Round Nine Canada vs
Denmark
Leaders Denmark met a Canadian team playing for a place in the
middle of nowhere. The Canadians’ fighting spirits were still
present, however, and they did their best to throw a spanner into
the Danish works.
On the third board Denmark’s Henriksen/Marquardsen bid a sporting
6©. When the ace
of diamonds wasn’t on side that was one down; 11 IMPs to Canada.
Some rather sleepy boards followed then Grainger/Lavee on Board
7 vulnerable tried to play 1ª
doubled on a three-three fit; down two and Denmark gained 12 IMPs
when Gjaldbaek/Schaltz did well in making eight tricks in 1NT at
the other table.
Here is maybe the answer to why Denmark is doing so well so far
in this Championship: their opening bids. Look at Boje Henriksen’s
first position opening bid on this board!
Board 9. E/W Vul. Dealer North.
|
|
ª 9 4 3 2
© J 9 4 3
¨ J 6 2
§ 9 6 |
ª A 8 6
© 10 5 2
¨ K 9 7
§ 10 7 3 2 |
|
ª J 7
© 8 7
¨ A Q 10 8 4 3
§ A K 5 |
|
ª K Q 10 5
© A K Q 6
¨ 5
§ Q J 8 4 |
West |
North |
East |
South |
Gjaldbaek |
Demuy |
Schaltz |
Wolpert |
|
Pass |
1¨ |
Dble |
Pass |
1© |
2¨ |
3© |
All Pass |
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
Lavee |
Henriksen |
Grainger |
Marquardsen |
|
2©(!) |
3¨ |
4ª |
5¨ |
Pass |
Pass |
Dble |
All Pass |
|
|
|
Perhaps North thought he had a jack too many to open 2©…
According to North/South’s agreement 2©
shows at least eight cards in the majors and less than an opening
bid. East/West can make game in no trump when the heart suit behaves
but Marquardsen’s 4ª
ruined any chance East/West might have. 4ª
will not make, so West misjudged when he bid 5¨
over 4ª and that
was down two. Wolpert made +140 in 3©;
8 IMPs to Denmark.
Denmark led by 28 IMPs to 13 at half-time.
North has showed 22-24 HCP and a balanced hand. What’s your
lead against 3NT sitting East?
ª
K 10 ©
8 4 3 2 ¨ 8
2 § A Q 10
6 3 |
In this match the lead was a club.
Board 13. All Vul. Dealer North.
|
|
ª A Q 4
© A K Q
¨ A J 10 5
§ K J 5 |
ª J 9 8 5 3 2
© J 10 7
¨ Q 9 6
§ 9 |
|
ª K 10
© 8 4 3 2
¨ 8 2
§ A Q 10 6 3 |
|
ª 7 6
© 9 6 5
¨ K 7 4 3
§ 8 7 4 2 |
West |
North |
East |
South |
Gjaldbaek |
Demuy |
Schaltz |
Wolpert |
|
2§ |
Pass |
2¨ |
Pass |
2NT |
Pass |
3§ |
Pass |
3¨ |
Pass |
3ª |
Pass |
3NT |
All Pass |
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
Lavee |
Henriksen |
Grainger |
Marquardsen |
|
2§ |
Pass |
2¨ |
Pass |
2NT |
Pass |
3§ |
Pass |
3¨ |
Pass |
3NT |
All Pass |
|
|
|
A club lead can possibly help declarer to find the queen of diamonds.
As you prefer to let East be on lead finessing through West gives
nine tricks. At least it feels more safe to play like that and it
was also the line Boje Henriksen followed. Meanwhile Vincent Demuy
was in deep waters at the other table. At trick two Demuy let ¨J
run to the queen. West was out of clubs and returned a heart. Declarer
won and cashed two more top hearts. When he took his diamond winners
Schaltz did not defend well when he pitched §10
which actually was a trick. A club to the king endplayed East who
had to give away either a spade or a club trick; contract just made.
If Schaltz could have bared the king of spades instead of pitching
clubs there was a fair chance declarer would have failed.
In almost every match declarer made 3NT on this board, but not
at one table in the match between Chile and USA1. The American declarer
faced a heart lead to the ace, ran ¨J
to the queen and the contract was later beaten by force when the
defence acted passively.
Board 17. None Vul. Dealer North.
|
|
ª K 6 3
© A J 7
¨ J 7 5
§ K 7 4 2 |
ª A J 10 5 2
© 9 5 4 2
¨ A
§ A J 8 |
|
ª 8
© K Q 8 6
¨ Q 10 9 6 4
§ Q 10 3 |
|
ª Q 9 7 4
© 10 3
¨ K 8 3 2
§ 9 6 5 |
West |
North |
East |
South |
Gjaldbaek |
Demuy |
Schaltz |
Wolpert |
|
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
1ª |
Pass |
2¨ |
Pass |
2© |
Pass |
3© |
Pass |
4© |
All Pass |
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
Lavee |
Henriksen |
Grainger |
Marquardsen |
|
1NT |
Pass |
2§ |
2ª |
All Pass |
|
|
A heart contract is the place to be for East/West but when Daniel
Lavee just made his 2ª it couldn’t be that bad, could it?
