Jan
30

Seven Good Points

Text message sent to Mr. Miyagi during a particularly disheartening game last week with a beginner (who’s been playing longer than me, go fig):

Just doubled the opps. in 3H and they made an overtrick in part because my p. overcalled on the two-level, vulnerable with 7 HCP…. so this must be what it’s like for you playing with me.

His response:

Oh, don’t get so down on yourself … you always have a good 7 when you make that bid.

So tonight, against our better judgement, MM and I headed off to the local bridge club and this was the very first board.

As we were removing the cards for the second board (and after he finally stopped laughing at my less than eloquent claim), MM caught my eye and mouthed the words, “Seven high card points?” I nodded. After the round, I followed him outside to bask in the 70° weather while we waited for the other tables to finish. I started the conversation, “It was a really good seven high card points.” He reminded me of the above text message which he claimed I’d taken offense at, if by offense he meant that I’d called him a cranky old man and told him to go drink some more bourbon, then yes. Still, it was a really good seven high card points.

As is typical of this bridge club, we played well and had an almost perfectly average game. But there were definitely some fun hands lurking around including a fair number of questionable 2/1 bids and a Jacoby 2NT raise on 4-3-3-3 and 12 HCP that was down one when MM found a slightly superior line to taking a club finesse. The club finesse works, the superior line doesn’t. And there was a particularly cute slam, still not sure how to bid it, but since seven doesn’t actually make (despite doing so at every single table) my lack of scientific bidding wasn’t an issue. Note the distribution in diamonds, MM was visibly annoyed at having to ruff so many in his hand before claiming, but claiming at this club is a tricky proposition unless you have nothing left in your hand save for aces and kings and trumps.

On the car ride home, he started back up again about my claim on the first hand, “It was like you were reading from a novel, ‘It was the best of times, it was the worst of times and I’m going to cross back to my hand by ruffing this and pitch the queen on the spade and then the other diamond on the other spade and then I’ll win my ace’ and the opponent was already putting her hand back in the board, conceding the tricks just so you would stop talking.” I laughed. The truth is claims might just be the worst part of my game (and that’s really saying something). For reasons I don’t fully understand, sometimes I have a really hard time putting into words what is so clear in my head. In retrospect this is a super simple claim, “I’m pitching two diamonds on my spades and then the board is good.” But when I tried to say this, it came out completely garbled. From now on I’m going to take the Mike Lawrence approach: just face my cards and say, “I’m not going to do anything stupid,” and hope like h_ll the opponents take my word for it, goodness knows my partners won’t.

Oct
31

Trick or Treat?

Halloween night finds me sitting with a giant bowl of candy, anxiously awaiting the arrival of trick-or-treaters. It seems fitting that I would be stuck with all the treats tonight, all the tricks were at the club last night.

This weekend the Kid and I are headed deep into Arkansas to play at a sectional tournament and we decided to pick up a couple of practice sessions at the local bridge club before the trip. When I first met him I was surprised to learn that he didn’t play at the club all that often. For one thing, there really isn’t all that much else to do around here and for another, he obviously loves bridge.

It was not until I moved here that I learned that there are Howell movements that go up past five tables. In fact, the directors here love to bust out the special guide cards for seven and eight-table Howells. The games are unbearably slow but you get to play a lot of boards and you get to play most everyone else, plus it’s only a two or three board sit out when there’s half a table.

Our first round was a bit rocky, the opponents bid up to 4♥ and went down one when I realized at trick two that our only hope of beating it was to take tricks in the trump suit and so resisted the urge to fly up with my ace in the hopes that my partner had the KJ doubleton, he did and it was off one. On the very next hand though I ran smack into a signal that I have missed before. We’re playing obvious shift on the opening lead, in the case of a singleton in dummy instead of just switching to suit preference, which is standard, we added the clause that a middle spot encourages while either a high or low is suit preference. Great idea, but you have to remember that is what is going on. I led an ace. He played the seven. (“The seven must be a middle spot, if only I knew what he wanted ….”) I shifted to a side suit. The switch in and of itself didn’t hurt us, but it gave my partner the wrong picture of the hand which led him astray later on and gave them an overtrick for a top. On the bright side, later on when my partner was the one on lead and the dummy hit with a singleton, I remembered to play a middle card to encourage.

