Professional Documents
Culture Documents
52 Bridge Mistake To Avoid
52 Bridge Mistake To Avoid
52 Bridge
Mistakes to
avoid
Email: [email protected]
Websites: www.masterpointpress.com
www.bridgeblogging.com
www.teachbridge.com
www.ebooksbridge.com
ISBN: 978-1-55494-556-6
[3]
31. Misplaying the trump suit 135
32. Allowing an honor to be ruffed 140
33. Running into entry problems 144
34. Going wrong at Trick 2 147
35. Taking an unnecessary finesse 150
36. Missing an extra chance 153
37. Failure to count the hand 158
38. Allowing a defensive ruff 162
[4]
Introduction
Why are the world’s top players so successful? They spend a long time
building and remembering their complex bidding systems. They acquire a
host of cardplay and defensive techniques. They have also played many
thousands of deals and feel they have ‘been there before’ when facing some
tricky situation.
There is another reason for their success. They make many fewer basic
mistakes! Players at a less exalted level tend to make the same mistakes over
and over again throughout their bridge careers. In this book we will see
many of the most frequently made mistakes – in the bidding, play and
defense. Each type of mistake will be illustrated by several deals where the
original player went wrong. Every chapter will end with some Tips, to help
you to avoid making such errors yourself.
In the first section, Mistakes in the Bidding, I have used deals from high-
level tournament play, including world championships. I watch a lot of top-
class bridge, commentating on Bridge Base Online. The cardplay and the
defense are usually excellent but it’s amazing how often the players surprise
the kibitzers with a bid or call that seems to be a clear mistake. Experts make
such errors less often than the rest of us but I think you will find it
instructive to look at these wayward decisions. Try to analyze why the bid
was wrong before reading my own thoughts on the matter. I do not name the
famous players involved because this would add nothing to the instructive
value. However, I will specify the match or tournament to add authenticity.
When it comes to declarer play and defense, expert mistakes are rarer. Most
of the time I will illustrate the various mistakes with constructed deals, or
deals from a lower level of play.
The more of these 52 common mistakes you can remove from your game,
the better your results will be. Mind you, it’s just possible that someone out
there will finish the book and think: ‘Well, I’d never make any of those
mistakes’. If so, I look forward to watching you in the next Bermuda Bowl!
David Bird
[5]
This book is dedicated to my fabulous
and ever-tolerant wife for 40 years,
the great Thelma.
[6]
PART I
[7]
Mistake 1
Judging whether to make a penalty double is not as easy as you may think.
In this chapter we will look at some unsuccessful penalty doubles and try to
analyze why the player should have known that it was not the right moment
for such an action.
We’ll begin with a type of double that you will see countless times,
particularly in the less experienced reaches of the game:
West, who had resisted doubling 1NT, was very happy to double 3NT on the
next round. He led the ♠8 to East’s ♠Q, ducked by declarer.
At Trick 2, East switched to the ♥Q in the hope that the defenders might
enjoy four tricks there. (This was optimistic after declarer’s spade duck at
Trick 1.) The queen was covered by the king and ace and West returned a
heart, declarer winning with the ♥J. A diamond to the ace revealed the 3-0
break. Declarer finessed the ♠J and took the marked finesse of the ♦J to
[8]
bring in that suit. Seven diamonds, two spades, one heart and one club gave
him two overtricks and a score of +1150.
‘I had to double after your overcall,’ West exclaimed. ‘I held 11 points!’
We cannot condemn West’s double merely on account of an adverse
entry on the score-sheet. We must try to write down a few reasons why he
should not have doubled. Think of some yourself before reading my own
suggestions.
The next deal comes from the semi-finals of a USA2 under-21 trials.
North led the ♣9 against 3♦ doubled. South won with the ♣K and returned
[9]
the ♣7. Declarer ruffed with the ♦K and was not pressed thereafter to record
three doubled overtricks for +770. What did you make of South’s two
penalty doubles?
