Dubious Logic

Tartakower's Maxim

Savielly Tartakower (1887-1956) was chess player born of Christian and Jewish Austrian parents in Russia who studied Law in Geneva and Vienna. After the First World War he settled in Paris becoming a Polish citizen on its independence in 1918, representing that country in the 1930 Olympiad. His diverse experiences reflected in his chess, he was imaginative over the board and in life, famous for his wit and aphorisms.

Three times in the last fortnight I've quoted him: "The winner of the game is the player who makes the second-last mistake." Perhaps even, truer of bridge than chess, with only 13 moves in the play of bridge deal, potentially hundreds at chess. The topical slant is that online bridge exposes the game in two ways: exact card-by-card replay is available; computer analysis is available at each.

This is a great way of learning, of 'getting your head around' how the cards work. But you need to be critical and transfer back insights gained to the real-world problem with only 26 cards visible. From an inter-county teams-of-eight match, both vulnerable.

At my table West declared just two spades; I led a trump, Declarer won the nine and led the diamond king. South won, tried a second spade but declarer took the ace, two red winners and two ruffs in each hand for eight tricks. He led a heart and finding myself on lead at trick ten with the last spade and ace-queen of clubs, I had to concede an overtrick.

The stakes were higher above where West showed great confidence is his play, again on a trump lead. He started nicely; winning in dummy and leading a low diamond, ducked by South, the singleton king winning. What now?

The diamond king isn't an extra trick as such (the queen won a trick before) but with no second trump lead, there are three ruffs in each hand. But the trump at trick one, one diamond, heart ace and six ruffs is only nine. Maybe something would turn up.

At trick three declarer ruffed a club, returned to the heart ace, ruffed a second club and led a diamond. The preference for the heart re-entry persuaded South that West held the diamond knave and he rose with the ace to see it ruffed away. Declarer had a tenth trick, the diamond queen. He ruffed another club and cashed it – North retaining the knave, a card he was known to hold from South's misguided play of the ace.

Another diamond ruffed with the spade ten was therefore safe. But declarer led a heart and South, still in the hot seat, converted declarer's play into the second-last mistake, by ducking – when he needed to rise and play a trump. That put North on lead with the queen and, after cashing the club ace, he had to lead away from the spade king into West's ace-ten.

Was declarer's approach correct? The early play was certainly practical and he camouflaged his holdings well but he erred in the endgame suggesting he was playing on reflex. When the contract is close, double-check the inferences before a critical play. Lastly, double-dummy shows that attacking hearts is the only way to make the contract. Should declarer look for a miracle layout? The technical players will, the pragmatists will play (the first eight tricks) as West did: you just have to be happy with your style.

Published Saturday 18.Jul.2020