The night wore on with hand after hand in which the opponents’ bad plays payed off while our good plays came to naught, but the stuff that nightmares are made of was yet to come. We sat down against a pair that are noted for being unpredictable. The Kid had already bemoaned the fact that the movement meant we’d almost certainly have to play them. On the first hand, my RHO was the dealer, we were vulnerable they were not and the auction went like this:

(P)-P-(1♣)-P-
(1♥)-1♠-(1NT)-P-
3NT!- All Pass

As he was entering the contract, North said to his partner, “Your hand must have been pretty good for a passed hand.” “It isn’t points, it’s trick taking ability,” she replied tersely. The Kid led a low spade and this was her “trick taking” dummy:

♠ x
♥ xxxx
♦ Axx
♣ Kxxxx

North stared at her as if she’d completely lost her mind. I probably had the same look on my face. I won my king, returned the nine, which the declarer covered with the ten and my partner won his ace. He returned a small spade which the declarer won with his queen. Then declarer went after the ratty clubs. He played a small club to the king, my partner dropped the jack which was really bad news because I was holding the T9 … so yes, the QJ dropped doubleton and so did the T9 which meant declarer took five clubs, two diamonds, a heart and a spade to make his 3NT contract with a combined 20 HCP while most of the field was in 3♣ making 4. My partner and I fumed. “Well, we needed a good hand,” South said.

On the next hand, both sides were vulnerable and I was the dealer with:

♠ Jxx
♥ J
♦ T98xxx
♣ xxx

Did I consider opening it 2♦? I admit that I did, but only very briefly.

P-(P)-1♥-(X)-
All Pass

Uh-oh. But on the bright side, half my points are in my partner’s suit. As it turned out, South had a 25 HCP hand and North had six hearts to the king. When the smoke cleared we were down 3 for -800 and they do not have a slam their way. The two of them started into this infuriating dialog, “Hearts was my suit I thought one heart doubled was the best spot we’d find.” “I had twenty-four high card points! What’d we get … two, five, eight .. eight hundred?” “There’s no slam our way.” “But I had twenty-four points!” (She can’t count.) “Doesn’t matter, there’s no slam.” “How many spades did you have?” “Even if we get to four spades it isn’t as good.” “What about clubs?” “There’s no slam.” And just when I thought they’d finally gotten the passive-aggressive gloating out of their system South spoke up again, “So that was eight hundred?” I was ready to test the club’s zero tolerance policy, but instead I picked up the next hand.

My partner opened 1NT (he was a point shy, but what’s one point between bridge partners?). I had another 2 HCP hand, but with a five card spade suit and we got out safely for down one in 3♠. I’ll admit I fled the table before I lost my cool and left the Kid to approve the last score. I get why he doesn’t play there more often.

Not all of the weirdness went so badly for us. I finally got a good hand:

♠ Axxxx
♥ Ax
♦ ATx
♣ AKJ

We were vulnerable and our opponents were not. My LHO was the dealer and opened a preemptive 2♦. Not surprisingly, my partner passed. Then my RHO bid 3♣ which was alerted as not being forcing. I doubled which got passed back around to my RHO who then bid 3♦. Now I bid 3♠ and my partner raised me to four.

My LHO led a club and much to my surprise the dummy hit with five clubs to the ten. Clearly something was amiss here. I won my RHO’s queen and started pulling trump. I wasn’t surprised when they broke 4-1, but I was surprised when my LHO (the opener) was the one who had four. As it turned out, my LHO had only two clubs, Qx. The club lead turned out to be rather advantageous though and the only trick I lost was to the jack of trump. The only explanation I can come up with for his 3♣ bid is that he wanted to keep us from finding our eight card club fit. He had the right idea, but the wrong black suit; a 3♠ bid in the same vein would have done them much better.

