Most hopeless / clueless comment?

[Zelandakh]

"I trusted you!" - I'm gonna use this from now on.

It makes quite a good apology in reverse - "Sorry partner, I should have trusted you more."

[Cyberyeti]

I heard this one from a friend, which is the same idea but differently phrased.

 

"He's had 1 year of experience 10 times."

 

This basic remark was used of English spin bowler Monty panesar by Australian legend Shane Warne who said something like: Monty hasn't played 33 tests, he's played the same test 33 times.

[ggwhiz]

A local self styled bridge teacher had a lesson booked at his house and with -25 (centigrade) and a howling wind his students arrived.

 

He looked at them, looked at his watch and said "you're 10 minutes early" and shut the door in their freezing faces. He's no longer in business for even funnier reasons.

[keylime]

Larry and I were a relatively new partnership playing canapé club, and the auction went:

 

1D* (could have longer major, alerted) (1H) 1S (only promises 4 spades) (2C)

 

<lots of bids later>

 

.... (3D) P (3H) X by Larry, all pass.

 

Larry somehow derives that I have a heart canapé. Still to this day I dunno how he did it. He leads the QH at 3HX vul at Swiss...and hits my AKJxx side suit of hearts. They took exactly 2 tricks for -2000. Afterwards the conversation:

 

P1: Pard, 3H confused me.

P2: 1H confused me, I thought you had five.

P1: Well I had five of his diamonds (true) and 4 hearts (to the 9), what do I do?

P2: Against these two guys, pass. They know the red card. They embraced the red card. And, thankfully Dwayne's O+ and knows where the nearest hospital is.

P1 looks at me: Oh, are you a doctor? If so I have a question about this illness I've read about...

[helene_t]

Not clueless at all but I wanted to post it somewhere:

 

Dummy puts her cards down and declarer exclaims: "Ach, mein lieber Gott."

 

Dummy replies: "You don't have to call me God. My name is Marijke".

[glen]

Playing with a BBO expert, auction by opponents with 1NT-2♣-2♦-3NT

 

I led a fourth best ♥, dummy has KQT. Declarer wins K, and then on some winners discards T and Q of hearts. At the end expert discards all his hearts, keeping a winner and a loser. Discussion:

 

me: with my discards and declarer discarding heart QT, clear i have heart ace

expert: it was his three of diamonds that threw me and you also discarded the three of clubs - both were the lowest I saw

[eagles123]

"experts never underlead aces at trick 1"

 

from an "expert" bbo opp

 

:)

[barmar]

"experts never underlead aces at trick 1"

While there are no unbreakable rules in bridge, this is one of the closer ones (assuming he's talking about non-trump leads in suit contracts). If you read Lawrence's book on opening leads, he takes every opportunity he can to tell the reader to find some other alternative. And when you're playing third hand, if your choice of plays depends on whether partner or declarer has the ace, assume it's declarer (unless the only way to defeat the contract is if partner made the unusual lead of underleading his ace).

 

Of course, one of the hallmarks of being an expert is knowing when to bend or break the rules.

[manudude03]

While there are no unbreakable rules in bridge, this is one of the closer ones (assuming he's talking about non-trump leads in suit contracts). If you read Lawrence's book on opening leads, he takes every opportunity he can to tell the reader to find some other alternative. And when you're playing third hand, if your choice of plays depends on whether partner or declarer has the ace, assume it's declarer (unless the only way to defeat the contract is if partner made the unusual lead of underleading his ace).

 

Of course, one of the hallmarks of being an expert is knowing when to bend or break the rules.

 

Assuming he was replying to glen's post, the point is if dummy has KQT and declarer the ace, they would not have been discarding them.

[barmar]

Assuming he was replying to glen's post, the point is if dummy has KQT and declarer the ace, they would not have been discarding them.

I thought he said it came from an opponent, not a forum post. If it's from a post, it's in a thread I haven't read, so I don't know the context.

 

In a situation like you describe, we can think of the quote from Sherlock Holmes: "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Since it's presumably impossible that declarer would discard from that suit if he had the ace, partner must have underled it.

[gwnn]

Glen's post is the right above that of eagles123.

[glen]

I thought he said it came from an opponent, not a forum post. If it's from a post, it's in a thread I haven't read, so I don't know the context.

 

In a situation like you describe, we can think of the quote from Sherlock Holmes: "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Since it's presumably impossible that declarer would discard from that suit if he had the ace, partner must have underled it.

