Too Much

	K 8 7 5 2
	A Q 9 8
	J 6
	10 2
A J		Q 4 3
K 5 4		J 7 2
A K 7 2		Q 10 8
A 7 6 5		K J 9 3
	10 9 6
	10 6 3
	9 5 4 3	Vul: N-S
	Q 8 4	Opening lead: 5 of hearts

East	South	West	North
Pass	Pass	1	Dbl
Pass	1	1 NT	2
Dbl	All	pass

This is about the extreme of recklessness in competition. The final tally was minus 1100 for the declaring side, more than those other guys could have made in little slam, not vul, which they don't have anyway. There are about 5 violations of common sense principles here, when one is often enough. Well, lemme start listing them.

We'll start with the bidding system. How many points to you need for a takeout double? Well, yeah, the bidding system sez you need the strength of an opening bid. That's what you need. And this North hand isn't of that strength. A Michaels 2 diamond bid for the majors would have described the hand better. But even that's awfully risky at that point count and vulnerability. Some say that should promise at least 5-5. Well, so be it, if that's your choice, but if you're going to play by the strictures of a Michaels bid here, by what justification does one violate the (substantially) agreed-upon requirements for a takeout double?

And they were doubly violated, for you need extra points for a free bid after a takeout double, your partner not having shown any strength. It should be about 16 minimum. This, incidentally, betrays a proclivity that I noticed long before OKBridge came along, which is an overbid on top of an overbid. You'd think a person who'd overbid would be sitting on pins and needles for a bit. Will my partner yank me skyward, reading me for more potential than I've got, and if so, will we be doubled? Yes, I have seen it any number of times, as here, where the overbidder isn't satisfied to have escaped danger, but challenges the opposition one more time and gets knocked on his rear.

Which brings me to another common sense principle. Bid your hand and shut up. South has another bid coming over one no, and North should trust that his partner will keep in the competition if he has something. And if he doesn't when he clearly had good stuff to show, you can discuss later that he often isn't aggressive enough. But you can't decide to bid his values for him to any advantage. Your primary and indeed sole task during the bidding is to get your bidding right.

Which brings me to another principle, my reference to 20 as a key figure. I have said that without a good fit and 20 hcp's or fewer, the two level begins to get risky and the three level is downright dangerous. How many points does South promise on that one heart bid? And how many hearts? Well, of course the answer is zero points (promised) and three hearts (minimum almost surely). There's no law that South has to have four or more cards in any of the unbid suits, now, is there? The only mathematical law you can count on is that South has at least four cards in (at least) one of the suits. But it might be the suit bid by the opponents, meaning not only that it's probably not your best fit, but that a bid of that suit would sound like a cue bid, promising game. So South is going to need about 10 hcp's to make the two level viable, and curiously, 10 hcp's is the level where you can make a (non-forcing) jump opposite a takeout double. Which South didn't do.

And lastly, this horrendous overbidding is done -- vulnerable! Can't North at least wait for non-vulnerable status before chancing such outrageous bids? In any event, since N-S were down 4, it appears they would be down 3 at the one level, which the opponents were kind enough to take them out of.

So given that North has only 9 (effective) hcp's and South has promised no hcp's on his bid and has 2, of course, giving N-S 12 in all, if we count the J of diamonds, this is sheer recklessness. Those other guys have more than twice as many hcp's as N-S and only one less heart and you wanna pick up three more tricks than they do? Pathetic.