A Reply to "Phillip Martin - We Want You Back"

Someone brought this article on BridgeWinners to my attention. Here is my reply.

A few months ago, there was a thread on BridgeWinners discussing COVID vaccine mandates. I don't recall now whether it was specifically ACBL mandates or mandates in general. In any event, I expressed the opinion that there is not a one-size-fits-all answer to the question of whether one should be vaccinated. Since there are individuals for whom, for reasons of demographics or personal health history, the vaccine offers a greater risk to their health than remaining unvaccinated, it is a decision each person must make for himself in consultation with his doctor. For a business to adopt a policy that discriminates against the unvaccinated is, in effect, to pressure people into making a medical decision that may go against the advice of their own doctors. I find that unconscionable.

I am aware that there are potentially valid counter-arguments to my position. Whether one finds my argument or the counter-arguments more compelling depends on a number of factors, perhaps most importantly on where one fits on the individualism versus collectivism spectrum. I do not, however, think "You're an idiot" is one of those potentially valid counter-arguments, and I said as much to Eugene Hung, BridgeWinners' moderator.

Eugene declined to remove the offending remark. Apparently, it did not violate community standards. I realized he was correct. Gratuitous abusive remarks are quite in line with BridgeWinners' community standards, despite posted guidelines to the contrary. I had to question why I belonged to a community where that was the case. Such uncivil remarks lower that standard of discourse and can make the experience of reading the site unpleasant whether they are directed to you or to others. While, sadly, this is true on just about any forum when the discussion becomes political, it is often true on BridgeWinners even on strictly bridge discussions. Over the years I had hidden some users who repeatedly use abuse as a debating technique. But one can't get away from it altogether.

Even the page linked to above offers an example: an unnecessary uncivil remark, terminating with a sarcastic "Truly remarkable." Admittedly, the comment was not grossly uncivil. But it was uncivil enough to make me cringe. When one encounters such comments time and time again, it makes the overall experience of the site unenjoyable. And if I found the site unenjoyable, why was I even there?

I decided if calling someone an idiot did indeed not violate community standards, it was time for me to exit the community. So I asked Eugene to terminate my account.

I do appreciate Cameron's article and the supporting comments. But actually there is no reason for me to return to BridgeWinners. Anyone who wants to hear my insights--or outsights--on bridge, as well the occasional Lowenthal story, can do so right here. I restarted the blog after the kerfuffle for that very purpose.

 

ACBL Daylong 1 - Jul 29, 2021 - Board 9

Board 9
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A K 7 4 2  ♥ K 6 5  ♦ K 10  ♣ K Q 8

I open one spade in third seat. Partner bids one notrump. Two notrump shows 17 or 18 HCP. This hand has 18 in prime cards and no jacks. Even so, it lacks texture. My spade suit will be hard to establish opposite a singleton or doubleton. So the hand is not worth more than its nominal 18 HCP. 

I raise to two notrump, and partner re-raises to three. West leads the deuce of hearts

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K 7 4 2 ♥ K 6 5 ♦ K 10 ♣ K Q 8
	SOUTH Robot ♠ 9 5 ♥ A J 10 9 ♦ Q 9 7 ♣ 6 5 3 2

West	North	East	South
Robot	Phillip	Robot	Robot
			Pass
Pass	1 ♠	Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 NT	Pass	3 NT
(All pass)

I play low from dummy, hoping to see East play the queen. But he doesn't. He plays the seven, and I win with the nine. 

In theory, West could have led from three or four small hearts. But East would have to be psychic not to play his queen at trick one. So I'm assuming the heart queen is on my left. I might has well use this hand entry to repeat the heart finesse. They should be able to keep me out of my hand and prevent me from ever cashing the fourth round of hearts. But the threat of reaching my hand may create problems for them. I lead the jack, just in case West thinks of some reason to cover. He does! I win with dummy's king, and East plays the three.

Why would West cover? Perhaps he has queen third. If so, he can't stop me from taking four heart tricks double-dummy, so, by robot logic, he sees no reason not to cover. The fact that, if he ducked, I wouldn't know I could afford to cash the ace, crashing my king, doesn't occur to him.

Now what? I have four heart tricks and two spade tricks. I need three minor-suit tricks to make this. I need either to find the club ace onside or to find the diamond jack. Playing for the club ace onside is problematic, since I only have one sure hand entry. So it looks better to hope the diamond jack is on my right. I'll start by leading the diamond king. I'll probably end up finessing East for the diamond jack, but I may change my mind, depending on how they defend.