Oct
08

Miscellany

When I saw the trailer for the upcoming film Oz: The Great & Powerful, there was one particular line that stuck out for me: “Kansas is full of good men. I don’t want to be a good man. I want to be a great one.” Of course, for my purposes I’ve tweaked it a bit, “Bridge clubs are full of good players. I don’t want to be a good bridge player. I want to be a great one.” There’s just one problem, I have no idea how to do that. As far as I know getting sucked up by a tornado and transported to a magical land in Technicolor is precisely the way to go about it.

One of the directors at the club is particularly energetic and quite keen on getting me to play Fantunes with him. He overheard a conversation in which the woman I’ve been playing with and I were discussing the myriad of conventions we’re playing (our system really is everything including the kitchen sink at this point). Anyway he asked me if I liked conventions and I shrugged (quite the understatement, I know) and then he asked what I knew about Fantunes and I noted that I’d spent some time watching Fulvio Fantoni and Claudio Nunes on the Vugraph recently and shortly thereafter had ordered a copy of “Fantunes Revealed”. He went off to grab his copy of it and now everytime I see him he wants to know if I’ve read it yet, even though I explained that my copy is, at the moment, in a shipping container somewhere between here and New Jersey.

Today I wasn’t able to play because when my partner and I showed up we learned that it was a “mentor” games and all pairs had to comprise one Life Master and one Non-Life Master. I immediately thought of one of my regular partners back in New Jersey and how we’d have likely swept such an event (some NLMs aren’t really, if you know what I mean). It’s probably a really good idea to have such a program, I was just disappointed that I didn’t get to play because there weren’t any spare NLMs running around, though the idea of me being the “mentor” is kind of laughable anyway.

But not everyone would feel that way. On Thursday I arrived home from work and when I checked my mail I found a letter from one of my bridge students. The letter was so sweet and unexpected that it brought tears to my eyes, no one would be more surprised by that occurrence than me. I’m still sort of shocked that I liked teaching bridge as much as I did. I should get back to it, and I have been giving some thought to a novice class. I’d much rather teach off my own notes than be tied to the series of books that the local club uses so perhaps I should see if one of the local community colleges is interested in it as a continuing education class.

Sep
23

A Rebid Dilemma

From what I’ve gathered the local club is not actually very good about finding partners for people; they’ll make an effort, of course, but there’s nothing close to a guarantee. On Friday when discussing my plans for the weekend, I mentioned that I was going to try to get a partner for at least one bridge game and my boss took the matter into his own hands and hooked me up with his wife. When I spoke to her yesterday on the phone to finalize our plans for today, she invited me over to their house for dinner and an “individual duplicate” bridge game last night. People really are very friendly around here.

This particular game of individual duplicate bridge was basically Board-A-Match scoring because there were only two tables. It was made more interesting by the fact that the players were all pretty sophisticated bidding wise and so even though an announcement was made that we were playing Standard American Yellow Card (not to be confused with “Standard American”) other conventions crept in quickly. On the second hand of the night, my partner made a Lebensohl bid of 2NT hoping to coax me into bidding 3♣ so he could pass — only Lebensohl isn’t part of SAYC so I passed and only made it because I happened to be holding the AKx across from his Qxxxxx of clubs. I’d rather be lucky than good.

Later in the night, playing with woman with whom I played today. I got confronted by one of the ugliest rebid situations I’ve seen in a very long time:

I opened the bidding in first seat, vulnerable against not, with this:

♠ KQJx
♥ AT
♦ Txx
♣ KJxx

(In the future I’m opening this hand 1NT — regardless of whether I’m playing a weak NT or not.)

The bidding went as follows with the opponents silent throughout:

1♣-1♥-
1♠-2♦-
?!?

I made an assumption here that her bid was meant as fourth suit forcing which actually makes my troubles worse because I can only guess at the existence of a diamond stopper so bidding NT is out. I refuse to rebid either of my four card suits and a 2♥ bid here would show three card support. I made the only bid left which was a raise to 3♦ hoping that she would take this by process of elimination as looking for NT.

