Against our boring, everyday auction, North leads the J♦ and South plays an encouraging nine, then wins the queen, king and ace on the next three tricks, and we need the rest. We're lucky that diamonds break 4-3 but unlucky that not everyone is getting a diamond lead. The T♠ is led to trick five and the finesse doesn't work, so I win the ace in dummy and I need three club tricks. I play my four heart winners and they break 4-3, South holding four. I cash the K♠ and do a little figuring. South passed in third seat and then turned up with AKQ♦ and 4-4 or 3-4 in the majors headed by the ten. In third seat this plus the Q♣ would be a potential opening bid. So I decide to play North for the Q♣, by cashing the king first and leading the...hold on, South had the queen and it dropped on the king! Nine tricks. Poor result since many other tables got a different lead and cashed the clubs before letting the opponents in to run their diamonds. Not much you can do when this happens. Nothing productive anyhow. Best advice: onto the next hand, fuggitaboutit!

RESULT: 3NTw=

Partner's 1NT is a non-forcing call, so I jump to 3♥ to show a big hand. When partner bids 4♠ I park the bus. The A♦ is led and when dummy appears it looks like I can make six by pitching a club from dummy on the fourth heart, then after losing a club I can ruff the third round. Oly one problem: playing out the hearts before pulling trumps is going to attract a ruff. So I settle for eleven tricks and so does about of the field. The other half remembers that we are playing matchpoints and gambles out 3NT, but North has a normal diamond lead and South (if East plays it) will reluctantly lead a diamond rather than lead away from KJ8♣. So the notrumpers make only ten tricks and our eleven in spades carry the day!

RESULT: 4Sw+1

Lots of interesting things going on in this hand, but before it got wild I foresaw a common problem that newer players face. We all learn about reverses early on, opening one suit and then rebidding a higher one, to show a strong hand, at least an ace more than a minimum opener. (If you turn one of your aces into a deuce and the resulting hand is still good enough to open, you have enough for a reverse.) But the trap newer players fall into with the South hand is to see the strength and decide that if it is enough for a reverse, we should go for it. In fact, a reverse shows more than just a strong hand. It also shows more, not equal, cards in the first-bid suit than the rebid suit. If you chose to open the South hand 1♣, with the intent of reversing into 2♦, you promised more clubs than diamonds. That's not what you have. The right way to show this hand is to open 1♦ and then rebid clubs. Now, because this hand was dealt by the computer apparently without shuffling the cards very well :) you have to make a decision about whether you are strong enough to show clubs at an absurdly high level after East comes in with a 4♠ overcall. Partner's response of 1NT is a clue: he clearly does not have a four-card major, so he is certain to have four-card support for one of your suits. The computers all saw this and bid a confident 5♣, and while the decision was sound, the result was rather unexpected. West led a spade to East's jack and East returned a heart which I won in dummy. I led the J♣ from dummy and East won the ace of trumps and led the 9♠. I ruffed with the 8♣ and West pitched, so I knew the Q♣ was finessable, but there was no way to get to dummy to do so! When diamonds broke badly I had to lose two diamonds, two clubs, and the top spade for three down. 4♠ looks to be a making contract, and 5♠ will make unless we remove West's singleton trump before East can ruff a club with it. But the computer Wests are all satisfied with their 4♠ call and willing to go no further. Results in the real game may vary quite widely, but in the computer tournament -150 is exactly average!

RESULT: 5♣s-3

1♥ or 1NT as an opening bid for West? The wisdom in vogue today says to open 1NT: opponents are less likely to intervene, and the Stayman/tranfers structure is both familiar and good. The mentors sitting East may forget this particular auction, because playing special agreements for 1NT (Pass) 3♥ or 3♠ is all the rage these days. But in the old days (and in SAYC) the jump to 3 of a major meant "I know we're playing transfers, but this is a very good suit in a fairly strong hand." 4♣, 4♥, and 5♦ are cuebids promising first-round control in those suits. After partner bids 6♠ I hope my three small trumps are enough and I hope his first-round control in hearts is not a void. All turns out to be well, taking the East chair to play the hand (computer programs hate to leave human players as dummy), I win the diamond lead, pull trumps in two rounds, then play three top hearts, pitching a diamond from hand, but discovering that the hearts split 4-2. I ruff a fourth round and return to dummy in trumps and play the fifth heart, discarding my last diamond. Now even if the club finesse fails, there is no second trick for the defense. The club finesse wins and I make seven for a near-top!

