UNIT 168 NEWS
:
Stepping Aside with a Huge THANK YOU to All
(A personal message from Deb and John Klinger)
You may have heard that we are retiring as Co-Chairs of the Lancaster Red Rose Regional. It took us 24 years to come to our senses. It has been a wild ride and we've loved it.
We started in the early 80's working for Eleanor Alboum and Phil Monyer. Years later Lorie Krause and Doris Klein took over. We were still on the committee. Cancer took our dear friend Lorie. We worked with Doris for another year and took over in 1994.
One of the greatest benefits of Bridge is getting to know good people. We cannot ignore naming committee members who worked with us to have many successful years. All seriousness aside, you probably gave us all the credit... Truthfully, it has been the committee that has set Lancaster apart from other tournaments.
At first, it was Roger and Vera Maurer, Bill and Susan Grover, Ralph and Gerry Calabrese and Don and Marion Marlette. Charlie Slupe gave out drink tickets for over 40 years! He kept every unused drink ticket and presented us with a trash bag filled with over 50,000 tickets when he retired. Classic Slupe! George Love was there at Registration. Galen Graham wrote 'Galen's Corner' for the Bulletin. Trudy Gaston was 'Our Girl Friday', but she was also there the rest of the week helping.
As time and players moved on, new friends became part of our 'family'. Russ Weimer, super-caddy Claire Weimer, Tom Coxey, Gerry and Becky Weiss, Andie Sheaffer, Dian Wise, Kay Crawford, Barry Gorski, Jeanne Gehret, Rick Rowland and Pat Civale.
Outside advisors were John Marks, Bob and Joanne Glasson, Meyer Kotkin, Bob Priest and Linda Ivanoff. These are all great people who gave their time to us to make your tournament experience memorable. Thank you committee!!!
We also had the privilege to work with nearly 40 different District 4 Presidents.
Ray Raskin, Craig Robinson and Joanne Glasson operated as District Directors. This spring will be John's sixth and Deb's fifth NABC involvement. John caddied the 1972 NABC in Lancaster while being an unemployed hippy. Hippiness didn't pay well.
The 2018 Lancaster Regional will be better than ever. Jeanne Gehret and Tom Coxey have been coerced .... pardon us, have volunteered to keep things moving forward. We have the greatest confidence in these two. Good people. Smart. Hard-working. Best friends.
Please, make your plans now to join the fun, October 29 through November 4, at the Nook! It is going to be a super time. We'll be there.
Love to all and thanks for the memories, John and Deb Klinger
December 18-22 will be a whole week of Club Championships and Holiday Parties at the Maple Grove Community Center! Games will offer e
xtra points and it's sure to be extra fun! Don't miss out... if you need a partner, contact Andie (M,W) or the Klingers (Tu,Th,Fr)
CONGRATULATIONS
to these Unit 168 members on their new master point rank achievements:
Club Master:
|
Jane Edgar Freet, Janet Shaffer, Connie Sturm
|
Sectional Master:
|
Gail Hamilton, Patricia Kaufold
|
Regional Master:
|
Cathy Brown
|
NABC Master:
|
Jack Thorp
|
Advanced NABC Master:
|
Frank Doub
|
Life Master:
|
Kathy Myers
|
Bronze Life Master:
|
Kathryn Gaither
|
Silver Life Master:
|
Kathryn Markley, Irene Schmehl
|
Ruby Life Master:
|
Silvia Herman
|
Gold Life Master:
|
Richard Braunstein
|
Diamond Life Master:
|
John Albright
|
Wacky Hands & Gadgets -
by Dave Bort
(Scary) Fun with Rule of 2-3-4 Preempts
Perhaps still slightly groggy during a recent morning club game, no-one vulnerable, I fanned my hand as Dealer to find:
East: 97643 Q5 A T9875
Using our partnership preempt agreement, the Rule of 2-3-4, using LTC (Losing Trick Count), I figured out our Rule number (by adding the "magic number" 7 to our Rule number, 2 for non-favorable vulnerability, 4 for favorable, and 3 for equal vulnerability, either both white or both red), which was 10 (7+3, at equal vulnerability). Then, subtracting the number of losers from my hand (which was 8), the answer (10-8) told me the highest bid I was allowed to make, which in this case was 2.
Now, hearing the chorus of traditionalists among you, saying "Wait, you can't use LTC until you know you have a fit (8 cards) with partner!", I can happily report I've researched the appropriate probabilities formulas and done the math: when you have 6 cards in a suit, the odds of partner having at least 2 cards in the suit (for, um, an 8-card fit) are actually about 84% (don't make me find my slip of paper for the exact number), and even with only 5 cards, the odds of partner having at least 3 cards in the suit are still something like 65% So, with 6 cards, you essentially Do have a fit, with better odds than only needing one of two finesses to be on (which is 75%), and even with only 5 cards, you'll have a fit about two-thirds of the time (better than a single finesse). Note that for extra safety (and with a grateful nod to traditionalists), we do want our 2nd-seat preempts to be sound. Anyway, dispensing with the unwarranted caution about LTC not applying to preempts, and with partner's hand being:
West: KT85 9876 KQT76 None
the bidding proceeds:
West
North East (me) South
2S(1) Pass(2)
Pass(3) X(4) Pass(5) Pass!(6)
Pass(7)
Notes:
(1) Scary, yes, and would be better if the opponents were red, but at least we're white, and the odds of Spade strength being concentrated in only one opponent's hand are not high (and cueing the mantra: "It's only a game")
(2) With reasonable but detectible hesitation, indicating some level of indecision about passing. By the ACBL Laws, her partner isn't allowed to take guidance from such hesitation, but I'm allowed to use such information, and I'm now worried about her Spade holding.