1♣-1♥-
1♠-2♦-
3♦-4NT-
5♦-6♦

It didn’t end very well, we were off two. Fortunately for us at the other table they ended up in 4♥ also down two. Clearly from the look on her face three diamonds to the ten was not her idea of support. It’s a miracle she agreed to play with me again today.

This afternoon went pretty well, though there were the usual kinks when playing with a new partner. Still we’ve decided to make a regular date to play on Thursday nights which pleases me greatly because she’s a terrific player with a very sharp mind.

Awhile back Yin had mentioned that his professional partner accepted all invitations when he had a singleton and you know me, I love any excuse to bid so I’ve been following that pretty consistently. Today I think I may have finally hit the limit of that rule with this hand:

♠ Axxx
♥ Axxxx
♦ x
♣ Axx

Both sides vulnerable I opened this hand in second seat — rebid problems be d_mned, I’ve never met three quick tricks I didn’t like.

(P)-1♥-(2♣)-3♣-
(P)-4♥- All Pass

Turns out the limit on the hand is three, I managed to make two when I misread the opening lead of the J♣ — a mistake I should have avoided had I counted.

This was the dummy:

♠ QT
♥ QJx
♦ Axxx
♣ Qxxx

If I put the queen of clubs on it, the queen will hold because the opening leader is leading from: KJTxx. The only way that not playing the queen would have been right was if my RHO held the singleton king which isn’t likely. But, of course, I’m still not making 4.

Jun
08

In the Dark

The Mad Scientist made it a point early on to tell me that his world view is, at least in part, formed by the idea that if he expects the worst he will not be disappointed. I once exceeded his expectations. It took days for him to recover from the shock, but I digress. There is one chink in his pessimistic armor though, and that is, he expects there to be a fundamental fairness, which is to say, he expects the worst for others as well and when the universe chooses to smile on someone who should know better, TMS is spurred to outrage.

We started against the guys who were easily the best East-West pair playing today. On the first board our methods kept the strong hand concealed, but also kept my LHO on lead with a singleton across from Axxxxx. Not many people with the RHO’s hand were going to find that ace lead and so we were held to four when on any other lead, five is relatively easy (though it turned out my LHO also had the ace of trump, so conceivably we could always be held to four). Good methods=bad result, this is totally in keeping with TMS’s world view.

On the second board, our opponents had an uncontested auction:

1♦*-2♣-
2♥-3♥-
4NT-5♦**-
5♠***-5NT****-
7♣-7♥

*Either diamonds or a big NT (opens 1♣ with 16+ HCP)
**1 keycard in hearts
***Do you have the queen of hearts?
****Yep.

Prior to making his opening lead TMS asked for explanations all around. I myself had been curious about the 5♠ bid. TMS led a spade and the dummy came down with:

♠ KQx
♥ AQTx
♦ T
♣ Jxxxx

The declarer played the king and I played my ace which the declarer ruffed. See here’s the thing about this auction, when the declarer got the response of one key-card he couldn’t possibly know if it was the ace of hearts or the ace of the spades. Once the trump was pulled the hand was essentially a lay down, though I noticed that some people only made six. Not surprisingly they were the only pair to bid seven despite an opening bid that violated their system and bidding Blackwood with a void. TMS was livid. Honestly, I expected this pair to give bad boards to every North-South pair they played against — though granted probably through more conventional methods. Meanwhile, TMS was cursing up a blue streak and his outrage carried on for the rest of the game. Unfortunately for him, he’s really funny when he’s angry at someone else. I tried to keep my snickering to a minimum lest he start to notice all the bad plays I was making (didn’t work, he still noticed — but he remained angrier about that auction than anything I managed to do today).