RESULT: 6♠e+1

The computer is dealing some difficult hands today! Partner's overcall shows five or more spades and about the values for an opening bid, so twelve points and a singleton in their suit make 4♠ a no-brainer. The play is not so clear-cut after South leads a singleton club. Declarer gets to win it, but this leaves only bad options. Pulling trumps (even if they are 3-2, which will turn out to be wrong) leaves me with multiple red suit losers. Not pulling trumps is an even quicker fate, as the defenders will probably get two red aces and two club ruffs before I even exhale. I opt for pulling trumps but when the 4-1 break is revealed on the second round I stop. There really is no escaping this one and I lose a club ruff, a spade, a diamond and two hearts for down two. It's a common result, but some are going for even bigger numbers by being doubled or going three down. We escape with a decent score.

RESULT: 4♠e-2

Just because a suit looks like a pre-empt doesn't mean you have to. Partner could have support for hearts or could have length in spades. Pre-empting to 2♥ or 3♥ may lose a spade fit if you have one. A simple overcall of 1♥ gives your side the chance to find that possible spade fit. When partner instead raises hearts, all is well, and 3♥ comes home routinely, losing two top trumps, a diamond and a club: the spade loser disappears when the trumps are pulled and the club ace is knocked out.

RESULT: 3♥s

South has the perfect hand to respond 1NT to the takeout double: 8-10 points and a stopper in the enemy suit. However, the reality is that there is seldom perfection in this response, since the takeout doubler is not usually looking to play in notrump. The 1NT response leaves the double only one way to proceed with his decent hand: an inviting raise to 2NT. Doubling and then bidding diamonds would show a stronger hand. The computer makes a good decision to bid game even with a minimum 8 count: there may be a second spade stopper with the spots, honours in all suits, and my opening bid will make the hand easier to play, since most of the missing high cards will be in the hand that opened the bidding. I decide not to lead a spade, opting for the Q♦, which sets up the suit for declarer, but most roads seem to lead to ten tricks and I escape with a decent score when more make eleven than nine.

RESULT: 3NTs+1

South's preempt wins the auction and I make a less than inspired opening lead, a small trump. We get two hearts and a diamond for -130, the most common result, but a significant minority of defenders are getting a fourth trick, and it's hard to figure out how on the layout. A heart ruff and overruff? A long club? South should make ten tricks every day of the week. Oh well, next hand.

RESULT: 3♦s+1

Partner opens 1♣ in second seat and the next player makes a 1♥ overcall. I choose only a 1NT call here despite 12 points, because a) my clubs aren't that good and partner only promises three, b) my heart stopper is dubious, and c) AK doubleton for notrump is not a great asset, it leaves you only one way to play the suit and no way to use skill to choose a best line. LHO makes a support showing cuebid of 2♣ (most cuebids are not alertable). Partner bids 3♣ and I have another awkward decision: play for a plus score or try for a game? I pass and it turns out to be spectacularly wrong. Game in clubs is a lock and we make twelve when the trump king is onside. A quirky distribution makes my Qxx an ironclad stopper in 3NT: a heart lead to the king and a heart back to the AJ can be ducked: North wins but cannot get partner in to cash the rest of the hearts! Worst score yet, but a bit unlucky: on almost any other layout the hearts run and I get a top...

