Three weeks ago the following hand was played downstairs on Tuesday night.
My Partner, Ken Ballans playing North opened with a bid of 2 Spades. This is a conventional bid showing both major suits - spades being longer. As we use the rule of 20 as a minimum opening requirement, this would normally equate to a minimum high card point count of around 10/11.

East (Peter Foster) who was vulnerable against not, bid 3 Diamonds.
My hand was:-

I have a choice of bids but looking at a likely 4 defensive tricks in my hand and the uncertainty of game despite my opening values, a penalty double was a fairly clear course of action.

Gail passed and Ken, not looking at all his usual cheerful self, accepted the double.

This is the full layout of the deal

I laid the JS on the table and my first emotion on viewing dummy was one of relief that we were not in hearts. Peter played the spade Ace. We play count signals and Ken dropped the 6. I am feeling just a mite uneasy –where is the 5? If Ken has it we can

no longer count on a spade trick. Peter then played a diamond and Ken the 5 of spades - giving me the information I most feared. The AD was played and was immediately followed by a small club to the King and the Ten Jack Queen Ace followed. Is Ken’s distribution 6 4 0 3? If so I must remove dummies diamond in case Ken’s remaining Club is the 9, as is possible on the fall of the cards. On my KD Ken threw the Heart 4 and I knew in a flash that Peter is void in Hearts AND that there is no room for Ken to have a third club. At this stage I tell Peter the roof has fallen in. I manage a broken grin between clenched teeth, congratulate my opponents on their overtrick  and again wonder for the umpteenth time why I am still drawn to this frustrating and oh so humbling a game.

But wait. –  to add to my chagrin there  is a sequel…..

Some 30 minutes or so later Ken said “I very nearly took out the 3D double into 3H –in fact on the almost certain lead of the AD the defence cannot stop 10 tricks as the cards lie”. I pick up the remnants of my shattered ego in silence.  I didn’t need to check his observation - I am sure he was right . .

Indeed - for the record - few people know that Ken was an acknowledged expert in the field of double dummy problem solving. In the International Popular Bridge magazine Ken’s name was consistently in evidence as a winner in double dummy corner over a period of many years – correcting the compiler, Hugh Darwen, on several occasions. Not unexpectedly he ended up assisting Hugh by editing and vetting the  problems in advance of them being set.

Mike Crook