Unlucky, or should we do better?

[AL78]

All but one managed to do better.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sajhakj83d65cqj93&w=sq7643hq9daj4ca74&n=s82ht2dkqt83ckt62&e=skt95h7654d972c85&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1h1sdr3cp3sp3nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

I was North. The opponents were playing an odd convention where redouble shows spade support (West is very elderly and it is his system that he is not going to change). The redouble wasn't alerted. I thought that if partner has enough to jump respond, I have just enough to go for game, so we end up in 3NT. This goes two off for a joint bottom, and we lose a heart (why not take the finesse?), four spade tricks and two aces. Only one other pair was in 3NT-2, everyone else was in a NT or club partscore NS, or a spade contract EW (going off).

[Cyberyeti]

If the redouble isn't alerted, you have a case to go to the director if you didn't enquire before bidding 3N, as you would probably expect partner to have 3 or even 4 spades without one, which makes a huge difference (consider 10x/10xx). N's 3♠ is hugely optimistic with a correct explanation, I think he should bid 4♣ which you pass.

[AL78]

If the redouble isn't alerted, you have a case to go to the director if you didn't enquire before bidding 3N, as you would probably expect partner to have 3 or even 4 spades without one, which makes a huge difference (consider 10x/10xx). N's 3♠ is hugely optimistic with a correct explanation, I think he should bid 4♣ which you pass.

 

I was the director, and that never occurred to me, both of us assumed the redouble was natural, something like values but no spade support. I only found out after the round was over when I expressed surprise to East at the redouble with four spades, and he told me their agreement. I didn't think about the lack of an alert and any possible damage our way as a a result, I just assumed it was either bad luck or my bidding misjudgement.

[FelicityR]

Just in my humble opinion, it is always tempting to bid 3NT with the South cards even with the opponents' ♠ intervention but you know immediately that you're going to be on the back foot on a ♠ lead, so settling for the ♣ fit and a part score looks less dangerous.

 

A bit unlucky I feel, but if you were given the right explanation for the XX instead of assuming it - the opponents are bidding at adverse vulnerability so working out the total high card points around the table given your own hand and your partner's - East is very, very unlikely to have 10+ HCPs so XX must mean something else, namely ♠ support [Even though that is odd way of bidding as you rightly say]

[barmar]

I don't see why the East hand should be unexpected after an unalerted redouble. If it's natural it means you think partner will make 1♠, so it should suggest support and/or values. East's values are minimal, but 4-card support makes up for that.

 

There was a thread a few years ago about what the redouble should mean, and Rosenkranz was popular:

 

https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/66138-redouble-after-a-negative-double/

 

But I think that meaning would be alertable, while this pair's meaning would not be.

[Zelandakh]

But I think that meaning would be alertable, while this pair's meaning would not be.

You have to be rather careful about such statements. Here neither XX would be alertable. You need a jurisdiction to be able to say what is alertable and what is not. Many jurisdictions do not allow for any doubles or redoubles to be alerted.

 

As far as what the meaning should be, I simply do not understand why Rosenkranz remains so popular when even Rosenkranz himself announced that it is inferior to reverse Rosenkranz (Guildenstern). The logical alternative to that is as a form of support redouble showing specifically Hx doubleton and some values.

[mikeh]

South overvalued his hand when he bid 3C. That spade holding has gone down in value on the auction. We assign values, such as 4 points for an Ace, not simply because the card may/will take a trick or stop a suit but also because, on average, high card winners help us promote smaller cards into length winners. Here, the auction suggests that we cannot expect to promote length cards in partner’s hand into winners. This is not because we didn’t bother asking about the redouble bu5 because west overcaller. Btw, I can’t understand why, when we think we have values for game, we’d assume that east did not have something in spades for the redouble. Even if it showed, say, only Hx, the fact that west overcalled is a very strong clue that we have only one stopper.

 

So South’s 16 count is not a good 16. I’d bid 2C, aware that I was at the high end of the range.

 

Now, as the cards lie east will probably bid 2S and now I can bid 3C.

 

As for north, 3S is way too optimistic. Again, the auction suggests that partner will have at most one spade stopper. Give South a better hand....say Ax AKJxx xx Axxx and game still has no play. Where are the tricks? What chance, realistically, is there that your side has 8 fast winners after winning the spade lead? When you have no aces, no fitting honour in hearts, and only 4 clubs, where are your tricks? Heck, give partner Ax AKxxx Jx AQJx, a prime 19, and 3N has no play

 

This seems to be a recurring theme. I don’t mean to pick on the OP (to the opposite: I commend him for posting hands), since I see similar mistakes all the time when I make a rare foray to the club or play in a sectional. The problem lies in not understanding that simply counting points is not a good way to bid. One has to constantly re-evaluate and, most of all, LISTEN to what the auction tells you.