RESULT: 3♣e+3

The one convention you should learn, if you haven't already, is New Minor Forcing. Most conventions cover situations that are fairly rare: you can go three or four sessions and never see a Texas Transfer or an Unusual Notrump. New Minor Forcing is all about what happens after opener rebids 1NT, which happens at least once in almost every session. Here, the 2♦ bid (the 'new minor') is artificial but promises about 11 points and asks partner to describe his hand further. Partner can bid 2♠ to show three-card spade support, 2♥ to show a heart suit, 2NT to show a minimum 12-13 with no potential fit, or 3NT with a maximum 1NT rebid of 14 or a good 13. Here, the choice of 3♣ indicates 12-13 with a real club suit, and no fit for hearts or spades. 3NT seems the place to park, but I am unable to bring back a good score. The spade lead loses to the jack when I try the ten, and back comes the deadly Q♦, bringing down all four royals! This sets up three diamonds for the defense, but my 8♦ turns out to be a stopper. Nine tricks are just barely there when the club and heart finesses work, but I get a bad score! Never a good idea to finesse at trick one when, if the finesse loses, you could fac a deadly switch. My bad.

RESULT: 3NTw

Disaster time. JACK thinks my 3♣ rebid was a bit much. I think making three bids of that diamond suit is more than a bit much. Down two nets us no matchpoints. Not much else to say. Can't yell at a computer...

RESULT: 5♦-2

Some West players may choose to pass the West hand as dealer, but because you always have a reasonable rebid in spades I think it barely qualifies, and as you can see from the six-packs below fifty computer players out of fifty agree. After North overcalls a pre-emptive 2♥ and partner makes a negative double, South raises to 4♥ and it's a poker game. 4♥ might be an honest attempt to make a game contract. It might also be a complete pre-empt and we might be the ones being talked out of game. I have absolutely got a minimum opener, but partner is unlimited, and partner has no way of knowing that I have four spades. If I bid 4♠ and go for a number, I would expect the oppoentns to be able to make 4♥ at least. So there's insurance there, but I sure would not want to face this auction with the vulnerablity reversed! My 4♠ call is passed around to South, who bids 5♥. At this vulnerability, South isn't sacrificing, so 5♥ becomes the final contract. Partner leads the 3♣ and it is ruffed in dummy. Two rounds of trumps ending in dummy and it should be over: the computer can play two high diamonds and ruff the third, and if the queen still does not fall, there are two remaining trump entries to dummy to ruff a fourth diamond and re-enter to run the suit. This is eleven tricks unless the Q♦ is buried in a four-card suit, and in that case there are still ten tricks and a chance at an eleventh if the A♠ is onside. Instead, the computer runs the 9♦ to my queen and I lead a spade through and we get this cold contract down a trick. Even more mind-boggling is that most of the field is down one, sometimes down three, often doubled, and our score for +100 is only 26%. Baffling.

RESULT: 5Hw-1

A concept hand; lots of stuff by the rules, leading to a great result. 1) A reverse shows more cards in the opened suit than the rebid suit, not equal. This is a perfect reversing hand, open a lower suit (1♣), rebid a higher suit (2♦) that has fewer (not equal) cards than the opened suit. Because partner needs to go to the three level to prefer your first suit, this requires a strong hand, at least an ace more than an opening bid. 2) When partner makes a fourth suit forcing call, the first thing to show (even before showing three-card support for partner's response suit) is a stopper in the fourth suit. 2♥ is an artificial, alertable call: fourth suit forcing to game. Even if we were not playing it forcing to game, a reverse would make it forcing to game, so 2NT is high enough. 3) Ensure your contract first and then look for overtrick possibilities. A diamond is led against 3NT and I win the nine. This gives me five red suit winners and two black suit aces to knock out to make nine. The first order of business is to remove those black suit aces from the opponents. But which one first? 4) The more cards you and dummy have in a suit, the more likely the small cards will become tricks later. This makes clubs the suit to attack first. South takes my K♣ with the ace and continues with another diamond. 5) Watch your entries! Next up is the spade ace to knock out, but there is a trap: if I play the queen of spades and the opponent with the ace ducks, I need an entry to dummy to continue the attack. So I win the diamond in hand with the ace, lead the Q♠, and it wins. I now use the Q♦ entry to continue spades. North wins and returns a heart. 6) Count your tricks. So far we have four diamonds, two established clubs, the ace of hearts, the queen of spades that was ducked, and we need one more. Clubs may run or maybe the fourth round will lose and the fifth will win. But the best prospect is that North has the K♥. I try the queen from dummy and it wins, allowing me to cash a spade trick, the A♥, and the K♦. 7) Stay focused! In order to keep the J♥, for reasons only understood by himself, South pitches a club on the K♦ and the whole club suit runs. Making five!

