When Ed, Pien and I started Bridgevaria.nl in March and Bridgevaria.com mid June 2009, we wanted to make a site about the game of bridge; that delightful game (or should I say: sport) in all of its facets: bidding, play, the Laws. That's where we wanted to write about, every day a new article: columns to read, but also puzzles for visitors to solve. Furthermore we began a questions section, in which we gave thorough answers. To questions about how that deal should have been bid, played and/or defended; about how the director (our very own, highly regarded Martin Sinot) should solve those irregularities.
We were convinced that Bridgevaria had to be free, without any fuzz: no log-ins, no passwords. Bridge fun, and only that, had to be the key.
This was also the reason we chose not to publish any bridge news or results. Many other sites do so, there was no need for us to do it. And we very consciously chose not to make Bridgevaria a forum for bridge-officials, or publish policy papers, agenda's or minutes of meetings. Useful items, no doubt about that, but Bridgevaria only deals with bridge fun.

We think that we succeeded pretty well in achieving our goals these last (almost) two years. The site is flourishing. Therefore I think this is the right moment to say goodbye. The reason I have to say goodbye is that I can't afford to spend the required amount of time anymore.
Ed & Pien are continuing with the Dutch site — so it will probably improve… (I thought it best to mention this myself, saving Ed the trouble to point this out). The future of the English site is still uncertain, at the moment I'm writing this.
When saying farewell, one is supposed to write/speak some wise and/or critical words. I think I'd better not do so; I'm neither the type to seriously criticise, nor to show 'The Path That Should Be Followed'.

Although…

I think that for some years already a number of doubtful developments are taking place in bridge. Often I've written about convention abuse. I am not opposed to using conventions, but I do object to convention users who hardly have any knowledge of them when they start using them. The consequences of insufficient knowledge and training are bidding misunderstandings and (often) faulty information to the opponents. These things spoil the game for those opponents. I think this is a serious matter, since they are innocent victims; they are being robbed of their joy in the game, only because the 'conventionalists' don't pay enough attention to (a) making solid agreements and (b) learn these by heart. I am of the opinion therefore, that the non-offending side is insufficiently protected in bridge. This is bad for the game: when playing their first matches, beginners are discouraged and tend to give up. They feel bullied.

Another development that doesn't amuse me at all are tournaments with open entries, which nonetheless are called 'European Championships'. I think that ridiculous: you enrol your team 'The Four Jolly Jokers', which is playing in League Four of the district of South-Snuffbury and there you go: you are participating in a European Championship (EC)! Such a 'EC' is often won by a team of three professionals and their sponsor. The reason for such a championship? The huge entry fees. Obviously money is more important than serious champions.
I think this a degradation of the concept of a EC: such a championship should be contested by national teams in their strongest possible line-up. Like in any normal sport. Or have you ever heard of FC Backwater Boys, fielding Lionel Messi, Christiano Ronaldo and sponsor Silvio Berlusconi as players (yes, the sponsor in shorts on the pitch!), winning the European Soccer Championship? See what I mean?

Now that I'm at it: I think it's a pity (but it can't be helped) that bridge at the top level has developed too much into a bidder's game: gains mostly originate in the bidding. Defensive bidding has become so effective that bidding the best contract is getting harder and harder. After all, if the final contract is unmakable or far too low, declarer and defensive play have become less important…

Still: 'in the old days everything was better', is a nonsensical remark for grumpy old men. For in those days too I think hardly any partnership would have come up with the right defence in this deal:

S/EW		♠	K J 4 2
		♥	10 8
		♦	A J 9
		♣	Q 9 7 3
				♠	A 10 6 5
				♥	6 5 3
				♦	8 5 4 2
				♣	A 6

¹ At least five-card suit

It is bridge at its finest if East comes up with the following reasoning: the lead denies an honour, so declarer now has three club tricks for the taking. In view of dummy's diamond holding, he is also certain to make at least two diamond tricks. And since the heart suit is 3-3 in EW, South will be able to develop a lot of tricks in that suit as well (probably West will gain the lead in hearts once or twice). In short: if East were to play a passive defence, declarer would cruise to nine tricks.
So East has to be quick in setting up about two extra defensive tricks (East's two black aces and West heart trick make a total of five). In diamonds that is both impossible and too time consuming. In hearts it's impossible. So partner will have to have ♠Qxx: East sets out to develop two extra spade tricks.
It seems logical therefore, to switch to the ♠5 at the second trick. Dummy wins with an honour and if West later gains the lead with a heart honour (declarer cannot succeed without developing that suit and is very unlikely to have a solid five-card suit) he plays another spade, allowing the defence to cash three spade tricks.

But if, to the second trick, East indeed switches to the ♠5, that turns out to be insufficient, although West does have the hoped for ♠Qxx:

S/EW		♠	K J 4 2
		♥	10 8
		♦	A J 9
		♣	Q 9 7 3
♠	Q 7 3			♠	A 10 6 5
♥	K 7 2			♥	6 5 3
♦	Q 10 3			♦	8 5 4 2
♣	10 8 5 2			♣	A 6
		♠	9 8
		♥	A Q J 9 4
		♦	K 7 6
		♣	K J 4

So East should do better at the second trick, he should switch to the ♠10!
Still EW are not home and dry, since to this trick West should unblock his ♠7. Declarer wins with dummy's ♠J (ducking won't help him, just try).
West wins the third trick with the ♥K and this time his return of the ♠Q sinks the contract, since it pins South's ♠9. If declarer ducks in dummy, West continues with the ♠3 and East is poised over dummy's ♠K4 with the ♠A6. This makes clear why West had to unblock the ♠7 at the first spade trick: if he hadn't done so, his last spade would have been that ♠7 and declarer would have won his contract by simply ducking the second and third spade trick in dummy.

So this was it. I wish to all visitors to Bridgevaria that they will play many deals like these; I wish for more dignified EC's and little or no opponents abusing conventions. And of course a prosperous 2011.
I expect all visitors to keep on clicking Bridgevaria (at least .nl; let's hope .com will continue as well) every day, because Ed and Pien will continue. Meaning the site can only improve…