Introduction vii 1. Roman Keycard Blackwood 12 by Edwin B. Kantar A quick guideline to playing this popular slam convention; a list of 37 rules; plus 30 example auctions 2. Make Your Own Relays 33 by Alan Truscott You can be your own bidding inventor. It's easy and it's fun. 3. In-And-Out Valuation 39 by Jeff Rubens Some honor cards are more valuable than others. Are they in partner's suit or out? 4. Two-Club Rebid Artificial 46 by Bobby Lipsitz Ways for opener to show hand-patterns that are not covered by Standard American bidding. 5. What Do You Play-and Why? 52 by Alvin Roth and Tobias Stone A classic quiz of 22 play problems, detailed with famous players of the past. 6. The Monty Hall Trap 140 by Phil Martin Information that the opponents give you is not the same as information you discover for yourself. 7. For Experts Only 147 by Pamela and Matthew Granovetter Four essays on cardplay designed to lift the game of the expert and would-be expert. 8. Three Notrump as a Weak Slam Try 163 by Kit Woolsey How to distinguish between serious and non-serious slam invitations. 9. How to Be a Difficult Opponent 168 by Terence Reese A top declarer wins the first trick with the most ambiguous card he can. 10. Rediscovering the Forcing Notrump 174 by Eric Kokish and friends Welcome to the world of the forcing notrump in the 21st Century. Here are new methods for describing responder's hand. 11. Bridge Probabilities 185 by Steve Bloom Are two chances better than one? Not always, says this mathematics professor. 12. The Other Way 194 by Martin Hoffman Sometimes declarer must play a critical card early, before the defense knows what's going on. 13. Ethics For Experts 196 by Michael Rosenberg Huddles, non-huddles, slow cards and fast cards all create a dilemma in the world of bridge ethics.
As a test of how easy you are to read, how would you play these familiar combinations? In each case you are playing this suit early on in a notrump contract.
(1) x x x
K Q x x
(2) x x
A Q J x
(3) x x x
A K Q x
(4) x x x
Q x
You propose to lead a low card from dummy, but you have different purposes.
In a technical sense there is a right and a wrong way to play most of these
combinations. And the manner in which you play them may be important too.
In position (1) you want to ferret out the position of the ace. Which card
do you normally play-the king or the queen? The queen is better, because if
you play the king, West, holding A-x-x, will place you with king-queen and,
if a good player, will hold off. It is not so easy for him to duck the
queen because you might be playing toward the Q-J-x-x-x or even to an
unsupported queen. Similarly, with K-Q-10-x, the best card to play on the
first round is the queen, not the king.
In position (2) you intend to finesse and you want to find out who has the king. This time, if you play the queen, a good defender will read you for A-Q-J and will hold up the king. But if you finesse the jack he will surely win, because from his point of view you might be playing toward A-J-10-x or Q-J-x-x and he won't want to give you an easy trick.
In position (3) you don't want it to be clear to everyone that you hold all the top honors. The best card to play is the queen, which could be from a number of combinations.
With (4) you are leading toward the queen as a deceptive play, hoping that your opponents will place you with strength. This time, of course, you have no alternative but to play the queen.
Now, is your style and tempo exactly the same when you make all four plays? I very much doubt it. Think for a moment of when you play the defense: Can you not usually tell (especially at rubber bridge) whether the declarer is finessing, or that he knows the trick is his, or that he is up to something?
Even at duplicate very few players take a finesse and lay down a winner in exactly the same way. Work on it, and in particular avoid two pitfalls. One is the ethical pitfall. It is, of course, unethical to play the queen from A-K-Q and half wait to see who wins the trick. The other is the pitfall into which weak poker players fall-playing with extra speed or emphasis when trying a bluff.
It is worth adding that there is another side to this. If, as declarer or defender, you have noted that your opponent is slightly unethical in these situations, don't say anything! You won't get your money back, and next time you will read this opponent quite easily.
There are innumerable situations in defense where the same considerations arise. The opening lead is a good example. How does the average player act when contemplating the lead of the 5 (if that is his conventional card) from 7-5-2 against three notrump? He studies the board, goes up and down his hand like a musician strumming a guitar, and finally advances the 5 with an air of foolish expectancy. It is quite different when he leads the 5 from A-J-7-5-2. "My lead?" and out it comes.
Try, then, both to bid and play at a consistent tempo. The one occasion when it is entirely right to take your time is before playing to the first trick. Remember that declarer, seeing two hands in partnership, has an advantage over the defenders at the beginning of the play. By the time five or six tricks have been played, the balance will have shifted: The defenders will usually know more about the hand than the declarer. That is why, so far as possible, declarer should do his thinking when he has the advantage.
Let us turn now to a few technical situations where some players are more transparent than others. Most players are too much inclined to duck when their weakness has been attacked. Playing three notrump you encounter this familiar position:
8 6 4
5 led K played
A 9
Apart from this suit you have one certain trick to lose; after that, you
will have enough tricks for game. You cannot be sure which opponent will
win the side trick.
Technically, it is correct to duck the first trick, playing West for a six card suit and no entry. Most players would do that. Practically, it is much better to win with the ace and play on the side suit. You must hope that West has the entry and that the suit will be distributed in this fashion:
8 6 4
Q 10 7 5 x K J x
A 9
Now West may think you started with A-J-x and may not realize that you will
gallop home unless he lays down the queen. It is quite possible that West
will try to find his partner's entry.
