PDA

View Full Version : How to beat Italy


sartaj
13-03-07, 04:15 PM
Ok, so i got you reading this with a catchy title.
Step 1 : Is to try and understand their psyche
Step 2 : Is to try and understand our psyche
Step 3 : Is to use this knowledge to change our losing trend

If you think beating Italy is all about "playing well", then i am sorry to say you are totally missing the point.

Step 1 : Thoughts on the Italians

One gets the sense that they are impatient in the bidding. They just want the damn thing to finish so that the play can begin. For the card play (whether declaring or defending) is where they seem to think the joy is. And it is here that they seem to enjoy playing bridge.
In the bidding, every bid is almost like a worry. I hope, thinks the Italian, that I haven't created a big swing in the bidding , coz most of the time the play is then going to be irrelevant.
This worry of generating a random result impacts their bidding style. It makes them conservative on preempting (avoid going for 800) and aggressive on bidding game (avoid game-swing).
Here in Oz, we like to believe that getting to the par spot quickly is what bidding is all about. This form of bidding has become almost "Australian Standard". Say, you hold,
AQxx
Kx
Axxx
Xxx

LHO opens 1C and partner bids 2C michaels. Pass to us ?
It is my belief that almost all "expert" Australians would bid 4S. This is one the best hands for this action, but we tend to mix it up with the 4S bid on

KJxxx
Xx
Xxx
Xxx

On both hands, we are bidding 4S, we are putting a lot of pressure on the opposition, we are forcing them to take a guess at the high level etc. etc.

This is how we think.

The Italians, however, will be worried on the first hand about missing slam. They will pooh-pooh this "give them a problem" attitude and go out of their way to avoid a loss of 11 imps if the opposing team gets to slam. To this end, their style is to start with a forcing enquiry. And they have adequate methods in their repertoire for this purpose.
I doubt if any Australian partnership has any methods after a "Both Majors" type of michaels (different from (1S) - 2S and (1H) - 2H where we usually do)

These same Italians hardly ever open a 3-level preempt.
Versace, in an internet match, all vulnerable, passed on
Xx
Xx
KQJ10xxxx
Xx

In a world championship final 2005, he passed on
X
Xxxx
Xx
KQJ10xx

In the latter case, he was dealer at Nil Vul. He passed and got to 4H, making. In the other room, Meckstroth opened 3C and missed the heart fit.
A strong argument against preempting with side 4-card majors was made by Benito Garozzo in the Blue team days. Most of the rest of the world has started disregarding it but Italy still listens to Benito !

The Italians' hyper-aggressive game bidding is well known. To understand that, lets try and look at the interplay between the card play and the level of the contract.
Part-score efficiency is often a function of winning it in the bidding and also on the precision of the defence. Declarer will usually play a fairly clear "main variation" as declarer in a part-score and the fate of a delicate contract will hang on whether the defence is adept enough to answer strongly.
Similarly slams are often decided either by the bidding, or by random luck (like a finesse working or two finesses failing) or by the function of opening lead. The "main variation" for declarer play for a skilled player will usually be clear and the distribution of the cards will determine the outcome in most cases. All the defence gets to do is throwing a big punch on the opening lead, after that, its simply a matter of wait and watch and hope that declarer falls over.

However, it is in the game-zone that declarer play makes its biggest impact. From the opening lead to the discarding at trick 10, the momentum often swings between declarer and the defenders. There are often multiple "key moments" in a hand. Declarer may go wrong but a soft defence gives him another chance. To and fro..it swings.
Its in a game contract that a skilled declarer will be able to use his technical skill, his psychological cunning, his adeptness at reading the opponent's cards.
Its in the game contracts that declarer runs his long suit and defense does the wrong thing, its here that players miss the most "obvious" defensive moves, its here that the card play swings occur.
It?s the game zone that the Italians aim for, every hand.
To get to game, the Italians overcall suits aggressively, rarely invite, and overcall 1NT on offshape hands. "Lets get to game and let the card play begin" seems a stronger
mantra than "Lets get the bidding over with and starting playing some cards"

Peter
13-03-07, 08:48 PM
My title is an attempt to get you to read Sartaj's post.

Sartaj wrote:
>How to beat Italy:
>Step 1 : Is to try and understand their psyche
>Step 2 : Is to try and understand our psyche
>Step 3 : Is to use this knowledge to change our losing trend
>
>If you think beating Italy is all about "playing well", then i am sorry to say >you are totally missing the point.

To reiterate what Sartaj has written, let's go through my match against Italy in the Yeh Bros Cup. I wasn't playing for Oz-One - my team was called New Zealand Plus. It is up to the reader to discern whether Sartaj's description of the Italian style applies.

We had a team of six. Our Captain Val Gardiner had said (perhaps 10 times or more) in the previous month that when we drew Italy she was going to play and we were going to win. The history was that 12 months earlier NZ Plus (without me) had beaten Italy. The match was important, with both teams narrowly qualifying at that stage.

Officially there were no seating rights. For most matches, everyone simply sat down. Due to some history from the previous year's match, the Italians waited beside the tables but did not sit down. We also waited, partly to see whether they were waiting for us. Eventually Val Gardiner and I sat EW and immediately Antonio Sementa took his seat as Val's screenmate and Agustin Madala was my screenmate. Bocchi - Duboin sat against Ware - Burrows. Their choice did not feel random to me.