The frustration at no longer being able to see the results at the other tables was minor by comparison. I appreciate that the director wants to keep the game moving faster. I also appreciate that it was noticeably quieter than usual. But it’s a club game, not a tournament, and most of us really enjoy probing the wound by examining what other people have done on the boards. Also, I noticed when looking at our matchpoints for the day (more wound probing) that there is no longer any way to tell what contracts the other pairs were in; while this information was being displayed on the Bridgemates®, it is not displayed on either the club’s result page nor the ACBL’s result & hand record page so one must take a best guess based on the scores themselves — a minor inconvenience perhaps, but still I’d much prefer that the games be kept moving the old fashioned way with a clock and the swift application of late plays followed by penalties.

May
08

Your cards have no clothes.

The bridge gods continued their campaign of messing with my head today. This afternoon when I played with the Mad Scientist, he got decent cards; we both did in fact and a good time was had by all.

I went back for this evening’s game which I ended up running. Luckily I had come prepared for that eventuality by wearing my “Now Panic and Freak Out” t-shirt. I managed to stay relatively calm even as I set up a truly terrible Mitchell movement that included a North-South sit-out, a skip and a “revenge round”. But the cards were awful; one hand really did freak me out just a little. I opened 1♦ in first seat vulnerable with:

♠ AJxx
♥ xx
♦ AKQTxx
♣ K

My high hopes for the hand were dashed when my opening bid was followed by three passes. The opening lead was the queen of clubs. The dummy came down with a singleton diamond and no card higher than an “8″ and only one of those. Even TMS has never devised a dummy quite that disappointing.

Earlier in the evening, my partner had wisely chosen to leave me in 2♠ with a void in spades, but at least on that hand he had the ace of clubs and the KJT9xx of hearts (a suit in which I was void). I was able to make five for a top when the lead was a small heart and I played the jack followed by my RHO playing his ace.

On the hand in question with the sub-Yarborough for a dummy I made my one for a good score when I won five diamonds and two spades (unfortunately for me, my RHO followed the Rabbi’s Rule on the opening lead making the hand just that much more panic-worthy).

Apr
05

Tolerating Fools Gladly

The room we were playing in felt like a sauna, two boards a round was going even slower than usual and tempers were flaring all around. My partner and I were defending 2♠X when the table next to us erupted in chaos. When the director arrived what may have been a simple revoke or lead out of turn (I never did figure out what the initial director call was for) turned ugly as accusations flew. So even as we approached the four-card ending that would determine if we were +200 or -670, it was impossible to fully concentrate on the problem at hand. I’m not saying that had that argument not erupted at that moment that we would have figured it out, but under the circumstances we had a snowball’s chance in h_ll of doing so. When the little old lady who was playing the hand made a point of thanking my partner for doubling the contract, we almost had a director call of our own. (Confidential aside to Ida: You should just be glad that my stiff trump turned out to be the ten. You won’t be so lucky next time we double you.)

All ACBL-sanctioned tournaments and many bridge clubs that award ACBL masterpoints profess to maintain a “Zero Tolerance Policy” toward:

  • Badgering, rudeness, insinuations, intimidation, profanity, threats, or violence.
  • Negative comments concerning opponents’ or partner’s play or bidding.
  • Constant and gratuitous lessons and analyses at the table.
  • Loud and disruptive arguing with a director’s ruling.

I’ve been guilty of most of those things; I’d venture to say that a majority of bridge players have violated this policy at one time or another.

What’s interesting to me is the fact that I have only very rarely seen the policy enforced despite the name and the frequency with which it is violated. The policy itself clearly states that, “Warnings are strongly discouraged and will be given only when there is no clear violation or in cases where the facts cannot be determined.”

It’s possibly that there is some unintended consequence of this policy that has made enforcement untenable, but I suspect that most directors haven’t tried actually enforcing the “Zero Tolerance Policy” as written. How refreshing it would be for a director to approach the troublesome pair(s) and immediately start taking away matchpoints a quarter at a time in lieu of the usual scolding, lecturing and, worst of all, arguing with the offenders. Bridge players are not a reasonable lot; hitting them where it hurts is likely the only way to get through to them.

