April 2014 ♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠ Club Games at the Lima Duplicate Bridge Club are held TUESDAYS at 12:30 P.M. and THURSDAYS at 7:00 P.M., at the Council on Aging Building at 215 N. Central Avenue, Lima. The games are OPEN to the public, and ALL are welcome. $3.oo per session is the CHEAPEST duplicate game in the area, and sanctioned by the American Contract Bridge League. The Lima DBC is your venue for special ACBL events, as well. If you do not have a partner, or if you have questions, please call the Club Owner & Director, Ruth Odenweller @ HOUSE PHONE (567) 712-7629 (this is a local number for Lima) or CELL PHONE (VERIZON) (419) 303-4940, email:
[email protected], or Director Elaine Altstaetter @ (419) 738-6332, (419) 204-9656, email:
[email protected].
PARTNERS ARE ALWAYS GUARANTEED!!!
♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠♣♦♥♠
Spring!!!
Lima DBC Newsletter, www.limadbc.blogspot.com, April 2014
Page 1
LBDC Bridge Accomplishments
In This Month’s Newsletter UPCOMING EVENTS .............................. 2 Unit/District Races for 2013 .................... 2 MARCH HONOR ROLL ............................ 2 LBDC Bridge Accomplishments .................... 2 70% Club ........................................... 2 MARCH MONTHLY RESULTS .................... 2 Theory, Part X .................................... 3
Congratulations to Dave and Lucy Poeppelman for a Second Place in Flight C of the Saturday Swiss Teams in the February Sectional in Toledo.
70% Club Roy Baldridge and Tom Faulkner 71.53% on March 25th!
MARCH MONTHLY RESULTS
TUESDAY AFTERNOON, MARCH 4 1. Ton Faulkner and Roy Baldridge 65.97% 2. Roz Abrams and Carol Parker 61.81% 3. Elaine Altstaetter and Trella Niswander 56.25% 4/5. Helen Stambor and Lucy Poeppelman 50.69% 4/5. Lynn Donley and Barb Verhoff 50.69%
UPCOMING EVENTS
Mark your calendars!
Regional Tournaments:
Gatlinburg, TN April 21-27
Sectional Tournaments:
Dayton, OH April 11-13 Fort Wayne, IN May 16-18
THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 6 1. Marlene Sigler and John Hoffman 60.42% 2. Roy Baldridge and Elaine Altstaetter 58.33% 3. Dick Slonaker and CC Harris 54.17%
Local Games:
No Games on April 22nd or 24th (G-Burg) Charity Games Tues/Thurs in April, Date TBA
TUESDAY AFTERNOON, MARCH 11 1. Elaine Altstaetter and Trella Niswander 62.50% 2. Marlene Sigler and John Hoffman 58.33% 3. Roz Abrams and Carol Parker 56.55%
Unit/District Races for 2013 Ralph Heitmeyer is 7th in the Unit 105 Mini-McKinney through March 6th for the 100-200 group, 5th in the Aceof-Clubs. Joining him are Dave and Lucy Poeppelman, who are 1st (Lucy) and 2nd (Dave) in the 300-500 group. Lynn Donley is 8th in the 5-20 group of the Unit 136 MiniMcKinney (5th in Ace-of-Clubs), joined by Darrell Clay at 7th in the 50-100 group and Linda Clay at 10th in the 100200 group. Roy Baldridge is 6th in the 200-300 group (5th in Ace-ofClubs), joined by Carol Parker at 8th in the Ace-of-Clubs for that group. Congratulations to all. Keep it up!
