Escaping by a Redouble?

	Q 8 4
	4 3
	K 10 9 7 4
	K 8 5
K J 10 3		7 5
A 6 5 2		Q 10 8 7
5 2		A Q J 3
A 10 4		Q 9 2
	A 9 6 2
	K J 9
	8 6
	J 7 6 3		Vul: E-W

West	North	East	South
			Pass
1 *	Pass	2	Pass
2	Pass	Pass	2
Dbl	Pass	Pass	Redbl
All	pass		* Alerted

This is the hand that made me decide to open the topic "Redoubling". I have seen any number of them lately that led to disasters like this one, where an impending poor board was parlayed into a very poor board. I presume that in every case, the redouble was an S.O.S., for after all, if you're destined to make 2 spades doubled, you almost surely have a top board coming without the redouble. And as for why the cry for help wasn't heeded? It's hard to say whether it stemmed from the feeling that there was nowhere to go (though just escaping from a redoubled bad contract would probably save some points even with a presumed double) or it wasn't recognized as an S.O.S., so I won't speculate.

I have discussed this from the dangers of the redouble under that topic. Here I only want to discuss a few common sense principles, starting with the balancing bid. Incidentally, as is my wont, I checked this player's self-evaluation to see if he considered himself advanced. I have found that very common among those who have a very tenuous grasp on common sense in bridge, though lately I've been striking out and finding more reasonable self-evaluations than expected. So here I was expecting to see "intermediate", a vague enough term to cover a lot of territory. No, this fellow didn't call himself intermediate, and he didn't call himself advanced. He termed himself EXPERT! Well, that's one expert whose example I don't think you want to follow. This has to be one of the most shamelessly bad balancing bids I've seen.

There's not much percentage in pointing out how bad it was. But you might note again that the balancing side had passed four times before deciding to enter the bididng! Well, one E-W pair did make four hearts -- I don't know how -- to save this pair from an absolute zero, but they managed second last. Rather, I'd like to discuss a few common sense thoughts to bear in mind.

First, you might consider how outrageous it is that we enter the bidding in normal bidding practices contracting for a majority of the tricks on only a third of the deck! Except that it works! We know it works because we've played enough bridge to see that 13-point openers do fine by and large long before we've given to reflection on why. I would suggest that there are three protections against disaster here, to wit:

It's not that often that we find a partner with so few points that a one-level bid can be turned into a disaster.

The scoring system might indicate that even if the opponents can set us, they might have a better score in the offing if they push on to their own best spot.

And lastly, there is the difficulty our opponents are going to have smoking out those cases where they can administer a stiff penalty on us at the one level. You have hearts back of my heart overcall? A double would be regarded as negative, a pass might lead to the auction being passed out, and of course, any other bid takes me off the hook.

So we make our 13-point opening bids with near impunity. Nevertheless, I think it behooves us to pause occasionally to reflect on how close we can be to disaster trying to get the majority of the tricks with what might easily be a minority of the points. Even opening 2 no with a strong 20-21 hcp hand, as is the modern practice, can turn into a nightmare. And when people try to "explain" the balancing bid to me on the ground that they can figure their partner must have something from the bidding, I counter that we just about always figure on our partner for something to help us. (Hands with an absolutely strong long suit might be an exception to that.)

Secondly, getting a little aggressive with a long suit is relatively safe, as every beginner knows, so with six spades, one might open that hand above with no more hcp's. Similarly, a two-suited hand (at least 5-5) or even a three-suited hand when you can bid all three suits in one whack with a takeout double will allow for considerably more aggressiveness than when your hand cannot fit those criteria.

Thirdly, there is not necessariliy a better spot! when the opponents let the bidding die at a low level. And I think it is a serious mistake to presume so. That's not sophisticated bridge to come in with a balancing bid and wind up minus 800 or 1100 when they were going for a partial! When the opponents are willing to let the bidding die at a low level, I would say there are three basic possibilities, to wit:

They are underbid.

They are not underbid, but there is simply no way for your side to better the situation. Let 'em have their partial.

They are not underbid and you can improve the situation with a balancing bid.

How to recognize when you are into Situation Three -- or more realistically, when you are likely to be in Situation Three -- takes a lot of acumen, and some pointers were given earlier on this topic. But here I want it to suffice just to recognize that there are two other possibilities and not feel under any obligation to come in balancing as if it's novice bridge to pass.

And lastly, redoubles are not a realistic escape. What, never? Well, hardly ever. It's not a magic word that automatically wipes away danger. Here, a down two doubled unwise bid becomes a down two redoubled disaster. And North? What could he bid but three diamonds. Now in diamonds, you lose a spade, you lose a heart, you lose two clubs -- and that's just the side suits! Now let's toss in three diamonds, and you see that on a double, you're down 3 for minus 500, saving 100 over passing the redouble, wasting 200 on the unnecessary redouble, wasting 360 over a simple pass by South.

This specific hand was a poor candidate for a balancing bid for these reasons: balancer doesn't have a five-card suit, doesn't even have an average number of hcp's, doesn't have the hand for bidding three suits (in a takeout double), has almost half his hcp's in the opponents suit (so whatever strength his hand has will perhaps be best realized in their suit), and not least, he's opposite a partner who didn't feel up to venturing an overcall over one club!

In other words, with 9 hcp's, I'd like a partner with both a fit in spades and, say, 11 hcp's to feel comfortable in 2 spades. Is there the slightest indication that either of these criteria is true? C'mon, fellas. Give your partners a break.

Oh, incidentally, playing time was 12:35! Twelve and a half minutes to play this hand? I've gotta suspect, though of course I don't know, that an unhappy declarer spent a lot of time trying to figure a way out of a miserable result. This sort of thing really kills the game.