[AL78]

This seems to be a recurring theme. I don’t mean to pick on the OP (to the opposite: I commend him for posting hands), since I see similar mistakes all the time when I make a rare foray to the club or play in a sectional. The problem lies in not understanding that simply counting points is not a good way to bid. One has to constantly re-evaluate and, most of all, LISTEN to what the auction tells you.

 

If there is a recurring theme as to why I regularly have lousy evenings I would like to know why, I've been trying to figure it out for much of the last three years, so feel free to "pick on me". The only thing I have found myself so far is I keep blowing the defence whenever I have to make a decision at a key moment. I seem to go through the information I have at the time and do the wrong thing, because either I have miscalculated, or I have lost one piece of information which would have steered me toward the best line. At the moment, I'm not sure what to do about this, it is possibly mental fatigue, sometimes loss of concentration (esp when opps are very slow), but until I can sort it out, I can forget ever being competitive at club level again.

[pescetom]

If there is a recurring theme as to why I regularly have lousy evenings I would like to know why, I've been trying to figure it out for much of the last three years, so feel free to "pick on me". The only thing I have found myself so far is I keep blowing the defence whenever I have to make a decision at a key moment. I seem to go through the information I have at the time and do the wrong thing, because either I have miscalculated, or I have lost one piece of information which would have steered me toward the best line. At the moment, I'm not sure what to do about this, it is possibly mental fatigue, sometimes loss of concentration (esp when opps are very slow), but until I can sort it out, I can forget ever being competitive at club level again.

 

One thing to ask yourself is how much you are playing now and how much you were playing when things were going better. I find that if I play too little I lack confidence in my judgement and if I play too much my judgement is poor. There is a sweet spot in the middle to aim for.

Another thing is if you are playing different systems (or the same system differently) with different partners. This takes a toll on your judgement which might not be apparent until you stop doing so, at least as an experiment.

[AL78]

One thing to ask yourself is how much you are playing now and how much you were playing when things were going better. I find that if I play too little I lack confidence in my judgement and if I play too much my judgement is poor. There is a sweet spot in the middle to aim for.

Another thing is if you are playing different systems (or the same system differently) with different partners. This takes a toll on your judgement which might not be apparent until you stop doing so, at least as an experiment.

 

 

If anything I am playing similar or a bit less than a decade or more ago. I used to play in some of the county competitions, but eventually gave up on that because it occasionally involved ridiculous amounts of travelling, or just ate into precious weekends (I would rather not play bridge on a beautiful warm sunny summer day). I do have different systems but the core difference between Acol and 5 card majors is not huge, I often would make the same bids with either system.

 

At my peak, I was only playing regularly with two partners, but playing more frequently with each. The first partner I picked up shortly after I joined the club in early 2003 was a very steady solid player, good card player, very sound bidding, and we gelled. We used to nearly always finish in the top third, and winning or at least in the top three regularly, and the club was stronger back then. With my current partners, I play once a month, and I sometimes do the wrong thing because my assumptions about their hand are wrong.

 

For example:

 

West (me)

♠KQ74

♥53

♦AK8

♣9842

 

5 card majors, weak NT

 

W N E S

1♣ 1♦ X 1♥

P P 2♦ P

2♠ P 3♠ P

?

 

I regret not bidding 1♠ over 1♥, but that is an example of a lapse of concentration. I thought partner had a big hand (game going) with spades, possibly with club support if I held a genuine suit, maybe 3♠ was setting the trump suit and inviting cue bidding if I had a good opener, so I bid 4♠. Not a success.

 

Partner held:

 

♠AJ63

♥T62

♦953

♣AQ7

 

I went one down, although there is a line to make it which I didn't spot (ruff the third heart high, play for a 3-3 club break with king onside, and the losing diamond goes away on the fourth club, another mental lapse). Despite my sub-optimal card play, I did expect a better hand than that in dummy, and don't understand why partner didn't just bid 1♠ instead of doubling.

 

There was another one the previous week where a different partner opened 3♣ (5-5 ♣+♦ weak) with an 11 count, which incited me to take a fantom sacrifice.

 

My strongest partner I do seem to do well with more often, and we won last time we played, however if I have an off evening, he can't carry me so we end up in the sub-50% zone.

 

One of my current partners is an enthusiastic novice who I am trying to help bring on.

 

I have taken it on board that some people think I don't bid aggressively enough, and that is why I defend 70+% of the time on average, so I've tried to increase my aggression. I may have swung the pendulum too far, and am being too aggressive in some situations.

[Zelandakh]

West (me)

♠KQ74

♥53

♦AK8

♣9842

 

5 card majors, weak NT

 

W

1♣

:blink:

 

Partner held:

 

♠AJ63

♥T62

♦953

♣AQ7

 

W N E

1♣ 1♦ X

:unsure:

 

:o :ph34r: :rolleyes:

[AL78]

:blink:

 

 

:unsure:

 

:o :ph34r: :rolleyes:

 

Sorry, I've got my systems and partners mixed up. With this partner we were playing strong NT, hence my 1♣ opening.

