Dubious Logic

The knockouts start.. and end

It's that season again – the one when the national knockouts start. Of course, by the very nature of the events, three quarters of the teams lose in rounds one or two and there are many sad tales told. I wish I could say that our demise from Crockfords was unfortunate but in truth we played worse than the opponents. Oh, and they were lucky as well.

Luck in duplicate bridge is a strange thing as I have reflected on many occasions. It might seem that because both sides play the same cards – two tables in play, your side sitting a different orientation in each – then even over a reasonable number of deals, luck should not feature in the end result. In practice it is not the case. Small differences, either genuine either-or decisions or the choices of system and philosophy that you bring to the table (for which there is at least no obvious best course else everyone would have adopted it), create effects much greater than might be expected. One hand from the ill starred match:

At my table I chose to open a spade because I could. As opening bids showed fewer than seventeen high card points, one spade seemed a fine call. We took no further part in the auction as West overcalled and East showed clubs artificially (with 2♠) then asked for a stop in my suit for no-trumps. Partner led the knave of hearts and declarer had eleven tricks. True, North could have been inspired on the lead but had no reason to do so.

South passed. They were not playing weak two bids but even in steam Acol – maybe especially in Acol – one spade doesn't look out of place. But the 'lob' – light opening bid on a good suit and little else belongs to bygone era. The problem that beset East was tough. Double seems the least worst call. True the negative double usually promises four cards in the other major but once the level rises you have to be flexible. Maybe West should not have rushed to bid 4♠ but he would surely have done so had East doubled again.

What of East's final pass? It looks certain that partner is short in hearts and will have to ruff the leads dangerously shortening his trumps. I think five clubs here would be unnecessary torture (does it agree spades?) but five diamonds looks like a hand that wants to play in a safer strain. It's a difficult problem but it was caused by South's reluctance to admit to spades (and his pressure bid of four hearts), something that usually not a good idea and he can have had no idea of what the repercussions would be. It just made the problems the opponents had to solve, on this deal, so much the harder. That's the rub.

Published Saturday 22.Dec.2001