Mar
24

Kaboom

The preemptive nature of playing a weak (12-14 HCP) NT was working like a charm yesterday, keeping the opponents out of their fits on hand after hand that belonged to them. There was only one small problem: the reason it was their hand was because the Mad Scientist kept turning up with nothing and I kept going down too many because the opponents weren’t actually making any games their way. It seemed like every hand I opened in NT ended up in a zero.

Throw in a handful of other bidding mistakes and the fact that even when I did manage to make a contract, the result was mediocre at best, and it was the worst game I’ve had in a long time. As readers of this ‘blog will know, that’s really saying something.

Medic!

Lately there has been some grumbling at the club about the system that TMS and I are playing. The vast majority of the complaints are coming from experienced players and really amount to little more than, “You’re doing this to confuse us!” What follows is addressed to them:

Just how did you think the bidding in this game evolved?

Perhaps when the bridge gods tire of watching us wander around in the desert of “standard” bidding, they bless us with new agreements that rain down from on high?

Or maybe when two bridge players love each other very much … and nine months later a stork appears with a bundle of new conventions dangling from its beak?

Everyone knows that bidding is the part of this game that changes and that it does so almost constantly. It’s a language and like language it evolves. The fact is that “Standard American” isn’t the same as it was ten years ago and it won’t be the same ten years from now. You can wax nostalgic all you want for the good ol’ days of the Goren Bidding System, but that dog won’t hunt. There’s a reason almost no one in duplicate plays that way any more and hasn’t in many years. Any reasonable bridge player can see that while the bidding has become more complex over time, it has also vastly improved.

Since clearly, you’ve never given this any thought, I’ll enlighten you. The way in which bidding systems improve is that there are always a handful of stone-cold weirdos out there playing something new and strange. Some of the things they play will work better than what everyone else is doing, but most of them won’t. Eventually the good players will stop laughing just long enough to cherry pick what’s working and incorporate it into their own systems.

And, for the record, as demonstrated by yesterday’s results, this “crazy” system (which isn’t actually all that crazy, it’s mostly just transfer bids — you do know how to compete over a transfer bid, don’t you?) is much more likely to bite us in the ass than it is to damage you; so when you see us getting into yet another muddled sequence your best bet is just to kick back, relax and collect your matchpoints. You may even catch a glimpse of the future.

Mar
20

Snipe Hunt

Last night I decided to pick up a partner at the “no stress duplicate” game, which in practice is a beginner/intermediate game, but with no real limitations on who can play. There are a couple of life masters who occasionally show up, and the general agreement is that we will play with a beginner.

When I first started playing bridge, I would spend all week looking forward to Monday nights, because I was too nervous to try any of the daylight games at the club. I got over that pretty quick, but it’s still a fun night because the atmosphere is very laid back. Anyway, last night I got to play with a gentleman that I’ve played with a couple of times before. He bids conservatively, plays the hands competently and we spend most of the night laughing — he’s a riot, and he thinks I’m funny, which is both a rare and valuable trait in a partner.

After the second round, we had some time to spare and were chatting about scoring when he mentioned that he’d never really had matchpoints explained to him. I launched into my explanation about getting half a matchpoint for each North-South pair that we tied and one matchpoint for each North-South pair that we beat. Counting up the tables, I explained that since there were five other North-South pairs, the percentage would be based on there being five matchpoints per board — if we got the highest score in the room, we’d get all five. If we got the lowest, we’d get zero, and if everyone in the room got the same score we’d get two and half or 50% of the matchpoints. But then I added that everyone bidding and making the same thing never happens on Monday nights.

As if to illustrate that last point, the new opponents showed up for the third round and had what appeared to be a normal auction: 1NT-2NT-3NT, but they went down one. I entered the score in the Bridgemate® and the results showed that one pair had played it in 2NT and made 3 while the other pair had played it in 1NT and made 4. “The less you bid the more you make. Neat. But, like I said, no such thing as a flat hand on Monday nights.”

Mar
18

St. Patrick’s Day

Unlike Ireland, my bridge club is not entirely free of snakes; however, it is often home to a truculent redhead of questionable sobriety.

