Be careful when you are hypercritical of partner

[inquiry]

At least one player was highly critical of his partner.

 

Was it South for north's 3♥ bid?

Was it West for East penalty double to 3♥ and/or not redouble with that hand?

Was it North for telling south not to bid 2♥?

Was it East for West not covering the ♠T?

 

Bonus question, what was the hypercritical players mistake that cost the

 

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=saqj6hqj85daj64c3&w=sk8754ha6d52caj72&e=s9h742dkqt3ckq984&s=st32hkt93d987ct65]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 1♠    Dbl   RDbl  2♥

 Pass  Pass  3♣    Pass

 Pass  3♥    Dbl   Pass

 Pass  Pass  

 

CA C3 C4 C6

D5 D6 DT D8

H4 H3 HA H5

H6 HJ H2 HK

HT D2 H8 H7

ST S4 S6 S9

S3 S5 SQ C8

D4 DQ D7 S7

CK C5 C2 HQ

DA D3 D9 C7

DJ DK H9 CJ

S2 S8 SJ C9

SA CQ CT SK

 

I just found it funny that the person who made the mistake(s) was critical of his/her partner. Can you spot the critical mistake?

[bid_em_up]

At least one player was highly critical of his partner.

Only one?

[inquiry]

At least one player was highly critical of his partner.

Only one?

out loud at least.... :)

[TimG]

I'll guess that west was hypercritical of east's double. West could have defended better, but as the hand was played not covering the Ten of Spades was not the critical error.

 

It seems to me that east did fine - he has denied 4 hearts by failing to double 2♥, so when he doubles 3♥ he is very likely 1345.

 

If I had made up the post, I would have cited north's double as the call for south to be critical of.

[andy_h]

South, for N making a t/o x with that hand.

 

But my guess is E for telling W to cover the ST.

[gnasher]

Here's my list:

- North's takeout double

- West's pass of 3♣

- East's double of 3♥

- West's pass of 3♥ doubled

- West's failure to lead a trump

- West's failure to cover ♠10

 

I expect that West told East he should have switched to his singleton spade at trick 3. That wouldn't, in itself, let the contract make, but if West were to give his partner a ruff that would let it through.

[Finch]

There's lots of stuff here I don't agree with.

The easiest mistake to pick on is West not covering the spade.

[helene_t]

West must cover ♠T but this is the kind of mistakes I could easily make myself so I wouldn't blame p for making the same mistake.

 

The worst call IMHO is North's t/o double, I think pass is obvious at favorable but if the dog ate his pass cards then bid 1NT.

 

Close second is East's penalty double. The situation is nonforcing and he has nothing to add to what he already showed.

 

Btw I have an elementary question: If 3♣ is nonforcing and and initial 2♣ or 3♣ instead of redouble would be nonforcing as well, East does not have many options with a GF hand. Can that be right?

[NickRW]

The first mistake, in my view, is the t/o double in the first place. It kind of goes downhill from there.

 

Nick

[TimG]

There's lots of stuff here I don't agree with.

The easiest mistake to pick on is West not covering the spade.

On a double dummy basis, west's failure to cover the spade cost nothing. At that point, the contract could be made even if west covered (though it may have been much trickier with the cover).

[inquiry]

This hand made me feel like those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. I was south, and while I would have liked to have passed 1♠xx just in case partner had some longish minor, the fear of playing 1♠xx was just too great for me, so I bid my best suit.

 

Lord knows that it is true that there was an entire host of odd decisions and mistakes on this hand.

1. North's take out double is horrendous
   
2. East redouble is mildly aggressive
   
3. South might should pass redouble to hope to find best spot, but this partner will take that as to play
   
4. West can not pass 3♣ which has to be forcing
   
5. North takes a chance with 3♥ of pushing them to game or substaining a significant penalty
   
6. The penalty double with a limit of 10 hcp (no aces) and only 3 small trumps (742) opposite a partner who passed a forcing 3♣ was too frisky by EAST
   
7. The failure of West to cover the spade TEN was a bridge mistake.
   

Despite all this, the actual comment made at the table about the hand was from EAST, who was critical of the failure to cover the ♠T, and mentioned how the contract goes down if the SPADE TEN was covered. I found that odd, given I though EAST's penatly double of 3♥ at imps was ill-advised, and in fact, it was his defense (and not directly his partner's failure to cover the spade TEN) that allowed the contract to make. For one thing, after T-K-A-9, the QJ6 is a ten-ace over the 875, for another, the secondary finessee is not necessary.....because....

 

IF the spade ten is covered, the hand is double dummy. EAST needs the ♦KQ and the ♣KQ to have his redouble. EAST distribution surely at this point is 1=3=4=5 from the play and the bidding. IF the spade is covered, Three spades are won and the fourth spade ruffed. EAST has to keep three diamonds, or else a diamond is ducked and dummy is good. So he comes to one club. A club is then ruffed in the dummy, and dummy exits with a low diamond, endplaying him.

