Time and again in bridge, when tackling problematic contracts, I miss simple solutions which, it turns out, were staring me in the face. It’s some consolation to know that this sort of temporary blindness is a fairly common condition: bridge clubs are full of people slapping their heads and groaning as they see — too late — how they should have played a hand. That’s just one of the things that separates the mere mortals from the pros: they have full vision, at all times.
Anyway, a friend showed me this deal from a local teams event. The contract was the same at both tables — as was the lead of the ♠8 (second highest from a rubbish holding). Would you have had the same blind spot as one of the declarers?
At the first table, declarer called for dummy’s ♠10, and East, correctly, saw no reason to cover with his ♠K. When he played low, declarer followed with the ♠5 and there was no longer any way to make the contract. As the ace of diamonds was offside, all declarer could make were his six trump tricks, two spades and the ace of clubs: one down.
At the second table, declarer realised that if West began with the ace of diamonds then he would have four potential losers in the minors. The solution was easy, once seen. He played low from dummy and won the opening lead with the ace. After drawing trumps with the king and queen, he led a spade to the ten and king. East now shifted to the ♦Q and West took declarer’s ♦K with the ♦A, and returned another diamond. East won and shifted to a club, but declarer rose with the ♣A, crossed to dummy with the ace of trumps and discarded his two low clubs on the queen and jack of spades.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in