Positive Declarer Play at Bridge
by Terence Reese and Julian Pottage

Master Point Press, ISBN 1 894154 94 0, US$16.65 from www.masterpointpress.com

This second re-issue of a Reese-Pottage book is a collection of dummy-play problems originally published in 1986. The problems come from Julian Pottage's archive of hands from actual play and are commendably realistic as a result. See what you make of this one:

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

West	North	East	South
1	1NT	Pass	3
Pass	4	End

West leads the 6. Plan the play.

Suppose you are on auto-pilot (you went to bed too late the previous night) and play dummy's J. You will go down! West has found a tricky lead from:
5 3 J A 10 7 6 4 3 A Q 10 8
and East will win with the Q. The contract will then fail when the K proves to be offside.

Do you see why the original declarer's play of the J was wrong? Suppose you rise with dummy's K and this loses to the A with East. Since only 16 points are missing, you can then be absolutely certain that the K and the A will be onside. So, it is right to play the K from dummy.

The problem is a fine example of a principle that Reese first explored in The Expert Game. Placing one card in a particular hand (the A with East, here) allows you to deduce where another card lies (both the K and the A on this occasion). Your guess in one suit is tempered by the fact that if the first play turns out badly you will meet with better luck elsewhere.

With Reese involved, you expect some final learned observation on the deal. Ah yes, there is one! The authors point out that when the K wins the first trick, your next play should be the Q from dummy. You can pick up J-9-7-5 with either defender. However, since West appears to have the diamond length, it is more likely that East (if anyone) will hold four hearts.

The book is packed with interesting and instructive deals. Sadly, the considerable editing of Reese's masterful original text has somewhat reduced the quality and clarity of the writing. Reese favoured short sentences, not long ones with multiple commas. It is fine to make technical improvements to the deals. It is another matter to seek to improve on prose laid down by the greatest writer the game has ever known.

Would Reese have written: 'Having gobbled up the K with the ace, declarer would . . .'? On the deal we have just seen, would he have attributed to the declarer dialogue such as: 'Also, with long diamonds and the A as an entry, I was sure he would lead the A in the hope of finding his partner with a singleton and giving him a ruff or two.'? I don't think so. He would rather fast for a week.

Still, literary style is not everything and this is undeniably a fine collection of problems. Study them closely and you are sure to improve your cardplay.

David Bird

© Bridge Plus 1999-2006