Dubious Logic

Suffolk Championship Teams 2004-5

Qualification

This was the first time I'd been able to play in the championship teams since the change in structure two years ago. In days gone by I mooted something of this sort in committee – a venue event to reduce the field then a knockout, instead of head-to-head matches from the start - so I'm pleased to see the format taking hold.

And it seems popular too – on the qualification day, rather more teams turned up than were expected. I'm in favour too, of the committee's acceptance of payment on arrival rather than all that cheque posting business. But these days, when you can get in touch so easily, you'd have thought it was just polite to tell someone you were coming a couple of days before. Malcolm Carey was playing and running the event but he managed the change in numbers with typical ingenuity - and the good fortune of having another set of duplicated boards in his car (previously created for an upcoming county match).

As the hall filled up it became apparent that where you sat might have a bearing on events. First in took near seats by the door and the later arrivals sat at the back of the hall. That back section started to look quite formidable, featuring within it defending champions STOKES (C. Stokes, P. Markwell, J. Lang, D. Morran), the 2003-4 League winners SHERER (M. Sherer, E. Newman, R. Hanley, W. Tweddell) and other fancied teams. It was four to qualify from each section plus the 'fastest loser', then the top four through to the knock-outs. Would any tall timber fall to the first cut?

There should be another article somewhere in this issue with in-depth analysis of this stage so I'll cut to the chase: when the eight 3-board rounds had been played, both SHERER and STOKES would be playing in the Suffolk Plate. The mix of teams for the next stage had something of an unfamiliar look and eight more rounds resulted in a win for HANSON (Pauline Hanson / Basia Malinowska, Harold Morris / Anne Wilmer) followed by CHAMBERS (Chris Chambers / Jim Gobert, Ed Colley / Jonathan Green), SHANNAHAN (Paddy & Norma Shannahan, Mike O'Reilly / Mick Spencer) and BIRLEY (Sylvia Scott-Laws / Ron Hosier, Judy Birley / Pat Dougan).

As an advert for that format change – principal criticism of the old mechanism was that the same teams featured all the time – this had to be good news.

The Semi-Finals

HANSON had won the right to choose opponents and selected BIRLEY. They were to rue that when the fourth placed team emerged winners. They took each of the first three quarters to lead by 19 IMPs with eight boards to play, that was a sufficient buffer and they still had seven of those at the final reckoning.

It was the same story in the other semi-final – almost. That match got off to a bang:

(1) Limit raise or better, 4+♠

East showed she wasn't going to be put off and produced a fearless pair of calls. Had she cut across West's intention to 'walk the dog' with his gentle raise? We may never know. Either way, five diamonds was cold. In the other room they were much more disciplined:

Four spades wasn't quite cold and Ed Colley started with the only card to keep the defence in the game – the club ace. He followed that with the ten, suit preference for a heart after West ruffed. But… West couldn't resist the temptation to 'cash' a top diamond. Four spades was cold now; +420 to go with +400, a whole 13 IMPs to start their account – and all on a love all board. Despite that, after eight boards CHAMBERS had a narrow lead, 27-23.

You need some luck to fight an uphill battle and my team-mates were treated (as usual) to me bemoaning my poor fortune having stayed out of 6♥ on these cards:

Board 13.
Game All

You need trumps 3-2 and the queen onside, that's about 2-1 against (34%). But South held Q82 and that was 13 IMPs away as well. However, the very next deal was:

Board 14.
Love All

Cindy's rule – slam follows slam. Now that's a pretty good contract. With five plain suit tricks, all that remained was to score all seven trumps on a cross ruff. Successful if South had the short hearts (look at those trump spots!) or the club knave. But… Mick Spencer led a trump. How he know to do that?

Now it was a whole lot less appetising. Woefully short of tricks if trumps were drawn, that meant the heart finesse couldn't be avoided. That would up my plain suit winners to six and I could revert to plan A and cross-ruff five more to go with the one I'd got already. If the heart finesse lost, I'd, ahem, think again. North held ♥Kxxx and that was 10 IMPs back. Maybe I shouldn't complain about luck too much.

There were other outages in the second set and the lead changed hands, SHANNAHAN by nine, 49-40. The third set was the tightest, only three swings, SHANNAHAN claiming two of them to take the set 14-4. After three quarters the net score was the same as HANSON v BIRLEY - the lower ranked team from the qualifying led by 19 IMPs.

We had seating rights and chose to play the Shannahans again. The deals were kind to us by providing opportunity to get those IMPs back. Unfortunately in my room we didn't take them. Notably there were two hands on the same theme; our direction had cards usually suited to 3NT but no stopper in an enemy suit. The first, the vulnerable one, we arranged to play in 4♥, a 5-2 fit, making +650. In the other room O'Reilly / Spencer arrived in 5 minor for +600. The second saw us pass in middle of the auction; I had a very weak 1=3=5=4 where the opponents had hearts. We settled on diamonds but when I rebuffed another a opportunity to declare no-trumps and bid 4♣, I passed Jim's conversion to 4♦ fearing he had three small hearts as well. He didn't, he had ideas on slam. Eleven tricks were the limit. In the other room O'Reilly / Spencer made no such mistakes and recorded the non-vulnerable game swing.