MARCH
First Place: Second Place: 3rd/4th Place: 3rd/4th Place: Fifth Place:
HONOR ROLL
Masterpoint Leaders Elaine Altstaetter Trella Niswander Marlene Sigler John Hoffman Roy Baldridge
4.41 MP 3.50 MP 3.36 MP 3.36 MP 3.03 MP
Lima DBC Newsletter, www.limadbc.blogspot.com, April 2014
THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 13
Game Cancelled
TUESDAY AFTERNOON, MARCH 18 1. Elaine Altstaetter and Trella Niswander 63.89% 2. Richard Rhoad and Gary Chaney 61.11% 3. Ralph Heitmeyer and Lucy Poeppelman 53.47% 4. Roy Baldridge and Ruth Odenweller 52.78% THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 20 QUARTERLY TOURNAMENT 1. John Hoffman and Marlene Sigler 61.90% 2. Tom Dautenhahn and Bob Leonard 57.74% 3. Ruth Odenweller and Jeff Weaver 55.95% TUESDAY AFTERNOON, MARCH 25 1. Roy Baldridge and Tom Faulkner 71.53% HIGH PERCENTAGE GAME 2. Trella Niswander and Elaine Altstaetter 61.11% 3. Frances Moeller and Lynn Donley 52.78% 4. Lucy Poeppelman and Ralph Heitmeyer 49.31% THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 27 1. Jeff Weaver and Ruth Odenweller 60.00% 2. Roy Baldridge and Elaine Altstaetter 57.00%
Page 2
Theory, Part X
By Ken Rexford
Intro to Italian Cuebidding. Italian-style cuebidding can be simplistically described as cuebidding values, with each bid described by a general set of principles: 1.
If I cuebid in an unbid side suit, I am showing either first- or second-round control. This could be an honor (ace or king) or shortness (stiff or void).
2.
If I cuebid in my own, already-shown side suit, I am showing unexpected strength, meaning two of the top three honors. (Partner will already expect that any bid of a suit shows a biddable suit, normally at least Qxxx.)
3.
4.
5.
If I cuebid in partner’s shown side suit, I am showing help for him, meaning one of the top three honors. As this is a side suit, honors are critical, not protected honors. Hence, I may cuebid a stiff honor. If I bypass a cuebid, I am usually denying an ability to make that cuebid. The main exception is a bypass of a cuebid of a suit that I must have control of to be considering slam, in which case bypassing that suit shows a weak (second-round) control. If my partner denies a control by bypassing a possible cuebid, any further cuebid by me shows that I have control of that suit, even if I do not cuebid that suit.
6.
Jumping to game is not fast-arrival. It shows that a hole shown by partner cannot be filled.
7.
Repeated control bids show additional features.
Italian-style cuebidding is enhanced not only by what is bid, but also inferentially by what is not bid, and even by what has not previously been bid. As a simple example, if one could bid 4♣ but instead bids 4♦, one directly shows an important diamond feature, but one also normally infers lack of an important club feature. However, if spades were trumps, a 4♦ bid might infer a club feature if made by a person whose partner had already denied a club feature necessary for a slam to succeed. It might even infer a necessary heart feature, for the same reason. This idea should be restated. Consider an auction where one partner has denied first- or second-round control in either
Lima DBC Newsletter, www.limadbc.blogspot.com, April 2014
diamonds or hearts, with spades as agreed trumps and game assuredly to be bid. Suppose his partner could make a cuebid of 4♦ or 4♥. Obviously, one need not cuebid if slam is assuredly not there, if two quick losers exist in one suit. Therefore, the partner would sign off if either diamonds or hearts were wide open. Inferentially, then, a cuebid of 4♦ would directly show a control in diamonds but also, logically, show a control in hearts as well. In the same way, a cuebid of 4♥ would directly show a control in hearts but would also infer a control in diamonds. Thus, a principle arises. Actual cuebids send positive messages about the suit actually bid. Furthermore, as cuebids are for a purpose, cuebids also infer possession of controls that are necessary to have but that have been denied by partner. This inferential control could be a bypassed suit (diamonds in the example of the 4♥ cuebid) or a “future” suit (hearts in the example of the 4♦ cuebid). How would this principle work in the real world? Suppose you are dealt: ♠ A K 4 3 2 ♥ A 2 ♦ K Q 4 2 ♣ Q 8. You open 1♠, partner responds 2♣, you rebid 2♦, and partner agrees spades, bidding 2♠. You cuebid 3♣ (showing one of the top three club honors and good trumps – trust me for now). Partner then cuebids 3♠, showing the missing spade honor, but denying the diamond ace and denying a heart control. Think through the two options of a 4♦ cuebid and a 4♥ cuebid.
1♠ pass 2♥ pass 3♣ pass 4♦/4♥???