I don't think underleading an ace against 3NT is improbable

[blackshoe]

I don't think underleading an ace against 3NT is improbable

It is for me. I don't usually have any. B-)

[barmar]

I don't think underleading an ace against 3NT is improbable

I did say "assuming he's talking about non-trump leads in suit contracts". It's very common to underlead an ace in no-trump or in the trump suit (you later expect to win a trick in a side suit so you can draw all of dummy's trumps.

[barmar]

Glen's post is the right above that of eagles123.

I never thought the context might be from 5 months ago.

[eagles123]

I've not found a board this funny for ages - it was last night against a couple of Lol's who must have been in their eighties.

[hv=pc=n&s=skt3hq732d8caq982&w=saq87hakdak642cj6&n=s96542htdqj93c743&e=sjhj98654dt75ckt5&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c2np3hp4hppp]399|300[/hv]

 

1c was 2+ and 2N and 3H were both natural (obviously).

 

It's fair to say declarer didn't have the greatest start, the stiff diamond was led and declarer won and for no reason at all decided to try and cash the King of diamonds... and at trick three on a spade switch flew ace - as you do. In the end it drifted a couple of for an at the time 100% board for N/S

 

The more clueless part was in the post-mortem. West saw that another pair had made 3NT which was their top result at the time - and not realising that 3nt needs VERY favourable defence whereas 4H is makeable, said to her partner: "You shouldn't have mentioned your hearts. They're just as good in no trumps as a heart contract and we can make 3 no trump. 3 hearts was not a very good bid partner - you should have just bid 3 no trump

[billw55]

heheh, good one eagles, they are trying to result but doing that wrong too.

[barmar]

Maybe what she was avoiding saying was "Your hearts aren't good enough to make up for your declarer play."

[manudude03]

[hv=pc=n&s=s975hakj9dq84ckj6&w=sak62hq5dj73cqt75&n=sqj4ht863dakt62c3&e=st83h742d95ca9842&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1c1dp2np3nppp&p=c5c3cac6c4ckc7h3d4d3dad5d2d9dqd7d8djdkh2dth4s5s2d6s3s7s6hth7hah5hkhqh8s8hjcth6c2h9cqs4c8cjsksjc9s9sasq]399|300[/hv]

 

I'm playing in 3NT on the above auction. At trick 11, West needed to find a pitch from her top 2 spades and her top club and decides to throw the club away. After the board, she says "sorry partner, there was nothing I could do, I had to stop the spades from running". Luckily for her, she was doomed from the start once we got to 3NT, with the field playing in 1NT by West.

 

It was actually an interesting night where I played a few 3NTs despite having a major fit, and had to keep justifying it.

[barmar]

she was doomed from the start once we got to 3NT, with the field playing in 1NT by West.

Does the field play weak NT? Otherwise, I don't see how they're getting to 1NT.

[manudude03]

Does the field play weak NT? Otherwise, I don't see how they're getting to 1NT.

 

Yes, the field is playing a weak NT.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skhdcaq98&w=sq8hdacj6&n=shdqjc743&e=shdt7ckt5&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c2np3hp4hppp]300|300|

In eagles123's hand declarer can make 4♥, without finessing ♠s.

 

There are simpler ways, but, going for the Turner prize, declarer can play ♦A, ♥AK, ♠A, ruff a ♠, concede a ♥, win the ♥ return, and cash the last ♥, to reach this beautiful 5 card ending.

 

Now, East crosses to West's ♦A and leads a ♠, discarding a ♦, to endplay South, who must concede 2 of the last 3 tricks. [/hv]

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sK987hJ987dQcaq54&w=sa5432hA2dAK32cJ2&n=sQJThQDQJT987c9876&e=s6hQT6543d654ckT3&d=E&v=0&a=4hppp&p=DQ]399|300|

A "front-wash" variant.

[/hv]

[eagles123]

Had this one that made me chuckle the other night

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s32h83dqjt74cqj74&w=sk874haq7dk952ck5&n=sqj6ht542d6ct9862&e=sat95hkj96da83ca3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1h(4%20card%20Majors)p1sp3sp4np5s(regular%20blackwood)p7nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

West to East after - "3 Spades was a big overbid partner"

[Jinksy]

One from last week:

 

We bid to 4♥ my way, and after trick 1, I ask LHO what signals they're playing. She looks at me like I've dribbled on myself, and exclaims 'we're not playing no trumps!'