Thinking Over “The Expert Game” By Jean Besse

Source: The Expert Game

In the Foreword of one of his books: The Expert Game, Terence Reese states that he is ” aiming to present a lesson in practical play, not an exercise in double dummy.” In the same spirit, I ask the reader to consider the following, not as a refutation, but on the contrary as reflexions, quite new to me, suggested by the extraordinary richness of the book.

Consider this hand :

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

South is in 3NT. West leads 6 and the Queen wins.

At trick 2, declarer leads a small diamond from dummy, obviously intending to duck this to a possible singleton 10 (or Knave) in the West hand as a safety play to prevent East from leading spades through South’s King. The point of the hand is that East can destroy declarer’s plan by going up with his J, second in hand. All very fine, but next time the K and K may be interchanged (as well as 10 and 7):

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

In this case, the play of the J by East, second in hand, ruins the defence, as declarer will not dare to finese with the spades wide open.

Next’ time, South will hold:  A 7 5   K 10 5 3   10 7   K Q 9 2  (C)

and East’s J (if played prematurely) cracks on West’s singleton K, declarer having decided to give up the first diamond at trick 2. My question is now: ” Is there a way of taking care of cases (B) and (C) as well as of case (A)?” Double dummy, certainly not. But AT THE TABLE?

At the table, the answer is easy. In all cases, East MUST PLAY THE NINE OF DIAMONDS at trick 2!!! In case (C) the J is preserved. In case (B) declarer has no reason to finesse. And in the actual case (A) declarer dares not duck the 9, as he can’t guess the true situation and can’t afford to let East hold the trick and play through his K. Did you think of playing 9 in that situation, as East? I did not before reading Terence’s book, and that is why I like reading it. (It had, as a matter of fact, been noted that the hand was was open to question in the sense described. The second edition has an additional sentence, as follows: ” The 9, also, from East would probably force the King and would avoid certain risks.”—T.R.)

Very many hands have their unwritten lesson. This one, for instance:

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

You are South, playing in HEARTS after East has opened One Spade. West leads 10. You ruff the third round of spades with a small heart while West, much to your surprise, discards 3, refusing the easy over-ruff.

As you are wondering how such a diabolical idea entered the mehu of West, you soon understand what is going on when you see a corner of ” The Expert Game ” peeping out of her bag. West declines the over-ruff in order to prevent the establishment of South’s hand. (If declarer plays trumps, after unblocking KO, West takes the second round of hearts and leads a diamond. And South can no more enter his hand without shortening his trumps definitely.) Can you do anything about it?

Yes! Once you have understood West’s manoeuvre and her holding of four trumps, you as South should lead, at trick 4, a club to North’s Q, then overtake North’s K with your Ace, and lead a small club for dummy to ruff, intending to cross-ruff for nine tricks. if West now interferes by ruffing in front of dummy with 6, declarer just over-ruffs with dummy’s J and will be able to pull the trumps, holding again one more than West! Yet another hand from ” The Expert Game,” which develops like a dream for the reader.

Esta entrada también está disponible en: Spanish