can take from all of this is that I'm not totally out of place in the typical club game anymore. It'll be some time, though, before I'm truly at the level of the better club players.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Book Report: Improve Your Bidding Judgement (Kimelman)
When I woke up yesterday, my first thought was "I'll spend the day reading. I have all these bridge books I want to read!"
By dinner time, I had advanced by a whole chapter - maybe 6 pages. (Such is life. I traded reading time for family time.)
Nonetheless, in the evening I was able to largely finish the first of my bridge book order - Neil Kimelman's Improve Your Bidding Judgement. This book came recommended to me, as I was looking for a book that would help with judgement. The advice I was given was "Neil Kimelman's book is pretty advanced, but certainly would repay study".
I think I agree on both counts. The book generally focuses on bidding decisions in competition, which is exactly what I was looking for. Some of the auctions were a little over my head, and I wasn't exactly sure how to interpret the preceding auction. That will come with time, and rereading this book down the road will undoubtably open my eyes.
There were definitely a few points that were faitly accessible, including:
- takeout double vs overcall (one of these came up last night, and I think based on the book I made the wrong decision)
- opening NT vs opening 1M. (Not sure I agree, but I think his point is well made, and worth thinking about)
The high level double/pass/bid is something I certainly plan on revisiting as time goes on.
The problems/solutions at the back were useful, and I think illustrated that I have some ways to go before I fully grok the book.
This was the book I was most looking forward to reading. Hopefully I've learned something from it, and hopefully future rereadings will help even more.
I'm still waiting for Lawrence's 2/1 book, and I'm seriously debating picking up Thurston's. For now, I think that next up will either be Downey/Pomer's SAYC book (I think this is the book I have the best chance of breezing through), or Hardy's 2/1 book.
I'm hoping that working through some of the drudgery of bidding theory will help me when I get into the good stuff - the card play - later on.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
ACBL
I've managed to play 3 ACBL games this week. I played online Monday and Thursday, online, and both times my partner and I managed to scrape into the points.
On Friday, I managed to get to the local club for the Friday morning 299er game. It was a bit of a strange set of cards, with partner declaring most of the first 12 boards, then very little after that. We were set very often in our contracts, but often wound up with a good score anyways.
Despite never having a very good feeling for how we were doing, we managed to top the session with a 61% game.
So three games, and I got points three times. I'm now probably a club master (whee!) None of which is to say, though, that I wasn't making mistakes. Both online games features discussion with my partner via email afterwards. I think I'm the type of player that really thrives on the post-mortem analysis. I certainly don't mind being told that I did something wrong, especially when it didn't feel right at the table.
There was less analysis in the Friday game, but I still caught myself making mistakes at the table. The most notable was forgetting which contract I was defending (they were in 2 hearts, I was trying to promote my long suit).
The other mistake was while defending 4 hearts. Dummy, on my left, held Kx in diamonds. I held AQxx. We took the first three tricks. Out of clubs, I thoughtlessly returned a spade to dummy, hoping to get 2 diamond tricks later. As soon as I led, I realized I had made a howler. Dummy's spades were KQJTx. Declarer ducked, and dummy won.
Fortunately for me, spades were now blocked, and declarer misplayed it badly. If she hadn't, declarer was going to throw all her diamonds on dummy's spades, and make an unmakeable contract.
I saw it all, but 2 seconds too late.
On Friday, I managed to get to the local club for the Friday morning 299er game. It was a bit of a strange set of cards, with partner declaring most of the first 12 boards, then very little after that. We were set very often in our contracts, but often wound up with a good score anyways.
Despite never having a very good feeling for how we were doing, we managed to top the session with a 61% game.
So three games, and I got points three times. I'm now probably a club master (whee!) None of which is to say, though, that I wasn't making mistakes. Both online games features discussion with my partner via email afterwards. I think I'm the type of player that really thrives on the post-mortem analysis. I certainly don't mind being told that I did something wrong, especially when it didn't feel right at the table.
There was less analysis in the Friday game, but I still caught myself making mistakes at the table. The most notable was forgetting which contract I was defending (they were in 2 hearts, I was trying to promote my long suit).
The other mistake was while defending 4 hearts. Dummy, on my left, held Kx in diamonds. I held AQxx. We took the first three tricks. Out of clubs, I thoughtlessly returned a spade to dummy, hoping to get 2 diamond tricks later. As soon as I led, I realized I had made a howler. Dummy's spades were KQJTx. Declarer ducked, and dummy won.
Fortunately for me, spades were now blocked, and declarer misplayed it badly. If she hadn't, declarer was going to throw all her diamonds on dummy's spades, and make an unmakeable contract.
I saw it all, but 2 seconds too late.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Meandering
I've been slowly expanding the circle of bridge blogs that I follow. One of the best, DoubleSqueeze, has led me to a few more, which have led me to a few more, including a local one, which is always nice to know about.
Part of this meandering led me to a couple of conversations between expert and world class players. I felt a bit like a kid in a candy shop, or maybe like a kid getting to see Babe Ruth or The Rocket in person. It rekindled in me the desire to become an expert at this game.
Of course, by the time I reach that level, I do sometimes wonder how many players will be left. There's a decent chance that all the ones younger than me will STILL be better than me, but what can I do? :)
My book orders have been slowly coming in. I'm now sitting surrounded by Kelsey, Lawrence, Hardy, Reese, and others. It may take some time, and more than one reading, but there's a lot I can learn here. I'm excited for what tomorrow will bring.
Part of this meandering led me to a couple of conversations between expert and world class players. I felt a bit like a kid in a candy shop, or maybe like a kid getting to see Babe Ruth or The Rocket in person. It rekindled in me the desire to become an expert at this game.
Of course, by the time I reach that level, I do sometimes wonder how many players will be left. There's a decent chance that all the ones younger than me will STILL be better than me, but what can I do? :)
My book orders have been slowly coming in. I'm now sitting surrounded by Kelsey, Lawrence, Hardy, Reese, and others. It may take some time, and more than one reading, but there's a lot I can learn here. I'm excited for what tomorrow will bring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
