BBO Discussion Forums: Qui Culpa? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Qui Culpa? You Be the Judge

#1 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,416
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2021-November-14, 04:45


Opening lead A. Table result 5-1 0%

My partner was scathing about my choice of 5C here at the North London Club this week. But I thought he should have just bid 3NT on the first round. He said that I should double 4D, as he thought it was 1100 even at adverse. I think declarer can get out for 800, but bidding 5C looked normal to me. I suggested that we had 10 clubs and they probably had 9 diamonds so we were not likely to get rich from 4Dx. He said "They were playing in a Moysian at the 4-level, and you didn't double them. Give me a break!"

Who was right?
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#2 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,416
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2021-November-14, 04:48

dupe
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#3 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,896
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2021-November-14, 05:06

S got done by a quality psyche, N's arguments are garbage, S "knows" he has a maximum of 2 but more likely 1 diamond.
0

#4 User is offline   DavidKok 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,234
  • Joined: 2020-March-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 2021-November-14, 05:09

Neither.

West got a psych in at a fortunate time, and you lost the board for it. It is reasonable for both of you to suspect partner is short in diamonds on the bidding, so 5 is safe. Neither side can bid any level of NT on the risk of EW running 6 diamonds.

Don't blame your partner for this. The opponents got you good. It happens.
0

#5 User is online   mw64ahw 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 939
  • Joined: 2021-February-13
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Bidding & play optimisation via simulation.

Posted 2021-November-14, 07:30

5 - N was unlucky with 3 losers off the top, but with 3, 3.5 quick tricks and a good majority of the points I would have preferred to double
0

#6 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,190
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2021-November-14, 19:08

IMO this should be a forcing pass sequence so it depends on how you define double. I played that double by opener here would show a hand interested in bidding on while pass showed a hand that preferred defending unless a subsequent double by partner was pulled and that became a slam try.

In this case I would pass showing a willingness to defend and partner should double looking at 3 diamonds.

Note that neither partner had to worry about what opps were doing. They based their decisions on their own hands and their FP methods.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
0

#7 User is offline   tolvyrj 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 2003-October-20

Posted 2021-November-14, 20:49

Obviously west.
1

#8 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,962
  • Joined: 2019-October-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE England
  • Interests:Bridge, hiking, cycling, gardening, weight training

Posted 2021-November-15, 03:14

Neither was right.

How were you supposed to know they were playing in a Moysian at the four level and so to know to double? If West had their bid, they could easily get out for -500 on some layouts where you have 6 on.

Why do you think your partner should have bid 3NT with no diamond stop and the opponents cashing the first six tricks (based on the bidding)?

When you have a disaster at the table, the objective should be to fix the mistake/misunderstanding, not the blame. All that does is fuel your ego, but ego won't reduce the chance of it happening again.

You both got duffed up by a psyche that worked. Deal with it and let it go.
0

#9 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,896
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2021-November-15, 03:53

View PostWinstonm, on 2021-November-14, 19:08, said:

IMO this should be a forcing pass sequence so it depends on how you define double. I played that double by opener here would show a hand interested in bidding on while pass showed a hand that preferred defending unless a subsequent double by partner was pulled and that became a slam try.

In this case I would pass showing a willingness to defend and partner should double looking at 3 diamonds.

Note that neither partner had to worry about what opps were doing. They based their decisions on their own hands and their FP methods.


I would agree with this if 3 was GF, it isn't, you could be looking at a minimum opening bid opposite a minimum limit raise where 4 is already one too many and there is no defence to 4. Our relevant meta agreement is that pass is forcing if below the level to which you've committed yourselves, in this case 4 so pass of 4 would not be forcing.
0

#10 User is offline   eagles123 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,831
  • Joined: 2011-June-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK Near London
  • Interests:Crystal Palace

Posted 2021-November-15, 13:30

I agree with others, W chose a great time to go rogue. It happens, move on.
"definitely that's what I like to play when I'm playing standard - I want to be able to bid diamonds because bidding good suits is important in bridge" - Meckstroth's opinion on weak 2 diamond
0

#11 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,190
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2021-November-15, 14:52

View PostCyberyeti, on 2021-November-15, 03:53, said:

I would agree with this if 3 was GF, it isn't, you could be looking at a minimum opening bid opposite a minimum limit raise where 4 is already one too many and there is no defence to 4. Our relevant meta agreement is that pass is forcing if below the level to which you've committed yourselves, in this case 4 so pass of 4 would not be forcing.

Agree that it depends on strength of openings and strength of limit or better responses.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users