An efficient defense - d*** it (corrected bidding)

[jcreech]

Dlr: South
Vul: None

          North
            KJ6
            AT62
            J7
            T932

West                    East
  T82                   A9754
  954                   Q
  T95423              AQ8
  J                       A876

          South
            Q3
            KJ873
            K6
            KQ54

Auction:
South   West    North     East     
  1         P      4       Dbl
    P          P        P

This was an unmitigated disaster.  It started when I could not remember whether we played 3 or 3 as the four-card constructive raise, so I took a flyer at game.  I have made worse bids, but who would have anticipated the consequences.  If had mad the proper bid, we probably would have still been in game, but undoubled.

Although I could guess that West might double, I never dreamed that East would pass with a near Yarborough and an unshown 6-bagger, AND that it would be right!

If partner had dropped the K or Q on the opening lead, there is a slim chance that East would have switched to another suit.  I doubt it, since switching to the A would have brought discouragement, and the was the only other reasonable continuation.  So the defense efficiently took the first six tricks, with West scoring all three trump.

When I looked at the “traveler,”  it was an interesting list of results.  One shared my fate, three played in spades (from 3 making to 5 doubled down 2), the rest played in hearts (from 3 to 5).  There were three that played in game making – one with a spade lead and continuation, one with a club lead with a spade shift plus continuation, and the last was a club lead with a diamond shift and continuation.  C’est la bridge.

[kenberg]

An interesting hand.  A small correction, I think you have the bidding diagram wrong, it shows N rather than S opening 1 and !W rather than E doubling.  But that's easy enough to imagine.

Some thoughts:

Nine tricks in spades could be hard to get (Gib agrees with me!).  The diamonds can be established so that W takes three tricks in spades, five diamonds and one club. That's nine tricks. But timing could get tricky.

And LOTT seems to be way off here. NS have nine hearts, EW have eight spades so LOTT says there should be a combined total of 17 tricks from a NS heart contract and an EW spade contract. But NS can be held to seven tricks (as you found out!) and EW can be held to eight, for a total of 15. Of course LOTT looks at double dummy play, and that often is very different than actual results.

I don't usually play Bergen, either reverse or original. I have no great reason for this, although the one that came up with you is a part of it. Some people play 3 as the constructive raise, others play the reverse form so 3 is the constructive raise.  Some play Bergen on over a double, some people play it off. Some people play it on opposite a third hand opening, some play it off, using some form Drury. Often on BBO there is not time to sort all of this out and so I just say forget it.  If playing Bergen, the reverse form might be better on this hand. After 1 - 3 then, perhaps, S could call 3 which I think should be "Well, maybe we belong in 4, maybe not" after which N, with a minimum (at best) 3 call could sign off in 3 . We are missing three aces and there are still some other issues. But again, I am saying what I think 3 should mean after a constructive 3 but no doubt there are other views. There is the age old observation:  "In any conversation there is what I meant to say, there is what I did say, and there is what you understood me to say, and they are often three different things".


W/o Bergen, I might well settle, as N, for a raise to 2 . But the T might inspire me to try 3 .  I suppose that at the tables where a spade contract was reached, it began 1 - Pass - 2 - 2 .  If NS still end in hearts at some level I can imagine W then leading a spade instead of his stiff club.

Bridge is interesting because often there are a great many choices, each with merit, each with defects.

Anyway, an interesting hand.