East wins my diamond king with the ace; West plays the three. East continues with the eight of diamonds. Here is the position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K 7 4 2 ♥ 6 ♦ 10 ♣ K Q 8
	SOUTH Robot ♠ 9 5 ♥ A 10 ♦ Q 9 ♣ 6 5 3 2

East doesn't know I have the nine, so he would probably lead the jack if he had it. It appears the diamond finesse is losing and I'm going to need the club ace onside instead. Since I need two entries to my hand, I can't afford to duck this trick. I need to hop and hope that either diamonds are four-four or West began with jack third. Otherwise, they will have enough tricks to beat me in the diamond suit. I play the queen, and West follows with the deuce. That's good. Maybe he's echoing with four. I play the deuce of clubs. West hops with the ace, and East follows with the seven.

I expect the opponents to cash their diamonds, but West shifts to the four of hearts. East pitches the diamond six. Why didn't they cash their diamonds? Were diamonds six-two?

I win and cash my last heart, pitching a spade from dummy. East pitches the five of diamonds. There is no way for me to take another trick beyond dummy's four winners. I cash them and concede the rest. Making three.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K 7 4 2 ♥ K 6 5 ♦ K 10 ♣ K Q 8
WEST Robot ♠ 10 8 3 ♥ Q 8 4 2 ♦ 3 2 ♣ A J 9 4		EAST Robot ♠ Q J 6 ♥ 7 3 ♦ A J 8 6 5 4 ♣ 10 7
	SOUTH Robot ♠ 9 5 ♥ A J 10 9 ♦ Q 9 7 ♣ 6 5 3 2

46%. My second below-average result. What did I do wrong? Oh, I see. Spade are three-three. I could have done better if I had ducked a spade after winning the king of hearts in dummy. 

Maybe that's a better line. If three-three spades is my only chance, it isn't. Playing for the diamond jack onside is better. But maybe playing on spades can work if spades are four-two also. I might wind up taking three spade tricks and two tricks in the minors. I'm not sure why I didn't even consider that line. For some reason, I was fixated on taking three tricks in the minors.

How would the play go if spades are four-two? I win the heart king and duck a spade. The best defense would be for West to win and play a heart. Now I"m forced to cash my last heart in this position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ A K 7 4 ♥ -- ♦ K 10 ♣ K Q 8
	SOUTH Robot ♠ 9 ♥ 10 ♦ Q 9 7 ♣ 6 5 3 2

What do I pitch from dummy on the heart? Say I pitch a club. Now I play ace, king, and another spade. They win and play a club. When I drive the diamond ace, they have club tricks to cash. So that doesn't work.

How about pitching a diamond, coming down to a stiff king? If the club ace is onside, am I home? I play a club to dummy and play on spades. When the defense wins the spade, they play ace and a diamond. I still have to lose a trick to the club ace. So if the diamond play comes from my right, I will have to finesse the nine. That means if spades are four-two, I need the club onside plus some additional luck.

I'm not even going to try to calculate this beyond a rough estimate. Let's just say playing on spades works when spades are three-three and less than half the time when spades are four-two. That puts it somewhere under 60%.

When does my line work? During the play, I thought it was a little better than 50%. It works when the diamond jack is onside, and I have some chance if it isn't.

Unfortunately, there's a problem that I didn't see at the time. Some of the time the defense can prevent my taking the diamond finesse by winning my diamond king with the ace and playing a heart while the diamonds are blocked. My line might be wrong even if you switch the ten and nine of diamonds. But, given the blockage, ducking a spade at trick three is clearly better. Plus, playing on spades yields an overtrick when spades are three-three. That would tip the scales even if the decision were close.

Note that two assumptions I made during the play were wrong. First, that the diamond jack was offside. I didn't consider the possibility that East had six diamonds. I still think he would have led the jack with fewer than six diamonds. But with six leading low makes perfect sense, since he is hoping his partner has three diamonds and I have queen doubleton.

My second incorrect assumption was that West would not cover the heart jack with queen fourth. I made the classic mistake of thinking my opponent was looking at my hand. I knew I had no side entry to the long heart, but West didn't. From his point of view, I might have had either the spade queen or the diamond ace. 

So covering doesn't necessarily cost. When does it gain? Perhaps West didn't want to make it easy for me to lead twice toward dummy's clubs. Maybe, instead of mentally berating West for his cover, I should have considered that his play suggested he held the club ace. Had I drawn that inference, it would be easy to see that ducking a spade at trick three was my best play.

