We are back at the TGR club, just around the corner from Paddington Station in north London, for the final stage of the trial to select England’s representatives for the Seniors Teams at the European Championships in Herning, Denmark this summer. The two teams in this final are MOSSOP (David Mossop, Gunnar Hallberg, John Holland and Alan Mould) and WARD (Trevor Ward, Rob Cliffe, Pat Shields and Richard Chamberlain).

The leading team will automatically earn selection. Those two pairs, in conjunction with the selection committee, will then select a third pair from the leading five pairs in the first stage of the trial. The format of the final is a 112-board match divided into eight 14-board stanzas. When we left things at the end of our first visit, MOSSOP had opened up a 40-IMP lead, 92-52, at the end of the third stanza.

As usual, we start with some problems. Firstly, with only your opponents vulnerable, you are East holding:

What action, if any, do you take?

Next, with neither side vulnerable, you are sitting in the North seat with:

What, if anything, do you open?

Finally, with only your opponents vulnerable, you hold in the East seat:

Do you agree with the negative double on the first round? If not, what do you prefer?

What action, if any, do you take now?

While you mull those over, we begin with the second board of the fourth stanza, and a bidding challenge for the E/W pairs.

Alan Mould’s 1♥ response silenced Richard Chamberlain, although it is unclear whether that was because he did not have a natural 2♥ bid available or because he thought this was not the right hand on which to take action. John Holland (left) bid and rebid his clubs, and then suggested 3NT when Mould gave preference to diamonds at the three-level. Do you think East should bid on and, if so, with what? Yes, his major-suit values are very soft. However, he has never really conveyed the message that he holds four-card support for opener’s first suit, not to mention great fitting cards in partner’s second suit too.

Slam is an excellent proposition as long as trumps are not 4-0. It is cold if trumps break 2-2, or if there is a singleton honour and you guess right. Even is the defenders have a natural trump winner, after cashing the top diamonds, declarer can just leave the big trump out, discard a spade from dummy on the clubs, and ruff two spades in dummy. The defenders will get their trump winner but that is all.

Pat Shields led the ♥J against 3NT. Having cashed his minor-suit winners, declarer was in the wrong hand to take the spade finesse, and he somehow ended up claiming only 10 tricks. E/W +430.

Trevor Ward (right) opened with a Strong Club and although there is no alert or explanation for the 2♠ response in the VuGraph records, it clearly showed a balanced hand, and probably 12+ HCP. The rest of the auction was simple enough and effective.

The ♥J was led and Hallberg astutely allowed dummy’s queen to win, as doing so left declarer conveniently in dummy to get the trumps wrong. However, it was pearls before swine, as Ward played a trump to the jack and king, then rose with the ♦A on the second round to record his overtrick. (I appreciated it Gunnar!) E/W +940 and 11 IMPs to WARD.

Those IMPs had barely registered on the scoreboard when they went right back, with interest, on the very next deal. Both East players declared the same contract, and both South players found a lead that gave the defence a chance.

Either a diamond or a trump would set the defence on the way to beating the contract by two, but Gunnar Hallberg (left) understandably opted for the obvious lead of the singleton in his partner’s suit. Rob Cliffe won with the ♥A, cashed the ♣A, and played a trump. When Hallberg followed with a low trump, declarer’s fate was sealed. Cliffe cashed the ♣K pitching a diamond, then called for the ♣Q from dummy. David Mossop ruffed with his remaining trump and Cliffe overruffed, but what can he do next?

He tried a diamond, but Mossop won and returned the ♥Q, allowing Hallberg to ruff declarer’s ♥K with his last low trump. Cashing the ♠A now killed dummy and declarer was still left with a loser in each red suit: Two down. E/W -200.

Richard Chamberlain also opened the ♥3 against 4♠, North’s eight forcing declarer’s ace. Here too, the ♣A was unblocked, but Alan Mould (right) now played a diamond. Pat Shields won and tabled the ♥Q for his partner to ruff away declarer’s ♥K. How would you now defend from the West seat?

To defeat the contract, you must cash the ♠A and then play a diamond. When Chamberlain led a second round of diamonds without first cashing the ♠A, declarer was in control. Mould ruffed in dummy and cashed the ♣K to dispose of his heart loser. He advanced the ♣Q, ruffed and overruffed, and then ruffed his remaining diamond with dummy’s last trump. Declarer was now left with all trumps, and his pips were good enough that the defenders could score only the ace. Ten tricks: E/W +620 and 13 IMPs to MOSSOP.

