Vugraph Deals #153

We return again to Salsomaggiore in northern Italy where, after ten days of intense competition, there are now just two teams standing in each of the four events. For the past two weeks, we have been concentrating on the Venice Cup, but we now switch back to the Bermuda Bowl, and the opening stanza of what promises to be a titanic struggle between two evenly matched teams.  

Switzerland and Netherlands occupied the top two places in the table at the end of the 23-match round robin, with the Swiss less than 5 VPs ahead of the Dutch. In the quarter-finals, the Dutch were tied with Italy at the midway point whilst the Swiss trailed England, but both teams pulled away on the second day, the Dutch winning 184-151 and the Swiss 182-139. In the semi-finals, the Swiss trailed USA-1 by 20 IMPs with two 16-board sessions remaining, but produced two big sets to win 230-182. In their semi-final against Norway, the Dutch dominated from start to finish, earning a concession after five of the six stanzas when ahead 192-78. 

As this match gets underway, I am delighted to say that I am sure to be able to report that at least one member of the BBO Bidding Challenge expert panel is certain to be crowned as a Bermuda Bowl winner tomorrow (with possibilities in the Venice Cup and the d’Orsi Trophy too). We have two of our panellists in the Swiss team and one in the Dutch camp. 

A couple of Dutch supporters proudly pointed out that this was a first, with a Dutch pair sitting in both directions at a table in the Bermuda Bowl final. Of course, Sjoert Brink and Bas Drijver had been teammates with two pairs from of the current Dutch team the last time Netherlands won the trophy, in 2011 on home soil in Veldhoven. I did confess that I have referred to Brink/Drijver with comments such as “IMPs to the Dutch” a couple of times this week, only to have it pointed out that it was “IMPs to The Swiss”. Of course, the first time in commentary today that I said “IMPs to The Dutch” some wag had to ask, “Which Dutch?” I wonder if this is what people mean when they say it is Double Dutch to them. Alright, enough waffle from me, on with the game... 

As usual, we start with some problems. Firstly, with only your side vulnerable, you are sitting South holding: 

What action, if any, do you take? 

Next, with neither side vulnerable, you are South with: 

What action, if any, do you take? 

While you think about those, we jump right into the action.  

When the board appeared on the screen, Barnet Shenkin and I debated on commentary how many diamonds East should bid over North’s 1♥ opening. Barnet voted for four while I went for five, but Berend van den Bos disagreed with us both, choosing instead a stop-asking, jump cue-bid of 3♥. Sjoert Brink stretched to 4♥ on the South cards and Joris van Lankveld took the save in front of his partner, despite holding only a singleton trump.  

You would have thought the defence would be easy with the long trump hand on display in dummy. It didn’t work out that way, though. Brink overtook the ♥K opening lead, cashed the ♥J and then played the ♠A and a second spade back to his partner’s king. A third spade now would promote a trump trick for South, giving the Swiss +500. Bas Drijver, though, chose to believe his partner’s play, rather than his bidding, and played a third round of hearts, allowing declarer to ruff in safely, draw trumps and claim the rest. E/W +300 and perhaps the first chink in the Swiss armour. At the other table, though, the Dutch South had to deal with the first of this week’s problems. 

Zimmermann also treated his hand as a 3♥ overcall, but Bauke Muller did not think the South hand was worth committing to game, doubling instead to (presumably) show a raise to 3♥. When the auction came back to him at the five-level, Muller evidently reassessed the offence-to-defence balance of his hand and chose to take the push. Pierre Zimmermann cashed a top diamond, and we all could have proceeded onto the next board in about 10 seconds flat had to then switched to his singleton club. 

When he instead continued with a second high diamond, though, things slowed down considerably. Declarer ruffed in hand, crossed to the ♥A, and led a club. Fernando Piedra rose with the ♣A and then started to think. Watching in the Open Room, our spy at the other table told us that Piedra was thinking. They played three more boards in our room and, when we checked again, Piedra was still thinking. Eventually, he played a club for his partner to ruff.  Simon de Wijs got the spades right to avoid a second undertrick, but that was still E/W +100 and 9 IMPs to SWITZERLAND when it might have been a handful in the other direction. 

