Playing with me in a National Pairs event, David Berkowitz held:
A 6 2
8 6 5
6
10 9 8 7 4 2
Not vulnerable against vulnerable opponents, he saw me open the bidding 2. We don't play a crazy style, so he could count on me having six trumps for my bid (even at this favorable vulnerability). When his RHO doubled, he did what I would urge everyone to do. He "Followed the LAW." He LAWfully raised to 3. The next player doubled (responsive/card-showing). What next?
Everyone passed! This was the auction:
|
How can this be? Isn't West supposed to take out East's card-showing double? Anyway, we should be okay. With 9 trumps and this favorable vulnerability, the LAW of Total Tricks should protect us. Let's now look at my hand. |
| A 6 28 6 56 10 9 8 7 4 2 |
|
| 9 5 J 10 9 7 4 2A 9 4 2 6 |
This doesn't look too bad. The opponents won't have a slam, but as long as the penalty is less than -500 (better than the value of their vulnerable game), we are in great shape. We have 2 aces for sure, and even if hearts are 3-1 and they take the top hearts, we have 3 sure heart tricks. That is 5 tricks, and a diamond ruff(s) in dummy gets us to at least 6 tricks and -500 for a good board.
The LAW has worked again.
Not so fast.
This was the full deal:
|
|
Against 3 doubled, West had no sense of humor. He was able to lead out the top 3 trumps (his plan when he left in the double). How did I do? I took my 3 long trumps and 2 aces. Down 4, -800. A bottom. David was looking at me and staring. Clearly this was my fault. He had Followed the LAW (some call it "my" LAW, but it is really Jene-Rene Vernes' LAW) and we had paid dearly. He told me, "You said it is safe to bid 3 with this hand." Actually, he was kidding, but he never lets me forget about this deal. Okay. My fault. But, the next 99 times out of 100 this bid works, I hope I get the credit. |