The double of 3♣ would appeal to some, although the risk of a red-suit
removal was evident. The subsequent double of 3♦ was… well, I mustn’t be
rude, particularly as they were juniors. Let’s just say that it was poorly
judged. North had not been able to overcall 1♠, yet he subsequently
contested the part-score with 2♠. What should South make of that? North
was likely to hold a shapely hand with very few points. Consequently, there
was every chance that one of the opponents would have a singleton spade
(not so, in fact). How many clubs did South think were going to stand up
against 3♦, when West had pulled the double of 3♣ to 3♦? At most one. So,
South was doubling 3♦ with a probable two tricks in his hand, opposite a
partner who might have no defense whatsoever.
This was the auction at the other table:
West made a slightly risky double of 1NT. The defenders were then
caught in a ‘doubling rhythm’. I can’t see why East should double 2♥
(which can be made). I certainly don’t understand for a moment why West
thought he should double 2♠. Had he not already shown his hand to the full?
Eight tricks were easily made, for another 670 in the minus column, and the
total cost was 16 IMPs.
Let’s look at something different, a spectacularly unsuccessful double of
a Stayman bid. It comes from a match between England and the Netherlands.
[10]
N-S Vul. Dealer West
♠72
♥AK65
♦K2
♣AQ975
♠AJ8 ♠9643
N
♥84 ♥ 10 7 3 2
W E
♦A98 ♦6543
♣ K J 10 8 6
S ♣2
♠ K Q 10 5
♥QJ9
♦ Q J 10 7
♣43
♠7
♥AK
♦─
♣A95
♠AJ8 N ♠9643
♥─ ♥32
W E
♦─ ♦─
S
♣KJ8 ♣─
♠ K Q 10 5
♥J
♦─
♣4
[11]
A spade went to the king and ace. When West returned the ♣K, declarer
played the ♣5 from dummy. West could not make another trick, whichever
card he returned! He eventually scored the ♦A, the ♠A and only one trump
trick from his ♣KJ1086. Declarer made two redoubled overtricks, entering
+1560 on his score-card. That was 14 IMPs compared with +630.
It’s an amusing story but our purpose here is to examine the penalty
double of the Stayman 2♣. Was it simply unlucky or was it a bad double?
This is how I see it:
South led the ♦6 to declarer’s ace and a trump was played to the king. A
heart back to the ace and a second trump saw South rising with the ace.
When he switched to a club, declarer rose with the ♣A, drew the last trump
and claimed an overtrick for +1050. That was 9 IMPs away compared with
[12]
4♠+2 for +680 at the other table.
To avoid making such doubles ourselves, we must sit back and consider
exactly why South’s final double was a clear-cut mistake. Ponder on the
matter before looking at my list.
This is how I see it:
An overtrick was easily made, for +990. It was a poor double because the
game was freely bid, albeit after an apparent sign-off by North on the first
round. The defenders’ hearts would be worth little, since an early ruff was
likely. West’s main defense lay in diamonds and her partner’s single heart
[13]
raise did not promise anything much in addition. West had no ‘surprise’ for
declarer and could expect a good board anyway if 4♠ went down.
The last penalty double to receive our inspection arose in a European
Championship match, a good while ago, between England and Finland:
Tony Forrester (South) ruffed the ♥A lead and played a trump to the ace,
felling East’s king. He then made the remaining tricks on a cross-ruff. That
was three doubled overtricks and an unusual route to the score of +1390.
Why did the Finland East double 4♠? He may have thought it was a
sacrifice because Forrester had not bid 4♠ on the previous round. Even on a
good hand such as South held, though, there was no need to bid 4♠
immediately when 3♠ had been doubled. If anything, East held less defense
that his partner would expect for the original take-out double at quite a high-
level. If West did have the hoped-for two defensive tricks, he would have
doubled himself. Finally, East’s ♠K was likely to lie under the ace in the
South hand (it did not, in fact).
