Who to blame - if any?

[Helmer]

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s108h10532da982cak7&s=skj62h76dj107cj1098]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

S        W       N        E

Pass  1♠      DBL     RDBL

2♣     2♥      Pass   2NT

Pass  Pass  3♣      DBL

all pass

 

 

Possible other bids from my hand:

 

Pass - with a chance that partner bids a red suit.

1NT - promissing a spade stopper - and some kind of points.

 

I (S) asked, "Why compete against possible 2NT?".

 

And then the discussion started.

 

Anyway my partner wasn't satisfied.

[mike777]

Alert

 

this maybe too old fashion but I pass not x with north hand.

In any case 3c seems a bit much. :)

[Lobowolf]

I think 3♣ is a real lemon.

[poohbear]

North lost their mind. Dbl opp a passed hand is questionable at best . 3C was clearly suicidal. I would pass the redbl with the south hand. Now partner can introduce a 5 card suit or kick it back to me with 1nt

[matmat]

north needs to lay off the juice.

[EricK]

3♣ is clearly ridiculous IMO. Partner is a passed hand and has bid your shortest suit. The hand is obviously something of a misfit for both sides. In particular, partner is pretty much marked with ♠ length under the 1♠ opener, a couple of ♥s, no ♣Q, and about 6 points. You can almost see 6 or 7 losers in a ♣ contract before the opening lead is even made.

[gwnn]

don't sac over 2NT, lol

[brianshark]

Every call was reasonable and defensible except 3♣ which was ludicrous.

[ArtK78]

North is solely to blame. South's one and only call was perfectly normal, although 1NT was a reasonable alternative. South could have held:

 

xxxx

xx

xx

xxxxx

[lilboyman]

The first mistake is usually the foundation for the rest. The t/o double while agressive is not clearly in error, since N/S can still have the majority of points and a Heart fit. After the redouble, South made the error of showing a preference for Clubs which was not necessary or desireable give the minimum nature of the hand and may have given North the impression that South held 5 cards in Clubs. Pass is clear as South has no clear preference for Clubs or Diamonds at this point in the auction. Better to pass the runout decision to North. Since the auction is clear that E/W have no fit North's 3C call is uncalled for but would have never have been made if not for South's 2C call.

[Sadie3]

I can't imagine why North made his first bid, he must have been feeling rather frisky that day or playing the opps or not trusting of his partner. Getting in the auction again was suicide.

[ArtK78]

The first mistake is usually the foundation for the rest. The t/o double while agressive is not clearly in error, since N/S can still have the majority of points and a Heart fit. After the redouble, South made the error of showing a preference for Clubs which was not necessary or desireable give the minimum nature of the hand and may have given North the impression that South held 5 cards in Clubs. Pass is clear as South has no clear preference for Clubs or Diamonds at this point in the auction. Better to pass the runout decision to North. Since the auction is clear that E/W have no fit North's 3C call is uncalled for but would have never have been made if not for South's 2C call.

I totally disagree.

 

When partner makes a takeout double and there is a redouble, you should make a call when you have a clear preference among the unbid suits. In this case, South does have a clear preference - clubs (ignoring the 1NT call that would not be an unreasonable alternative). If he passes, he indicates that he does not have any preference among the unbid suits, and he is willing to play in any of them. That is clearly not the case.

 

By bidding 2♣, he is taking partner off the hook. He is NOT inviting partner to bid again. North's 3♣ bid was, to put it charitably, a wild gamble. Others have been less kind.

[jdonn]

Obviously north does not understand bridge. Not much else to say.

[kenrexford]

Obviously north does not understand bridge. Not much else to say.

Maybe North thought that they were playing "baby Lebensohl" in this auction. LOL

 

Actually, this makes me think. There might be some actual merit to playing "Baby Lebensohl" here after all. I mean, I often see auctions start like this where, as Advancer, I have every bit of my 2♣ call and would like to announce that. Playing 1NT as Lebensohl here would allow me to relay that information. It might also help in the event that LHO has made a psychic opening or RHO has made a psychic redouble.

 

Hmmmm.

[jdonn]

Obviously north does not understand bridge. Not much else to say.

I was told I should be more constructive. These are specifically the things north doesn't understand about bridge:

 

- Vulnerability

- The difference betweeen offense and defense

- Competitive bidding

- Redoubles

- Scoring

- The term "in context" as in "in context, I am as weak and short in clubs as I could be"

- Inferences (including that partner has 4+ spades, and that we have a club loser)

- Post mortems

 

Did I forget any?