Bobby,

You mentioned 5 different holdings in Diamonds that were covered. At the expert level, do you really see all 5 in practice? Or, do you realize that this option covers more of the likely holding than that option?

Hi Ken,

Bridge learning over time is similar to driving a car and even better illustrated by learning to ride a bicycle, “once learned never forgotten”.

At a certain level of bridge experience one doesn’t usually count the exact numbers of winning vs not so combinations, but rather instead just (by feel) jump to the right (or very close) percentage advantage and then immediately (if not sooner, refer back to the bidding, opening lead choice and/or defense up to the time for the right decision). Like brushing one’s teeth in the morning, doing it without much thought, but fully in the knowledge of not ever being thoughtlessly careless.

Yes, like any successful endeavor, good habits need to be formed, especially when the stakes go from leisure time to deadly serious.

Playing bridge for fun is an entirely different enterprise and my guess, why our beautiful game was created. Your reference to diamonds rather than spades is proof of that and never, never, never to even be slightly criticized, but rather to be taken in stride, since what difference could it possibly make.

BTW, the above is not to imply that high level bridge is anywhere near error-free. Far from it and during a normal session of say 26 boards, I would consider it an outstanding accomplishment if I held my mistakes to only ten+, when so-called errors refer to all bidding choices, opening leads, the exact order of playing cards while declarer and defense considering helping partner with the exactly right card played (and remaining actively ethical while doing it), while attempting the opposite while defending (not with being ethical but by playing precisely the correct card) with both following suit and discarding, and, not to be taken lightly, getting the most from partner by handling him psychologically in just the right way (sometimes the most difficult task of all).

Aren’t you glad you asked?

Good luck and gave me time to rant.

I believe Our Host is being a smidge over-modest.

🙂

I am confident he sees faster and makes fewer mistakes than he allows.

For example, in this hand there are at least 3 other factors he has left out, but which all point to the column line:

1) Leading small spade from Board preserves the 9 from a cover, which improves the odds somewhat.

2) A small to the 9S increases the chance that the necessary early spade trick is conceded to West, not East, preserving the diamond suit from early attack.

3) Should the 9S win and the AS have West show out, the Board retains a spade tenace and diamonds have STILL not been broached, letting declarer try for tricks elsewhere, like 3-3 clubs.

Number of Mistakes?
Moving down from top expert level to typical club level…
…here’s a quote from the last revision of Dorothy Hayden Truscott’s Bid Better Play Better. She says:
” The average player probably makes about one hundred errors in the bidding and play during an afternoon of bridge. Fortunately for his self-esteem, he will recognize only ten percent of them”.

Hi Jim2,

Thanks mightily for coming to my aid.

However, keep in mind that I have a team, all times at least 2 and often 3 or more who spot errors with the original effort, before it goes to press, of course, limiting the number of glitches our challenging game is capable of causing.

Fortunately that team is both bridge loving and conscientious enough, to suffer when uncompromising great analysts like you, can offer something superior.

To call you and more than several others worthwhile friends, is vastly understating your collective due. However in truth, my estimate of playing or bidding less than the exact right card or bid at any one time must add up to 13 times on a diminishing plateau (tricks) plus an average of three or four times 26 hands played, subtracting the 1/4 of the time one is dummy.

To quote you, the above results in a number which might hurt your head (or anyone else’s) for the mere chance of choosing one of many alternatives on a consistent basis. Also keep in mind that even in playing equals if one possesses both QJ or J10 one will likely be superior to the other, although to determine such, often it would have to be thought out but unethical for one to take more than 1 second or so to do.

Please forgive my generalized conditions, likely exaggerated to some extent, but I do think bridge does lend itself to a myriad of tiny mistakes, which very likely will go unnoticed until, BINGO, any one of which, might cost a major negative result.

However, do not think for one minute, that I do not appreciate what I hope that what you said. is at least on a 50% percentage that you were no less than 100% right.

Finally, I have no doubt that, after reading, your head is still hurting, but if it is any comfort, so is mine.

Hi Clarksburg,

Well quoted and equally well said, except likely 100 is an underbid and ” recognizing 10% of HIS errors” is a serious overbid.

And furthermore, no sexist, I, but instead perhaps masochistic.

I think that it was Charles Goren that said, “You can play bridge for the fun of playing or the fun of winning. But not for both.”

Hi Ken,

If Charley said that about bridge, I wonder how he would have described poker or blackjack?

Probably the same, except for the fun of playing part.

BWTA, my (novice) experience is that double conveys more information. Given W pre empt, N is likely to have numbers in H or S, and given 2 passes and the pre empt, points are fairly evenly distributed, i.e. pard has some. So why not double first, hope for H or S response, and go from there? Keep 3-4 H in play. 3 S takes away pard having 5 or even 6Hs and possible H contract.

Joe1 –

I am not Our Host.

With that typed, I share the misgivings expressed in the BWTA answer but also lean towards 3S.

You see, the chance that pard is 3-3-4-3 or 3-3-3-4 is very real, and disaster may be waiting. Even 3-4-3-3 might go very badly in hearts.

The absence of a 4D raise hints that the opponents do NOT have a big diamond fit. This suggests pard may have 2 to 4 diamonds, which reduces more than a little the chance that pard has five or more hearts. Thus, the best chance of a fit at the three level is spades. Also, spades may play better in a 5 – 2 fit (esp if pard has a good doubleton behind East) at the 3-level than 4 clubs might in a 5-3 fit.

Hi Joe1 & Jim2,

Jim, even the consideration of you not being the official host doesn’t prevent you from answering, since, by doing so, is usually straight to the point and even more importantly, directly in the main stream of being what most of us will think is surely the best percentage action.

While Joe1 was giving his considered opinion on what he thought best, it is likely that his future experience will guide him to a more likely realistic viewpoint on what partner is more likely to hold and thus head toward, on balance, a better result.

Nothing proved, since to do so, is an impossible practicality, leaving all three of us only to ponder and ask and tell what the three of us,, with perhaps more to help decide, what bid (or, for that matter, pass) might work out best.

In any event Jim, you are hereby promoted to Jim3, with all its added advantages (TBD) but still should continue to be known by your former name, Jim2, if only to not lose all the respect you have justifiably earned and thus be recognized immediately.

BTW Joe1, The number of total trumps held by the side declaring the hand, especially at the 3 level and above needs to reach at least 8 (except on rare occasions), otherwise sometimes big trouble results leading to what could be an embarrassing result, meaning starting out with 5 instead of doubling and taking a bigger risk on how your partner’s hand is distributed would likely be decided by qualified high-level players as prudent.