I did not encounter many technically interesting positions at the Biloxi Regional, but three deals stood out for unusual reasons. The first is a tale of woe (click NEXT to follow the play):

North dealt and opened a hyperlight 1♠, showing 8-14 HCP. "The lightest the ACBL will allow us to open," explained South. South's 1NT was semiforcing, and North rebid 2♣, completely artificial, simply confirming full opening values. South tried 2NT, alerted but not asked about, and North's undiscussed 3NT ended the auction. The opponents had reached 3NT with two 6-5 hands without ever showing their distribution.

My partner pulled the ♥2 out of his hand, but before leading it he paused to inquire about the 2NT bid—mistake! The ♥2 would have defeated 3NT, but armed with the correct information, he knew that South had five hearts, so he tried his other red deuce, an unbid suit.

South gratefully won my ♦Q with the king and fired back a diamond to the 9. When that held (rising with the ♦A doesn't help), she crossed to the ♣Q and drove out the ♦A. Partner exited with a club, and declarer ran that suit. On the last club, the position from my point of view was:

I had to decide whether partner held the ♠K10 or the ♥K without the ♠10. If the former, I have to discard the ♥Q and partner's spade holding will be sufficient to establish three tricks in the suit to go with the red aces. If the latter, I need to keep the ♥Q, because the fourth spade will be a loser. Based on the carding, I knew that partner did not have the ♥K, but unfortunately, declarer's singleton spade was the 10.

She exited with a low spade to her 10 and partner's king, then inserted the ♠8 on the return. I won the ♠J and cashed the ♥A, but I had to concede the game-going tricks to dummy's ♠A9 at trick 12: -400 and a 6-IMP loss when my teammates played in partscore at the other table (see this bidding problem).

Does partner have a better exit available after winning the ♦A? No. Say he exits the ♠K to dummy's ace. Declarer cashes the clubs and comes off dummy with the ♠9 to endplay me. A low spade away from the king does no better: declarer ducks, and again dummy's spots eventually stand up. A heart to the ace simply delays the inevitable.

The next deal was a triumph for my team. At my table:

I was South, and I opened 1♥ in a Precision context. When my partner showed a three-card limit raise, I kicked it into game. The mesh was excellent, but West's unfortunate heart holding meant I had four losers: -50.

At the other table:

My teammate opened 1♦ in second seat, and he and his partner bid and raised spades. Over the 2NT inquiry, West forgot that his partnership played 3♥ as a maximum four-card raise (more commonly 3♥ shows a minimum), so they accidentally reached 4♠. All was well, though, when they made 10 tricks for +420 and a 9-IMP pickup.

But what did I find interesting about this deal?

Answer: Both pairs on my team bid game on power, on a deal that might have been passed out in past decades.

My final offering was a disappointing push (click NEXT to view the play):

I opened the South cards a Precision 1♦ and rebid 1♠ over partner's 1♥. When partner issued his strongest invitation in spades (he could also have made a normal raise to 2♠, a heavy raise to 2♠, and a light raise to 3♠), I had an easy acceptance.

West led a fourth-best ♣4 and I did not like my chances. Aside from some miracle position in spades, I needed the opponents not to figure out to cash their diamonds before I could discard them on the hearts (and even then I am not cold). I rose with the ♣A and led a heart to the king and ace. West huddled and then returned a club, so I had 10 tricks for +420.

This was a nice result, but unfortunately it was a push rather than a swing, because my teammates also went wrong in the cashout after a similar start.

Of course, misdefense does not an intriguing deal make. Barring a singleton spade honor or ♠QJ-doubleton, is there any chance to make 4♠ if the defense takes its three top winners?

The trump position resembles the matrix for a Devil's Coup, where declarer can make a seemingly-sure trump loser vanish like so:

Dummy leads its heart through East. If he ruffs low, declarer scores the ♠9 and subsquently makes the top trumps. If he ruffs high, declarer overruffs and finesses against West's ♠Q. The key is that West must follow suit to the last plain-suit card led from dummy.

So, does it work on the actual deal? No. Since West holds the four-card length in hearts and clubs, declarer needs to ruff twice in dummy and once in hand, ending in dummy, and lead the last remaining heart through East's ♠Jxx. But East will be in position to overruff dummy on the fourth club, ruining the coup.

What if you switched the fourth diamond and the fourth club? Still no good, because now when you lead the fourth club, to which East must follow, West will remain with

and can simply discard his heart, allowing him to overruff declarer on the fourth round of hearts.

To enjoy a Devil's Coup, declarer must eliminate all the opponents' side-suit cards except one in the suit to be led at trick 11. The fact that the opponents hold the long diamond means that declarer can never prevail.

What looked so promising at first glance turns out to be fool's gold. I guess I shouldn't be surprised—after all, the devil is in the details.