[jdeegan]

Scoring: IMP

1♦-P-1♥-2♠
3♦-3♠-P-P
P

---

I was playing in an indy tourney with one board rounds. On my single hand with the Polish star, the bidding went as shown. On defense, I led the jack of clubs. Declarer won, drove out the spade ace, won the diamond return and pulled trumps. He played the king and one club. Partner tried to cash a diamond, but it was ruffed. Declarer conceded two hearts for 3♠ making three. We lost 4.7 IMPs on the board since 4♦ is making for our side. If I made an error on this hand, it escapes me, and the game of bridge is much tougher than I thought.

While we were waiting for the next hand, I got a private message from the Polish star 'You are imbicil'. I cannot dispute the veracity of this comment, but I am mystified as to its motive. Can you help out?

[FrancesHinden]

I'd have lost more than 4.7 IMPS on the hand because I'd have bid 3NT on the North cards and been -200.

[whereagles]

The reason he insulted you is simple. It is just the common strategem some people use to tell off partner before he realizes it was them who screwed up.

[Free]

'other'

You didn't misbid, you're just a little light. But I don't understand why YOU would be the imbicil

He had lots of values, and probably thought his pass was forcing somehow. But I wouldn't know why it would be forcing in the first place, he only showed 6+HCP or even less. I don't think you did anything wrong here, and would report the rudeness to abuse. We can live without such people...

[Miron]

With unknown partner I like 3♦. If we would be playing support doubles I would probably bid double as it seams a better bit to me (however, i don't say 3♦ are wrong - imho it's a matter of style).
3♦ are a bit overbid, but the shape is good (and partner bids hearts and opps spades). With north hand I would also try 3NT. And the south can move to 4♦ (but prepare to run if partner has ♦Axx).

[Miron]

And I forgot:
Any who says "you're imbecil" is ...
Even if you would made a mistake, it can be said in polite way.
I don't think these 3♦ is a mistake. It is overbid, but has a reason.

[hotShot]

Opening the south hand 1♦ is surely an option, but 10 HCP and a 7 card minor are better described by opening 3♦. This makes it much harder for opps to find the ♠ fit and to stop in 3♠.
But your opening does not qualify as a misbid, it's just 2nd best.
Your 3♦ bid, promisses a stronger hand than you have, but again a misbid is something else.
Your partner showed 6+ HCP and did everything to hide how much more he holds. Without bidding game (3NT or 5♦) he's got no reason to complain, about your bidding. Not bidding game when holding opening strength and trump support qualifies as misbid.

As to the defence your side gets 2♥, 1♠ and a ♣. I think you got that, so no misdefence there.

[mr1303]

3♠ has the unfortunate problem of being cold. And North should try bidding like he has more than a 6 count....

Incidentally, 4♥ looks like a reasonable contract. OK, on the lead of the ace of diamonds and a club switch it goes off, but on a spade lead, declarer can win, draw two rounds of trumps, play a diamond, ruff a spade in the dummy, draw trumps and claim. Maybe double dummy, but it's the only NS game that has any play.

[sfbp]

I have no idea if your partner was right but I had a disaster with a Polish partner when HE opened 1 ♦ on this type of hand. My perspective that day was - why stretch to open wildly distributional hands with 1♦? (it's not the same with major suits, as the 4-level is more attainable, witness this hand). We got to slam down 1 because I thought he had an opening bid. He didn't.

Perhaps this is what he was complaining about. In an indy this is a perfectly good bid of 2♦ or even 3♦.

But what do I know? You could bid 4♥ and in an indy the defence may well not find their diamond ruff.

I don't see anything wrong with anything else you did. And some days opening such hands works a treat.

I don't care who it is, report to abuse.

Stephen

[hrothgar]

I suspect that the comment was (primarily) about your bidding.

The 1♦ opening is a bit light (I'd cetainly preempt)
Some players might consider a support double after the 2♠ overcall.

[Codo]

You opened the Hand 1 ♦ and rebid 3 ♦ as a free bid. I see, what hand type you liked to show, but I had understood the same hand with at least 15+ HCPs.
So in my view, you misbid the hand.
Maybe I am in the minority, but at least the polish star seems to be on the same wavelength.

In this case, he thought, that his pass was forcing. I doubt, that this is mainstream at least in an indy.

Your lead was bad. You bid a suit, he bid one, you lead a third and why? To get a ruff?

But after the hand, all the blame goes to him: Even if you did something very very stupid (what you did not), there is never ever a reason to insult someone.
The only possible excusion is, that he may have another understandig of the sentence 'You are imbicil' then you have.

