{"id":86443,"date":"2024-02-06T10:20:13","date_gmt":"2024-02-06T09:20:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/funbridge.com\/blog\/?p=86443"},"modified":"2024-02-06T10:20:35","modified_gmt":"2024-02-06T09:20:35","slug":"luc-bellicauds-analysis-january-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/funbridge.com\/blog\/en\/luc-bellicauds-analysis-january-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"Luc Bellicaud’s Analysis – January 2024"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

For my first ambassador tournament of 2024, there were 1,100 participants <\/strong>and the deals were particularly interesting! I achieved a score of 66%<\/strong>, which I got thanks to a few deals that I will go through here. Well done to robotic<\/a><\/strong>, who won the tournament with an average of 86% (!)<\/strong>, ahead of Dominique Fonteneau<\/a> and a superb 81%<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Deal 2: The right slam<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In first seat, I picked up a very nice two-suiter: <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

Having opened 1♣, I heard a response of 1♠ from my partner. I had a good enough hand to stretch and reverse into 2♦, which shows a hand of 17 or more points. With these 16 lovely points, I was on track! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

My partner supported with 3♣, a game-forcing but not a slammy bid, contrary to one popular idea: initially, it is looking for the best game. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

I have quite a pure 4♣ bid, which should show my sixth club in a hand very much oriented towards a suit contract. However, Argine did not explain it in this way; so, I settled for bidding 3♥, fourth suit, which asks Partner for extra information. Over that, he jumped to 4NT: a slam invitation with good stops in the majors, and only 3 cards in Clubs. This is one of the rare situations where 4NT is not Blackwood, despite having found a fit.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

I had a very pure hand with only 4 losers and I would not stop below 6♣; but should I try my luck in a 6NT contract? My partner was marked with around 13-14 high-card points and lots of hands should allow me to make 12 tricks; for example, ♠AQ84 ♥AJ6 ♦J42 ♣Q65. However, in some cases, I would need a finesse or a favourable break: should I take the risk? That depended greatly on the number of other players in 6♣: if the majority of players were there, it would be a good bet. Otherwise, there would be too little benefit if I were already scoring well in 6♣.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I ended up deciding that the contract was worth it and bid 6NT. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

Unfortunately, you needed to guess the Spades; but luckily, both honours were onside. 97% in 6NT=, when 6♣= would already get you 70%: a mediocre gamble but one which worked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Deal 5: Knowing when to stop and blackmail via an endplay<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

On this deal, I held 11 nice high-card points. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

My partner opened with 1♣ and my opponent overcalled with 1♥. I doubled to show at least 4♠ in my system (a variation on the negative double). My partner repeated his clubs at the lowest level and my right-hand opponent did the same with his hearts. I doubled again, take-out, since I still had 11 HCP and wanted to at least fight for the part-score. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

My partner responded 2♠: he seemed to have a minimum hand with 3♠ and 6♣. I had no heart stop and we were in a total misfit; it was high time to stop there. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

Despite a 5-1 break, I managed to blackmail my opponent by reaching this position, where I need to make 3 tricks:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

If he ruffed the Jack of Diamonds, he would have to play back a diamond himself and give me the last 4 tricks. His best play, which he made at the table, was therefore to discard his club, leaving me on lead and forcing me to give him the Queen of Diamonds and two trumps at the end, for 8 tricks and 81%. <\/p>\n\n\n\n