BRIDGE

De mortuis

Andrew Robson

I THINK it is a shame when postmortems are discouraged. There is frequently much to be gained from a constructive discussion of what has just occurred. I suppose the (occasionally justifiable) fear exists that the postmortem will deteriorate into the open- ly critical. My experience is that the criticis- er is often the one who is most at fault.

Dealer West

4Q

VA K 8 6 4

• K J 4 4A 109 • 10 6 2 • A K 10

Both vulnerable

3

6 4 3 48 2 V Q J 10 9 7 5 3

• 9 7 5 3

N W E

49 8 5 2

4 —

4K J 6 5 4

V2

• A Q 8

J 7

The Bidding South West North East 1♦ 24 411 44 pass pass pass 64 pass 74 pass pass 7, double An out-of-the-blue (`Lightner') double of a slam contract asks for an unusual lead generally the lead of dummy's first bid suit. Thus East felt on safe ground when he doubled the final contract — he could trump if his partner led a 4. But West was on a different wavelength. He presumed that East was doubling because he felt, quite simply, that 74 was failing. West led Declarer trumped in dummy, cashed 4A, crossed to his 4K drawing the last remain- ing trump, and ran his 4s. A gigantic 2,470 points (including 500 for the game) were scored by North-South when the contract would have been defeated on a 4 lead.

East found himself unable to control his emotions and wanted to know why the 4 lead had not materialised. Doubtless West should have led a + — if East was dou- bling because he was sure that the contract was failing — then it would fail even if West led a 4 rather than IPA. But the most telling comment was made by a 'kibitzer' (spectator). Somewhat nervously he prof- fered to the irate East 'Perhaps if you had bid 7+ instead of 7111 . . . '