Thursday, April 23, 2009

Why I hate Peter Gill

In my previous post I posed this defensive problem.

Trick one goes spade queen ducked all round. Trick two is a spade to the king ducked again leaving us on play. Is there a clue or will we eventually succumb to the hindsight bias ?

At the table, in the PABF 2006, I realized the futility of continuing a spade. Between clubs and hearts, it appears to be a tossup at first glance, but the heart switch requires fewer specific cards in partner's hand. So I chose the H10.

Why I hate Peter Gill is because he spoilt my plans for this post by his insightful reply that can be found here.

"I must trust my partner - otherwise it is my error. "

Tony had played his lowest spade spot and his clubs were K109 (declarer had opened a 3334 11 count) so the club shift could have won us a game swing.

Now try this one

Over 1NT, partner's 2C would have been natural and double would have been takeout for the minors.


  1. There's "trust your partner", and then there's
    "blind faith in partner". This time, is partner Tony Nunn?

    Peter Gill

  2. Partner is Tony Nunn but does it really
    matter ? ha ha

  3. Gosh, I would've liked to get my hand off my chest with something other than 1S. Now, doesn't it depend a bit on what your agreement on 2C is - forcing, or non-forcing? If 2C was forcing, then partner could now have something like: void xxx xxx KQJxxxx. However, if 2C was non-forcing, that eliminates such a hand - maybe partner must imply some kind of hand with spade tolerance - eg Qx xxx xxx AKxxx? Anyway, in the absence of further agreement or definition, I think partner is trying to improve the part-score, and I shall pass.

  4. I suppose the title is Sartaj's attempt to join humanity. Bad luck, the whole animal kingdom is together on this one. Better luck next time.

    Any one of us.

  5. Seems an impossible question without further explanation of your style.

    Pass and 3S are both reasonable.