Koach's Korner

 Netherlands vs Great-Britain

West	North	East	South				West	North	East	South
Collings	V.d. Neut	Jones	Paulissen				Ten Kate	Jones	Oosthoek	Watson
		1	pass						1	pass
3	3	pass	3NT				2	2NT	pass	3
4	pass	pass	4NT				4	5	pass	5
5	pass	pass					5	6	all pass

I'd be proud to say that this was one of my prepared practice match deals, but in truth it was dealt by Simon Wiersema's random deal generator at the NBB office in Utrecht. The truth is often stranger than fiction.

Let's start with Netherlands vs Great-Britain. Jaap van der Neut and Gert-Jan Paulissen were playing against the legendary John Collings, a very imaginative player whose nose for the game continues to function well although his hearing has been diminished in recent years. Collings' 3 might have been several different kind of hands, none of them weak and Jaap's 3 showed a two-suiter, usually including hearts. Now perhaps Gert-Jan's 3NT and 4NT both described good hands and asked for clarification, but in the end, neither of the Dutch players seemed to be on firm ground as to "ownership" of the deal abd they sold out ignominiously to 5 for minus 650. Should Jaap have bid over 4? Not if 3NT was simply an effort to play in the right suit at the four-level? Might Gert-Jan have bid 5 over 4? Not if 3 might have been a minor two-suiter. The fact that he bid at all suggests that he would have support for two suits. Should that have prompted Jaap to act over 5? Well, perhaps. But wouldn't the most attractive action have been double with such a prime defensive hand? And if he had doubled, would Gert-Jan have bid 5NT, completing a most unusual chain of notrump bids? My best guess is that this scenario would have led to a final contract of 6 doubled, down 200. The fact that they sold out to 5 suggests that there was a certain lack of partnership confidence in the auction. Human, to be sure, but worrisome.

At the other table, Chris started with an honest 2 (which would have been my choice too) and the British were both willing to cue-bid after the initial two-suited action. Here both of North's suits were known, so the bidding had a different flavour. Sould Bas' pass to 5 have any encouraging overtones? I'd vote yes to that. WOuld his pass to 6 have been forcing? The vulnerability suggests that it would have been, but the nature of the bidding should have been particularly significant in determining how to proceed. Bas doubled because he did not wish to go forward ... constructively, but perhaps in this dangerous situation, a double should be a stronger opinion about defnsive prospects. It looks as if Chris interpreted the double in that way, so here too, the partnership was not on firm ground. If Bas had passed, I believe that Chris would have gone to 6 as an "insurance" action, guarding against a huge adverse swing. Try to remember this deal the next time you consider an "easy" double in the kind of position that Bas found himself. 20 imps to GB.

Netherlands vs Denmark

West	North	East	South				West	North	East	South
Auken	De Boer	Koch	Muller				Westra	D.Schaltz	Leufkens	P.Schaltz
		1	pass						1	pass
3NT	4NT	pass	5NT				4	dbl	4	5
pass	6	pass	pass				5	6	pass	pass
6	dbl	all pass					6	dbl	all pass

In the Netherlands vs Denmark match, Wubbo de Boer had to commit to the five-level (3NT was some sort of distributional spade raise) to show his two-suiter and this prompted Bauke to drive to six as some sort of two-way shot. 6 would have been cold (indeed seven will make from the South side), but Bauke Muller elected to pass 6, perhaps in the belief that both contracts would make and that by passing, there was only one more Dane to get past in the auction. Jens Auken could not tell how well (or badly) 6 was going to play so he sensibly went on to 6. It was too late to reach 7 by South now, so Wubbo doubled and collected plus 200.

At the other table, Berry Westra decided to splinter in response to 1, and faced with an embarrassment of riches, he chose his void. Hearts never became a factor at this table, and in the end Berry bid the 6 that he suspected he would have to bid when he first picked up his hand. No swing, but a set of circumstnaces rather unlike those in the GB match.

Netherlands vs Ireland

West	North	East	South				West	North	East	South
McGann	Jansen	Hanlon	Westerhof				Maas	Timlin	Kirchhoff	Walsh
		1	pass						1	pass
4	4NT	pass	5				4	pass	4	all pass
5	6	dbl	all pass

In Netherlands vs Ireland, Hugh McGann settled for a simple 4, facing a limited opening bid. Piet Jansen came in with 4NT, then did something rather remarkable by carrying on to 6 after McGann volunteered 5. Whether this was because McGann sounded like a person bidding to make or because Hanlon had not doubled 4NT to suggest some defense I can't tell you, but Jan Westerhof had enough to make 6 a fine contract. The annoying part, of course, was that 6 couldn't quite be made after K, taken, A. Would 5NT by Piet have shown diamonds and hearts? Or would that have been some sort of grand slam try? I'd vote for diamonds and hearts since letting partner in on which suits you hold can be vital if the bidding should continue. And here it was not at all clear that it would not continue after Piet contracted for slam. At first blush, it might seem that a double of 5 would have had much more going for it than the wild raise to 6. At second blush too. But would Jan have realized that 5 was going to make and that grand slam was still possible for his side?

At the other table, Anton followed Berry's plan and was rewarded beyond his wildest dreams when his side bought the auction quietly at 4. Would a double by North at this vulnerability be best used to show diamonds (for sacrificing purposes), or to show interest in either a club lead or a heart lead (by agreement) or perhaps as a takeout double of spades? If you haven't discussed that with your favourite victim ... um, partner, perhaps you should. Should Rory Timlin have risked 4 over 4? Yes, unless he could have shown his hand in some other way. Remember that 4 would usually deliver significant high card values and that this West hand was hardly the prototype for the bid.

I am not usually a big believer in presenting freak deals, but as you can see, they do happen. Having a lot of agreements in high-level situations can make all the difference in the world with a spectacular number of imps on the line. Is it worth it to work on this sort of thing? You bet it is.