[Zelandakh]

Sorry, I've got my systems and partners mixed up. With this partner we were playing strong NT, hence my 1♣ opening.

In truth I think your system issue on this hand was not the opening but the response. Most pairs play X here to show at least 4-4 in the majors and of those that don't the next most popular method is probably for it to show 4+ hearts. My assumption would be that your methods are for X to show one or both 4 card majors an an immediate 1M to promise 5, Montreal style. That is just not an especially good method in a competitive auction although you would have still gotten this right if you were secure in the methods. The real point here is that, playing Standard, your partner could have responded 1♠ to give you a completely normal auction that you could not possibly have gotten wrong - you would raise to 2 and your partner would presumably make a game try that you refuse. Something along the lines of: 1♣ - (1♦) - 1♠; 2♠ - 2NT; 3♠.

 

This is one of the side-issues of playing non-Standard methods, you need to be secure not only in the conventions themselves but also the effects they have on the later auction. As long as you and your partner analyse and discuss the board after the session and decide on a scheme though, you can take the hand away as a simple learning opportunity that has made you stronger as a pair. On this hand you will probably want to discuss in particular the initial double, your subsequent pass and the 2♦ cue. The cue is presumably what caused you to think partner had a big hand. And maybe it should but that is something for you and partner to work out between you. How do you handle weak-INT-GF hands as Responder and how does Opener show extras? There is no 100% right answer, only agreements that work for you. Without agreements it is difficult to bid effectively, especially in competitive auctions, so this analysis and discussion is an important part of forming a good partnership, not to mention advancing your own understanding.

[hrothgar]

If there is a recurring theme as to why I regularly have lousy evenings I would like to know why, I've been trying to figure it out for much of the last three years, so feel free to "pick on me". The only thing I have found myself so far is I keep blowing the defence whenever I have to make a decision at a key moment. I seem to go through the information I have at the time and do the wrong thing, because either I have miscalculated, or I have lost one piece of information which would have steered me toward the best line. At the moment, I'm not sure what to do about this, it is possibly mental fatigue, sometimes loss of concentration (esp when opps are very slow), but until I can sort it out, I can forget ever being competitive at club level again.

 

Based on the hands that you have been posting, you appear to be playing against quite weak opposition.

I think that your skills are suffering as a result.

 

Get a good program, like WBridge or Jack and practice with this.

[AL78]

In truth I think your system issue on this hand was not the opening but the response. Most pairs play X here to show at least 4-4 in the majors and of those that don't the next most popular method is probably for it to show 4+ hearts. My assumption would be that your methods are for X to show one or both 4 card majors an an immediate 1M to promise 5, Montreal style. That is just not an especially good method in a competitive auction although you would have still gotten this right if you were secure in the methods. The real point here is that, playing Standard, your partner could have responded 1♠ to give you a completely normal auction that you could not possibly have gotten wrong - you would raise to 2 and your partner would presumably make a game try that you refuse. Something along the lines of: 1♣ - (1♦) - 1♠; 2♠ - 2NT; 3♠.

 

My initial assumption was the double showed both majors, but the following cue bid sounded like a strong hand. Partner had neither, to be honest I don't know where she got the double from, I would have bid 1♠ with her hand.

[KingCovert]

My initial assumption was the double showed both majors, but the following cue bid sounded like a strong hand. Partner had neither, to be honest I don't know where she got the double from, I would have bid 1♠ with her hand.

 

Well, while a basic one, 1♣-1♦-X is a special double. Some people just play double to show values, because they don't know any better. When, in fact, double is best used to show (or deny) shape, of course, depending on context the expected values will fluctuate. Think balancing doubles vs direct seat doubles. One of the important things about bridge is, and I can't speak as to whether this would apply to you, but certainly your partner on this hand: You don't understand any of your options (in terms of available bids) unless you understand all of them.

 

Some might disagree, but, you can't assert that you've chosen the correct line of bidding if you can't actually discern what's available and what they convey. Some would think that that is a high bar, but, ironically... Once you understand the principles behind why certain bids show certain holdings in situations, it completely organizes your agreements into an easier to remember structure.

[Zelandakh]

My initial assumption was the double showed both majors, but the following cue bid sounded like a strong hand. Partner had neither, to be honest I don't know where she got the double from, I would have bid 1♠ with her hand.

This is pretty fundamental and from sentence two it sounds like you and partner have not subsequently discussed the sequence. If you want to be proper bridge partners rather than just a semi-regular pick-up pair, it is important that you do discuss things like this and come to some shared understanding. That is actually more important than any feedback that BBF can give you. It might be that you can help to educate your partner on this auction, just as your partner might be able to help you on some others. In this way both of you grow as players individually and the partnership improves its understandings at the same time.