ACBL Daylong 1 - Jul 29, 2021 - Board 8

Board 8
Neither vulnerable

♠ Q 5  ♥ A K Q J 9 5  ♦ J 8 5  ♣ J 6

RHO opens one club in third seat. I bid one heart. LHO raises to two clubs, partner bids two spades, and RHO passes. 

Partner tends to have good suits for his weak two bids. So he probably has a six-card spade suit that wasn't up to his standards. A good five-card suit is possible but unlikely, since it would be dangerous to bid past two of my suit with only five spades and no expectation of a fit. 

Should I pass or correct to three hearts? Even though my suit is better, it's a level higher. For it to be necessary to correct to hearts in order to go plus, hearts would have to take two tricks more than spades. I see no reason to believe that's true. 

I realize that's more of an IMP than a matchpoint philosophy. But my experience is that other tables find all kinds of ways to go minus. So even at matchpoints my primary goal in partscore auctions is to go plus. I rate to go plus here. Who knows what will happen if I bid three hearts? Partner might even bid again.

I pass. West passes also and leads the deuce of hearts.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ Q 5 ♥ A K Q J 9 5 ♦ J 8 5 ♣ J 6
	SOUTH Robot ♠ K 10 8 6 4 3 ♥ 4 ♦ 10 9 ♣ A Q 9 8

West	North	East	South
Robot	Phillip	Robot	Robot
		Pass	Pass
1 ♣	1 ♥	2 ♣	2 ♠
(All pass)

East wouldn't be raising without four clubs, so West has only three. Why is he leading a heart? A lead from three small in my suit would be weird. I suspect he has four hearts and is trying to give his partner a ruff. So he is either 4-4-2-3 or 3-4-3-3.

I might as well pitch one of my diamond losers. I win with the ace and cash the king, pitching a diamond. East plays six--eight. West follows to the second heart with the three.

Now what? If I try to cash a third heart and East ruffs, I have lost my chance to take a club finesse. That may not matter. I don't expect the club finesse to work, since I don't think West would have led dummy's suit if he had a safe club lead. So I might as well try a third round of hearts. Good choice. Both opponents follow, and I pitch my last diamond. So West is apparently 4-3-3-3.

I was wrong about the heart split. Let's see if I'm wrong about the club finesse as well. I lead the club jack--five--eight--king. West belatedly tries the the diamond ace. East plays the deuce and I ruff. If West has ace-jack-nine fourth of spades, he has three trump tricks unless I can endplay him. Can I? I can cash the ace-queen of clubs and ruff a club to dummy as West pitches a diamond. Then I ruff out his last diamond and lead a spade. He can't take more than two spade tricks.

Embarking on this plan, I cash the ace and queen of clubs, pitching a heart from dummy. West's ten drops. Now my nine is good. This is the current position:

	NORTH Phillip ♠ Q 5 ♥ J 9 ♦ J 8 ♣ --
	SOUTH Robot ♠ K 10 8 6 4 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ 9

When I lead the nine of clubs, West ruffs with the deuce, and I overruff with the five.That's another way to hold him to two trump tricks. Can I hold him to one?  If he has ace-jack-small of spades left, there is nothing I can do. My only hope is that East's singleton is the jack.

I lead the spade queen. No such luck. East follows with the nine. I have to lose two spade tricks. Making four.

	NORTH Phillip ♠ Q 5 ♥ A K Q J 9 5 ♦ J 8 5 ♣ J 6
WEST Robot ♠ A J 7 2 ♥ 10 3 2 ♦ A 7 6 ♣ K 10 7		EAST Robot ♠ 9 ♥ 8 7 6 ♦ K Q 4 3 2 ♣ 5 4 3 2
	SOUTH Robot ♠ K 10 8 6 4 3 ♥ 4 ♦ 10 9 ♣ A Q 9 8

95%! Another surprisingly good result. True, West made a poor opening lead. But it's not even his worst opening lead. Leading the suit they had bid and raised would have dropped yet another trick. Besides, everyone has the same opponents, so you wouldn't expect this result to be unusual. 

The reason it is unusual is that most players are in hearts. Some bid three hearts over two spades and played it there. Others tried a two-heart overcall over one club, pre-empting partner out of mentioning his suit altogether. A two-heart overcall is not a terrible choice opposite a passed hand. In fact, it's somewhat unlucky that it works out poorly. One would not expect that hearts is the wrong strain. In fact, the only reason it is is that East has an easier opening lead than West does.