The stage was set for board 28, the last deal on the table in the second room, the match still with SHANNAHAN, ahead by 11 IMPs:

Four clubs asked for aces, an answer already known but a prelude to the subsequent king ask, 5♦ showed either the minor or the major pair. Concerned that East had the major kings and he'd receive a club lead and lose a trump finesse (not to mention perhaps a slow heart trick as well), West guessed low and played in game. In the other room, desperate measure were called for:

East's three spades announced a spade shortage but the response to 4NT had not been discussed. There's a similarity to the two auctions yet the final contracts were wildly different. The grand slam is not an enticing prospect but a glance at the diagram shows that ruffing two spades generates the important discard for dummy's last heart. That was 14 IMPs for CHAMBERS who had stolen the match by 3 IMPS.

To get a measure of how close that was, consider that those two themed hands in the same set; had the vulnerabilities been the other way around, that would have left SHANNHAN 4 IMPs better off.

At the risk of doing this hand to death (it appeared in the EADT and has provoked more comment than almost any other hand I've written about) I've still got a couple of things to say. I was asked "How did they know to bid a grand slam?". As I explained they knew that they'd had one good board (a snuck through vulnerable game which was IMPs in) but suspected that their opponents had done the right thing on the two minor suit games. That meant they hadn't enough on their card to get those 19 IMPs back. This is a matter of experience and it's dangerous to do. Most of the time you should trust something to your team-mates – they're trying to win as well – but it's a mark of experience to keep a running score.

The other thing is how fortunate is this contract? True, ruffing down the spade KQ doubleton or trebleton is only about 3%. However, that wasn't the principle shot. The way Jonathan shaped the early play, ruffing clubs and spades, he was aiming at a position like this:

When South has both spade honours (or any six card holding) and the heart king, he has no answer to the play of the last trump. That chance requires South to hold three specific cards and happens only one eighth of the time. However, there was a slightly better line. Declarer could have ruffed three spades to bring his trumps tricks to seven and eleven in total, then count one for the club finesse and that makes twelve and a position like this:

If North has four clubs to the queen then possession of the heart king will doom him. If it's South that has the long club, then he'll have to have both missing heart honours. As either player is pretty much equally likely to have the length, half the time you need two specific locations, half the time three. That's a dizzying 3/16 to add to your 3% spade ruff option – about 22%. Back to the main diagram, you can see that had South had a spade more and a club fewer, Jonathan's less likely line would have worked but the club finesse play above would have failed (North keeps the ♥J). Now, that would really have been a cruel blow.

The SHANNAHAN team took the result with great grace. I honestly hope I can find that if it happens to me.

The Final

Of course, 3 IMPs represents a significant proportional improvement over the last time we were here. In the 2002 semi-final we edged out the Ipswich quartet, ALLNUTT (M. Allnutt, D. Sutcliffe, P. Sutcliffe, P. Gemmell) by a single IMP (and if you're wondering, they didn't compete this year, the only downside of the venue start; not everyone is going to be able to make it).

Forty boards, four lots of ten. The match started with a bang. Actually, three bangs:

1. RKCB for diamonds
2. 2KC and ♦Q

Ugh… Not good at all but not without play, Jim hoped I'd have ♦KQxxx and if the ♥A and no spade control, then perhaps East would still lead a heart. East did lead a heart and all I had to do was find trumps 3-2 and play them for one loser. I played to the ace, ten from East, and back, Judy Birley played small again without a flicker, so I decided to back the judgement and duck to East's presumed now singleton king, by covering the seven spot. But she showed out instead it was all about damage limitation. I considered a finesse of the ♣10 but the thought of going about five off in a freely bid slam as one's opening contribution to the match was too humiliating, so I stated clubs from the top, knave from East.

Phew. Now club ruffed, over-ruffed, ruff a heart, club ruffed again with ♦K and my last heart went away so I ruffed West's heart continuation. A spade towards dummy and East couldn't take the risk I was sneaking to those winners so she rose with the queen from five. On the play of the ace next the suit fell over and I was a only down one – a small triumph but ten IMPs away against 5♣= in the other room. Behind again on board one but BIRLEY's lead didn't last long:

Board2.
NS Vul., East

The East hand looks like a weak no-trump to me and 2NT was a clear underbid. The potential of this hand was never discovered with West understandably cautious facing possible heart wastage. When you decide on a scheme of jump overcalls be it weak, intermediate or strong, discuss some examples. Yes, the West hand above is towards the high end – that's fine – but even opposite the same cards with a king less, East should want to play in game and a non-forcing 2NT is far too mild. No mistakes in the other room, 11 IMPs to CHAMBERS, taking the lead. Cindy was having a field day, board three was yet another non vulnerable slam:

This hand, where responder can make a strong raise with only three trumps, falls very well for the five card major system. Well, that's true if you've agreed a mechanism for it which means it turn, finding a route for both the balanced game-forcing and the invitational 3-card raises. Not all was as pretty as I though at the time. A day or so later we had a very similar sequence, I confidently assumed that the 4♦ call denied a club control – "Oh no – could follow up with 5♣, when trying to elicit a heart control bid". Hmm, I'm not so sure about that and no doubt more discussion will ensure. But it's clear that the above sequence wasn't looking for seven unless I had more tricks – it's important to clarify which slam seeking auctions look for more stuff and which look for controls. Note: establish what that 4♦ then 5♣ sequence means with your favourite partner.

That was eleven more, CHAMBERS ahead 22-10 after three deals – a healthy 10+IMPs a board turnover. The swings didn't stop there and the set ended up 51-18, a relatively sedate 7 IMPs a deal. With this sort of volatility no team should feel demoralised – after all, if you're scoring, all you have to do is stop giving the points away and you'll win! The second set continued in the same vein:

Courageous stuff and as a fond wieldier of the dark blue card, I heartily approve. But here… Four hearts redoubled was down 3 for –1000. Gobert / Chambers halted in 2NT from the South side (West passed as dealer). This cannot be defeated but Jim Gobert was unwilling to play it 'all in' on the diamond lead (first round heart to queen, club finesse, clear clubs) and the defence had a chance. However, it isn't easy to make safe exits from that West hand and tricks swapped sides until South had eight. +120 to go with that grand, 15 IMPs in. Odd how like busses these swings are:

In the West seat Ed Colley had been passing throughout until his opponents reached 6♦, having started 1♦ – 1♠; 3♦ – 4NT; 5♥ – 6♦. He doubled to get his partner off to a spade lead. Well, it's certain his partner wouldn't have led one otherwise…

A quick death but there was no escaping the spade losers and the contract was two off. In the other room it again proved difficult to reach the bidding challenge 3NT and Gobert / Chambers stumbled into 5♦. On a trump lead I set about finding a lie for eleven tricks - and that almost existed. I eliminated clubs taking a heart finesse on the way and was set to play a spade hoping for AK doubleton or AQ and defensive error. That plan hit the rocks when trumps were not 2-2. But West had a discarding accident and I ended up with a spade trick. +600 to go with 500 and another 15 IMPs.

It was far from all one way, both easts declared four spades here:

The early play was the same, two rounds of clubs, West ruffing. Jonathan Green played to combine his chances, he started trumps and when he discovered a loser there, he left it outstanding. He now played the diamond eight, South rose ace and played another club. East ruffed again and now gave up a spade. Though Ron Hosier still had a club left he put Jonathan to an early guess and played a heart. Declarer considered and considered. Eventually he played to get the diamonds right. So he rose heart ace and played his last trump to extract some for information. If there was some going he didn't piece it together because he now played for diamonds 2-2. They weren't and he was down two.

To some extent he was right. His line might have been defeated when he played the first diamond. South could had led another, North ruffing and exiting safely with a club: East has no entry for the heart finesse. But the subterfuge with the diamond spot made it impossible for South to read North's three-spot with the deuce missing. So the inference that the defence hadn't beaten him because they couldn't wasn't really valid.

Over to Pat Dougan. She ruffed the second club and played four rounds of trumps. I was in and the diamond ace still outstanding, no heart play would fool declarer. Nor, with the trumps gone did I have the entry severing play. So I played back a club, East ruffed, got to dummy with a diamond – leading the deuce but we play upside-down signals so Jim couldn't count the suit either – and took the heart finesse when the diamond suit didn't oblige. Simple and good, +11 IMPs. Another volatile half saw 70 IMPs change hands, 39-31 to CHAMBERS, ahead now by 41. BIRLEY was still capable of picking up swings if they could keep those 15s off the card.

The seven IMPs a deal stuff couldn't keep on for ever and the third quarter was low scoring, 19-13 to BIRLEY but clock was ticking down. There were two swings in the second half where the sharp axe that had been applied in the first seemed blunt. BIRLEY registering scores of +870 in 2♥x+1 (they didn't double us in 3♥=) and +280 from 2CX+1 (they didn't double us in 3♣+1) and wielding the blade themselves for +1100. Still, the small stuff was all CHAMBERS and they had 15 IMPS from the final set to take the 2004-5 Suffolk Championship by 130-80.

The final was played in fine spirit and the whole campaign from the qualifying event on provided interesting deals and fascinating match play – ask anyone who was involved. It was good to see new faces in the knock-out stages but the teams that didn't make it this year will be out to rectify that next time – the teams that did will have gained experience and will want to show that it was no accident - thinking of putting a team in? Of course you should!