AL78

At my club slow play has been a problem for decades. It has got worse since the pandemic with an aging and more fragile membership who have slowed down, and because Horsham, West Sussex, England seems to be home to some of the world's slowest people in general. There is one who is notorious for slow play and I believe he has lost partners partially because of it and he is never going to speed up. When I direct I do my best to keep the movement going on time and I am largely successful, but there is occasionally that one pair who start the last board with a minute to go just before I get the chance to stop them (I am a playing director and it can sometimes be difficult to take boards away in time if they have no chance of finishing on time). There is one director and his wife who can be slow, frequently doesn't call the move until everyone has finished, including the slowest pair, and his wife once refused to acknowledge that bridge is a timed game. Once a pair has been allowed to play slower than the field for long enough, it becomes an entitlement and nothing is going to speed them up.

"A complete movement, in which each entrant plays against all of the other entrants or in which all entrants in each scoring field play against all of the same field of opponents, is inherently the fairest choice. The worst scenario is a movement that is one round short of complete: one entrant does not play against a very strong competitor, thus gaining a significant advantage, while another entrant does not play against a very weak competitor, thus incurring a significant disadvantage." At my club we frequently have to knock off the last round because the players aren't able to keep to 15 mins/two board round, and I hadn't appreciated the reduction in fairness that results.

I wasn't intending to imply anything about climate change at all, what I was attempting to do is claim that this saying which is often quoted is a long way from the truth, the Norwegians are quoted as saying there is no such thing as bad weather only inappropriate clothing which also irritates me. I get that it is saying for most weather people might class as bad you can dress appropriately and deal with it, but there clearly exists a point when weather transitions from nuisance to dangerous/destructive which is clearly definable as "bad" weather. Apologies for going off topic and derailing this thread. Back to bridge, you can be on the wrong side of a hand bias where you seem to follow the worst hands at the table and you are competing against those who sat the other way and were able to do something with good hands. It is one of my bugbears of duplicate bridge, when you have a string of poor hands you can be at the mercy of what your opponents do, be that bidding the slam no-one else finds or failing to bid a cold game that is bid across the field, and there is a feeling of having little influence on the game when you are frequently passing and following suit. It is not as bad as IMP pairs where being on the wrong side of a couple of slams can cost 20+ imps for doing nothing wrong, but it is still a pain when it happens at MPs. Ultimately you have to do what you can with the cards you are dealt, a bit like life really,and a bit like backpacking in the pouring rain when you have to trek for 7-8 hours in it to get to your next overnight stop. Sometimes I wish the skill to luck ratio of bridge was closer to that of chess, but I guess the game wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if doing well was entirely down to who played the best overall and players had to work hard to improve if they wanted to have a fair chance at winning.

A statement which can easily shown to be incorrect: That is from the UK, a country that doesn't fair highly on the leaderboard of natural disasters. Other countries have much worse weather.

I don't think you can correct for that and even if you could I'm not convinced it is reasonable to do so. What happened to you on BBO is comparable to what occasionally happens to me at my F2F club such as only declaring twice in 24 boards, or the opponents get three slams their way and partner and I get bad scores because three quarters of the field don't bid them. There is unfortunately a significant luck element in duplicate bridge and you have to take the bad days on the chin.

This is related to what happened at my local club either last year or the year before. We have a competition where a beginner/improver is partnered with an experienced player and there is a trophy for the winning beginner. One year there was a large bias in the way the hands went where the beginners hardly got to declare a hand, I think one person only declared once in 24 boards and this was consistent across the field so unlikely to be anything to do with the beginners themselves. Some of them felt disgruntled by this and it defeats the object of giving the beginners an opportunity to learn from an experienced player during a duplicate session. It was decided in future when dealing boards for this competition to check the deal for a large bias and redeal if the hands look to be heavily biased.

I didn't consider 4♥, with a scratch partner who knows how she will interpret it and where we will end up. I made the most practical bid I could think of which was 5♦. The full deal: [hv=pc=n&s=sqt763hkq652dc754&w=sjhat3dkq6542cat9&n=s984hj94dt87ckq82&e=sak52h87daj93cj63&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p1dp1s2h3d3h5dppp]399|300[/hv] 5♦ made 11 tricks. Of course partner has a heart stop and 10 tricks off the top in NT so we lost out to those who found 3NT. I suspect other EW pairs did not get such aggressive interference.

