Assign the Blame

[pclayton]

One of my regular partners and I perpetuated the following disaster tonight:

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=saqjtxxhxdkxxxxcx&s=sxxxhajtxdxckqxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1♠ - (pass) - 1N - (4♥)

4♠ - (p) - 4N - (p)

5♣ - (p) - 5♦ - (p)

6♦ - (p) - 7♠ - (dbl)

AP

 

1. 1N is forcing

2. 5♣ shows 1/4 keys, 5♦ is the Q ask; 6♦ shows ♦K + ♠Q.

 

-800.

 

Assign the blame to NS and what is the worst call?

[cherdano]

Well, it is sick to have to bid 1N, but let's stick with it...

 

Isn't this obvious? There are many hands that North can have after 5♣ with 1 keycard. So South "signs off" in 5♠, as partner will bid on with 4 keycards anyway - this is systemic in RKCB in my understanding. 5♦ is the clear culprit.

But it's not like this couldn't happen to everyone, getting excited about slam while visualzing some nice hands, then forgetting that there might be a slight problem with a completely different hand...

 

I suppose 4♠ is worth discussing, but its certainly a possible, I actually agree with it, and it has nothing to do with the disaster.

 

Arend

[awm]

I blame:

 

The methods 50%. I've found that showing support with support is dramatically more effective than concealing support with a cheap 1NT call. Obviously I'm against the grain here, but you can see that a sequence like 1♠-3♠ (limit) or 1♠-3x (three-card limit) or even 1♠-2♣ (natural) would have worked better than hiding both the values and the fit. I agree with north's 4♠ call (there are many hands where south will pass out 4♥ and 4♠ makes or is a good sacrifice) and south can hardly pass it with such a wonderful fitting hand....

 

South's 5♦ bid 40%. There are plenty of hands north could have with only one keycard, including this one. North should bid on with four in any case.

 

North's 6♦ bid 10%. How can south possibly have a grand slam try after the initial 1NT response? Can N/S really hold all five keycards (this gives south 15 hcp for the 1NT bid)? Even that's not enough for a grand as we need south to have some ideal diamond holding (or an even more likely side source of tricks).

[brianshark]

I think North's 6♦ bid was also systemic... it's just the response to the Q ask when holding the Q and an outside K.

 

I don't like blaming methods. 99% of the time, it's the misuse or misunderstanding of the methods that are at fault. And this isn't that 1% time.

 

100% of the blame to South's Queen ask.

[Free]

99% South

1% system agreements

 

Apparently South can't show support immediately, so that's the 1% system.

North bids 4♠, I guess he didn't open 2♣ for a reason... It's just competitive, so no reason for South to go on like a crazy truck driver.

North can't do anything else than responding to the questions asked. Partner asks a question, you respond, end of story. The only blame you might try to give North is for opening this hand in a 2/1GF system (I guess), but imo it qualifies.

[whereagles]

Was South on steroids or something?.. (hope's not you, phil :o ) his bidding doesn't make much sense to me, system or no system.

[Dwingo]

I blame:

 

The methods 50%. I've found that showing support with support is dramatically more effective than concealing support with a cheap 1NT call.

 

In 2/1 system , limit raise with 3 card support is done via 1NT and hence you really can't blame South for that. It was unfortunate that South had to hear 4♥ on his left, as he would have been planning to bid 3♠ over any 2 level bid to show limit raise.

 

Clearly 5♦ is the culprit

[EricK]

A few people are calling this hand a limit raise. Vulnerable at IMPS opposite a 5 card major opening, is anybody seriously not driving this hand (7 losers, 3 card support, a singleton, two good suits) to game?

[inquiry]

I hate the entire auction. The only good bid was 4♠, and i suspect 5♣ by north has to be ok. I don't like the 1NT response with this hand, I would have bid 2♣ but that still doesn't solve the big problem when the bidding continues 4♥-4♠.

 

The absolute worse bids was 5♦. The 4NT bidder hearing 1 or 4 keycards should "signoff". Opener with 4 keycards will never accept the signoff, but instead will show values over that bid should he have it.

[Codo]

I would bet, that from 100 players out there 85 and more will call this a limit raise. They count 10 HCPS and MAY add something for the singleton and they surely will add nothing for their nice suits and their pure points.