RESULT: 3NTw+2

A heart, a club, and a spade are the universal losers in the galaxy-wide contract of 4♠ by South, so we have a little fun taking the side roads to the predetermined result instead of the autobahn. I begin by opening a very strong 2♦ after two passes. Twelve points, nothing in the majors, LHO likely to have a decent hand, why not overbid a bit if it has some preemptive value. It doesn't and they get to 4♠ anyhow. Rather than leading away from an honour, I lead my singleton trump, and South wins it in dummy. The desire to do something different just for the hell of it continues and South, instead of the normal play of knocking out the K♠, calls for the K♣ instead. I win the ace and make another strange play: the 6♥. South puts up the ace and even with this strange start, the result is still the same: my K♦ is trapped and we get one trick in each other suit. Abnormal bidding, abnormal play, normal result. Sometimes it's just in the cards.

RESULT: 4♠s=

This is only the fourth time I have been instructed by the program to sit South. The program scouts the deals and puts me in either the South or West seat, so I can take the seat that the mentees sit in and experience the deals from their perspective; it chooses the one with the most likely action, based on highcard points and tricks available. Usually it is evenly distributed; this time, not so much -- that's randomness for you. However, this South hand is a doozie, chock full of interesting decisions to make. It is an 18-count that has plusses (a nice five-card suit) and minusses (a few dubious jacks which may not pull their full weight), but they cancel one another out and although I might like to downgrade to 17 in order to open 1NT and get us on well-travelled ground, that would be an underbid. So I open 1♣ and after partner's 1♦ response, East overcalls 1♠. This is trouble: my plan of rebidding 2NT to show 18-19 no longer fits the auction. Partner will assume I have a spade stopper. There is a good bid available though: a 2♠ cuebid shows good values and will get a response from partner that might help. Partner's next call is 3♦ and now the question is what to do now? JACK has an interesting feature called 'analyze position' that helps visualize what might be the best way to proceed in cases like this. The feature keeps the 13 South cards and deals the other 39 randomly, over and over again until it finds a random layout that matches the bidding so far. Then, when it finds such a layout, it analyzes that hand and works out what contracts make and which ones do not. Eventually it finds one thousand fitting random layouts and gives you an idea what to expect. In this case, JACK takes 14.5 seconds to find and analyze 1000 samples, and says that 3NT will make an average score of +198. Since making 3NT at this vulnerability is worth 600 we can see that it goes down a fair bit! 4♦, worth 130 if it makes, scores an average of +119. 5♦ (600 if successful) scores +132. It would appear that we should continue trying to find a way to bid 3NT. JACK's suggestion: cuebid spades again. Partner converts to 3NT and we actually have a stopper! They lead a spade and make us win the first trick, so with lots of spades out there we need eight winners now. Luckily, diamonds break and we have one spade, two high diamonds dropping the queen, the jack of diamonds, a heart to the king, and four more diamonds. This makes it easy for the opponents to figure out what to keep and we have to abandon the AQ♥ in dummy in order to make the hand, but it scores well with a large portion of the field going down in 5♦.

