Disaster in Spades


I have remarked elsewhere on the strange propensity of players to bid properly opposite an opening bid but to lose their perspective in competition, making bids far beyond what would be tolerated or chosen opposite an opening bid. For example, bidding two of a higher ranking suit on 7 or 8 hcp's opposite an overcall. They're not strong enough to go to the two level in a lower ranking suit opposite an opening bid, but in competition? Not to worry. One diamond by partner, one spade by RHO. Two hearts on Q 6 5 4 3 (8 hcp's overall), as seen recently.
I never had any sense of this penchant when playing at a real table, and whether this represents a tendency more common among OKBridge players or it's something I can more easily pick up with hand records or a little of both, I leave up to you. Here, West (wisely) passed at his first opportunity, knowing he didn't have the tickets to raise the bid one level even on a fit. But at his next opportunity, he raised his partner's overcall two levels -- on 3 hcp's? "Not to worry, partner! I've already indicated a weak hand, right?" But East was looking at a far stronger than minimum diamond overcall and so chose to double.
N-S have a game hand here through a lucky break of the cards. With a spade holding like that, you'll have loser, call it, 90% of the time -- and two losers on occasion. At the same time, hearts comfortably break 3-2 so you don't have to worry about picking up the jack. Missing game hands like that is not the stuff of things to concern yourself with. So this pair chose to play it safe when game didn't look all that attractive. When West balanced with 3 diamonds, they still chose to play it on the safe side with three spades and the defense had one more chance to pass it out for a moderately good score. But now East read his partner for more defensive strength than he came close to having and N-S finally had their game bid. Three diamonds was a "safe" bid, as far as that goes (with superb declarer play), but it induced a disastrous double -- just another of the dangers of balancing.
K 9 2
A K 9 3
9 3
K 9 6 3
J Q 7 6 3
J 8 7 4 2
J 7 6 5 A K Q 10 4
10 8 7 5 2 A 4
A 10 8 4 3
Q 10 6 5
8 2
Q JVul: East-West

Bidding Box

WestNorthEastSouth
1 1 1
Pass 2 Pass Pass
3 Pass Pass 3
Pass Pass Dbl All Pass

With the law of restricted choice enhanced by a double from the defender who is now presumed to hold the queen, declarer pulled in the spade suit without loss and thus made an overtrick, losing two diamonds and a club. Disaster.
My first impression was that good defense -- leading trump twice -- could beat 3 diamonds (by holding declarer to two spade ruffs), thus making even the 3 diamond bid risky at that vulnerability. However, I soon saw that three diamonds can be made: Opening trump lead, won in the closed hand. (Don't even think of winning with the jack. When you've got a lot of entries to this hand and only one or two to that, you'll want to chew up an entry to the hand with an overload of entries.) Declarer now lays down the ace and low of clubs, wins the next round of diamonds in dummy, ruffs a club high and loses a spade. He still has to lose two hearts, but now he'll be able to ruff one spade to ruff out the fourth round of clubs and another to cash the last club for 9 tricks.
So three diamonds was a makable contract, but . . . It was paradoxically just because East's hand was strong enough to bring the contract home that the double was induced and thus the disaster. A double raise on 3 hcp's? You've gotta be kidding. No, it was a double raise on 3 hcp's and a singleton. Oh, yeah. Right.
[I don't suppose this would be considered "balancing" by many people. East made a legitimate overcall and West a delayed raise. But it has the earmarks of balancing in that West didn't bid on his first opportunity, and then evidently because the bidding was dying down, decided to stick in his oar. So I'll let it stand.] .