Aces on bridge

“The task is, not so much to see what no one has yet seen; but to think what nobody has yet thought, about that which everybody sees.”

— Erwin Schrodinger

Has it ever occurred to you that the act of setting bridge problems has something in common with Schrodinger’s Cat? I thought not. Maybe that is too eggheaded a comparison, but there is something to be said for the idea that solving a problem written down on paper is not the same as doing so at the table, because by giving someone a problem and making them aware that there is a catch, it ceases to be as much of a problem.

Enough of such nonsense; let us look at today’s deal, where I suspect if you were to encounter the hand at the table in four spades, a sizeable percentage of the population would ruff the opening lead and draw trumps, expecting to be able to claim 10 winners. But in problem-land, as opposed to real life, wouldn’t you expect something to be rotten in the state of Denmark?

If trumps are 4-1 with West having the length, you appear to be in deep trouble. What happens if it is East who has the long trump, with diamonds also breaking in unfriendly fashion? To solve the problem of transportation between your two hands, ruff the club king, then cash the spade ace, unblocking dummy’s spade nine. Take the spade king, unblocking the spade 10 from the board, and lead a diamond to the queen. You can next finesse the spade eight, draw the last trump and claim.

ANSWER: Facing a direct double, you would bid two hearts now; but the range for a balancing double is somewhat lower, so a free bid here should be a slightly better hand than this. You can pass, relying on your partner to reopen if he has real extras. If the opponents go back to two diamonds, you can balance with two hearts. I’d bid two hearts with the heart king instead of the queen, so it is very close.