[Free]

During the European Championships, Bocchi asked for a ruling, I don't know the exact hand though. Basically it was a misexplanation, and he claimed that they would've sacrificed against some game contract and would go -3 (NV vs V). However, if you look at the hand, everyone would go -4 on that hand. That's why the TD, a friend of mine, didn't adjust the score. TD explained that the sacrifice wouldn't gain, because Bocchi would go -4. Bocchi's reaction: "YOU (pointing his finger) would go -4, I will go -3". However, he couldn't explain how he'd do this with 100% certainty... Result stands.

[neilkaz]

This was my 2nd hand ever on BBO. Opps were Red we were White and the opps played Bergen raises and ended up in 3♠X with me on lead with AKQJ♠. Dummy(the Bergen raiser) came down as 4333 with 9 high! I drew 4 rds of trump and then careful defence meant that declarer took only his 2 aces and his 5th trump for -1700.

After the hand, declarer said,"Unlucky, but this is our system and we'll stick to it." His partner replied," Yeah, with 9 trumps we're protected by the LAW".

.. neilkaz ..

[Antrax]

I must be clueless too. Is it wrong to open 1S with a bad suit? Or is the mistake to raise to the 3-level with four small?

[Mbodell]

 Antrax, on 2011-December-21, 02:21, said:

I must be clueless too. Is it wrong to open 1S with a bad suit? Or is the mistake to raise to the 3-level with four small?

Assuming 9 high means a Yarborough and not a 9-hcp hand, then the LAW doesn't apply since it is supposed to be when both sides are around equal in points. Also raising to the 3 level with 4333 is pretty bad since the 4333 shape is death and hard since no ruffs in the short hand.

[Antrax]

Oh, I interpreted "9 high" as "9 HCP".

[olegru]

Playing against husband-wife partnership.
The first board.

I am declaring 2♥
LHO (husband) leads small ♦.
Dummy has ♦ Kxxxx and I have the ♦J singleton in my hand.
RHO tanks a lot and finally plays ♦10. Good result for me.

After board was over RHO decided to lecture his wife: "If you are on the third sit you should not think what card to play. Just play the top, period!"

The very next board. I am declarer in 3NT.
RHO starts from two top diamonds, and on the second round LHO gives Lavinthal for clubs.
Clubs suit around the table was like this:
......♣ AQx
♣ J8x.......♣ K10x
......♣ 9xxx
LHO plays small club, small from the table and King from RHO...

"Why did not you think..." started LHO after board was over.
He did not have an opportunity to add any more words for at least 10 minutes because now RHO started her speech...

[Lobowolf]

I was playing at a Regional once, and led the ace of a side suit. Declarer asked my partner, "Do you lead ace from ace-king?" Partner told her (correctly) that we do. At the end of the hand, when partner turned up with the king of that suit, declarer called the director on me.

[Venom]

Audrey Grant reported this at one of her lectures during the Summer NABCs in Toronto this past July '11. Not sure that this rates as being clueless. In fact, it's quite the opposite as well as being humorous and something to try sometimes.

According to Audrey, Shannon Cappelletti suggested the following answer or response to use after a mistake has been made and partner has started to inquire why you bid or played such-and-such or some other critical comment. The Answer? = "Because I Hate You!". It absolutely breaks the tension. Try it (and then duck to void flying objects).

DHL aka Double !

[gnasher]

Here's a particularly inane comment that was made at my table today:

---

South played in 6♥ after West had shown the minors. West cashed ♦K, then paused for thought. After about 30 seconds declarer claimed, saying, "If you had eight clubs I expect you'd have played one by now."

[dwar0123]

 gnasher, on 2011-December-27, 16:10, said:

Here's a particularly inane comment that was made at my table today:

---

South played in 6♥ after West had shown the minors. West cashed ♦K, then paused for thought. After about 30 seconds declarer claimed, saying, "If you had eight clubs I expect you'd have played one by now."

Took me awhile to see the 13 card heart fit.

[Antrax]

It wasn't "post hand" but I thought this qualifies:
Yesterday a pair arrived at our table. A woman is highly distraught, mumbling "This is appeal material! What a bad director, they can't do that!" with her partner consoling her "yeah, some people just care about winning, you can't help that". Curious, I ask what the matter was. The woman tells me "he (presumably an opponent - A) opened 1NT with only 14 HCP!". I consider how to reply to that, and she continues "and his partner looks me in the eye and announces it '15 to 17'! And it was our game! My partner overcalled 2♠ but I counted the HCP and knew we can't have the 25 required for game, so I passed, and we had 4♠, and it's all because he lied about his point count. HE HAD ONLY 14!"

Right. At that point I felt obligated to inform her that I had done the same thing earlier in the day (lest it happen again in the upcoming two boards and she gets an aneurism or something), and told them I could try and explain this highly illogical bid if there's time after the round. Luckily, during one of the boards that followed I made a light overcall that threw partner off on the defense and gave them an extra trick, so I just pointed the incident out to show how it cuts both ways as long as there's no concealed understanding yadda yadda, and she seemed somewhat mollified - at least she stopped muttering about it.

[billw55]

 Antrax, on 2012-February-09, 03:09, said:

It wasn't "post hand" but I thought this qualifies:
Yesterday a pair arrived at our table. A woman is highly distraught, mumbling "This is appeal material! What a bad director, they can't do that!" with her partner consoling her "yeah, some people just care about winning, you can't help that". Curious, I ask what the matter was. The woman tells me "he (presumably an opponent - A) opened 1NT with only 14 HCP!". I consider how to reply to that, and she continues "and his partner looks me in the eye and announces it '15 to 17'! And it was our game! My partner overcalled 2♠ but I counted the HCP and knew we can't have the 25 required for game, so I passed, and we had 4♠, and it's all because he lied about his point count. HE HAD ONLY 14!"