2♣ 2♠ 3♠
pass pass pass
If you cuebid 4♦, this shows (again, trust me) two top diamond honors. However, if you did not have a heart control, you would simply sign off at 4♠. Slam would be hopeless. Thus, 4♦ guarantees to partner that you also have a heart control. What about 4♥, instead? 4♥, out of context, merely shows a heart control, and it denies two top diamond honors. Inferentially, however, it also seems to imply, very strongly, a diamond control. With a queen-top diamond suit, slam seems to have been ruled out, unless partner holds a stiff in diamonds (impossible, for he would have splintered considering the rest of his known hand) or a void in diamonds (with which he may continue on notwithstanding your sign-off suggestion). Additionally, either call seems to suggest first-round control of one of the red suits and at least second-round control of the other, for otherwise two red aces would cash. All of these “meanings” are inferences from logic.
Page 3
Cuebids are also defined by prior actions and by prior alternatives not taken. If, for example, one previously denied a club control, all future calls also deny a club control. Hence, a cuebid of clubs after denying a club control shows a lesser club feature, perhaps a queen or a doubleton or a jack, whatever seems contextually most relevant and/or possible. Similarly, if one could have made a Splinter previously, a cuebidding sequence done without the Splinter suggests a holding unsuitable for a Splinter. The true understanding of the cuebidding sequence, therefore, requires an understanding of the inferences involved. This includes understanding as to the meaning of alternatives to the “simple” cuebidding sequence, meaning the use of jumps in a cuebidding sequence. Jumps, because they consume vast amounts of potential bidding space, should be well-defined bids. The non-jump sequences then derive body and meaning from the failure to use the jump alternative. One must first, therefore, learn the meaning behind the jumps in cuebidding to be able to understand the cuebidding sequence that lacks a jump. A simple example to explain. follows:
1♠ 2♥ ???
pass pass
2♣ 2♠
Suppose the auction is as
pass pass
specific sequence, promises two of the top three heart honors but denies the jack. Clubs remain uncertain, until later. The first task to understanding cuebidding seems, logically, to be an understanding of jumps in the cuebidding structure. Jumps are the precisely defined bids. Non-jump cuebidding sequences derive meaning from the failure to jump. Thus, the jumps are easiest to explain and necessary to understand before understanding the non-jump sequences. You see the “trick” to cuebidding. Although technically possible, it would be extremely difficult to imagine every possible auction, every possible interference, and define every possible bid. Even if possible, no one I know could possibly memorize all of this. The key to superior cuebidding, and understanding, is to learn the principles. Once the principles are learned, each new situation pops up with, hopefully, each partner prepared to figure out the definition at the table. Sure, a definition exists. God knows what it means. We mortals must figure it out each time anew. This is not impossible, but it is difficult. It is hard work. You will sit at the table looking dumb for a few minutes on occasion. But, it is better to look dumb for a few minutes than to look dumb during the entire play of the hand, right?
Opener now might commence cuebidding. You may play that a jump to 4♥ by Opener is a Picture Jump Cuebid and shows two top spade honors, three of the top four heart honors, and no minor suit control. Four of a minor would have shown essentially the same thing, but with a stiff in the minor. Opener could cuebid 3♥, instead, which would show two of the top three honors in hearts. If Opener, in the example, cuebids 3♥, he, by definition, shows two of the top three honors in hearts. However, certain additional messages are inferred from non-jump bids that he could have made. 2NT would have denied good trumps (in my methods -- bear with me for theory purposes), so 3♥ also shows two of the top three honors in spades. Because 3♣, partner’s suit, would have shown one of the top three honors in clubs, 3♥ denies the ace, king, or queen of clubs. Because 3♦ would have shown first- or second-round control in diamonds, 3♥ denies a diamond control. More messages exist, however, within the 3♥ call. Opener also did not jump cuebid and did not splinter. He cannot have the holdings appropriate for these calls. Therefore, if Opener does bid 3♥, we can infer that he does not have a stiff club or that his heart suit lacks a third honor, or both. As 4♣ would show club shortness, we can safely assume that the heart suit is only two honors strong, but we are uncertain about the club situation. Therefore, 3♥, in this
Lima DBC Newsletter, www.limadbc.blogspot.com, April 2014
Page 4
