Counting up to Twelve


K Q 9 4
10 8
A 9
Q 7 6 5 2
J 3 2 7 5
Q J 9 5 4 6 3 2
10 7 3 Q 6 5 4 2
8 3 K 10 4
A 10 8 6
A K 7
K J 8 Contract: 6 spades, 6 NT
A J 9 Opening lead: Q of hearts

I was floored to read this opening to a recent column by Frank Stewart: "You may think counting at the bridge table takes a mathematical genius like Dustin Hoffman's character in 'Rain Man'." Well, of course it's hyperbolic, but even if we tone down the hyperbole to something like: "You may think it takes an above average (or pretty sharp) mathematical abiltiy for counting at the bridge table," I'm still flabbergasted. I don't know how many hands I've presented recently where the mathematics didn't get past adding up to or subtracting from 13, but I know it must be at least 10 in the past month or two. Further, except for scoring, and there are some who appear comfortable not knowing how to score, you don't ever have to get past 40! We're talking about 3rd and 4th grade arithmetic here! So I am a little surprised that anyone would think you need such an extraordinary ability at the bridge table or that a columnist would suggest that this is a common misperception.
Frankly, I think it's more a matter of laziness, or perhaps a level higher, a failure to focus on the point at issue. Yesterday, I offered a hand where a declarer had, by virtue of an opening lead into an A Q, eleven top tricks and the K Q of hearts promising a 12th. A lead toward the K Q gave him his 12th trick, or it would have been his 12th if he'd chosen to cash out, but he went back to dummy and now led toward the queen -- which can be a winner only if his RHO has the ace of hearts and ducks the second time. Was declarer going for an overtrick? Did he really think an opponent would duck a second time? Or did he simply fail to count.
Of course, I don't know and you don't know, but I would guess that he simply failed to count -- up to 12. Above is another hand where a few declarers -- not many -- butchered the hand when they too had an easy path to 12 by simply counting up their winners.
Despite the balanced fit, this hand doesn't offer any more tricks in spades than in no trump. Indeed, the whole hand (with reasonably competent play) hinges on the handling of the club suit. On any 3-2 split, if the king is offsides, you lose a club trick, no more. But it if the king is onsides do you play East for what he has? Or for K low? Or for K low low, giving West a 10 doubleton? Or more simply, does West hold a low doubleton, a ten doubleton or a twice-guarded ten (giving East K 10)? And nobody could go wrong with that, could they? I don't think there's a penny's worth of difference in the odds here, not enough to criticize anyone for choosing wrong. So I'm not here to critique those who made only 6. But how on earth did some go down in 6 no, or in one case in 5 no, or down 2 in 7 spades? That would take some doing.

On any 3-2 split in clubs, declarer has 4 winners, with a chance for five if the K is onsides and declarer guesses right. With every suit doubly stopped and with both black suits breaking 3-2 (and with no reason to suppose otherwise), it would seem to be a fairly easy path to at least four club tricks, and hence to 12 tricks for a minimum. But here is what happened:
Opening lead a low heart, the 10 holding! Well, on another day, that might have been a gift, but not here. Club to the jack. A good start. Now a diamond to the ace, king of spades, a spade to the ace, the ten back to the king. Ah, well, he's saved his nine of spades for a re-entry to dummy, eh? Not exactly. For that was his next play,the 9 of spades! This declarer absolutely rushed to wipe out his entries to the long clubs. I'll never understand that proclivity, but I see it all the time. Why the ace of diamonds? Why the spades beyond two leads, settling that they're 3-2? Why indeed lead the ten of spades if he's going to wipe out the value of that 9 of spades as an entry?
It simply makes no sense. Ironically, this declarer still had a way to his contract because of that opening lead gift. And that was to take the diamond hook. But it wasn't to be, of course. Now he led the queen of clubs, covered, and he was destined to go down. He had no access to the long clubs.
The next one, playing from North, got a diamond lead, the jack holding, another apparent gift that really does nothing for declarer. You've got to hit them clubs! This one now took three rounds of spades, finessed the jack of clubs and then a fourth round of spades! Beginning to look like the other declarer. Now the ace of hearts, for no known reason, then the ace of clubs, getting that 3-2 split. He still has his ace of diamonds, so a simple club lead, conceding one trick to gain the rest would have done it. But, no. Guess what his next play was? The ace of diamonds! Finally the last access to the long clubs was eliminated. A heart to the king, and now a club "establishing" the long clubs, if that's the right word. But the defender now led a heart, and the setting trick was the 7 of hearts to the jack. This defender, by the bye, got more tricks with diamonds than with clubs! Something's rotten in the state of Denmark.
Here's one down in five no!. Since you could just about shut your eyes and make 5 no, you know it was another case of wiping out entries before promoting clubs. Lemme see. Opening lead the queen of hearts, spade to the king, diamond to the ace and now the diamond hook! If I'd been dummy, I would have winced at that one, though the finesse held. But it does nothing for declarer unless there's a bad club break. Now came the ace of hearts and the 7 of hearts continuation!
I have no idea why anyone, with top spades and a lot of potential in clubs would not merely wipe out her heart stoppers, but then lead the suit. As for going down 2 in 7 spades, this one too moved to wipe out his entries, thus: opening lead the Q of hearts to the ace, three rounds of trump -- good start -- heart king. Oh, oh. Why not clubs? Ruff a heart! Well, that's a trick that was always coming and also represents an entry to the long clubs. You don't wanna wipe out tricks you've always got coming except with good reason. But at least there's the ace of diamonds, no?
Club to the jack, and he could still have held it to down one, but now came a diamond lead to the ace, and the long clubs were no longer accessible (though declarer had queered his chance for 7 on the club lead to the jack). I think declarer's primary mistake here was not deciding on how to play the club suit early. If you play low to the jack, you can now bring in the suit if there's a king doubleton before the ace or if you smother a 10 doubleton with fourth hand. But if you're thinking of smothering a 10 doubleton, why not start with the queen? It has the advantage of not needing another entry to go back for a second finesse. It seems evident that declarer had no clear idea on how he wanted to play for the club 10, and that was his undoing. At least he wouldn't have gone down 2 on that line.