Most of us play bridge with slight tunnel vision; we focus on our own cards, and those in dummy. Experts manage to split their screen, as it were, and see all four hands at the same time. I was reminded of this the other day, when playing with Barry Myers in the London pairs. I went two off in 3NT and felt I should have done better, but couldn’t work out how. Barry shook his head impatiently. ‘One off was lay-down,’ he said. ‘You knew exactly what everybody held.’ (Remember, the difference between one and two off in pairs scoring is huge.) As so often in bridge, I was flattered and insulted at the same time. Obviously, I’d played like a klutz, but at least Barry thought it was a blip of concentration rather than a sign of my limited ability. Here was the hand:
Sitting West, I bid 3NT (in mitigation, I was worried about South ruffing hearts in 4♠). North led the ♥J to my ♥Q, South discarding a diamond (not best!). I then played a spade, and when North showed out, put up the ♠A. I could think of nothing better than playing a diamond next. The defence won and cashed three more diamonds, then switched to a club. I won, and at this point pretty much gave up, cashing two more clubs, the ♥A and ♠K, and conceding a spade and a club to South.
I don’t deny it’s fairly easy to see, staring at all four hands, what I should have done. This is the five-card ending: declarer holds ♠87 ♥A5 ♣Q opposite ♠KJ94 ♣9. South holds ♠Q105 ♣J10. It is vital not to play the ♣Q yet. First cash the ♥A.
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