A 2009 USA Trials Board by Adam Wildavsky

 This was my favorite deal from the trials. It illustrates another aspect of:

«One must never make any decisions, form any convictions or seek any values out of context, i.e., apart from or against the total, integrated sum of one’s knowledge.»

Ayn Rand, “The Objectivist Ethics,” The Virtue of Selfishness, 26.

This is from the third set of our semi-final against Welland, the 2 seed. Doug and I beat a similar Welland team (Fallenius, Garner, Weinstein) in the finals in 2003. That year they were 4-handed, and it took its toll.

52. Both vul, West deals

	10 8 6 2 K 10 2 A 9 7 9 8 7
A K Q 5 4 3 K 10 8 3 A K 4		J 9 7 6 3 A 9 8 7 6 4 5 10 3 2
	3 Q J 5 Q J 6 4 2 Q J 6 5

West	North	East	South
Adam	Weinstein	Doug	Garner
1	Pass	2	Pass
3!	Pass	4	The End

I bid 3, a short suit game try, in case Doug could make a move towards slam. If he bids 4, for instance, I can picture 6 opposite xxx xxx AQxxx xx, making even with 4-1 spades. When he could bid only game I passed.

Why the 10?

Because I knew South’s context was incomplete. The auction he heard showed a game try — only I knew that I held a slam try. If I hold the hand South expects he will usually know that he can beat me by going up with the diamond ace. I trusted him to defend correctly given his context.

A club was led at the other table on this auction:

West	North	East	South
1	Pass	2	Pass
3	Pass	3	Pass
4	Pass	4	The End

Declarer made the normal percentage play of a diamond to the king, but with no trump lead this cost him only an overtrick. 10 tricks were scored at each table for a push.