Even on holidays my addiction has a strong pull on me. So Sanne and I went to a bridgeclub in Piedmont, California. The director apologized for the little amount of six tables and the not so young competition.
The first game I was dummy and I see Sanne struggling in a fair game, but the trumps split nasty. I pay too much attention to the game instead of sitting back and I notice one of my opponents revokes. Sure, can happen, her discards were of no importance to the game. I was willing to let it go by unpunished, but not unmentioned. The old bat immediately shuffled her cards with the remarks "No, I did not!". Okay, I know what I saw, and that shuffling sure gives the situation a bad taste of guilt. Sanne’s "We’re here as guests"-look made me swallow and forget about the deal.
Here’s a nice deal (NS vulnerable against not):
I ask West for the meaning of 3. Invitational. I would really like to bid 5 but the unfavourable vulnerability forces me to a reluctant pass. I could have doubled, but +50 or +100 doesn’t look to make a big difference, and it could easily be -590 if there’s some distribution involved.
Before I lead East mentions he has to correct his partner’s explanation. 3 wasn’t invitational, it was merely competitive. I am allowed to take back my last pass and reevaluate. I still don’t know what to do. I just pass, and hope for the best of it.
Here’s the full deal.
Down two, but we are cold for 5.
And now something strange happened. East called the director himself and eventually the score was corrected to +600 for us. Huh?
Sanne could have doubled 4 to show a good takeout double. I could have doubled to show values and my possible nasty trump possession. But both opponents agreed our lousy score was because of the wrong explanation only. Huh again.
We finished 4th place with some 55%.