 

Of course this hand has game forcing values, but not for the majority of HCPS counters.

 

To the problem: It is always hard to cope with a high barrage, even if this what made in 4. seat, so a lot of credit for the opps to create this problem.

 

Of course the system showed its downsides dramatically. If you judge your hand as a 11 HCP 3 card raise, your rebid is 1 NT. SO bad luck in playing 2/1 this time. 5 %

 

The main problem is the 4 Spade bid. Obviously the majority thinks, that this can be quite weak in regards of HCPS but wants to play 4 Spade opposite any form of 1 NT response from South. I share this view, south did not. 50 %

 

The second problem was the 1 NT rebid. South has a game forcing with 3 Spades. So, as Adam pointed out, each rebid had worked better and had described the hand much better. I had prefered 2 Club. 30 %

 

To believe, that North has 4 KCS and running spades but no 2 Club opening was influenced from the idea, that 4 Spade was a strong bid in terms of points. But still 5 Spade was approbiate. Another 10 %

 

Bidding 6 Diamond was without any thought. There is no way that pd bid 1 NT and has now enough for a GS opposite North hand. 5 %

[inquiry]

Bidding 6 Diamond was without any thought. There is no way that pd bid 1 NT and has now enough for a GS opposite North hand. 5 %

If 1NT can include strong balanced hands or sound limit raises, it is not out of the question that responder can have three keycards (AAK is only 11 hcp), and was looking for the spade queen to risk 6♠. If you play you can not ask for the spade queen unless all keycards are held, 6♦ becomes more probkematic.

[the hog]

4NT is the worst bid by far. Nth is under pressure and may not have bid 4S if the opps had not bid 4H. 4NT is unsympathetic to say the least - most unlike you too, Phil.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

The responding hand does look a little too good for a limit raise IMO.

 

That 4NT bid really started us down the path to disaster.

 

1S-1NT-(4H)-4S-5H would show slam interest and 'deny both minor Aces. I would have passed over 4S. Playing standard methods, a pass 'giving partner' some leeway for 'taking a push' would not be wrong.

 

I do not think that assigning the blame 'works' on this hand. Either the pair(or partner?) was having an 'off night' or a 'bit of work' is also needed on the system.

 

I suspect that this hand is a matter of 'not seeing' the cow that just flew by. The 4NT bid was very poor, however, that later Queen ask was proof that a wheel had already fallen off.

 

Regards,

Robert

[pclayton]

Yeah I was South :o

 

OK, I'll accept that 5♦ was pretty bad, although pard shouldn't play me for a 15 count here with tolerance. Thats some sort of 2/1, or a 3N response. But note that 5♠ is still dangerously high.

 

I also don't agree that this hand is worth a game force. Give pard a very plain opener; AQxxx, xx, AQxx, xx and game needs an awful lot. A little more, and pard would accept a game try. The only way a 2♣ response pays off is when pard reveals a double fit; AQxxx, xx, xx, Axxx for instance (and this isn't an opener for many). I also have methods (via an ambiguous 2♣) where I can show a 3 card limit raise cheaply.

 

I'm surprised that you all are so tolerant of 4♠. Maybe I'm influenced by the result, but I think at these colors, I should have some realistic expectation that pard is bidding to MAKE. How can I differentiate this hand from something like: AKQxxx, x, Axx, Axx; which gives us an excellent play for a grand? There's plenty of lesser hands where 6 is excellent too. North has a nice hand, but its not that great if there isn't a fit there. To say South should pass 4♠ isn't realistic, when South hasn't hinted at any strength or fit, and he has both.

 

I think that pard should pass 4♥. If I come out of the woods with a double (which I will), then pulling looks right with this ODR. Thats how you get to 4♠.

[ArcLight]

1. South had a tricky response at his first bid. Using 2/1 he's not quite strong enough for a 2/1. One plan is to bid 1NT (frocing) then rebid 3 Spades, delayed Limit Raise (10-12 Support points and 3 card support). The only problem is you have 13 and are 1 point too strong. Another would be to "upgrade" your hand and bid 2 Clubs GF, then later support Spades.

 

I think 1NT was ok. No blame assigned

 

 

2. North bid under extreme pressure. Game has a shot, the bid was reasonable. But what is teh partnership agreement? Will pard expect 19 points and bid on? IF so be prepared to apply the brakes.