Perhaps wanted Val (the sponsor) with him. It is hard to be sure.
We had no strong feelings, but it seems that they did. I think Sementa, who often partners sponsors such as Angelini and Henner-Welland, likes to be screenmates with the sponsor so that his expert table feel is most useful.

Only 8 boards in the match. I have lost my hand records for Round 11 so the hands are approximate.

Board 1
I pick up Q, A6, AK873, KQ863 or the like. Favourable vul, three passes to me. I open 1D, Pass, 1H from partner, 1S from Madala. Do you bid 2C or 3C?
3C is game-forcing.

The nice aces and kings argue for 3C. Being non vul, SQ looked dubious and partner possibly responded on very little, so I chose 2C in a close decision.
Wrong! Partner passed (2D on a doubleton and a pushy 2NT were reasonable alternatives), we had 27 HCP, 3NT and 5C were cold. How do you feel?

If you are a real winner, the answer should be: "I have no strong feelings, in fact I am going to blot out any feelings and get on with the next hand, playing my very best."

Madala had overcalled 1S on almost nothing, Italian style. By the way, we were not the only pair in the field to play the hand in 2C. 7 imps lost.

Board 2 we are vul against not.
You hold A6, K9754, 10832, 76. Partner opens 1C, RHO bids 3C (diamonds and spades). I passed (do you?), Sementa on my left jumps to 4S, Pass, Pass. Do you pass in tempo? Do you think that perhaps Sementa is taking a save against your making 4H, so you should double the advance save?

I passed in tempo and Val led a top club. Declarer has K9x, Jx, Ax, xxxxxx (bid game at every opportunity) and dummy has 1087xxx, xx, KQJxx, void. Sementa ruffs, plays three diamonds to pitch a heart, as Val ruffs in smoothly with SQ. HA and another heart ruffed put Sementa in hand for a long tank. Eventually he exited with a low spade from hand and Val made her bare jack. +100, 12 imps to us. Spades are easier to pick if I double. An Indonesian pair found the low heart to the king at Trick 5 to beat 4S legitimately.

Even from my side of the screen I thought I could feel a bit of Italian passion on my left. We led 12-7.

Board 3 was Sartaj's Hand of the Week (see separate thread on this forum). For those who missed it, Sementa declared 4S and lost two trumps with A8x opposite KJxxx when they broke 3-2 (king fells my ten, then low to 8 to safety play Val having Q9xx, but we get a ruff now).
Us = calm and collected is all I will say here. 12 imps twice = we lead 24-7.

Board 4 was a competitive auction. Sementa jumped to 4S Aussie-style (ref Sartaj's post). Slam was on, so there was a brief spirited NS post mortem, but it was a flat board. 24-7.

On Board 5 I made an overtrick in 4H - 25-7 in imps.

On Board 6 I was the Dealer at favourable vulnerabilty. Following the "Rule of 1,2,3,4,and 5" for preempts (1,2,3,4 at the four vulnerabilities, with the 'five short of one's bid' referring to being dealer at favourable vulnerability) which our partnership had discussed, I opened 3D on x, xx, Q109xxxx, xxx. Val tried 3NT, all pass. -3, -150, 2 imps out. The hopeless 3NT was a common contract in the field. They make nothing. One rule too many? We led 25-9.

Board 7 was Sementa's third fling at 4S (Madala played the one that made six). -1, 50, 2 imps out when it failed by 2 tricks a the other table. 25-11.

On Board 8, Sementa overcalled 1NT on minimal values, and Madala drove aggressively to 4H. Sementa's usual jet-propelled declarer play had stopped to a walk by now. 4H was missing three aces including trump AQ9xx, but all was friendly, -620. 9 imps out when our South at the other table miscounted his points and never bid. 25-20 imps, a 16-14 win to us.

Conclusions:

This brief sample match includes most of Sartaj's points. No collusion. :)
To beat Italy, board by board:
We missed a 27 HCP game
Val ruffed smoothly from QJ doubleton and I avoided a tell-tale double.
Val got off to a bad lead but, due to her smooth SQ on Board 2, Sementa thought her capable of a smooth duck with Q9xx when the low spade was led towards dummy's eight.
Two nothing hands.
We drop 2 non vul undertricks.
They bid and make a lucky vul game.

We did have to be smooth in tempo, calm and collected in order to win,. We did not have to play terribly well to win.

I try to pretend that I maintain an even keel to bridge events - that I am psychologically sound - but it is more likely that in the glow after the win over Italy with our last round qualifying draw in Round 12 being vs Oz-One,
I probably forgot to pick up hand records for Round 11. I have hand records for every other match. This is a good example of how easy it is to lose one's calm at big bridge events. Usually I never forget to pick up hand records.

And I hope nobody missed the psychological importance of Val's confidence that we would win this match.

Yes - Val and I did discuss our bidding of the first board - two days later.
Not a word at the table.

On the www.bridgebase.com Discussion Board (or Forum), there is a new thread called Canadian Bridge Federation, in which Justin Lall and others are offering even money that either USA or Italy (i.e. not any other country) will win the 2013 Bermuda Bowl. Go Oz-One!

Peter Gill.

sartaj
14-03-07, 12:13 PM
http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=18156