Home | Peter van der Linden | Technique, tactics or both?
Technique, tactics or both?
Thursday, 07 January 2010 07:00

Peter van der  LindenA common quality of top bridge players is their ability of playing technically correct while at the same time not losing sight of tactical chances. In other words: they induce mistakes by their opponents.
Take for instance Terence Reese, who once played this 6NT contract against two 'little old ladies' as he politically incorrectly called them (not only politically incorrect by the way, many little old ladies know very well how to play their cards...).

S/AllA 6 4
 
 A 7 5
Q J 9 5 3
4 3
9 5 3 2
windroos10 8 7
Q 8 3
9 6 4 2
7 4
A 8
J 10 9 6
Q 8 5 2
 K Q J
 
K J 10
K 10 6 2
A K 7

WestNorthEastSouth
Little old lady
 Little old ladyReese
-
-
-2NT
pass
31pass3NT
pass6NTpass
pass
pass   

1 Natural (!) - the deal dates back from the 1950's - and forcing

Reese won the J lead, forced out the A and won the club return. He had eleven top tricks now, but since there were practically no squeeze or other chances, he had to finesse for the Q. But over which defender? He could cash his tricks in diamonds and spades hoping to discover a long heart suit with one of the defenders; the finesse for the Q over that defender then would give a better than 50% chance. However he expected rather evenly distributed hands with EW, so he would not be any wiser after taking these tricks (he was right as can be seen from the lay-out: EW both follow suit in the black suits and both have two diamonds).

So it looked like he would have to gamble, with a 50% chance of success. But top players hate to do so; they will always try to improve on their chances.
Reese decided not to cash his side suits first but check whether the little old lady in West had adopted - let's say - 'unfortunate habits': he played the J from his hand. West showed a slight but clearly visible hesitation before playing a small spade. Playing quickly (EW should not be given the time to realise what was happening) Reese overtook in dummy, crossed to his hand with a diamond and played the J.
In Reese's own words: 'No hesitation now, absolutely not. Finesse!'
Well, yes, the little old lady hesitated when not having the queen, so when she did not hesitate she did have the queen.
The moral of this deal is that, apart from being reprehensible, it is stupid as well to adopt such habits.

The deal below has a similar theme, though harder to recognise:

E/All
A K 6
 
 10 7 6 5 2
K Q 2
8 2
  windroos  
    
 9 7 4 3 2 
A 8
A 8 5
K Q 4

WestNorthEastSouth
-
-
pass11
pass
2pass2NT
pass4passpas
pass   

1 Five or more spades

West leads the J. East wins with the A and returns the 3.
Declarer has a certain heart loser, so he can afford one trump loser only.
Try to find the right play before reading on...

Found it?
If the trump suit splits 3-2, there is no problem.
If the trump suit splits 4-1, declarer has only one 'technical chance', i.e. this lay-out:

E/All
A K 6
 
 10 7 6 5 2
K Q 2
8 2
Q J 10 5
windroos8
K 9Q J 4 3
10 7 3
J 9 6 4
J 10 6 5
A 9 7 3
 9 7 4 3 2 
A 8
A 8 5
K Q 4

South plays the 9 from hand.
If West covers, declarer wins in dummy, crosses to the A and plays the 2. Whether West now plays the 5 (declarer finesses by inserting dummy's 6) or a higher spade, declarer loses only one trump trick.

And how about declarer's tactical line of play? The 9 from hand as well! Nice, isn't it, when technique and tactics coincide?
That brings us to what the theme of this article really is. It is a defensive problem: to cover or not to cover? (Reese's little old lady was basically right in not covering).
Suppose East's singleton spade in the last deal is not the 8, but the Q, the J or the 10. West then has the J1085, Q1085 or QJ85 respectively.
Of course West should not cover the 9, but many West players will cover. South then wins in dummy and sees East's Q (or J or 10) drop. He crosses to the A and plays the 2, intending to cover West's card cheaply. Whether West plays the 5 or a higher spade, declarer loses only one spade trick.

In the heart lay-out below declarer South 'usually' (technically spoken) loses two tricks if the suit is 4-1 in EW, but a tactical line of play may induce a mistake by East. How should declarer play?

 9 3 2
 
  windroos  
 A K 7 5 4
 

He plays the 9 from dummy. Technically correct and nice if West has the bare 8.
Furthermore, very satisfying if West has the bare Q, J or 10...

 9 3 2
 

Q
windroos
J 10 8 6
 A K 7 5 4
 

...and East wrongly decides to cover: South then wins, crosses to dummy and advances the 2. East cannot recover from his earlier mistake: if he plays the 6, South inserts the 7, if East plays a higher heart South can wriggle out for one loser only as well.

In the example below too declarer begins with the 10 from dummy, hoping for East to cover. Again: East should not, but many East players will do it...

 10 3 2
 

Q
windroos
K J 9 7
 A 8 6 5 4
 

Note that if West's singleton had been the 9, this play would have been technically correct (on the assumption dummy has two more entry cards, since declarer will need to play hearts from dummy two more times).

In the layout below East has shown a heart guard. Declarer plays the J from dummy, again hoping for East's 'covering reflex':

 J 4 3 2
 

K
windroos
Q 10 8
 A 9 7 6 5
 

Again this is a technical line of play as well: just interchange the 10 and the K...

Although declarer in the layout below has no intention to finesse, he begins with the 10 from dummy, rather than a lazy top heart from hand:

 10 5 3 2
 

-
windroos
Q J 8
 A K 9 7 6 4
 

You never know: maybe East is caught napping and covers...
Of course, if East plays the 8, declarer goes up with the A; a 2-1 split is far more common than this 3-0 split.

The next 'tactical safety-play' is rather, but not completely similar:

 10 5 3 2
 

-
windroos
Q J 9 7
 A H 8 6 4
 

It will not come as a surprise any more: declarer begins by playing the 10 from dummy. He has no intention to finesse if East plays the 7, for he does not give up on the far greater chance of the suit being 2-2 (if the suit is 3-1, the most common distribution, any reasonable line of play works).
But if East has all four hearts and wrongly decides to cover, South escapes with only one loser.

I conclude with the reply to the question in the headings: technique is fine, tactics is more fun, but a line of play that combines the two aspects is best!
 

Top Tips

New: Martin Sinot answers all your questions about the rules and regulations
Have a question about something concerning the rules? Go to our contactform and ask our expert director Martin Sinot.