Right. At that point I felt obligated to inform her that I had done the same thing earlier in the day (lest it happen again in the upcoming two boards and she gets an aneurism or something), and told them I could try and explain this highly illogical bid if there's time after the round. Luckily, during one of the boards that followed I made a light overcall that threw partner off on the defense and gave them an extra trick, so I just pointed the incident out to show how it cuts both ways as long as there's no concealed understanding yadda yadda, and she seemed somewhat mollified - at least she stopped muttering about it.

Perhaps the perpetrator should have saved her the grief, by telling her he miscounted.

[HighLow21]

 frank0, on 2011-November-01, 12:30, said:

A story I found in other forum.

opp1:"Is that game try?"
opp2:"No, just invitation."

Hahahaha, that's awesome. The next question should be "OK, is it forcing?" It very well might be.

[HighLow21]

 dwar0123, on 2012-January-03, 02:56, said:

Took me awhile to see the 13 card heart fit.

Hey you never know. Maybe declarer was planning to rise K♣ on the club switch and then take the practice finesse.

[HighLow21]

It's not a specific comment, but more of a general one. When playing with the less astute, remember the following 10 rules:

(1) 4NT is always Blackwood regardless of context, and if you don't like partner's original suit, a bid of 4NT means you will not be able to stop short of 6NT. One time, an opponent said, after my 5NT correction, "Here comes the kings." I said "Yeah, I know."
(2) If partner really likes his suit, he will keep rebidding regardless of any support he has for your suits, and regardless of any inference available that you don't like his suit. And, eventually, he will bid NT as a "rescue."
(3) Just in general, NT is *always* an option if you have a stopper, regardless of whether you have any other tricks to take.
(4) Sometimes, even a stopper isn't necessary in (3) above.
(5) When you support partner's better minor opening, a reply in NT doesn't show a strong game invitation. It's a confession that he or she hates the fact that you supported his or her opening bid. Pass like lightning because you won't be able to stop short of 3NT even on a combined balanced 18 count.
(6) Using Blackwood doesn't necessarily mean that you know what strain you want to play in. This is evidenced by the 3-minute huddle after your reply to Blackwood.
(7) It's perfectly reasonable to use Blackwood if one is not sure whether to go to slam off one ace.
(8) If partner uses Blackwood and stops at the 5 level, having a void is a perfect reason to go 6.
(9) Opening 2♣ on a minimum 2♣ opener, you must continually rebid the same values, driving to a grand slam off one ace, or driving to a small slam off 2 aces.
(10) Similar ideas hold after a 1NT or 2NT opening. If, for example, you compete to 2H with a terrible hand and a 6-bagger, after the auction starts 1NT-2D, partner is not allowed to let you stop short of game. 3NT is the appropriate bid with a balanced minimum 1NT opener, and 4H is the appropriate bid with a minimum NT opener and heart support.

Oh man, I haven't even gotten to the actual play of the cards yet...

This post has been edited by HighLow21: 2012-February-11, 00:13

[HighLow21]

 olegru, on 2011-November-03, 09:03, said:

Very recent online comments I receive from my partner after winning impossible contract with a huge help from defenders.
“Do not expect wdp, Partner. With 3 declarers this contract was easy to make.”

Very similar to my usual comment -- "I'm OK with having 2 opponents at the table, but not 3."

[HighLow21]

 Mbodell, on 2011-December-21, 02:54, said:

Assuming 9 high means a Yarborough and not a 9-hcp hand, then the LAW doesn't apply since it is supposed to be when both sides are around equal in points. Also raising to the 3 level with 4333 is pretty bad since the 4333 shape is death and hard since no ruffs in the short hand.

While I agree that 4333 is usually a terrible shape for a limit raise or preemptive raise, particularly when very weak, the LAW is actually particularly poor in general whenever both hands are weak, and/or when the trumps are very weak, often regardless of shape, and/or when the trumps break badly. In "I Fought the LAW..." Mike Lawrence and Anders Wirgren (spelling?) write up a great example of this wherein both sides have around 20 HCP and a 4-4 fit. However, in both cases, one of the opponents holds AKQJ in the other side's trump suit. That defender can draw trumps and then lead over to his partner's long suit, running 8 tricks to start the defense. It's a great example of how terribly off the LAW can be on some deals. 16 trumps but only 10 total tricks. (In fact, Richard Pavlicek has some examples where the Law can be off by 12 tricks!)

[HighLow21]

 neilkaz, on 2011-December-17, 22:23, said:

One of my favorites from the club over 20 years ago. Weeknight pairs game and PD and I are sitting across from an older married pair who often agrued so much that it slowed the game down.
Wife was quite strong and would be a respected expert on BBO whereas hubby was basically as skilled as the average advanced pickup.

<snip>

To say that "hubby was basically as skilled as the average advanced pickup" is a severe insult to advanced pickup players everywhere, "average" or otherwise...

[HighLow21]

 Phil, on 2011-December-19, 00:00, said:

Partner held this trump suit on Saturday:

98xx

AQTxx

LHO plays three rounds of spades, ruffed in dummy with the 9 whereas RHO discards.

He cannot work out that LHO has the K and J.

Unfortunately for us, they were doubleton. He says, how can I possibly guess this?

The best retort would be that he was playing RHO to have made a Grosvenor gambit. But I imagine he wouldn't understand that anyway.

[blackshoe]

 HighLow21, on 2012-February-10, 14:45, said:

Oh man, I haven't even gotten to the actual play of the cards yet...

Hey, don't stop now!