BTW: What is imbicil?

[1eyedjack]

Clear to me.
Being a 1-board round indy there is a reasonable probability that he expects to be sitting on your left or right on the next hand, and wants you rattled.

[helene_t]

I fail to see that you did anything wrong, unless you had agreed that your 3♦ bid established an FP situation since a weaker hand should have used good-bad 2NT.

Your lead was bad but it turned out not to matter so this can hardly be what he complained about.

[Al_U_Card]

I think that he judged the hand incorrectly (an indy with an "unknown" pard) he thought that your 3D bid was on a 5 card suit perhaps? I don't have a problem with the opening bid (a bit too heavy for a pre-empt for my taste) but the free rebid of 3D promises way more. Coming in later is a risk, but it shows the nature of your hand (weak with lots of D). Why in the world he didn't take another bid is beyond me. I know that I would have and 3NT is a logical choice.

btw Were there any significant pauses during the auction?

[barmar]

A couple have suggested support doubles. First, since this is an indy, it's extremely unlikely that any system discussion has taken place (the most I ever see is something like "we'll play your profile"), and support double is not usually one of the assumed conventions. But even if support doubles are available, most don't play them this high. Absent discussion to the contrary, I think most don't play support doubles when they would force responder to the 3 level when he could still have a minimum hand (would you really want to be in 3♥ with minimum opener and responder and only a 4-3 fit)?

[jdeegan]

Al_U_Card, on May 30 2006, 08:25 AM, said:

btw Were there any significant pauses during the auction?

I don't think there were any significant pauses. I may have paused a moment before deciding to make a deliberate 3♦ overbid, but I didn't agonize over it at all. Having opened the hand, it seemed better than passing, and we had no agreement to play the support double.

[bid_em_up]

Lovely. Another case of a person bidding just as badly (or worse) but blaming their partner instead.

I dont like the 1♦ opening either, especially not in an individual. At least if you open 3♦, you have about the hand partner will be expecting, 7 diamonds, <10 hcp (discounting any value for the J♣ for 1st seat opening bid). Opening 1♦, and making a free rebid of 3♦, distorts the values of the hand.

On the given auction, I dont believe that your partners pass of 3♠ can possibly create a FP situation. Even though you have shown approximately 15+, his hand is the unknown. There is no way you should attempt good/bad 2N in an individual, no matter who your partner happens to be. He has shown no more than a 6 count and HASN'T shown his fit. On the auction, his own brilliant self (yea, dats da phrase I was looking for) should have either bid 3N, cued 4♠, or raised you to 4♦/5♦. His failure to do any of the these things is unexcusable, imo.

Its either that or its a case of him of attempting to lose the board and win the post-mortem. Which, sadly, he managed to do.

Blacklist him and move on.

Codo: imbicil = mispelling of imbecile = A stupid or silly person; a dolt.
A person whose mental acumen is well below par.

(Not my definitions....Websters Dictionary)

[pigpenz]

jdeegan, on May 30 2006, 02:42 AM, said:

While we were waiting for the next hand, I got a private message from the Polish star 'You are imbicil'. I cannot dispute the veracity of this comment, but I am mystified as to its motive. Can you help out?

you could have asked him how many poles it takes to screw in a 4♦ bid

[Al_U_Card]

pigpenz, on May 30 2006, 09:23 AM, said:

jdeegan, on May 30 2006, 02:42 AM, said:

While we were waiting for the next hand, I got a private message from the Polish star 'You are imbicil'.  I cannot dispute the veracity of this comment, but I am mystified as to its motive.  Can you help out?

you could have asked him how many poles it takes to screw in a 4♦ bid

or how many it takes to screw up a hand?....

[fred]

I would appreciate it if you would report this incident to abuse@bridgebase.com.

Your partner's behavior would not be acceptable even if he was right about the bridge aspect of the situation (he wasn't). I can only imagine how he would have reacted if you had actually made a mistake.

Furthermore, we expect star players to know better and to set an example for others not only through their play, but through their behavior. Star players should think of themselves as ambassadors for the bridge players in their countries. I am sure that there are many Polish players on BBO would be shocked and embarassed to see one of their leading players behave in this manner.

If you do not want to e-mail our abuse department, but feel comfortable about sending me an e-mail (fred@bridgebase.com) containing the star player's ID, I will be happy to remove his star. I don't care how well he plays - if he is capable of behaving this way he should not have this symbol on his profile.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com