Misadventures In Manhattan

We’ve had some contenders for “stupid hand of the month” lately – thankfully, some of them were perpetrated by the opponents.

This one includes stupidity, but even more luck.

Love all, dlr E (rotated)

           ♠ A K
           ♥ -
           ♦ 10 9 5 4 3 2
           ♣ Q 9 8 7 4
♠ Q 10 6              ♠ 9 8 4 2
♥ K J 7 6 5 4 [ ]     ♥ Q 10 9
♦ -                   ♦ A Q 7 6
♣ A 6 3 2             ♣ J 10
           ♠ J 7 5 3
           ♥ A 8 3 2
           ♦ K J 8
           ♣ K 5

E    S    W    N
Pass 1♦   1♥   2♦
2♥   Pass 3♥   4♦
4♥   5♦   Pass Pass
Dble All pass

I really hate the 2♦ then 4♦ from my partner – I was raised in the Acol tradition, where you bid what you think you can make. In that style, he should bid some large number of diamonds immediately then keep quiet. Or, alternatively, make some other noise first (a cue-bid of hearts, perhaps) and then support diamonds. But you don’t say “I think all we can make is 2♦” and on the next round come out with “trick or treat”. All that achieves is confusing partner and giving the opponents more room to exchange information.

I’ve seen this sort of bidding from this partner before, so I expected the distributional hand, and that was why I chanced the sacrifice against their 4♥. Of course, I didn’t expect the two spade tricks that make the sacrifice a phantom.

From East’s demeanor, it was clear he held the trumps, so I ruffed the opening heart lead and played small to the ♦8. Then across with a spade and small to the ♦J. East was hanging on to the ♦AQ (nobody is quite sure why), so now I exited with the ♣K, noting the fall of the ♣J with some interest. Another heart from West (aagh! anything else is better) shortened dummy’s trumps enough that I could play winning clubs through East to trap the ♦Q - +550.

Two boards later, the same opponents were still brooding.
 
N-S vul, dlr W (rotated)

           ♠ 8 7
           ♥ 8
           ♦ A Q 7 6 5 4 2
           ♣ K 9 6
♠ K Q 6                ♠ A J 9 5 4
♥ J 3 2      [ ]       ♥ K Q 10 7 6 4
♦ 10 8 3               ♦ -
♣ J 10 7 3             ♣ A 5
           ♠ 10 3 2
           ♥ A 9 5
           ♦ K J 9
           ♣ Q 8 4 2

W    N    E    S
Pass 3♦   Dble 3NT
Pass Pass Dble Pass
Pass Pass

This was pretty much a tie for stupidity, but the opponents win the battle on the grounds of the result. The first round of bidding is actually sensible enough. I was just trying to stir the pot with the 3NT bid, planning to run to 4♦ when the water got too warm. But when East doubled again, the devil on my shoulder said, let it ride (obviously a stupid decision at the vulnerability). West didn’t want to bid 4♣, so decided to pass also, which might well have been the winning choice. However, she then didn’t lead a major suit. When the ♣6 held at trick one, I announced that I could see nine tricks. Our score of +750 compared favorably to the -450 that everybody else was racking up.

I don’t know what to say, really. Perhaps 4♦ from East would have got the message across that he really, really wanted to hear a major suit bid from West.

This one was from a session with Agent 99.

Love all, dlr W

            ♠ Q 5
            ♥ A K 8
            ♦ A K 9 5 4
            ♣ J 8 4
♠ A 3                   ♠ 10 9 8 7 6 4
♥ Q J 9 7 3 2 [ ]       ♥ 6
♦ J 8 7 2               ♦ Q 10
♣ 9                     ♣ A Q 7 2
            ♠ K J 2
            ♥ 10 5 4
            ♦ 6 3
            ♣ K 10 6 5 3

W    N    E    S
2♥   2NT  Pass 3NT
Pass Pass Pass

The rule of thumb I grew up with was: if you don’t have partner’s suit, you can’t lead it, if you only have one, you don’t want to lead it, and if you have two, you better have a good reason why not to lead it. So we started with two rounds of spades, declarer winning the ♠Q at trick two. Now declarer made her first mistake, leading the ♣4 to the ♣10. (Leading the ♣J makes a lot more sense, because from the bidding and play so far, both the ♣A and ♣Q rate to be in front). Crossing back to ♥A, she tried the ♣J next, but it’s too late. I rose with the ♣A to clear the spades, and she’s in deep doo-doo. Back to the ♦A to lead the ♣8, but I still had ♣Q7 surrounding it. In dummy for the last time, she now led a second diamond and then hesitated forever. The mistake that wins the prize: she tried the double finesse of the ♦9. I now tabled my hand, for down three.

Actually, at IMPs, she might have an argument that the finesse is correct play. But at matchpoints, it must be correct to take the top winners and settle for down one. The contract is not outrageous, so there is a chance she would have company at -50. There was nobody else at -150.