On the next deal, Brink’s systemic opening on a 3-3-5-2 19-count with ♦A-K-10-x-x was a 2+♣ 1♣ because it was a balanced hand. When he then declared 3NT, Van Lankveld had a fairly routine diamond lead from Q-J-x-x-x, which gave declarer his ninth trick: N/S +400. In the other room South opened 1♦ and North declared 3NT with only eight tricks available: N/S -50 and another 10 IMPs to SWITZERLAND.  

Fernando Piedra won the opening diamond lead in hand and cashed the ♠A. When no honor appeared, he cashed the ♦K and played a second trump. When spades fell 2-2, he claimed eleven tricks, losing just the ♣A. E/W +450, but surely this deal cannot swing more than the overtrick IMP. 

Perhaps aided by his partner’s double, Drijver found the best opening lead, a heart. With no way for North to regain the lead quickly to lead a second heart, though, it seemed that the Swiss would gain only an overtrick IMP, as all sensible lines appeared to lead to ten tricks.  Or did they?

Brink won with the ♥Q and, with nothing more attractive, returned the suit in the vague hope that his partner had led from ♥J-x-x. Van Lankveld does not sound much like a southern Mediterranean name, so perhaps he has never learned to beware of ‘Greeks bearing gifts’. 

Winning with the ♥J, declarer cashed the ♠A but no honor appeared. However, with no heart loser to be discarded on dummy’s diamond winners, there was now a losing option. With a 4-3 diamond break surely better odds than finding trumps 2-2, who can really blame Van Lankveld for taking the bait?  

Rather than playing a second trump, declarer unblocked the diamonds and crossed to dummy with the ♥A. However, when he then tried to cash one of dummy’s diamond winners, Brink ruffed in with the ♠Q. Declarer could get rid of one of his clubs, but Brink quickly cashed the ♣A, and North’s ♠K was the setting trick. Three defensive tricks had suddenly become four: E/W -50 and another 11 IMPs to SWITZERLAND.  

After just eight boards, halfway through the first stanza, the Swiss had already built a 33-0 lead. The Dutch finally got on the board when they stopped in 4♦ (+130) whilst the Swiss climbed to game in clubs at the other table (-100): 6 IMPs. On the next deal, the Dutch bought the contract in both rooms (2♦+1 and 1♥ just making) for another 6 IMPs. Then Van Landveld opened 1♦ on a chunky 2-4-5-2 14-count and rebid a 14-16 1NT, with the result that Van den Bos played in 2♠, making exactly for +110. At the other table, the Swiss upgraded to a 15-17 1NT and thus went two down in 4♠ for another 5 IMPs. Slowly but surely, the Orange Army was climbing back into the contest after having looked completely overrun midway through the stanza. 

The next deal had potential for a significant swing. 

Brink’s 4♦ showed a heart raise (for system-nerds, 4♣ would have been a slam try in hearts and 4♥ would have shown clubs). Quite what Drijver’s 4NT meant is unclear, as this seems an unlikely hand on which to bid Blackwood, although perhaps it was and Brink’s jump to 6♥ showed one key-card and a useful void.  

East led the ♠K, so Drijver ruffed in dummy and led the ♥10. West covered with the jack and declarer won with the king. Discussing it on commentary with Barnet Shenkin, we agreed that West would not split his honors with Q-J-x, and it would seem that Drijver agreed with this analysis as he promptly laid down the ♥A and claimed when the suit behaved.  

The same contract was played at all four tables in the Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup finals. At the other table in our match and at one of the VC tables, an identical line led to making twelve tricks. At the fourth table, declarer attempted to cross back to dummy in diamonds, presumably trying to pick up ♥Q-J-x. The very next deal turned out to be one of the most explosive in Bermuda Bowl history: 

Let’s start with the auction. I have no problem with East opening a natural weak two in hearts on this hand. The chances of getting caught for a big penalty are small, as has been proven on numerous occasions when such bids have been made in recent years. However, to pass, telling the opponents that you don’t have a hand good enough for a first-seat non-vulnerable weak two, and then to come in at the two-level, particularly after LHO has shown a very strong hand, is, in my as-always humble opinion, bordering on insane.  