ACBL Daylong 1 - Jul 29, 2021 - Board 7

Board 7
Neither vulnerable

♠ A 3  ♥ A 8 5  ♦ J 7 4  ♣ K 8 6 4 3

I open one club in first seat, partner responds one diamond, and East doubles. The robots play that redouble here shows three-card support. This makes sense opposite a response of one of a major, but I don't see the point of that agreement after one diamond. If you have only three diamonds and an unbalanced hand, you surely have something more interesting to say, such as showing a major or rebidding a six-card club suit. And if you're balanced, the fact that you are balanced seems more important than your puny support. 

I think the right call with this hand is pass. There is no reason to bid when you have a weak notrump, so passing allows you to reserve a one notrump rebid for some more useful purpose, like showing an offshape strong notrump. Even if you haven't agreed on a special meaning for one notrump, passing seems like the wiser choice. Rebidding one notrump conveys no additional information. All it does is leave you exposed to a possible double by LHO.

Still, I haven't had much success passing with these hands opposite robots. The auction always seems to get tangled up, because they find themselves in unfamiliar territory. If I rebid one notrump, at least partner knows what his rebids mean. So I bid one notrump to keep him happy. 

West bids three hearts--pass--pass to me. I have nothing further to say. I pass, and partner leads the deuce of hearts.

	NORTH Robot ♠ K 10 8 6 5 ♥ Q J 9 7 3 ♦ 10 ♣ A 5
		EAST Phillip ♠ A 3 ♥ A 8 5 ♦ J 7 4 ♣ K 8 6 4 3

West	North	East	South
Robot	Robot	Phillip	Robot
		1 ♣	Pass
1 ♦	Double	1 NT	3 ♥
(All pass)

Partner appears to have led a singleton heart. A singleton trump is not generally an attractive lead, so I suspect he has a spade stack.

Declarer plays the seven from dummy and follows with the five when I take my ace. I follow partner's plan and return a heart. Declarer wins with the nine in dummy as partner discards the five of diamonds. The robots signal count with their discards, so if partner has five diamonds, he will discard his lowest. The only way that can be his lowest is if he began with specifically AQ985, so it's more likely he has six. 

I do wish partner would signal louder. When you choose to play high--whatever high means in your methods--you should play the highest spot you can afford. If partner could be counted on to do that, then I would know for a fact this was his lowest diamond, however unlikely that was a priori. Unfortunately, the robots are fond of these bloodless count cards, so one can never be sure what they have. In any event, I'm assuming for the time being that partner is 4-1-6-2, which makes declarer 2-4-3-4. 

Declarer plays a trump to his ten, and partner pitches the spade four. That's a bit of a surprise. Partner has plenty of diamonds he can pitch. Pitching a spade from any holding seems like a bad idea. 

Declarer cashes the ace and king of diamonds, pitching a club from dummy. Partner follows with the three (told you) and the eight. Declarer now leads the deuce of spades--nine--ten--ace. I can't believe partner pitched a spade from queen forth. He must have been 3-1-6-3 and his queen is now dropping. But even if it isn't, declarer can ruff it out. I return a club. Declarer wins with dummy's ace, plays a trump to his king, and leads the seven of spades. Partner plays the queen. Declarer has the rest. Making five.

	NORTH Robot ♠ K 10 8 6 5 ♥ Q J 9 7 3 ♦ 10 ♣ A 5
WEST Robot ♠ Q 9 4 ♥ 2 ♦ Q 9 8 5 3 2 ♣ Q J 2		EAST Phillip ♠ A 3 ♥ A 8 5 ♦ J 7 4 ♣ K 8 6 4 3
	SOUTH Robot ♠ J 7 2 ♥ K 10 6 4 ♦ A K 6 ♣ 10 9 7

This is a good example of how the robots' assumption of double-dummy play by declarer leads them astray. Yes, double dummy, pitching from queen-nine third of spades can't cost. So why not? At the tables where partner didn't pitch a spade (by pure chance presumably) declarer went wrong in the spade suit and took only ten tricks. Losing eleven tricks placed us slightly below average at 42%. 

I don't see that there was much I could do here. Well, I suppose I could have made that support redouble I complained about. A couple of players did raise diamonds (although, weirdly, they chose two diamonds, promising four, rather than redouble, showing three). This prompted partner to compete to four diamonds, down one. Fortunately for them, the opponents sold out rather than bid their game. Since no one redoubled, I can't say what would have happened had I chosen to do that.