Gjaldbaek understandably raised to game when Schaltz made an invitation.
On the club lead from Demuy the declarer would have made 4© by going
for a cross-ruff. Declarer started perfectly by winning the lead
with the ten, then played a diamond to the ace, cashed ªA and ruffed
a spade. He now ruffed a diamond and a spade. Instead of continuing
on this successful way he won §A and ruffed a spade. When North
pitched ¨J there was no longer a winning line since North over-ruffed
the next diamond then played ace and another heart. If declarer
continues the cross-ruff the defence cannot prevent ten tricks.
Board 18. N/S Vul. Dealer East.
|
|
ª 8 5
© A K 8 5 4 2
¨ Q 2
§ J 9 5 |
ª 7 4 3
© Q 7 6
¨ K J 10 7
§ K 7 2 |
|
ª A K Q J 10 6 2
© J 10 9 3
¨ 9
§ Q |
|
ª 9
© -
¨ A 8 6 5 4 3
§ A 10 8 6 4 3 |
West |
North |
East |
South |
Gjaldbaek |
Demuy |
Schaltz |
Wolpert |
|
|
4ª |
4NT |
Pass |
5§ |
All Pass |
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
Lavee |
Henriksen |
Grainger |
Marquardsen |
|
|
4ª |
4NT |
Pass |
5§ |
Pass |
Pass |
5ª |
Dble |
All Pass |
|
In the Open Room Demuy went two down in 5§. Denmark’s Andreas
Marquardsen gave the declarer a Greek gift in the Closed Room. Marquardsen
led ¨A then cashed the other minor ace. To lead a diamond is South’s
only chance to beat the contract and when Marquardsen did so –
David Grainger swallowed the gift when he took the ‘safe’
finesse. If Grainger had counted his tricks, he would have realized
that only two diamond tricks were not enough to make the contract.
Therefore his only chance is to put up the king, pray and hope that
the queen will show up. Were there any indications for declarer?
Yes, there were. First, South had started with ¨A and not with §A.
With A-Q in diamonds South was likely to have started with §A to
see the dummy before he decided what to do next. Secondly, if South
had ¨Q why didn’t he exit with a club or a spade instead of
giving a trick away? South did his job but it was not that well
done by East.
Board 19. E/W Vul. Dealer South.
|
|
ª 6 3 2
© K 7
¨ A J 2
§ A Q 10 9 3 |
ª K 9
© J 9 6 4 3
¨ K 10 8 6
§ K 6 |
|
ª J 10 8 5
© A 2
¨ 7 4 3
§ J 8 4 2 |
|
ª A Q 7 4
© Q 10 8 5
¨ Q 9 5
§ 7 5 |
West |
North |
East |
South |
Gjaldbaek |
Demuy |
Schaltz |
Wolpert |
|
|
|
Pass |
Pass |
1NT |
Pass |
2§ |
Pass |
2¨ |
Pass |
3NT |
All Pass |
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
Lavee |
Henriksen |
Grainger |
Marquardsen |
|
|
|
1NT |
Pass |
3NT |
All Pass |
|
Both tables reached 3NT, a contract which can be rather easily
made double dummy. As declarer at single dummy, however, you need
to play very nicely to make it. In the Closed Room Daniel Lavee
led a heart to East’s ace and declarer let East win the spade
continuation. West won the next spade when dummy played low. Andreas
Marquardsen couldn’t get things right and went one off.
On vugraph Martin Schaltz, known for producing original leads,
here started with the eight of spades. Declarer played low and West
switched to a low club after taking the first trick with ª9.
Declarer tried the ten losing to East’s jack. ª8
from Schaltz continued to confuse declarer and he put up the queen,
letting the king take the trick. It looked like this was a nice
start for the defence, though the declarer can still make it. The
§K went to declarer’s
ace then the ©K
lost to the ace and East exited with a club. This was the ending:
|
|
ª 6
© 7
¨ A J 2
§ Q 3 |
ª -
© J 9 3
¨ K 10 8 6
§ - |
|
ª J 10
© 2
¨ 7 4 3
§ 8 |
|
ª A 7
© Q 10
¨ Q 9 5
§ - |
Not exiting with a spade East gave Demuy a chance to make his contract
if he minds his Ps and Qs. If he now plays his two club winners
pitching ¨Q and another diamond from dummy East can discard a heart
on the second club and West can afford to pitch a heart and a diamond.
Declarer now crosses to dummy in spades. West cannot throw a heart
and must pitch another diamond, so is now down to only K-10 in diamonds.
The layout is now:
|
|
ª -
© 7
¨ A J 2
§ - |
ª -
© J 9
¨ K 10
§ - |
|
ª J
© -
¨ 7 4 3
§ - |
|
ª 7
© Q 10
¨ 9
§ - |
See what will happen when ©Q is cashed. East must save his spade
and give up the control in diamonds. Declarer takes the rest via
a diamond finesse. Understandably, Dumuy didn’t read the situation
right at the table; one off and a flat board.
Over the 20 boards Denmark was with no doubt the stronger team
and they managed to win a relatively close match by 18–12
VPs (42–29 IMPs).
|