[hv=pc=n&e=sak52h87daj93cj63&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1dp1s2h3d3h]133|200[/hv] Playing 5CM strong NT, what do you do here, MPs? For some reason it has come out as EW vuln but it was no-one vuln.

Second mad hand in the same round. Got to practice elimination and endplay technique as demonstrated on BridgeMaster. [hv=pc=n&s=st7432hkdak5cjt65&w=sj8ht954dqtcq9872&n=skq965hj72d76ck43&e=sahaq863dj98432ca&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1dpp1s2h4sppdppp&p=h6hkh5h2s2s8sqsad4dkdtd6s3sjskd2h7h3s4h4dadqd7d3d5c2s5d8hjhqs7h9cjcqck]399|300[/hv] 4♠X+1 was a top for us. NS can make 4♥ double dummy but it requires dropping a singleton offside king which no-one is going to find unless I am the one sitting with the singleton king. The one pair in 5♥ only made nine tricks. I've explained to beginners before about the folly of underleading aces against suit contracts especially when there are shapely hands around, and this illustrates that principle. If you are going to try and penalise on the basis of holding three aces, it is not a good idea to underlead one and go to bed with it when dummy comes down with a stiff king. I was a little impressed this did not set off a married couple post mortem.

Yesterday was playing with a scratch partner as a practice for a local teams competition in a couple of weeks. The session had been a mixed bag although we hadn't had any bidding misunderstandings or defensive disasters. We got to the final round and my estimate was we were somewhere in the middle although it is hard to tell when there are only four and a half tables and some boards only get played three times. The score didn't matter, this was about getting some feel for each other. [hv=pc=n&s=sak754hjt96d84cj7&w=sqt932hk72dkjt6c2&n=sj86hq83d72cat985&e=sha54daq953ckq643&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1dp1sp2cp2dppdppp]399|300[/hv] I was North. I had no idea what partner was doubling on nor why she couldn't find a 1♠ overcall. It can't be takeout as the opps have bid three suits, but what can partner have to penalise when she couldn't do anything on the first two rounds? Is opener 1444 and they have landed in a 4-2 fit and she is sitting with a diamond stack? 2♦X makes 10 tricks for -580 which is a top for us. The other two pairs are in 3NT+1 and 5♦+1 for 620 and 630. I have never seen the strategy of doubling the opponent's making partscore with overtricks in order to seduce them out of a higher scoring game before. After questioning what partner was thinking it turns out she was applying the principle of not letting the opponents play in a two level contract and was trying to do a TOX, playing me for some HCP, although the standard when making a TOX is that there are at least two possible strains to play in.

If double shows four spades and North with superb five card support, a four loser hand and a void in the opponent's suit cannot find anything other than the weakest possible way of supporting spades, you are going to be writing +200 or +230 on your scorecard quite frequently. 2♠ is a terrible underbid.

This wasn't a hand from any of my games, it was a hand within a set with commentry linked from the site of a nearby bridge club I used to play at: Dorking Bridge Club hand commentaries The hand I posted is the third one down on that link. Note: "After 1NT by E a contract that normally scores very well when Non Vulnerable. As can be seen one East was allowed to play in 1N making 5 tricks which resulted in a top. Many will bid a natural 2♥ by South with opening points and a (weak) 5 card suit. This is likely to be passed out." I've bolded the bit that stood out to me. I was thinking I am out of touch with modern bidding style because I would not overcall 2♥ on that hand if I was only playing natural overcalls. If playing Landy a 2♣ bid is automatic. Many would overcall 2♥? Does suit quality not mean anything anymore?

♠AQ85 ♥J9873 ♦- ♣KQT5 RHO opens 1NT 12-14, you are red against green. Assuming you are not playing any two suited overcall structure, is this worth a 2♥ overcall at MPs?

Those combinations I know, and have a fair grasp of suit combination probabilities in general. Your examples are fundamental. I also appreciate the odds change when opponents have given information about their hands in the bidding. I remember once my partner (West) was in a slam when North had pre-empted at the three level. The slam required picking up the queen of trumps with a nine card fit. If I had been declarer, I would have cashed a top honor in hand and finessed South playing him for Qxx. Partner took the eight-ever-nine-never line and dropped Qx with North. Sometimes the most likely play doesn't work. The problem I have is, if we take the OP hand, working out probabilities of several combinations where the probabilities are not independent, such as playing the jack at trick one, what is the chance of it holding, if it does play a heart to the ten, if it wins cash hearts from the top, if it loses I have the hearts set up but I have an awkward blockage in clubs, how do I need the spades to lie, is there any danger if East gets in and pushes a diamond through, do I go up with the king or play low, while I am doing all this have the opponents established enough clubs to set the contract? One thing that is clear is we need to use the hearts if we are making 3NT. An expert can go through all that as routine, it is like muiscle memory to them. I sometimes get stuck trying to piece all the possible combinations together and with limited time at the table end up just going with one that looks best at the time. Same issue in defence, do I play for layout A and lead card B which is best or do I play for layout C and lead card D which is best, where either layout is possible on the bidding and carding so far, but if I get it wrong I blow the defence. It is a pity there aren't a set of BridgeMaster hands which cover defence.