(3) As agreed. I've asked partner to NOT routinely raise my preempts, because it confirms to the opponents that we have a fit, so they then know two things: (a) that they have a fit, and (b) that at least one of them is most likely short in our suit. Automatically raising a preempt can help the opponents, so we Don't Do That - instead, we Let the Preempt Do Its Work!
(4) To his credit, opponent ethically makes his double without any discernible emphasis, holding:
North: None KT43 J86542 AKQ
(5) Uh oh, I might be in for it!
(6) Holding: AQJ2 AJ2 93 J432, South had a choice to make. Going for penalty, so be it!
(7) Good Luck, partner (uh oh)!
Made 3 (with a doubled overtrick, for a cold top!) on the lead of the Diamond 9. Winning my Diamond Ace, I lead a low trump. South goes up with the Ace, in order to lead her last Diamond (definitely not best). I take the King, throwing a Heart, and play the Queen, throwing my last Heart from hand and expecting South to ruff, which she does with the 2. South then leads a Club to put her partner in for a Heart return, but it's too late, and I can now start a relentless cross-ruff of red suits and Clubs, as South is forced to use her high trumps for ruffs, rather than pulling mine!
Since the club in which we played provides hand records for all games, I know from the informative double-dummy analysis that the opponents have a NT game, and that, given double-dummy defense, we can't even make a 1S contract. So, even if doubled and defended perfectly, down 2, we only lose 300, compared to N-S's 3N game. Sometimes, Preempts Work! Sometimes they're even a top! But, it helps to have discipline, and this Rule of 2-3-4 provides 100% discipline (in its way) for the opening preempt, so Responder can decide how many "cover cards" they have for Opener's reported number of losers. And, Opener might even have fewer losers than their bid indicates, since we try not to "lie" about the traditional length by more than 1 card, e.g., we'll bid at the 2-level with 5 cards, or the 3-level with 6 cards, but never (scratch that, usually not!) at the 3 level with only 5 cards (an occasional 3C comes to mind, but that's another story).
Slow-Walking a Preempt to a Top
Just two boards later, in the same club game, red-on-white, I heard my partner, the dealer, open 1H, while my hand was:
East: AKT83 JT98 T87 7
According to our Rule of 2-3-4 preempting style (see the first hand, above, for details), when red-on-white, partner is guaranteeing no more than 7 losers in her hand. I look at my hand, and decide I have a reasonably solid four (4) "cover cards" (i.e., cards that will "cover" one of partner's losers). What are they? The Spade A-K and two (2) Club ruffs can be expected to cover 4 of Opener's losers (to count shortness as a ruff, aka a cover card, we need two more trumps than the shortness - so, here, with 4 trumps and a stiff, I can count 2 cover cards). With partner saying she has no more than 7 losers and I have 4 cover cards; sounds like a game to me (7-4 equals only 3 losers, aka making 4 in our major)! But, thinking we may have game, I decide to play it cagey. I don't want to play in 4H... I want to either play in 4H doubled or have the opponents compete to 4S, which I will double (look at my Spades)! And the bidding proceeds:
West
North East (me) South
2H(1) X(2) 3H(3) X(4)
Pass(5) Pass(6) Pass(7)
Notes:
(1) Showing no worse than a 7-loser hand, when red-on-white (aka we're vul, they're not)
(2) Preferring to have four Spades, North is nonetheless willing to double, holding: Q62 3 Q932 AK653 (with only 11 points, but it is a 6-loser hand)
(3) Almost immediately going against my earlier advice to partner. I had actually ended that advice with: "Don't routinely raise preempts... unless it's right!" In this case, I think it's Very Right; I want to appear to be simply raising the preempt; then, if I later re-raise to 4H, I'm hoping to either draw a double, or that they'll bid 4S, so I can double!
(4) Denying four Spades, South offers her partner a choice of minors, holding: J94 Q4 AKJ5 QJ84
(5) Partner knows better than to raise her own preempt (unless it's right!)
(6) Probably grateful not to end up in a 4-3 Spade fit, and thinking they don't have a minor-suit game, North decides to try for a vulnerable penalty
(7) Oh boy, 3HX, that's even better! Good Luck, partner!
Making 4 (with a doubled overtrick, for another cold top!), on the lead of the Club Ace. As it turns out, partner actually mis-bid, because when holding: 75 AK7652 64 T92, West has an 8-loser hand, so she can't open, in our system, red-on-white. But, with a 9-card fit, the trump Queen falls, and with Spades splitting 3-3, partner can ruff a third Spade, leaving two good Spades in dummy, and losing only two Diamonds and a Club.