With 2 small spades today, isn’t that a warning sign against bidding on to 5H? With 3 you can expect partner to be short (although he is today) and with 1 or even 0 the losers are limited. Isn’t it all too likely that there are 2 spade losers?
Judgement in these positions is often very difficult and you can’t rely on mottos like “Leave the 5 level to the opponents”. The +300 available would have been enough for a 1 IMP win if I’ve calculated it right.
In terms of the play, not only does your suggestion pick up HQxxx with East but the bidding suggests spades are 6-4 so East is likely to be longer. The ultimate irony is that declarer actually judged the H lengths correctly with West having 3 but walked into a doubleton Q with East. Was he perhaps assuming that NS would be in 5H in the other room and was trying to duplicate the anti-%age line that the declarer there might take? Wheels within wheels as they say.
Regards,
Iain
bobbywolffJuly 23rd, 2023 at 6:37 pm
Hi Iain,
As always you make bridge players think when you create natural problems along the Yellow Brick road to the “Wizard”.
However, instead of signing thirty with “wheels within wheels” methinks it is only more of a “poker” situation much more than a scientific (figuring it out) challenge To amplify my judgment it seems to me, that even the tempo of possibly a relatively fast 5 hearts by me, may cause those specific opponents a glitch in trying to read the tempo, allowing us to defend 5 spades doubled, while at the same time, just guessing (much like the play) the
nessesity to make that contract, if left to play in it. That feature, with the blind hope of pushing the opponents a level higher might break the tie in favor of the bridge deceit your fast 5 heart decision might have allowed. BTW, those tempo breaks when random, should
never be ethically penalized, since the opponents must take the risk when trying to benefit from a normal enough “fast” response, as would be a much slower 5 hearts, if that bid
was made with a very unbalanced distribution (partner never sure what fast or slow means).
Yes, it gets complicated, but one thing is for sure, no one bridge player will ever be discussed as one of the world’s best, if and when, the opponents have a step up, because of his giveaway tempo, always so, no matter if he NEVER failed to take the correct percentage bid (always subjective) or play (not).
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
With 2 small spades today, isn’t that a warning sign against bidding on to 5H? With 3 you can expect partner to be short (although he is today) and with 1 or even 0 the losers are limited. Isn’t it all too likely that there are 2 spade losers?
Judgement in these positions is often very difficult and you can’t rely on mottos like “Leave the 5 level to the opponents”. The +300 available would have been enough for a 1 IMP win if I’ve calculated it right.
In terms of the play, not only does your suggestion pick up HQxxx with East but the bidding suggests spades are 6-4 so East is likely to be longer. The ultimate irony is that declarer actually judged the H lengths correctly with West having 3 but walked into a doubleton Q with East. Was he perhaps assuming that NS would be in 5H in the other room and was trying to duplicate the anti-%age line that the declarer there might take? Wheels within wheels as they say.
Regards,
Iain
Hi Iain,
As always you make bridge players think when you create natural problems along the Yellow Brick road to the “Wizard”.
However, instead of signing thirty with “wheels within wheels” methinks it is only more of a “poker” situation much more than a scientific (figuring it out) challenge To amplify my judgment it seems to me, that even the tempo of possibly a relatively fast 5 hearts by me, may cause those specific opponents a glitch in trying to read the tempo, allowing us to defend 5 spades doubled, while at the same time, just guessing (much like the play) the
nessesity to make that contract, if left to play in it. That feature, with the blind hope of pushing the opponents a level higher might break the tie in favor of the bridge deceit your fast 5 heart decision might have allowed. BTW, those tempo breaks when random, should
never be ethically penalized, since the opponents must take the risk when trying to benefit from a normal enough “fast” response, as would be a much slower 5 hearts, if that bid
was made with a very unbalanced distribution (partner never sure what fast or slow means).
Yes, it gets complicated, but one thing is for sure, no one bridge player will ever be discussed as one of the world’s best, if and when, the opponents have a step up, because of his giveaway tempo, always so, no matter if he NEVER failed to take the correct percentage bid (always subjective) or play (not).