I have to admit I would have been tempted with going up with the ace and playing a heart to the ten. I didn't fancy posting on this thread because a) I'm not exactly known for my expert declarer play and b) I frequently feel out of my depth and in a lower league with play problems on here. These are the sorts of situations I struggle with at the table, plausible lines A,B and C, what layouts work for each line and what is the probability of those layouts based on the known information.

I do, and I would double intending to bid diamonds next time if partner doesn't bid spades or diamonds. The problem is what to do when partner does bid diamonds as my hand improves if we have a good fit. I'm not sure I would bid 2♠, probably 3♦ and hope partner takes that as showing a good hand.

I do my best, I don't teach rules, I teach rough guidelines alongside logic, but teaching people to think, whether at bridge or life in general, is an uphill battle. Here in SE England they haven't yet mastered the art of walking through a door without stopping midway and blocking it.

I'm thinking in the context of the systems I play with my partners, which is either Acol or 5CM but not 2/1 GF. Your last sentence implies splintering on voids is wrong, should splinters show a singleton only? If my thinking is correct, with a game going hand and support for partner's major, the options are: 1. Splinter with a singleton, balanced-ish in the unbid suits and 10-13 ish HCP. 2. Fit jump with a long side suit with 2/3 top honors or bid it at the two level followed by a raise to game or slam investigation depending on partner's second bid. 3. Jacoby 2NT with a balanced/semi-balanced hand.

I have heard it mentioned on here that splinter bids are limited in strength and with strong hands and a shortage you should go via another route. Have I got this right and roughly what strength range do people here splinter on?

I play J2N as described in various sources which I believe is the original version. Someone once put me on to an improved version but the problem is remembering it when it hardly ever comes up. Is it worth spending hours practicing online for a convention that is very rarely used, or is it better to use that time studying and improving one's judgement and partnership agreements in competitive auctions to try to reduce the number of sub 50% results in mixed club fields?

Partner is marked with 17-19 HCP and I've seen six of them so far. The singleton diamond suggests to me partner has led from ♥KQxxx and if I understand the signalling correctly has signalled encouragement for clubs and discouragement for spades so is probably 3514. I think I would cash the ♥T so partner knows where that is/was and continue with the ♣J. I am anticipating partner has club honors over declarer and wants a club through whilst we are in for possibly the only time before cashing winning hearts, otherwise if we just continue with hearts there is a risk partner will be endplayed in the black suits.

Bridge is not dying at my club, we keep getting new members, that is because we have an excellent teaching system for getting new people into the game. It will not attract youth because bridge is a game optimised for retired people. When you have to arrive at a set time, have to play for a set time, and that set time can interfere with work and getting an evening meal, or childcare duties, it is going to be difficult to play duplicate regardless of whether it looks like a fun game. People's other halves may not like to be left holding the baby all evening. Add to that the fact that bridge is seen as an old persons game (for the reason just mentioned) and you are not getting many younger people into the game technology or not. Unfortunately at my club F2F evening bridge seems to be dying with attendance dropping to 2.5 - 4 tables, which at this time of year cannot be blamed on winter flu, poor weather or dark evenings. Coupled with a committee which is biased towards online bridge, and at least one of them wants the evening F2F binned, I cannot see it surviving much beyond the next committee meeting at the end of June, in which case I will be unable to play F2F and will be terminating my membership.

Don't worry, I know you couldn't have known and I was not offended by your response. My club does have a defib although I cannot remember if anyone has done a first aid training course so they know how to use it and/or do CPR.

Likely blind luck. If he cashed the diamond ace and saw dummy he might then try and play you for a spade void on account there is no other source of tricks beyond the heart ace.

To avoid blocking the suit. If East has KJx then play from the top and hope West has an entry before declarer can get nine tricks. If East has KJ, the king is normal is it not?