World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Grosvenor gambit

Article Id: WHEBN0005783791
Reproduction Date:

Title: Grosvenor gambit  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Coup (bridge), Glossary of contract bridge terms, Snapdragon double, Stayman convention, Stepping-stone squeeze
Collection:
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Publication
Date:
 

Grosvenor gambit

In the game of bridge, a Grosvenor gambit or Grosvenor Coup is a psychological play, in which the opponent is purposely given the chance to gain one or more tricks, and often even to make the contract, but to do so he must play for his opponents to have acted illogically or incorrectly.

Thus, the opponent likely ends up blaming himself for not taking advantage of the opportunity presented, even though to do so would have been irrational. The benefit of the Grosvenor gambit is supposed to come on future hands, due to a loss of concentration by the player who was taken in by the gambit.

The gambit was named after Philip Grosvenor, a fictional character in a short story by Frederick B. Turner published in The Bridge World,[1] who first discovered the gambit accidentally, and over time developed its theory and deployed it deliberately. The story depicts Grosvenor as often frustrated by opponents who are too obtuse to fall for his ruse. Grosvenor's lifeless body is eventually found bludgeoned to death, his fingers broken, shortly after a bridge tournament in which he used his gambit against the wrong opponents.

A subsequent article by Kit Woolsey in The Bridge World, titled The Grosvenor Gamble,[2] extends the original idea, farcically expounded in the 1973 story, to possible at-the-table applications.

Example

The following deal provides an opportunity for a Grosvenor coup by West:

South in 3NT 5 4
Q J
K 9 8 7 3 2
7 3 2
8 7 3 2

N

W               E

S

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

Against South's 3NT West leads A and continues with K and two more winning hearts. South wins the spade continuation, and has to run the diamonds without losing any further tricks. He therefore plans to play the A and next to unblock by playing the J to the K, hoping for a 2-2 split or a singleton Q (this is the percentage play with the given holding). On the actual layout, South cannot succeed. See, however, what happens when West drops the 10 under the A. Declarer now has the opportunity to make his contract by next letting the J run. This play, however, is utterly illogical: it can gain only when West has started with Q-10-6, but with that holding West would "never" play the 10 first. So, South plays for a 2-2 holding in diamonds and on the second diamond trick overtakes the J with the K, only to see East show out.

South will regret not having finessed, and - per Grosvenor's theory - will be furious with himself for not taking the illogical play, for not guessing that West would misplay from Q 10 6. Worse yet, North may blame declarer for not having made the impossible play of letting the J ride. East-West are expected to reap even more benefit on the following boards, due to the emotional storm that West has stirred up for North-South.

In his 1973 article,[3] Turner describes various other examples, including one in which a Grosvenor gambit is successfully deployed by declarer.

References

  1. ^ June 1973, Volume 44, Number 9
  2. ^ July 1978, Volume 49, Number 10
  3. ^ The Grosvenor gambit
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 


Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.