Lose 'em All

Author: Larry Cohen Date of publish: 4/1/2006 Level: Intermediate

IMP Table


Point diff. fromPoint diff. toIMPsPoint diff. fromPoint diff. toIMPsPoint diff. fromPoint diff. toIMPs
010037042091750199018
20401430490102000224019
50802500590112250249020
901203600740122500299021
1301604750890133000349022
17021059001090143500399023
220260611001290154000 24
27031071300149016   
32036081500174017   

One of my favorite stories in bridge was when a player replied "Lose 'em all" during a score comparison. Here was a recurrence from the 2007 National Open Swiss Teams. Kit Woolsey held:

♠3
♥A Q J 10 6 5
♦--
♣A 10 7 6 5 4

With both sides vulnerable, RHO opened 1♠, and Kit tried 2♠, Michaels. LHO bid 3♦ (natural) and RHO bid 3♠. Kit now bid 4♥, which was doubled. His partner, Fred Stewart, redoubled. This was supposedly for rescue*, but Kit stuck it out. This was the full deal:

Vul: Both
Dlr: North
♠J 5 3
♥4
♦7 6 5 2
♣K Q J 8 2
 
♠Q 7
♥K 9 8 7 3
♦A Q J 10 8 4
♣--
 ♠A K 10 9 8 6 4
♥2
♦K 9 3
♣9 3
 ♠2
♥A Q J 10 6 5
♦--
♣A 10 7 6 5 4
 
EastSouthWestNorth
    
1♠2♠3♦Pass
3♠4♥DoubleRedouble
PassPassPass 

West led the ♠Q and continued the suit. Declarer played the ♥A and the ♥Q in an attempt to make his contract (on 4-2 or 3-3 hearts). Disaster! West was in control. He played diamonds every time he was in and declarer was held to only his 5 natural trump tricks. Down 2800!

At the other table, East opened 4♠, South bid 4NT, takeout, West raised to 5♠. North bid 6♣ and East doubled. Declarer had no trouble making this for 1540 to go with 2800 from his teammates.

Kit was ready for the score comparison. When his teammates read off "minus 1540," the reply was "lose 'em all."

* No, I don't understand why North wouldn't bid 4NT to ask partner to choose a minor, and no, I don't understand why the partnership wouldn't presume South held clubs (since West bid diamonds).


Created by  AttainDreams ® Copyright by Larry Cohen--www.larryco.com--not for distribution