aces on bridge

“The worst moment for the atheist is when he is really thankful and has nobody to thank.”

— Dante Gabriel Rossetti

Today’s deal produced a bizarre flat board in a teams game where both declarers played four spades. I’m fairly confident there were two Souths relieved not to have lost a swing.

In each room, West led the heart king, won by declarer’s ace. The first South ran the spade 10, which held the trick. Next came a spade to the queen and another to the ace, East pitching a heart. South now ran the diamond nine, and West won his queen and played the heart queen. South ruffed this trick and tried to bring in the club suit, hoping for a 3-3 break. When his second chance failed, declarer had only eight tricks. In retrospect, South was kicking himself; all he had to do was to discard on the heart queen, and he would have had a sure route to 10 tricks.

In the other room, the lead and play to the first four tricks were identical. But at that table, West was a very tricky customer. When declarer brought out the diamond nine, East gave count, and West realized that South was either 6-2 or 4-4 in the minors. Since he had no realistic chance to set the game in the second case, West decided to give declarer an additional losing option by winning the diamond ace at his first opportunity!

When West returned a heart, declarer did not see any danger; he ruffed in hand, crossed to a top club, then finessed in diamonds and went down the same humiliating two tricks as had happened in the other room.

ANSWER: This looks like an easy problem, but it may have hidden depths. A simple bid of one spade shows four spades (a three-card suit is possible, but unlikely), but is most consistent with a balanced 12-14, and this hand is surely too strong for that. I would bid two spades, intending to show some extras. Even a call of three spades is not absurd.