ACBL Daylong 1 - Jul 29, 2021 - Board 6

Board 6
Both vulnerable

♠ A Q J  ♥ A K  ♦ 10 9  ♣ A K 10 7 3 2

RHO passes.  How should I handle this hand? It's too strong for one club. But two clubs followed by three clubs is an awkward auction. It's best to avoid it unless nothing else appeals. Despite the two small diamonds, treating this hand as some variety of notrump opening is more palatable. Which variety? A two notrump opening shows 20-21 HCP. Two clubs followed by two notrump shows 22-24 HCP. This hand has 21 HCP, but the six-card club suit is worth at least one HCP, so two clubs, then two notrump looks like the right choice.

I bid two clubs, partner bids two diamonds, and I bid two notrump. Partner transfers to hearts, then bids three notrump, which I pass. West leads the club queen.

	NORTH Robot ♠ 6 2 ♥ Q 9 8 7 5 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ J 6 4
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q J ♥ A K ♦ 10 9 ♣ A K 10 7 3 2

West	North	East	South
Robot	Robot	Robot	Phillip
		Pass	2 ♣
Pass	2 ♦	Pass	2 NT
Pass	3 ♦	Pass	3 ♥
Pass	3 NT	(All pass)

I have at least ten tricks: six clubs, three hearts, and the spade ace. If hearts split, I have two more. And I will need to decide at some point whether to risk the spade finesse. The opening lead suggests the spade king is offside. If West was going to choose a passive lead, a lead from small spades of whatever length would have been more attractive than what is apparently a singleton club.

East plays the five of clubs, and I win with the king. I cash the king and ace of hearts. (Cashing the king first is right, since the opponents are more apt to give count, thinking their partner may have the ace.) West plays four, six; East plays three, jack. The deuce and ten are left. Since no one played the deuce on the first round, the suit is probably four-two. West surely would have played six, four with a doubleton, so I suspect he is the one with four. He played a bloodless count card on the first round, then choose to conceal his deuce on the second round.

I play the deuce of clubs to the jack. West discards the seven of diamonds, and East follows with the nine of clubs. The robots tend to give count when discarding, and the seven looks like the start of an echo with four. So it appears West is 4-4-4-1.

I cash the queen of hearts. East pitches the diamond eight, and I pitch the diamond nine. Since I suspect from the opening lead that the spade king is offside, I'm not taking the finesse at this point. Perhaps if the king is onside, the opponents will discard poorly and I will get another chance in the end position.

I play a club to my hand. West discards the spade eight. On the next club, he pitches the spade three; East, the spade ten. West's echo in spades is consistent with my belief that he is 4-4-4-1. Here is the current position with my best guess for the East-West cards:

	NORTH Robot ♠ 6 2 ♥ 9 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ --
WEST Robot ♠ K x ♥ 10 ♦ ? ? ? ♣ --		EAST Robot ♠ x x x ♥ -- ♦ ? ? ? ♣ --
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q J ♥ -- ♦ 10 ♣ 7 3

On the next club, both opponents discard diamonds, the three and the five. On the last club, West discards the heart ten; East, the spade nine. Each opponent has two spades and two diamonds left, so it doesn't hurt to exit with a diamond and see what happens. West wins with the king of diamonds, then leads the queen to his partner's ace. There are only spades left, so I can safely finesse when East leads a spade, although I don't expect the finesse to win. It doesn't. Making four.

	NORTH Robot ♠ 6 2 ♥ Q 9 8 7 5 ♦ J 4 2 ♣ J 6 4
WEST Robot ♠ K 8 5 3 ♥ 10 6 4 2 ♦ K Q 7 3 ♣ Q		EAST Robot ♠ 10 9 7 4 ♥ J 3 ♦ A 8 6 5 ♣ 9 8 5
	SOUTH Phillip ♠ A Q J ♥ A K ♦ 10 9 ♣ A K 10 7 3 2

76%! Another result that's better than I expected it to be. Why is this result so good? Some opened one club and played it there. I don't mind opening at the one level when others might choose two clubs. But the time to do that is when you have a flexible hand and want to leave room to bid all your suits. With this hand, even if partner responds to one club, you have no suitable rebid. That's precisely the hand the two-club opening was designed for.

Some took the same auction I did but corrected three notrump to four hearts, apparently frightened by their lack of a diamond stopper. Fear makes you do terrible things. 

Some reached five clubs after opening two clubs and rebidding three clubs. 

And some brave souls went down in three notrump by taking the spade finesse after cashing the heart queen. Taking the finesse is reasonable provided (A) you expect this to be a normal contract and (B) you expect the finesse to win at least half the time. One might be forgiven for (A). It's a bit surprising that less than half the field is in three notrump. But if you ask yourself why West chose to lead a club rather than a spade, you should realize the finesse is not a favorite.