No Blame

 

 

3. North bid under extreme pressure. South shouldn't expect a 19 point monster.

The heart Ace was potentially wsted if North was void, and the J is certainly wasted.

Even if pard has a stiff heart the ace is not helping establish a long suit. Souths ource of tricks clubs can be great if north has the ace.

Any Spade finesse is likely to fail.

South doesnt have enough trumps to ruff a lot of diamonds.

I can see South wanting to bid, but slam is probably too risky.

Maybe South assumed North had more than he did, jumping to 4S.

 

Blame South 75% as the slam is likely to be poor.

 

 

3. North knows South doesn't have an opening bid because of the initial 1NT

Time to sweat, get ready to apply the brakes. Pard needs 2 aces and teh Spade King (or teh finesse to work - unlikely) what about the dimes? Ugh!

 

4. South sees a bid of 1/4. WOW pard has great spades, and BOTH aces, Slam here we come!

Pard you have the Queen?

No Blame.

 

 

5. North - APPLY THE BREAKS! Bid 5 Spades.

100% Blame North at this point

[ArcLight]

>I think that pard should pass 4♥. If I come out of the woods with a double (which I will), then pulling looks right with this ODR. Thats how you get to 4♠.

 

 

I don't agree. What would it take form pard to make 4 Spades?

AKxx in diamonds? Or the Spade K and QJxx in Diamonds.

Making 4 Spades takes little. Why defend when 4 S likely makes?

[bid_em_up]

Sometimes playing assign the blame is a moot point. To me, there can only be ONE mistake in an auction. After that, everything else is based off the original mistake and cannot carry any "blame". The question really should be, what is the worst bid in the auction?

 

I think if your 2/1 methods allow for the opening of weakish 6/5 hands in 1st/2nd seats, then partner must absolutely pass 4H. To bid 4S here should confirm a much better opener. North should also be expecting a misfit by looking at his hand and the 1N response. So the blame lies with North for bidding 4S. Pass is clear cut, imo. His hand certainly hasnt gotten any better at this point.

[bid_em_up]

>I think that pard should pass 4♥. If I come out of the woods with a double (which I will), then pulling looks right with this ODR. Thats how you get to 4♠.

 

 

I don't agree. What would it take form pard to make 4 Spades?

AKxx in diamonds? Or the Spade K and QJxx in Diamonds.

Making 4 Spades takes little. Why defend when 4 S likely makes?

Who was it that said, "Never play me for a certain hand. I won't have it"? Kaplan? Kay?

 

Partner also may hold x xxx xx KQJxxxx and look how much fun you are about to have.......

 

This auction and hand pattern scream the hand is a likely misfit. Partner is quite capable of bidding 4S on his own if opener passes at this point. To bid 4S, says three things to me:

 

1) Partner, I dont trust you enough to do the right thing if I pass.

 

2) Man, I really like playing the hand and pass just isnt in my vocabulary. After all, I am 6/5, so I will bid even though 4S is a total misdescription of my hand. Partner doesnt need to know that I have a second 5 card suit.

 

3) I am such a poor defender, I can't stand to pass and find out if we can at least go plus on this hand. Maybe scoring even more than our game.

[Echognome]

Partner also may hold  x xxx xx KQJxxxx and look how much fun you are about to have.......

 

This auction and hand pattern scream the hand is a likely misfit.  Partner is quite capable of bidding 4S on his own if opener passes at this point.  To bid 4S, says three things to me:

 

1) Partner, I dont trust you enough to do the right thing if I pass.

 

2) Man, I really like playing the hand and pass just isnt in my vocabulary. After all, I am 6/5, so I will bid even though 4S is a total misdescription of my hand.  Partner doesnt need to know that I have a second 5 card suit.

 

3) I am such a poor defender, I can't stand to pass and find out if we can at least go plus on this hand. Maybe scoring even more than our game.

And 4♥ might make opposite such dismal hands from partner. Note that North's spades were AQJTxx, which will play for one loser opposite a singleton most of the time.