I noted a similar situation recently from the other side of the table. Defending against two notrump, East won the first trick and switched to a new suit, which in fact was distributed as follows:
A x x
K J x Q 10 9 x
x x x
Most declarers, when the ten was led, would have held up for a round or two
and everyone would have known what was going on. But this declarer won
calmly with the ace. Twice later West was in the lead, but he had a fixed
idea that declarer held Q-x-x in the suit his partner had attacked.
On the other side of the coin are the plays that conceal strength. Many of these are well known, but here are a few that are not.
8 4 2
K J 7 3 9 6 5
A Q 10
At notrump, West leads the three and East plays the nine. If you win with
the 10, you will never induce West to lead this suit again. But if you play
the queen at trick one, West may well lead a low card when next on lead.
A similar coup is possible with K-J-x:
4
A Q 8 6 2 10 7 5 3
K J 9
West leads the 6 and on East's 10 South plays the king. If West takes the
first defense trick (as you must hope) he will lead low, because his
partner might hold J-10-x.
Finally, have you ever held up in a suit where you held three top winners and only three cards?
K 3
10 8 6 5 2 Q 9 7
A J 4
Suppose that this suit is spades, that you have no guard in hearts, and
that you will need to finesse toward East in diamonds. If you head the SQ
with the ace at trick one and lose a diamond trick to East, he may attack
hearts when he comes in. But suppose you play low from dummy and let the
queen hold! East will return the nine to dummy's king and will surely
persist with the suit later, placing his partner with A-x-x-x-x.
* A similar method is played by Eric Rodwell in his partnership with Jeff Meckstroth, and has been popularized as "Serious Three Notrump." In that method, the bids have a reverse meaning: three notrump is a serious slam try, and a cuebid is a weak try. Perhaps the method proposed by Woolsey could be labeled: "Non-Serious Three Notrump."
A common problem that troubles experts as well as average players is as follows:
Once a trump suit has been established and a game force has been created, just how much extra strength should a player have to make that first cuebid on the road to slam?
I have seen several expert pairs miss excellent slams or get too high because their methods are unable to handle this problem. Let's look at a typical case. Playing two over one as a game force, West holds:
S AKJxx H Axx D xx C Jxx
West East
1 S 2 D
2 S 3 S
?
Now what? Is this minimum West hand worth a four-heart cuebid, even
assuming East's three-spade call shows some slam interest, as many pairs
play? If West fails to cuebid four hearts, reasoning that he has a minimum
opening, he may find his partner holding:
S QTx H xx D AKJxxx C KQEast will certainly not move over a four-spade call. From his point of view partner likely has no side aces and the defense could have three cashing tricks if West's hand is:
S AKJxxx H QJx D Qx C JxThat East hand opposite the first West hand produces a pretty good play for slam.
On the other hand, suppose West tries a four-heart cuebid. Suppose East holds something like:
S xxx H Kx D AKJxx C AxxBecause West could be considerably stronger for his four-heart cuebid, it would be hard to imagine that East would not drive to at least the five-level and quite possibly to a slam. On this pair of hands, even five spades is in quite a bit of jeopardy.
How can this problem be solved?
What we would like is for West to be able to make a bid that shows some
slam interest without really being a slam try. If we decide to forget about
playing in three notrump when we have an established eight-card major-suit
fit, three notrump can be used for just that purpose. Not only does West
convey his approximate strength, but the whole four-level is left open for
further cuebidding without taking the partnership above game. Furthermore,
if West does cuebid instead of bidding three notrump, East knows that West
is really making a slam try rather than just cooperating, and East can bid
accordingly.
Let's see how this structure would work on my above examples:
West East
S A K J x x S Q 10 x
H A x x H x x
D x x D A K J x x x
C J x x C K Q
1 S 2 D
2 S 3 S
3 NT (some interest) 4 D (I'm interested,
tell me more)
4 H (normal cuebid) 4 NT (that's what I
needed)
5 C (0 or 3 keycards) 6 S
pass
West East
S A K J x x S x x x
H A x x H K x
D x x D A K J x x
C J x x C A x x
1 S 2 D
2 S 3 S
3 NT (some interest) 4 C (cuebid, also
interested)
4 H (normal cuebid) 4 S (I've made my try,
it's up to you)
pass (I'm out of gas)
If West were somewhat stronger, with a hand like:
S AKQxx H Axx D Qx C xxx,
he would cuebid an immediate four hearts rather than start with three
notrump. Note that this hand is a favorite to make a grand slam opposite
the second East hand, while the original hand is in jeopardy at the
five-level, which illustrates just how important it is to distinguish
between a real slam try and a hand that is just cooperating.
What if our trump suit is hearts? It is unwieldy to make three notrump the
general interest bid, for we no longer have room to cuebid spades below the
four-heart safety level. The solution is to make three spades the general
interest bid. Three notrump by either partner is a spade cuebid, of course.
This way, we have all the room we need.
Under what conditions should we play this treatment?
Any time we have established a game force with an eight-card major-suit
fit and the last bid was three of the major, it is reasonable to use the
general interest bid.
Also, consider auctions such as this:
Opener Responder
1 H 2 C
3 H
The jump establishes hearts as trumps, so it might not be a bad idea to
play three spades here as the mild slam try. The exact rules for when these
methods apply must be determined by each partnership. Whatever the rules
are, use of this treatment should make your slam bidding much smoother.