Writing 14

Make sure you have logged in before clicking a Members’ Area Button

Yorkshire Masters Pairs 2009

This year 20 pairs competed in the Yorkshire Masters Pairs at Bradford Bridge Club on Sunday 17th May. This is a graded event in which players ranked at Regional Master and above are Grade 1, players ranked at Tournament Master, Star Master, or Master are Grade 2 and those currently ranked below Master are Grade 3.

The event, expertly directed by Bradford’s renowned TD Stuart Davies had received only 4 entries at Grade 2 and 1 entry at Grade 3. It was therefore run as one complete section with all pairs playing either 2 or 3 boards against every other pair with 24 boards before the excellent tea was served, followed by another 26 boards after tea.

The method of scoring was by Butler imps which involves each pair’s score on a board being compared to the board’s average (after the top score and bottom score are ignored), with the difference in scores being converted to ± imps. This method of scoring means that one uses team tactics in the bidding and play – bid games (risk a close game especially if vulnerable) but do not risk the contract for an overtrick and employ safety plays which might cost a trick but ensure the contract. This contrasts sharply with tactics at match-pointed pairs where an overtrick can be the difference between a top and a bottom so one takes risks at this form of scoring. Stuart scored the Butlers after every round so players always knew how well (or how badly they were doing).

Bob and I won the Grade 2 competition in 2008 when the event was held at Harrogate Bridge Club. Although there were only 5 entrants at Grade 2 that year and like this year the event was run as one section only, we did actually finish 7th overall (out of 26 pairs). So we went to Bradford this year to ‘defend our title’.

It transpired that we were literally 1 board away from victory over the whole field. We came second with a total of +46 imps to lose to Tony McNiff and Bill Townsend with +59 imps. But it was against this formidable pair that we had our single disaster of the day when we wrote 1100 in the minus column for board 13 (yes, board 13) after I went 4 down doubled and vulnerable in a 3 Heart contract. This translated to -13 imps on the board (or +13 imps for Tony and Bill). Stuart Davies rightly commented later that had we held the loss to -6 imps on the board then we would have won the event. I didn’t ask Stuart what our imp score would have been for -800 instead of -1100. I feared the answer since I could have held the loss to
-800 had I played it better!

A few hands from the competition:

1. Session 1 – Board 5

You reach 4♠ holding
   ♠ AQJ9843
    ♥ KJ6
    ♦ 85
    ♣ 7

The heart 8 is led and partner puts down
     ♠ 62
     ♥ AQ10 5
     ♦ K1073
     ♣ K63

You win with the heart 10 in dummy, RHO following with the 2, you then successfully finesse the spade Jack with both opponents following. What next?

o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o–o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o

2. Session 1 – Board 7

Both sides vulnerable you pick up a nice 2-suiter:
      ♠ -
      ♥ A98
      ♦ AK1032
      ♣ KQJ103

What do you bid after your right-hand opponent opens the bidding with 3 Spades?

o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o–o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o

3. Session 2 – Board 5

You are South, vulnerable and the opponents are not vulnerable. Partner opens the bidding with 1♠ and the next hand passes. What do you bid with the following hand?

    ♠ 9
     ♥ K5
     ♦ KJ765
     ♣ AJ432

-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-O-o-

Discussions……….

1. Bob and I were defending this contract and Bob got off to a good start by leading the heart 8. This gave declarer a chance to go wrong. In his urgency to repeat the spade finesse the declarer tried to return to the dummy the only way he could – in the heart suit. This was a disaster for declarer since my 2 of hearts was singleton and I was able to ruff dummies heart (with my now single King of spades). I returned the club 8 to Bob’s ace who dutifully switched to a diamond allowing me to take the Ace and Queen of diamonds for the setting trick. This resulted in 10 imps for us since the common score was 4♠ making +1.

After the spade Jack holds declarer must lay down the Ace of spades (safety play). As it happens the tricks roll in after the King falls. The hearts provide a discard for the club or a diamond and declarer loses only the two minor suit aces or two diamonds.

But even if the King did not fall on the Ace (if I had started with Kxx in spades) then declarer can still fall back on the hearts hoping I hold 3, 4 or 5 hearts. (after all, my partner’s 8 of hearts could have been ‘mud’, or top of doubleton, or singleton) in which case he will successfully pitch a loser on the fourth heart from dummy.

2. Bob held this hand and whatever method accords with your own system against opening pre-empts, it is unlikely that you will be able to get the message across to partner that you have such a nice hand. A number of people double for take-out but this usually promises the heart suit – which you do not have. We were playing Fishbein in which X is for penalties and 3NT is to play. A simple 4 clubs (take-out) in our system was likely to be passed.

Bob solved the problem by bidding 4NT which effectively forced us into a minor suit game. From his point of view I didn’t need to hold very much in order to make this a reasonable bet.

I actually held

♠ Q86

♥ KQ52
♦ 97

♣ 8764

and dutifully bid 5 clubs. This made +1 for +620 and we picked up 6 imps on the deal. Best defence against a spade contract takes only 4 tricks anyway so 3 spades makes with 4 going 1 off and 5 spades only off 2. The opponent sat over Bob held Ax in spades and the club Ace and probably expected to have a good chance of defeating 5 clubs so it was not clear that a sacrifice bid of 5♠ was the right move for him.

3. Bob held this hand and over my 1♠ he bid 2♣ (not 2♦). His reasoning was that he fully expected to end in No Trumps and bidding 2♣ does not eliminate the possibility of finding a diamond fit because I will still bid diamonds if I have them. I actually re-bid 2♠ so Bob invited with 2NT which I raised to 3NT.

His bidding had the effect of ‘right-siding’ the contract and he duly received the lead of the 4 of diamonds. Dinah Stocken, Bob’s LHO held 5 diamonds and 4 hearts. His RHO Peter Stocken was void in diamonds and would probably have led a heart from 10842 if he had been on lead to my 3NT. The avoidance of the heart lead gave Bob a tempo and he managed to make the contract for +600 when most pairs in 3NT were going -1. We scored +8 imps on the deal.

Another point about this hand lies in the fact that I had raised 2NT to 3NT on the following hand:

♠ AQ1043

♥ QJ6
♦ A93

♣ 109

We might only have a combined 24 count and 3NT is likely to be tight but at Butler scoring the 3NT bid is mandatory. As I placed dummy on the table after the diamond lead, I commented to Peter, my LHO, “Oh, the lure of the vulnerable game”.

All-in-all a good day’s bridge in which we made a minimum of errors in the bidding and defence and remained reasonably solid in declarer play to outscore a number of strong pairs. Throughout the two sessions we never fell below 3rd place in the rankings.

The complete final rankings can be found at the YCBA site through this link:

http://www.ycba.freeserve.co.uk/results.htm

Dave Butler

June 2009

Yorkshire Masters Pairs 2009

By David Butler