If I ever write a book or column (aimed at the beginner or intermediate level, presumably) it would be titled “Don’t Take That Trick!”

Hi Slar,

At least to me, being a professional bridge player should mean, in addition to getting paid to play, possessing a superior knowledge of exactly what happens when honors (often including the nine) need to be covered, all hands need to be counted during the play, and the pros and cons of popular conventions along with an inherent love of the game and its competition, showing beyond doubt the enthusiasm necessary to succeed.

Anything less should take away the respect which normally goes along with special knowledge of a particular enterprise.

Very simply, end plays, from time to time, usually occur from making the “hated” enemy have to lead first and third to a particular trick rather than the advantaged second and fourth which comes from receiving rather than leading.

If you agree, and then decide to write that book, do not forget to preface your point by carefully defining the above. Although in a bridge school or in a normal course of events with bridge being an optional course to take, the reasons why and how tricks are developed should be available to be learned early rather than late. Without which, the student will continue to remain in a quandary about how to manufacture extra and often key tricks which make the difference between success and failure for so many close contracts.

That and many other positive innovations need to be created in order to thrust bridge as a means to better understand many complications which arise randomly in just living life.

Good luck, whether or not you are serious or just merely showing a bit of frustration.

I want to read that book! My approach: see how many are “on top”. Often you are one or more short. What weapons? Squeeze, end play, deception (false card) or banking on an unusual distribution (some basic statistics) or card placement (understanding that TOCM is lurking). Counting often helps. Also learning the psychology of reading opponents. What am I missing? A lot I am sure. This column helps with the subtleties, a lot of smart people out there!

Hi Joe1,

Your particulars appear more logical than most.

Obviously declarer’s play, defense and bidding all play their part in the end result.

However, your mentioning the subtleties of psychology and also the reading of opponents are often underrated in determining success,

Of course, COUNTING needs to be emphasized on every hand played, as long as you are not the dummy, on, of course, offense and defense.
To not do so on every hand you are involved (with the exception of claimers) leaves the door open for avoidable mistakes.

And also remember Joe1 that you are right on with realizing that there are a lot of smart bridge players out there, so the secret of beating them is to be as consistently good as possible on every hand. To do so requires immense discipline, but, I can assure you, that the result will be worth that effort.

And once one gets in a good bridge playing groove, it will be with you at all times, as long as you remain mentally tough enough.

Also do not sweat the small stuff with playing or defending less than perfect. As long as you and partner usually are on the right track together (give or take a small percentage different) you’ll accomplish enough to make both of you proud.

Good luck and TABLE UP!

Am I qualified to write the book today? Heck no. Does the book need to be written? I believe so. The one thing that has become clear to me is that over-eagerness to take tricks has led to the vast majority of my negative swings and that planning out the timing carefully is the one thing that is most likely to lead to positive swings. Even tonight I threw away a slam because I tried to ruff out the setting trick (~33%) instead of trying the ruffing finesse (~50%). If I can’t benefit from my own advice maybe someone else can.

Hi Slar,

Although obviously I am not privy to watching you play nor have I any preconception of your hand by hand analysis or your results, but typically we are usually not the best judge of our own game.

Taking relatively inferior lines, but nothing outrageous, will often not take many matchpoints away, but your attitude needs to adopt a more positive approach.

When you attempted to ruff out the setting trick, rather than the better percentage play of just a finesse, that alone is mostly run of the mill, but dwelling on it will tend to do much more damage to your self-esteem, which, at least to me, begins the confidence all winning players must feel, otherwise there will be frequent trouble between partners usually followed with no good ending.

At this point in your development just chill out and work on your own partnership in order for better bidding and partnership defense.

It would be ridiculous for me to ask you to not worry about your score and how you finished, since everyone in that room is interested in their finish, but for future success, your score today has no bearing on what your partnership can achieve if you concentrate only on that.

All I can assure you is that playing bridge is about the best mental exercise anyone can do, and the game itself, although filled with ups and downs, will never ever, in the long run, be a disappointment.

However, the road to success demands total concentration and if only one trait will do it, that would be simply, discipline. You need to get your captaincy situations down pat and never violate them, although you will be severely tempted to do just that.

You show me a superior player and I’ll show you one who needs a compelling partner in order to get the job done. That is just the way it is, so try the above, add your own twists, as long as they are not just sloth, and go with it.

Then let me hear from you, but please do not mention how you did in the last duplicate. It is just NOT IMPORTANT! However after a couple of years of showing that discipline, on every hand, you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Watch the news on television, or you may learn the information on-line
instead of shopping for newspaper.