Like yesterday, when I decided at the last minute to pick up a partner. I was feeling especially tired, but since I was (technically) awake and I had a stupid hat to wear, going to the club seemed like the thing to do. “You look like a pixie,” one of my opponents said when I sat down, but he said it in a way that made it seem like that might not be a good thing. I got lucky in that my partner turned out to be a woman I always enjoy playing with, but with whom I get to play only very rarely. We had a bikini game — tops and bottoms, sadly more of the latter than the former, but we had a good time.

This particular partner doesn’t play very many conventions, it’s more of a bidding “by feel” sort of a thing which in practice translates to: “Bid like hell when you’re not vulnerable; otherwise, don’t.” I kind of like it, it’s certainly a nice change of pace. (Indeed, our problems weren’t much associated with our bidding, we just kind of get each other’s style.) When we arrived at Washington’s table, he turned to me and said, “I was going to ask what system you’re playing today, but then I saw who you’re playing with.” I replied, “Right, so the answers to your questions are: ‘Standard’, ‘Standard’ and ‘I don’t know.’” He laughed and said, “You left out, ‘None of the above.’” “Oh, right, that one comes after, ‘I don’t know.’” Bridge humor, Abbott and Costello style.

By the last round, I was quite ready to pack it in and head home so I could go back to sleep. On the first hand of the round, no one vulnerable, in second seat, I picked up:

♠ J9xxxxx
♥ T9
♦ x
♣ xxx

My RHO passed and I passed (while wondering if I had ever passed a seven card spade suit before), then my LHO passed, all three green cards hit the table quite quickly so it was not surprising when my partner opened 2♣. Also not surprising, we hadn’t actually discussed any responses over 2♣ so I was wondering just how I was going to sign out in spades if her next bid wasn’t NT.

(P)-P-(P)-2♣-
(P)-2♦-(P)-2♥-

My thinking was that even with only one lonesome high card point, I couldn’t possibly play dead with a seven card suit. Also I happen to know that this particular partner considers a 2♣ opener not just forcing, but essentially game-forcing, so I’m not entirely sure that 3♣ would have been a double negative anyway. Anyway, I settled on bidding 2♠.

(P)-P-(P)-2♣-
(P)-2♦-(P)-2♥-
(P)-2♠-(P)-4NT-

Well, that’s not what I wanted to have happen.

(P)-P-(P)-2♣-
(P)-2♦-(P)-2♥-
(P)-2♠-(P)-4NT-
(P)-5♣-(P)-6♠-
All Pass

Faith and beggorah! This is bad. Very very bad.

The opening lead was a small club. The dummy came down with:

♠ AKQT
♥ AKxxx
♦ AJ
♣ AJ

Holy cats! I’m actually going to make this.

In fact, it made seven when the hearts split 3-3 and so I got to pitch both of my losing clubs. In retrospect, I’m not sure why she even bothered with Blackwood, and then didn’t ask for kings (not that I had any anyway). Still being in six and making seven was good for most of the matchpoints.

As drowsy as I had been feeling, I was now wide awake. The next couple of hands were unremarkable and then we came to this one. In third seat, no one vulnerable once again, I picked up:

♠ KQJT
♥ T9x
♦ xx
♣ AQxx

My RHO opened the bidding and I just couldn’t let it go, I mean, how much trouble can I get in on the one level anyway?

P-(1♦)-1♠-(2♦)-
4♠-(P)-P-(5♦)-
5♥-(P)-5♠-All Pass

What is wrong with me? Why can’t I just keep my mouth shut? And why am I not doubled?

The opening lead was a friendly club. The dummy came down with:

♠ 9xxxx
♥ AKJxx
♦ x
♣ Jx

When the queen of hearts dropped singleton (I had to find her somehow to have any chance at all), I made this one too. It wasn’t that surprising that it was a top, (kind of a hard game to get to with 21 HCP), but what was surprising was that elsewhere it was being played by the opponents in two or three diamonds. I can see people not over-calling with my four card spade suit, but I have a harder time imagining my partner remaining silent with 5/5 in the majors or the person with my hand not competing once partner shows some sign of life in either major.