 

No one has yet to criticise the 4♥ bid as it resulted in a big imp gain, but it really wasn't a good bid. It just got a lucky result. (x KQ8xxx Axxx Ax was the actual holding)

 

I think North has enough distribution to bid 4♠. I think South should make a disciplined pass at this point. Sure there are some hands where slam is good, but we cannot get to every slam when there is heavy preemption. Alternatively, how can a hand that started off by bidding 1NT take control and bid 4NT? To me, that just doesn't make sense. If you take the view that your hand is not worth a GF, then it certainly is not worth taking control with.

 

Note that 4NT was the bid that turned a plus into a minus. You may say that 4♠ was that bid, but give North AQJTxxx --- Kxxx xx and he's bidding the same way. You will have to start delving into what constitutes a 4♠ opener vs a 1♠ opener at some point, but hands that were going to rebid 4♠ will still do so here.

 

I don't see why this is a question of partnership trust. This was simply a question of judgment. In my view 4♠ is a somewhat wide-ranging bid. Many of the hands of a stronger variety (say, e.g. AKQxx x Axxx Axx) will surely double 4♥ giving partner the option to defend. So it is more likely the bid will be made on distribution rather than strength.

 

So what about pass then 4♠? That's a possibility. But note that (1) we are nowhere near a forcing pass situation. So partner will often not double and we will end up either defending 4♥ undoubled when game might be making or they might make 4♥ when we have a cheap sacrifice in 4♠. Note that North does not know that South holds AJTx in hearts! But also (2) how is South to know that North's spades are good enough to play opposite x or xx? North merely opened 1♠ and can having anything from xxxxx (with a lot outside) to AKQJxx (with little outside).

 

So I find your reasonings unjustified.

[ArcLight]

>Sometimes playing assign the blame is a moot point. To me, there can only be ONE mistake in an auction.

 

 

I dont agree. There can be an initial mistake, and then another, there are 2 players, one mught slightly misvalue their hand, and the other is not blameless.

 

 

>I think if your 2/1 methods allow for the opening of weakish 6/5 hands in 1st/2nd

 

I think its a clear 1♠ opening bid. Count HCP, add for length, and add for concentration of intermediates in the Spade suit. Basic Hnad Evaluation, its an opening 1 Spade bid. And it takes little to make game.

 

 

 

>Who was it that said, "Never play me for a certain hand. I won't have it"? Kaplan? Kay?

 

Except we are not playing pard for specific cards, there are many general collections of HCP that will produce game. Playing pard to hold exectly the trump K and a specific ace and length in a suit would be a stretch.

This is not, it takes little for pard to make game.

 

 

>Partner also may hold x xxx xx KQJxxxx and look how much fun you are about to have.......

 

Pessimistic bridge is not winning bridge. Yes we can constrct hands where 4 Spades doesnt make. bUt we can constrcut many more mediocre ones where 4 Spades has play.

 

 

>This auction and hand pattern scream the hand is a likely misfit.

 

Who can judge this? South or North? South sees 3 spades and is happy? Noth is sad about the 4 Spade bid but doesn't know anything about Souths hand.

 

 

>Partner is quite capable of bidding 4S on his own if opener passes at this point.

 

Maybe not. Maybe South has 2 Spades (king off side but spades split 2-3) but the needed fillers. It takes little to make game, bid it.

He who knows, goes.

 

 

 

>To bid 4S, says three things to me:

>1) Partner, I dont trust you enough to do the right thing if I pass.

 

No, it says pard, I have the kind of hand that has play for 4S if you have an average hand for your bid.

 

 

>2) Man, I really like playing the hand and pass just isnt in my vocabulary. After all, I am 6/5, so I will bid even though 4S is a total misdescription of my hand. Partner doesnt need to know that I have a second 5 card suit.

 

It says nothing of the sort. Opener has a hand thats hard to describe. Take the risk and bid it. Its possible that 4 hearts will make! Maybe there is 1 spade loser, and if the King is offside, its a discard. I don't think 4 Hearts making is impossible.

Given what North knows (not from Souths point of view)

 

Pass with a more balanced hand, bid with a distributional one.

 

 

 

>3) I am such a poor defender, I can't stand to pass and find out if we can at least go plus on this hand. Maybe scoring even more than our game.

 

Again , this is not true. Don't defend with extreme distribution.

You own the Spades, bid them.

Go for +620 rather than +100 or +300 or -590.