In discussion on commentary, we observed that 6NT could be made on a finesse and a squeeze, but that seemed like jolly hard work for +980 when N/S could simply collect +1100 defending. However, faced with the last of this week’s problems, Brink chose to bid and thus it was now a question of whether he could make twelve tricks in 6NT. 

Our squeeze expert in resident, Kit Woolsey, felt that winning the heart lead in hand and immediately playing the ♦A and then a diamond to the jack, was just about guaranteed to work as long as one of the minor-suit finesses was working. When declarer subsequently cashes his winners, either East would get squeezed in hearts and clubs, or West would be squeezed in the black suits. This is basically an automatic squeeze played as a double squeeze, as it will work against whichever defender happens to hold four (or more) clubs. 

Brink’s first error was to win the opening heart lead in dummy and take the club finesse, which won. When he then played the ♦A and took a losing finesse to the ♦Q, East returned a thoughtful ♣Q. Had West held the fourth club, this would have broken up the black-suit squeeze by severing communications between the two hands.  

With East holding the club guard, though, declarer is still cold, by cashing the ♣A-K and the top spades from his hand, then playing off the diamond winners from dummy. When he then cashed the ♠Q, East would have been squeezed out of his heart stop or his club winner. When Brink won the club switch and laid down the ♥A, though, he had severed his own communications and the squeeze would no longer work. N/S -50. 

This result can surely be put down purely to exhaustion, after twelve solid days of 48-64 boards a day of high-level concentration. Believe it or not, though, what happened in this room was almost irrelevant. Yes, going down in slam actually cost only 5 IMPs. Indeed, the difference between making +980 and getting +1100 from 2♥-X – absolutely nothing! 

I know it’s popular in France and the Low Countries, so I suppose it should come as no surprise to find Pierre Zimmerman playing a 2♥ opening to show a weak hand with hearts and a minor. Bauke Muller doubled on the good hand, and you can perhaps understand Piedra’s reluctance to pass just in case North is sitting with a heart stack. As we have already seen, though, declarer has to make three trump tricks in 2♥-X, which may not sound like a lot, but...  

If you try to escape from a penalty double of 1NT, you need to make two extra tricks to make it worthwhile going to the two-level. Similarly, here, would you rather play a 5-1 fit at the two level or a 4-3 fit at the three-level? Sure, perhaps partner will have diamonds and it will be a 4-4 fit, but you will still need to make TWO more tricks to make it worth going a level higher. I’m sure that many people reading this report play this method and they, too, would have bid a ‘pass-or-correct’ 3♣ on that West hand. You are lucky, as what you take away from this lesson cost you absolutely nothing, unlike the Swiss. 

To say that 3♣-X played poorly would be the understatement of the championships. The defence began with three rounds of trumps, leaving declarer with a trump winner in dummy. Declarer had options as to when he took that trick, but it was the only one he would get. The Dutch pair scored twelve tricks on defence: N/S +2000 and 19 IMPs to NETHERLANDS. 

For the record, the board was also significant in the Venice Cup final, where the results were 3NT+2 for +460 and 3♣-X down seven for -1700, and thus a 15-IMP swing to Sweden. 

Having trailed 33-0 after eight boards, the Dutch actually edged ahead 36-35 six boards later. The Swiss picked up a small swing at the end to win the stanza 39-36, but I think it is fair to say that the first session finished just about honours even. This final has the potential to go down as one of the all-time classic matches. One thing you can be sure of – if the rest of this final is as exciting as this first stanza, we will all need another week just to recover. 

We will be back next week with more action from one of the finals in Salsomaggiore, as the first post-COVID world championship draws to its exciting conclusion.