TRUST YOUR PARTNER

by Aleksander Wagner
Deal no.4

 Do I trust my partner? Of course I do! But do I trust my partner completely and blindly? Do you?

 In all partnerships the issue of trust between partners is the most basic one. Everyone makes mistakes, everyone errs in evaluation of hands, even balanced ones. And there are precious few players in the world that have mastered freaky, crazy, extremely unbalanced distributions. Is it so strange that after several disasters, we tend to trust our partners less and less, instead of having an open heart to heart talk about going back to basics, and learning together from scratch how to evaluate our hands?
Doing and saying the unspeakable, forgetting for a moment our overgrown ego? Would you do it?

 Let's be honest, the last time I did it I was twelve years old. Instead, many years ago I made my own choice: in the beginning I always trust my new partner one hundred per cent, giving him plenty of room to make his bidding more precise. And if after several months and many disasters he doesn't reach the obvious and only conclusion and does nothing about it, dissolving the partnership seems to be the most prudent choice. Either this, or greatly lowering your standards.

 But what does this "blind and complete trust" mean? Here are few examples.


 Deal no. 1:

                                            N       E       S       W
                                           ---------------------------
  My hand (North):                          1C      1H      x (1)   2H
                                            3H (2)  -       4S(3)   -
  S-J109x , H-x , D-KQxx , C-AKxx           4NT(4)  -       5H(5)   -
                                            6S (6)  -       -       -
  
(1) negative double, at least 7 points, two other suits
(2) I like double fits! How do you like your hand?.
(3) I like it very much. Got 4+ good spades as well.
(4) All I need is 10 good points and some shape, any finesse should work...
(5) two Aces
(6) "good spades" mean more than Axxx, more like AQ...

My partner's hand: S-AQxx , H-xx , D-Axxxx , C-xx. He described his hand very precisely and we made the slam. 1430 for NS.


 Deal no. 2 ( only few minutes later ):

  S      W      N      E
 -------------------------
                1S     -
  2H(1)  -      3C     -
  3D(2)  -      4D(3)  -
  5C     -      6C(4)
 
(1) Madness with S-x, H-A109xxx, D-QJ, C-Qxxx! We've got 6 playing points with a singleton in our partner's suit. The correct bid is 1NT.

(2) The pits! It shows an even stronger hand than 2H, if we had another Ace - then maybe...

(3) My hand (N): S-AKQJ10 , H-K , D-xxx , C-AKJ9. After the 2H bid it was clear that we've got 30 points, and 3D promised even more, so the 4 level was perfectly safe. If so, why shouldn't I say exactly what I've got? Can't bid 3H (two good hearts at least), can't bid 3S (six spades, or minimum without a diamond stopper), can't bid 3NT (minimum with a diamond stopper), can't bid 4C (five clubs), and 4D says it all!

(4) 5C after 3D has only one meaning: full support in clubs and a cue-bid in diamonds. I could have tried to reach 7C, but decided against it, had no space to get all the necessary information below the 6C level.

 And the result? 11 tricks, 100 for EW.


 Deal no. 3:

 Sometimes we fail to find the bidding sequence that precisely describes our hand, reach a borderline contract, and need all the knowledge, imagination, luck and even some help from our friends in order to make the contract.
 Here is one of such cases (all vulnerable):
                                              W       N       E       S
 6                           973             ----------------------------
 AJ75            N           Q2               1D(1)   1S      2D(2)   -
 QJ10652       W   E         A874             2H(3)   2S      -       -
 A2              S           Q653             5D(4)   -       -       -
(1) 3+ diamonds, better minor
(2) free bid, 5 diamonds, constructive
(3) all of the sudden I'm strong! won't quit below a game.
(4) can't make it alone, don't like all the strength in the North hand.

 The lead - Ace of spades and another spade. South played the King.
 As you can see, my partner didn't know what to bid and apparently decided that one diamond less wouldn't make any difference, and his 8 lousy points looked like beautiful 10... Now I had to make the best of it. But how?
 Queen of spades, King, Ace, small. Some improvement, but still long way to go. There was always a heart finesse to try, but if the King was off side, I'd have lost immediately. And the bidding showed that North was strong... But how strong? In my opinion AQJxxx in spades and the diamond King didn't justify his bidding, so he had to have at least one of the other Kings, and maybe even both of them. But maybe he's got singleton or dubleton King of clubs? So I ruffed my last spade, drew the last trump and played the Ace of clubs and another club. The result - 600 for NS, compared to 130 for NS or 140 for EW on other tables. Here's the full distribution:
               AQJ842
               K963
               K
               K7
 6                           973
 AJ75            N           Q2
 QJ10652       W   E         A874
 A2              S           Q653

               K105
               1084
               93
               J10984
If North had another club, I'd still be able to finesse hearts because whatever he played I'd have taken in the dummy. If North had only the King of hearts, I'd have lost the contract anyway. I lost my chances only if South had both the Kings, and it seemed quite improbable.

 The defenders made a mistake and gave me the contract in the second trick, and only because South held 9 of diamonds. North shouldn't have continued spades - what should have he played instead?

 Deal no. 4:

 One of the reasons I never made a carreer (and piles of money) of playing with sponsors is my refusal not to treat any partner as my equal in bridge, even if it isn't true. Some people call it no bussiness sense. My friends call me old fashioned and naive. I prefer to call it self-respect: if I spend few hours playing with someone, I hate to think I wasted my valuable time playing with a moron - even with a rich one. I tried a couple of times, was very nice, polite and gentle with them, collected some cash and hated every minute of it. The last time I did it must have been some ten years ago, and the resolve not to do it again is still there.
 Today I often play with lesser players but for different reasons, like socializing and friendship. I am aware of the sad truth that their bidding can't be trusted, neither their grasp of my bidding, but I'm stuck with this silly notion of taking the person I play with seriously, and it often costs me dearly.
 Here's one of the more recent examples:
I was South and really loved my hand: AQ109xxx, 98xx, xx, x. My partner opened 1H (5+ hearts), East passed, I bid 1S, West doubled (take-out). Then my partner bid 2C. It could have meant 4 clubs with almost anything, but if he had 3514, 2515 or better, there was a chance of a slam. So I bid 2D which was definitely forcing. West bid 3D (natural) and North 3S, which must have meant 3514 or better and very good values, otherwise he would simply have passed. And with three spades and a weak hand he would have passed even earlier - after my 1S! So now I know he's got a strong hand, full fit in spades and good values, what else do I need but ask for Aces? 4NT, 2 Aces, 6H and I love it.
 And here is the gloom reality:

       Kx
       AQJxx
       xx                     N       E       S       W
       QJxx                 ------------------------------
                              1H      p       1S      x
         N                    2C      p       2D      3D
       W   E                  3S      p       4NT     p
         S                    5H      p       6H      p
                              p       p
       AQ109865
       9876
       98
       4

2C I can live with.But why 3S? I don't know. Why 5H? Because with someone else he answered with key values.But it doesn't matter 5S would have been down anyway...

Deal no.1 Deal no.2 Deal no.3 Deal no.4