 

So what went wrong, is 3♥ cold? No it is not. On the opening ♣A lead, west played his lowest club (the ♣4)!!! To ensure setting the contract, amazingly, it seems EAST has to keep the club four to avoid some endplay options where south leads a low club and EAST needs the club four to avoid an endplay in diamonds. Even keeping the club four, the defense to set 3♥ can be tricky.

 

Anyway, before being critical of your partner... remember this hand... and for the most part, keep your comments to yourself... (or better yet, post them here!!!)

[nige1]

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=saqj6hqj85daj64c3&w=sk8754ha6d52caj72&e=s9h742dkqt3ckq984&s=st32hkt93d987ct65]399|300|Scoring: IMP

At least one player was highly critical of his partner.

Was it South for north's 3♥ bid?

Was it West for East penalty double to 3♥ and/or not redouble with that hand?

Was it North for telling south not to bid 2♥?

Was it East for West not covering the ♠T?

Bonus question, what was the hypercritical players mistake that cost the

West  North East  South

1♠    Dbl  RDbl  2♥

Pass  Pass  3♣    Pass

Pass  3♥    Dbl  Pass

Pass  Pass 

CA C3 C4 C6

D5 D6 DT D8

H4 H3 HA H5

H6 HJ H2 HK

HT D2 H8 H7

ST S4 S6 S9

S3 S5 SQ C8

D4 DQ D7 S7

CK C5 C2 HQ

DA D3 D9 C7

DJ DK H9 CJ

S2 S8 SJ C9

SA CQ CT SK

I just found it funny that the person who made the mistake(s) was critical of his/her partner.  Can you spot the critical mistake?[/hv]

IMO

• North-South accurately assessed the deal and their opponents. They took full advantage. They achieved an above-par result. It would be greedy for South to redouble :) especially as he didn't want to scare East-West into 4♣ :)
  
• What about East-West?
  • East was relatively blameless.
    • East's XX is OK
      
    • East's _X of 3♥ is aggressive but reasonable,
      
    • You can hardly blame East for failing to keep ♣4 :)
      

    [*]West was out to lunch :

    • West passed 3♣ :)
      
    • West passed 3♥X :)
      
    • West led ♣A :(
      
    • West failed to cover ♠T :(
      

[sfbp]

I did some checking (Ben doesn't believe me, yet) and it looks like double is a winning call in this position. Also well ahead in simple frequency of any call except pass.

 

If you load it into GIB, the error is not the ♣4 but taking the first round of ♥ with the Ace. I will admit, I can't exactly see why but that's for someone else to explain.

 

Thanks for the kind words, Nige. Until you posted I was afraid to raise my head after everyone yelled at my double :)

 

Edit: BTW I didn't criticise 2♥. Of course he's not promising values.

[han]

I ran a simulation and double by north is a clear winner.

[NickRW]

I ran a simulation and double by north is a clear winner.

Simulation of what? The bidding?

[helene_t]

We mathematicians can simulate everything, Nick. Don't worry just trust the results :)

 

Edit: someone told me that this remark could be interpreted as a contribution to an old flame war concerning simulations/BridgeBrowser/etc. Please don't read anything into it except that I was wondering whether Nick realized that Han was joking.

Edited June 22, 2008 by helene_t

[han]

Perverted humor.

[sfbp]

Ah,,, finally a new type to rite on my Konvention Kard - "Perverted Doubles"

[NickRW]

Sometimes I do a crossword puzzle. One of those ones that has normal and cryptic clues. I get the answer off the normal clue and then I look at the cryptic clue - and I still don't get it even when I know the answer.

[sfbp]

Sometimes I do a crossword puzzle. One of those ones that has normal and cryptic clues. I get the answer off the normal clue and then I look at the cryptic clue - and I still don't get it even when I know the answer.

I would sure like to see why NOT taking the first ♥ with the Ace gets that contract down 1.

[TimG]

[*]South might should pass redouble to hope to find best spot, but this partner will take that as to play

I don't think passing the redouble is to play. But, this is a situation where special agreements are useful in landing the intervening side in their longest fit.

[sfbp]

huh?

[inquiry]

Sometimes I do a crossword puzzle.  One of those ones that has normal and cryptic clues.  I get the answer off the normal clue and then I look at the cryptic clue - and I still don't get it even when I know the answer.

I would sure like to see why NOT taking the first ♥ with the Ace gets that contract down 1.

it allows two trump entries to south hand so that the SPADE TEN cover king, ACE, can be followed up twice with low spades towards the QJ6 through the 875... QED. If you duck, any spade play (TEN COVER) allows the heart ace to be won and partner give a ruff.

[Guest Jlall]

I ran a simulation and double by north is a clear winner.

i LOLed

[pigpenz]

I ran a simulation and double by north is a clear winner.

i LOLed

yes after seeing this i ran a simulation with about 1500 hands then used DF analysis on them.

2♣ 27%

2♦69%

2♥69%

1NT 65%

 

so double does have enough merit to it, though maybe its not evident.