A Coup For You

Well actually it is a hand from Bernie. We may not talk with Berkowitz, but we talk with people who do talk with Berkowitz. You hold this hand: J 9, xx, K 10 x x, K Q J x x.

Bernie did not give the vulnerability, but let’s suppose that you are South and the auction goes as follows, with East as dealer:

1

1

2

Dbl

3

Dbl

P

?

Mike Flader is an Associate National Director who works the more important tournaments in our part of the world. He has had a higher profile in recent years, including writing the “Ruling the Game” column in the ACBL Bulletin, which pictures him in a judicial robe and wielding a gavel.

I had just finished writing an earlier note here where I commented on the proper role of dummy, when I glanced at Mike’s column and read the following:

At the club last week, I was dummy and my partner made a claim for the rest of the tricks. The opponents accepted his claim.

I could see that there was more to come in the column, but I was laughing so hard that I could not read it. How could this not be the end of the hand? Surely there was no “rest of the story at this point.” Maribeth was attracted to the noise, so I read the first two sentences to her. Now there were two of us laughing.

I finally focused enough to see that the (unnamed) writer of the letter questioned the partner’s line of play at the table, only to be told by declarer that it was not within his dummy rights. Now they were asking Mike if dummy could ask about a claim.

I told Maribeth that the writer needed the partnership desk, not a director!

Mike’s answer, tongue firmly in cheek I’m sure, was to cite dummy’s rights under Law 68D.

I’m still laughing, trying to imagine how John Fourness or Harry Goldwater would have handled this question.

With both vulnerable, LHO passes, partner opens 1 and RHO passes. You hold K75, JT9, 9754, QT7. Your agreement is that a raise is wide-ranging, but you could also choose to further limit your hand with a forcing NT. What do you think?

Update on Saturday, December 31, 2005 at 05:12PM by Jeff Miller

Bernie held the following hand:

Q J 9 6 4 2
K 85
A
A 9 3

That looks like a game try to me, but Bernie elected to bid game. I understand that, since I could have some really good cards (K, A) and game might have no play. Or I could have the right junk with nothing in diamonds, and it could be cold. Maybe a short suit try is right.

But my real point is the result. You obviously need the Q onside to get going. After finding it favorably placed, Bernie got plenty of information before finally playing on clubs. I had a strong opinion as dummy, which is unusual for me. (Regular partners know that as dummy I rarely form an opinion and never state one. If partner wants to consult me after the game, I’ll be happy to chat). Anyway, Bernie reached the same conclusion I had and got the clubs right, winning a vulnerable game swing.

So even though we both might have stretched a bit, and apparently both still think the other guy made a slightly inferior choice, we reached a playable vulnerable game. If either of us had been playing with a clone of himself, we would have missed it. There is a lesson here somewhere.

A friend sent an interesting bidding problem that has implications for our understandings.

You hold, red on white, xx, Jxx, KT9xx, KTx. Your RHO passes as dealer and so do you. LHO bids 2 and partner bids 5 . RHO passes, and it is up to you.

Update on Saturday, December 31, 2005 at 06:07PM by Jeff Miller

Not that it matters to our group’s assessment of the best answer, the actual partner hand was A K Q J x x x, void, D A x, A Q x x.

The vote of the “other panel” was 5 for 6 and 3 for pass.

When given the problem, I voted for 6 . I stated that I was worried about missing the grand. 5NT might show both Kings, but might also be misunderstood. I dismissed the “1958″ hand as extremely unlikely, especially given the auction and my hand. (Scary how close that is to the Wickham comment). I suggest two practical rules for my partnerships:

1. Beware of expecting a bid to have an extremely specific meaning, especially if you and your partner have never discussed it.
2. When seeking to ask a question about a specific suit, try to set the suit first (as Jonathan suggested in his comment).

In Denver I had the pleasure of playing with Bernie Miller, now a Floridian and a teammate in some major events over the last few years. Because of Lew Finkel’s commitments and young Bill Wickham’s age, Bernie and I decided to play together in the Senior KO. With a few emails, a little bidding practice, and a couple of online sessions we were ready to go. I wish we could say that it was one of those Bulletin stories where the first-time partnership wins, but we did come pretty close. Bernie is a great partner who works hard on every hand and almost always finds a good answer. Here is an intersting hand where he had the helm.

K 9 2
A 7 6 2
3
K 10 5 4 3

A Q 6
K Q 5 3
A Q 4 2
A Q

Board 8 Dealer E, Neither (reversed for convenience)

2	2 waiting
2NT	3 puppet stayman
3 1+ major  (DBL)	3 shows hearts
4	4NT
5 1 or 4 KC	5 queen ask
6 got it	7 Play well!

As North, I did not know about the heart jack, so I was risking a 4-1 split for starters. I was using Mr. Chang’s double of 3 to help me place partner’s cards. He had denied the diamond king with the jump to slam, and I thought he probably didn’t have the queen either. Without these diamond honors, he almost had to have the rounded jacks for his 2NT rebid. Wrong again!

So Bernie got to play a grand that probably would not be reached at the other table. Can you match his play and the 11-IMP pickup?

Opening lead: C8.

Update on Saturday, December 31, 2005 at 05:03PM by Jeff Miller
Sorry for omitting the opening lead in the first post. I’ll get better at this. Check out Bernie’s coment for the correct line of play. The player who doubled and made the opening lead held the following hand:

J 8 5 3
J 8 4
K J 8 6 5
8

The double may have encouraged us to bid the grand, in a sense, but it laid a trap for Bernie.