The various penalty doubles we have seen were very poor examples, each
with several arguments against them. Most unwise penalty doubles have
only one or two pointers against them. If you look back and fix in your mind
the sort of reasons why these penalty doubles were unproductive, there is
every chance that you won’t make similar doubles yourself. A few of my
partners will think I should do the same!
[14]
Tips to avoid Mistake 1
(Making unsound penalty doubles)
[15]
Mistake 2
Unwarranted Gambling
Many points are thrown away by entering the auction at a dangerous time, in
the hope that partner will have a fit for you. We are about to see some
examples from top-level play. As in the previous chapter, there will be no
profit from this exercise unless we try to analyze why the bids were wrong.
The first deal comes from the final stages of the 2014 European
Championship, with England facing Norway:
The England East went 800 down, losing 14 IMPs against 4♠ two down at
the other table. Why was East’s 4♥ a mistake? This is how I see it:
[16]
The next dubious intervention comes from a quarter-final of the 2013
Bermuda Bowl, with Canada sitting East-West against USA1:
[17]
N-S Vul. Dealer South
♠J975
♥A2
♦K42
♣K876
♠Q2 ♠AK84
♥KJ9653 N ♥ 10
♦J7 W E ♦ A Q 10 3
♣A52 S ♣Q943
♠ 10 6 3
♥Q874
♦9865
♣ J 10
What do you make of North’s take-out double, vulnerable against not and
facing a passed hand? It was risky, with little to gain and possibly a huge
penalty to lose. To make matters worse, North was facing two of game’s
most vicious tigers – Jeff Meckstroth and Eric Rodwell!
South tried his luck in 1♠. When Rodwell doubled this in the East seat,
South jumped from the frying pan into the fire, correcting to 2♦. This was
also doubled and Meckstroth led the ♠Q, the defenders taking three tricks in
the suit. Declarer discarded the ♣10 on a fourth round of spades and West
ruffed with the ♦7.
West’s ♦J switch was covered by the king and ace. East drew further
rounds of trumps with the 10 and queen. He then switched to the ♥10, won
with the ace. When declarer called for a low club, East rose with the queen
and exited with a low club. Declarer discarded a heart and West won with
the ace. He cashed the ♥K and gave East a heart ruff with the ♦3. Declarer
scored the ♦9 at Trick 13. With only two tricks before him, he then had to
enter -1700 in his scorecard. This cost 15 IMPs compared with 3NT+1 at the
other table, where North did not make a take-out double over 1♥.
North’s loss on the board is our gain – a valuable warning not to make
sub-minimum bids when the possible losses outweigh the possible gains.
We will end with an unwarranted gamble of a different sort. The deal
comes from a quarter-final of the 2014 Spingold.
[18]
Both Vul. Dealer East
♠KJ96
♥ J 10 8 6
♦ 10 6 4
♣K3
♠543 ♠AQ82
♥A9542
N ♥K73
♦Q
W E ♦J98752
♣Q652 S ♣—
♠ 10 7
♥Q
♦AK3
♣ A J 10 9 8 7 4
West North East South
— — 1♦ 2♣
dbl 3♣ 3♠ 5♣
dbl all pass
At the other table South’s 2♣ was passed out and eight tricks were made.
Here West contested with a negative double and North raised the clubs,
expecting at least six clubs opposite. What should South do over East’s 3♠?
Bidding 5♣ is too much. Partner didn’t bid 2♦ to show a sound raise to
3♣. There are likely to be three quick losers in the majors and a fair chance
that you will lose a diamond too. Even if you think 4♥ or 4♠ will be a make,
you won’t cause any awkward decision for West by leaping to 5♣. He is a
passed hand and can hardly be thinking of going to the five-level.
Declarer lost two spades, one heart, one diamond and a club, conceding
800 for 13 IMPs away. Of course it was unlucky to lose so much but when
you make an unwarranted gamble, the cards will often let you down.
[19]
INTERMEDIATE/ADVANCED