RESULT: 3NTs=

East opens 1♠ in third seat and I overall 2♦. West's 3♦ rebid is a spade raise and East wastes no time in bidding game. It looks like the distribution should be good for twelve tricks, losing only the offside king of hearts, but declarer can't cross-ruff the whole hand without risking an overruff, so the play is not quite as easy. The K♦ opening lead is taken by the ace, and a spade to the queen puts declarer in dummy to run the Q♥. I duck. Next is the A♠ and then the J♥ around to my king. I return a third heart but partner declines to ruff, pitching instead a diamond. Declarer now plays the T♦, forcing a cover from my hand and a ruff with the 9♠ in dummy...and partner overruffs! This nice play cuts declarer off from dummy's set up hearts and declarer has a diamond to lose in hand, so we hold it to four for a good score.

RESULT: 4♠e=

Another scary one for newer players here: after North rebids 1NT, what's the best way to continue. 16 points opposite a 12-14 1NT rebid should be easy: 3NT, but we may have no heart stoppers at all. One inventive solution would be to treat the AKQJ of spades as a five-card suit and use New Minor Forcing, but a look at the layout shows that this will end in a disaster: partner will show three-card support for spades, and you'll be in 4♠ facing a 6-0 trump split! The solution is probability: partner has about 13 points and although there are hands you can construct where those 13 points do not contain a heart stopper, the great majority of them do have one. Added to that is that with two unbid suits there is a chance the opponents may not even lead a heart. So 3NT it is and whe the lead is a club we can face our hand and relax. Except that this is computer bridge and the machines switch seats so that the human players can declare as often as possible. (They probably think we need practice...) We have nine winners and a two-way finesse for the Q♦? Should we take the risk? Well, my initial inclination is to take my nine and hope the Q♦ is doubleton, a 40% chance. The finesse, taken either way, is 50%, but if it loses, the contract goes out the window with it. First though, we can get some idea of the distribution by playing out spade winners...and discovering that West has all six missing spades. Now, this may appear to make it more likely, much more likely in fact, that East has the Q♦, but the finesse if it loses is still a contract killer, while cashing the ace and king of diamonds at least ensures nine tricks. So I win four spades, three clubs, and the ace of diamonds. When I lead toward the KJT♦, East shows out! I play the king and down comes the queen, so I make eleven tricks and West wins the last two with the king and ace of hearts, so the Q92♥ was actually a valid stopper. Defenders leading clubs get the ace-king of heart at the very end, defenders leading hearts get the ace-king of hearts at the beginning. Either way, declarer gets the other eleven.

RESULT: 3NTs+2

East opens 2♠ as dealer and is West's hand enough to bid game? I think it is: East shouldn't be fooling around with shady weak twos in first chair. South leads the 4♦ and I switch chairs to declare the hand. I win the king, lead a spade from dummy, North's ace winning. A heart return is ruffed, and I pull one round of trumps then play the ace of diamonds and ruff a diamond with dummy's last trump. A heart ruff back to my hand and another trump to pull South's third trump, and it is only clubs left. They break 3-1 and I make five, which surprisingly is not a good result! Many declarers have somehow made six, despite what appears to be losers in both black suits. The answer is in the opening leads: many South computer players chose the Q♣, dropping partner's ten and allowing declarer to finesse the jack on the second round to pick up the whole suit!