Midway through the set, both North players had to decide what to do as Dealer on the second of this week’s problems.

In this day and age, when everyone bids at any excuse and aggressive pre-empting has become the norm, it is hard to believe that any red-blooded mammal would even consider passing this North hand in first seat non-vulnerable. David Mossop (left) duly stepped up and proved himself a member of the human race.

Rob Cliffe led the ♦J. Trevor Ward smartly overtook with the ♦Q and returned the ♦5 to his partner’s nine. When Cliffe then switched to a low heart at trick three, Mossop guessed to rise with the king, so Ward’s thoughtful defence saved an overtrick. N/S +110.

Of course, there is always an element of risk when you pre-empt, and this was one of those days when the mouse-like tendencies exhibited by Pat Shields (right) paid dividends. (I have license to give Pat some stick about his bidding, or lack of it, as we have been friends for many years and he knows that I have always considered him a fine player.)

Shields’ pass allowed his partner to get spades into the game. Indeed, Shields continued the theme by simply raising to 2♠ after Holland’s double of the 1♠ opening. Perhaps they do not play transfers in this position, enabling responder to show a constructive 2♠ bid with a 2♥ transfer, but most people would presumably raise to 2♠ after a double without the ♣A. Never mind, as Richard Chamberlain decided he had enough to make a game try anyway, and Shields now showed signs of a pulse with a jump to game.

John Holland led a top diamond and the defence could not find a way to get East in to test declarer with a heart through the king, so Chamberlain was soon claiming 11 tricks. N/S +450, 8 IMPs to WARD, and a victory for pusillanimity.

There were no more double-digit swings in the fourth set, but WARD got the best of the trench warfare and won the stanza 34-15. At the midway point of the match, MOSSOP led by 21 IMPs, 107-86. How long did that lead last? Let’s see. WARD cut the deficit by a third with a 7-IMP gain on the opening deal of the second half, and then came…

Both East players had to answer the first question posed by the last of this week’s problems. I confess that I am not a fan of Alan Mould’s negative double, but it is more a problem with five-card major systems than anything else. Playing a sensible system (😉), 1♣ would show at least four clubs and this East hand could then be described accurately as a weak hand with club support, via a raise to 2♣. (Rant over. Well, nearly.)

John Holland then showed a good hand with his 2NT rebid, and Trevor Ward tempted fate with a competitive 3♠ bid. Had Ward passed 2NT, there is little question that raising to 3NT is right on this East hand. As I and a number of other teachers try to drum into their students, 2NT is not a parking place. Partner is likely to make anywhere between seven and ten tricks in no-trumps, depending on how the hands fit and the opening lead, so you might as well guess to be in the contract with the biggest upside (i.e. game). After North’s 3♠ bid, I am not so convinced that bidding 3NT is right on this East hand. Haven’t you already shown your values (and perhaps a more) with your negative double? Perhaps you should give partner a chance to make a decision?

Of course, Trevor Ward had the world’s most obvious ♦K opening lead and the defenders quickly took five diamonds and the ♥A to put Holland’s game two down. E/W -100.

The auction began the same way at the other table and, here too, East presumably could not raise clubs as his partner’s 1♣ opening had not shown any length in the suit. (It really is hard to see how you get to the decent 5♣ on deals like this if East can never support his partner’s suit.) Pat Shields chose the other alternative, by passing after David Mossop’s 1♠ overcall. Richard Chamberlain (left) was then rather stuck when Gunnar Hallberg raised spade, so he had to pass on his 17-count.

Now Shields came alive, and backed in with a double, but Chamberlain could not do much other than retreat to 3♣. In the face of what sounds like relative weakness from his opponents, David Mossop was duly sucked into competing further with what is a fairly obvious 3♦ bid. Hallberg corrected to spades but Chamberlain now lowered the boom with a red card.

Shields led a trump, Chamberlain winning with the ♠Q and switching to a club. Shields won with the ♣Q and continued with the ♣A, forcing declarer to ruff. Mossop could have settled for two down at this point by playing on diamonds, but he was tempted into playing a second round of trumps. Now Chamberlain had control of the trump suit. He won with the ♠K, cashed the ♠A, and then switched back to clubs. Declarer pitched his heart loser but the next round of clubs forced him to ruff with his last trump. The defenders made four trumps and three club tricks for three down: E/W +800 and 14 IMPs to WARD.

Remarkably, with just two deals of the second half played, the match was tied at 107-107. All to play for with 54 boards still remaining.

We will be back soon with the best of the action from the latter stages of this final.