Trouble in Spades
|
 K |
|
 K 9 6 |
|
 A K 10 6 5 3 |
|  K 8 6 |
| J 9 8 6 5 |
|
------ |
| 5 4 2 | |
Q 10 8 |
|
| ------ | | Q J 7 4 2 |
| A Q J 10 3 | |
9 7 5 4 2 |
|
A Q 10 7 4 3 2 |
|
|
A J 8 7 |
|
|
9 8 |
|
|
------ |
Vul: Both |
| South | West |
North | East |
| 1 |
Dbl |
Redbl |
All pass |
You wanna know what the final score was? Plus 2320 for the spade fellows. More than a grand slam on a one-level bid! I've taken this up before. You've got to take out these one level redoubles. Somehow. Anyhow. When the bidding goes one of anything, double, redouble, I've seen cases where the doubling side had stepped into it and had no good escape and I've seen cases where they had an easy out, and the redoubling side continued on with their bidding, and of the two, I'd say the latter predominates, and that you'll more often than not have an escape. But one thing I've never seen is a case where the redouble was allowed to stand and it turned out anything less than a disaster for the doublers. [This was written before a hand referred to earlier, where a one diamond, double, redouble would have turned out rather well for the doublers -- except that the doubler took it out, only to have the opponents bid the same suit at the two level! That was doubled and down two for 500 points. Technically, the redouble wasn't allowed to stand. Nevertheless, though what was substantially an exception popped up, I'll stick with my basic position while acknowledging that exception: letting the redouble stand will "just about always" lead to disaster for the doubling side. You've gotta run somewhere.]
[Further, West certainly doesn't have a hand suited to a takeout double, where he's supposed to have a holding in each unbid suit. He has a void in diamonds, three yukky hearts -- and 5 cards in an opponent's suit, where tradionally the takeout doubler is short. The hand is much more suited to a 2 club overcall.]
This, I believe, was the first time I've seen the redouble stand with a major suit, which means the redoublers get not only the value of redoubled overtricks, but the game bonus as well. I've mentioned before that I have always followed a policy of bidding a five-card (or longer) suit when I'm opposite the doubler, and passing with no long suit, allowing (and expecting) my partner to bid his best suit. Here, it is self-evident that if the doublers find their 10-card club fit, even if they waste a level by East's bidding diamonds first, they'll be perfectly safe.
The score? Nineteen IMP's, one of the highest totals I'ver seen. After all, if you bid and make a grand slam, you'll probably have company and your winnings will be diluted. But here, when the second highest score is 990 (some declarers got doubled in 4, making an overtrick), you're gonna get a lot of IMP's -- or lose a lot.
|
------ |
|
A J 9 6 5 |
|
------ |
| K Q 9 8 7 4 3 2 |
| A J 7 2 |
|
Q 4 |
| Q 8 | |
10 7 4 2 |
|
| K Q 10 7 4 | | A J 9 8 6 3 2 |
| J 6 | |
------ |
|
K 10 9 8 6 3 2 |
|
|
K 3 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
A 10 5 |
Vul: N-S |
| East |
South | West |
North |
| Pass |
1 |
2 |
Dbl |
| 5 |
Pass | Pass |
6 |
| Pass | Pass |
Dbl | Pass |
| Pass |
6 |
Dbl |
All pass |
Oooooh! I don't know which was worse, letting the redouble stick or bidding six spades here. And you wanna know the score was? Well, you can guess what the score was, but what it would have been had the doubled club bid been allowed to remain? Eighty-eight percent! The double was a gift, allowing the declaring side to lift its percentage 12 points! Instead, this incautious player drew his side down 88 points, the largest drop for an incautious bid that I believe I've seen.
But on second thought, I believe I do have a vote for the worst bid, which was this one and that's because it was doubly wrong. Six clubs, pass, pass. Had South bid six spades immediately, it would have been a flagrant case of not noting the value of his trump support opposite a partner who'd bid clubs first at the six level! Scandalous and terribly self-centered. But South had accepted the six club bid and let an opponent fake him out. He trusted the acumen of an opponent over that of his partner, and that is strictly verboten in my book. So he not only got rattled by an opponent's incautious double, but now bid at the six level a suit headed by the K 10! And wait a minute, he has ace 10 and low support for his partner.
Let me suggest a maxim: You've got to let your partner be wrong! Be wrong? Did I mean that? Yes, I meant exactly that. You don't want your partner to be wrong, but you've got to let it happen from time to time. And the reason for that is illustrated here in spades. Sometimes your partner won't be wrong when you think he is. And sometimes you may be right about your partner being wrong but you can't improve the matter! And how about the times we're right and can improve the situation?
Well, I would say first that in the early stages of bidding, if you have not yet bid your full values or shown your distribution (and can bid a long suit without raising the level) or both, then of course you will want to warn your partner that you can't support his suit and offer yours. This is not saving your partner but a legitimate exploration for the best spot. But if you go to save your partner, which I'll define here as making a bid you wouldn't otherwise make out of fear that your partner has gotten you into trouble, then I would say the chances of improving the matter are at best one out of ten and probably closer to one out of fifty.
Just let him be wrong this one time. If he wasn't wrong after all, you'll be happy you did. And if you were right, it'll probably do a lot more for your partnership relations and eventually your score if you just let it be.