The Way They Were

The BBO coverage of 2014 world championships from Sanya provided bridge fans with lots of entertainment and food for thought. Kit Woolsey was on hand to give his spot-on expert analysis and Al Hollander was as ever an entertaining and helpful commentator. Both these guys favour Big Club systems.

First we should note that Kerri Sanborn came out a winner in the Mixed Pairs playing with Jie, or ‘Jack’, Zhao, an event she won in 1978. We have criticized her bidding methods with regard to some women’s team events, but here her natural style fitted the field well, and she won by the huge margin of 4 boards over 10 sessions. Graciously she acknowledged that Zhao was the nicest male partner she has ever played with, presumably surpassing in that regard Barry Crane and Bob Hamman, among others.  Zhao for his part disclosed his secret was that he always let Kerri assume the male role. We can see that ‘Jack’ has accommodated himself well to life in America, where the affluent male will do anything to please his significant other, anything short of voting for Hillary Clinton on a secret ballot, that is.

Of course, with the Mixed Pairs one always imagines there is romance in the air. Kerri and Jie we picture as being in the honeymoon phase where nothing rankles and two hearts beat as one. Auken–Welland appear to be involved in a tempestuous roller coaster relationship where exhilarating highs are followed by gut-retching lows. The highs were all the sweeter, as they came out winners in the Mixed Teams. Gromov-Gromova represents the happily married couple who play for the long term conserving energy and judiciously avoiding the usual pitfalls as best they can. For the numerically inclined, here as evidence are the percentage scores over the ten sessions.

Commentators in their role as teachers advise students against a roller-coaster existence that goes against the notion of safe normality. They prefer the steady approach to bidding, aiming for a normal result while hoping to benefit from the mistakes of others. Auken-Welland aren’t satified with that; they aim for inducing errors through altered perceptions. Frustrated opponents often double a perfectly sound contract because they feel that somehow they are being robbed blind, which at other times they often are.

Zia is especially admired by the commentators willing to overlook the occasional psyche. To be known as a master card shark it is enough to be able to play the cards as if one can see the actual layout, simply put, when one’s perception matches reality. It is partly a matter of probability and partly one of psychology through the reading the intentions of the opponents. The true expert is not afraid to take the chance that what he perceives is what actually exists. This is when miracles appear to occur, but they are not miracles, just confident card placement. Here is an example where Zia was generously praised for performing a miracle in the Mixed Teams.

Marion Michielsen, twice a champion at Sanya, had the methods available to make Zia declarer in 3NT on a 7-7-6-6 division of sides. Kit Woolsey noted that the safest lead might be the ♦7, and so it came to pass. In fact, the contract makes on any lead, the key being not to take the finesse for the ♠K. Well, that’s what Deep Finesse tells us, and it’s a fact. However, on winning the ♦Q, Zia had nothing better to do than take the spade finesse at trick 2. 3NT could now be defeated, confirming my superstition that on a 7-7-6-6 deal finessing should be a last resort. Upon winning the ♠Q, West can defeat the contract in several ways. Lew Stansby continued the ♥K which was allowed to hold, Johanna giving encouragement. On the continuation Zia won the ♥A and set up the suit. The lack-luster defence led to this 5-card ending once the hearts were played out.

Needing 4 tricks Zia had to decide whether the remaining spades were evenly divided or whether he should run the ♠9. He got it right, and gained 10 IMPs against 3NT by South down 1 at the other table.

Two commentators were fulsome in their praise judging it to be a miraculous result. Kit deferred, putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of the defenders. Clearly, in the interest of telling it like it was, Woolsey was not concerned about removing himself from anybody’s Nicest Commentator List. He made two criticisms: Lew should have got rid of the ♦8, the card he was known to hold, and Johanna should not have encouraged continuation on the non-fatal lead of the ♥K. Thus, most apparent miracles have a root cause that can be found through correct reasoning. Let’s give Zia credit where it is due: he gathered information, drew the correct conclusion from what he had observed, and acted accordingly. Perhaps that is rare, but it is not miraculous – it is science at work.

For the benefit of followers of the Open Teams, Woolsey followed the fortunes of the Nickell team until they were eliminated in a close match against the Poles. Coincidentally a Polish Team last won the world’s championship in 1978, the same year Sanborn-Crane won the Mixed Pairs in New Orleans. True to form Kit was not slow to point out places where improvement was possible, while others defended the performance of the American pairs deemed by some to be the greatest in the world. Our main interest lay in the performance of Meckwell. It is the current trend in high-level bridge to present a false impression by entering the auction with poor holdings. In this way experts have adopted a style that comes naturally to bad players. Auken-Welland carry it to extremes, but the trend is general. The idea behind it is that there is something to be gained from uncertainty, especially when the hand belongs to the opponents. Here is a case in point from the final session in which a Big Club opening bid was involved.

The only entirely innocent bidder appears to be Michal Klukowski, the soon to become 18 year-old champion, sitting West. Piotr Gawrys followed the age-old adage, ‘when in doubt lead trumps.’ Obviously he didn’t trust his partner’s double. Surprising there aren’t more trump leads. Anyway, after this lead the contract depended on finding the ♥A onside, which the naïve observer might think has a less than 50% chance.

The quick conclusion is that the reason for this poor effort lay in Gawrys’ overcalling on a garbage hand, even though no space was lost as a consequence,  however, Meckwell were able to engage in a largely natural auction. They had trouble stopping in 4♠, whereas 2/1 bidders might feel they stretched to game. In the other room the Polish pair bid without interference to 6♥, an even worse contract. At each table South cuebid 4♣ to show a control. I am against this style, feeling more comfortable with the Olde English style that insists the first control cue bid be in a suit in which first round control is held.

Without interference it is convenient to have 3NT act as a serious slam try in the agreed major, however, as Woolsey noted, when the suits bid by the opponents suffer from PDD,  the pronounced deficiency disorder, it makes sense to be able to bid NT naturally to show where the true values lie. Stumbling into 3NT would have won the match for Nickell. This is often the situation after a PDD attack, and it only a matter of time before experts learn to make the fine adjustments. Meanwhile, we lesser players should continue to bid 3NT to play and expect bad defence, profiting from the low information content made available. Unfortunately for Meckwell 3NT in their auction retained the characteristic of a slam try in spades., and the quality of Meckstroth’s heart suit remained a mystery.