[cherdano]

Yeah I was South :(

 

OK, I'll accept that 5♦ was pretty bad, although pard shouldn't play me for a 15 count here with tolerance. Thats some sort of 2/1, or a 3N response. But note that 5♠ is still dangerously high.

 

I also don't agree that this hand is worth a game force. Give pard a very plain opener; AQxxx, xx, AQxx, xx and game needs an awful lot. A little more, and pard would accept a game try. The only way a 2♣ response pays off is when pard reveals a double fit; AQxxx, xx, xx, Axxx for instance (and this isn't an opener for many). I also have methods (via an ambiguous 2♣) where I can show a 3 card limit raise cheaply.

 

I'm surprised that you all are so tolerant of 4♠. Maybe I'm influenced by the result, but I think at these colors, I should have some realistic expectation that pard is bidding to MAKE. How can I differentiate this hand from something like: AKQxxx, x, Axx, Axx; which gives us an excellent play for a grand? There's plenty of lesser hands where 6 is excellent too. North has a nice hand, but its not that great if there isn't a fit there. To say South should pass 4♠ isn't realistic, when South hasn't hinted at any strength or fit, and he has both.

 

I think that pard should pass 4♥. If I come out of the woods with a double (which I will), then pulling looks right with this ODR. Thats how you get to 4♠.

In situations like these, Justin has always been arguing in favor of giving partner lots of leeway for his competitive game bids. I think it is losing bridge if you have to pass with the North hand, missing out on a possible double game swing. (If partner has ♠Kx and ♦QJx, you are making 4♠ or down 1 and have 1-3 defensive tricks against 4♥.)

Of course, this wasn't bridge but MP, so the double game swing argument isn't that big. But even at MPs, opponents may not be able to double you with 4♥ making.

 

In fact, I have convinced myself that South should pass. Game-before-slam. (And throw out the forcing 1N with a possible fit.)

[Echognome]

Of course, this wasn't bridge but MP, so the double game swing argument isn't that big. But even at MPs, opponents may not be able to double you with 4♥ making.

It was IMPs.

 

Oh and on a small technical point, North's x in clubs was the J.

 

P.S. I wasn't North (nor obviously South)

[Apollo81]

One of my regular partners and I perpetuated the following disaster tonight:

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=saqjtxxhxdkxxxxcx&s=sxxxhajtxdxckqxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1♠ - (pass) - 1N - (4♥)

4♠ - (p) - 4N - (p)

5♣ - (p) - 5♦ - (p)

6♦ - (p) - 7♠ - (dbl)

AP

 

1. 1N is forcing

2. 5♣ shows 1/4 keys, 5♦ is the Q ask; 6♦ shows ♦K + ♠Q.

 

-800.

 

Assign the blame to NS and what is the worst call?

Obviously the bids at fault here are, in order of worst to least bad:

 

5♦: no reason at all to bid this, 5♠ is forcing if opener has 4 keys

6♦: how can we have a grand? nonetheless an easy mistake to make

1NT: RED IMPS why not GF with this hand?

 

The methods also lose on this hand, as they basically force the 4♠ and 4NT calls.

[Apollo81]

I don't like the 1NT response with this hand, I would have bid 2♣ but that still doesn't solve the big problem when the bidding continues 4♥-4♠.....

Umm, yes it does. North bids 4♠ and South can easily pass. Not that it matters much as to South's decision, but remember North could have made a forcing pass then pull to 4♠ as a slam try in this auction. He cannot do that after a 1NT response.

 

I'd have bid 2♣ too...

[Echognome]

I don't like the 1NT response with this hand, I would have bid 2♣ but that still doesn't solve the big problem when the bidding continues 4♥-4♠.....

Umm, yes it does. North bids 4♠ and South can easily pass. Not that it matters much as to South's decision, but remember North could have made a forcing pass then pull to 4♠ as a slam try in this auction. He cannot do that after a 1NT response.

 

I'd have bid 2♣ too...

Except for the fact that Ben's 2♣ and your 2♣ presumably have different meanings.

 

I believe Ben is bidding 2♣ as multi-way (either GF with clubs, GF bal, or 3 card limit raise). This will not create a forcing pass.

 

Your 2♣ natural GF, certainly does create a FP. Not saying it's wrong, just saying these are markedly different auctions.