RESULT: 4♠e+1

In thirty-five years of playing bridge, there is one thing that has always been apparent in the difference between experts and non-experts: the emphasis on bidding over cardplay. Many newer players seem to have the idea that if I could just learn to bid like the good players, that would solve all my problems. This is like saying "if I only had a Ferrari F1 car I could win the Italian Grand Prix." On this hand you may be surprised at your result if you slip after reaching the final lap. Another big hand for West, and it is certainly worth a 2♣ opener. East's 2NT response shows 8 points and no suit to bid (to bid a positive suit over two clubs requires a good five-carder, in order to avoid getting in partner's way). West continues with a natural 3♥ and Blackwood follows. 5♣ is the correct response with zero or all four aces. And when partner bids 6♥, do not even think of bidding 7♥ on the theory that partner may think you have zero aces. Partner heard you open 2♣ and knows what you have. Dummy hits after the 3♦ opening lead, and the slam looks like a sure thing, but is there an overtrick there somewhere? On this layout, some pairs may try 6NT, and if that makes, we need to make seven to outscore them. The K♠ may be onside. The J♦ may be onside (South plays the Q♦ at trick one). Is there a better way? I think so. I win the diamond lead, cash the A♥ and the A♣, then play the other high diamond and ruff one in dummy. Both follow, but this is expected: the 3♦ opening lead is likely to be from a three or four-card suit. Now I pull a second trump and then play three rounds of clubs, pitching losers from my hand. There is a trump out, and three things can happen: clubs might not break and if they are 6-2 I could even end up going down but this is unlikely. Clubs could be 5-3 and the player with three might not have the last trump, allowing me to make all the tricks anyhow. Or, as here, clubs could be 4-4 and I get to pitch losers, then lead a spade to the ace, pull the last trump and claim. Making seven in the tough computer field is only worth 51%: three pairs bid the grand and four made only twelve tricks. I don't think there is a way to bid seven other than a straight gamble. But the real danger here is letting your guard down when you get to the slam and not realizing the potential importance of that overtrick. If, like many newer players, you are enamoured by the science of bidding and not so much into cardplay, this can be a real issue.

RESULT: 6♥w+1

Nothing to see here. North has a textbook 2NT opener, South raises to game, East leads a club, and whichever club he leads ends up in eleven tricks when the J♠ drops on the second round. A few crazy computers found some way to hold it to four, but that's a trivial mystery. A larger mystery is why the program had me sitting West again...

RESULT: 3NTn+2

Partner's 2NT rebid gives me a difficult problem with five-card support for his first suit. I lean towards 5♦ rather than 3NT as the safest game, and JACK's 'analyze position' agrees, but it is awfuly close. Looking at the six-packs, you can see that even the computer players were split on where the best place to play it would be. Dummy comes down and we have two black aces to lose and cannot lose any other tricks. The opening lead of the 2♥ would put me in trouble right away in 3NT, so I am glad to be in 5♦ where I can ruff losers. I win in dummy perforce and lead a spade; North grabs the ace and leads a second spade. I win in hand and play the two top diamonds. North shows out, playing the 2♣, and I have a new problem: South has four trumps. I lead the ten of clubs towards the king and the king wins, both following low. A third round of diamonds puts back in to lead the nine of clubs. South plays the six. If South has ducked twice from AJxx even running the nine will not work because I will still have two club losers, so I assume South has the ace and play the queen, dropping North's jack. I pull South's last trump, concede a club and claim. It turns out that a few pairs have misdefended 3NT and allowed two overtricks, so our score is below average. Can 3NT be beaten? A heart lead makes it very dicey: if South ducks club leads and declarer misguesses, North can get in and lead the T♥ and still have the A♠ as a reentry. I'm happy not to have had that headache!

RESULT: 5♦e=

My decision to not overcall 1♥ on the South cards leads us off the normal path, which for the computers is directly into sillyville. The most common computer contract is 3♦ by West, reached after South overcalls 1♥, West bids 1NT, East rebids clubs, passed around to North who finally comes in by bidding 2♠. At this point East decides to double and West bids 3♦ on a three-card suit, instead of simply supporting partner's rebid clubs with two! These computers play a different game sometimes... In my auction, my idea was why bid hearts and give up on the chance that partner has spades. This turned out to be a good idea, but led to a difficult decision over 3♣ that I guess I got wrong. 3♠ goes down always, and if the opponents get their cross-ruffing going can be defeated as many as three tricks. But maybe I should have taken the risk: -100 is worth 25% more than -110, and if they bid on to 4♣ we get 98% for beating it a trick! -150 seems really remote; it is hard to see how East-West can come to seven tricks in spades.

RESULT: 3♣e=