[AL78]

I was North.

First board

Defensive cock-up by me. When in with the ♥K I must have niscounted declarer's tricks, because I didn't think he would run off so many before partner gets in and I cash my spade winners. I should have just taken my spade tricks then given up. 12.1%

Second board

I thought partner was unlucky with 25 HCP and a double fit that no game makes (at least double dummy), but a load of others managed to make 3NT and 4♠, and some managed to stop in part scores. 32.1%

Third board

One of these high level partscore battles. What do I do when opps bid 5♠ over me? I decided not to risk pushing them to a making slam or even taking a phantom, but evidently I should have done, those who bid six were allowed to play there, and several were allowed to play in 5♣ or 5♥, only seven pairs in a spade slam. Partner asked if she should have bid 3♥ instead of 3C, I thought her hand was good enough, what do you think? 41.4%

Fourth board
I think partner should have opened a weak 2♠ here, then I blast to 4♠ which might shut them out. Three off is a good score at this vulnerability. Surprisingly a few of those allowed to play in hearts failed to make 12 tricks. 29.3%

Fifth board
Another cock-up by me on the opening lead. Leading from a suit headed by an unsupported ace is horrible, leading a singleton trump is horrible, so that leaves clubs. Leading a low one might mislead partner so I led top of nothing, which completely blows a trick by setting up the club suit for two heart discards. Other pairs are bidding to game going off, so that was worth 16.4%.

Sixth board
Third defensive cock-up. Like the motorist who failed to see the cyclist directly in front of him, I failed to see the obvious endplay coming up which requires me to hold onto a spade and throw the ♥J. 33.6%

Seventh board
I didn't have much to do with this one, I showed partner my hand in the bidding. Partner bid too high and went for -200 on a partscore deal. Of course a load of people are allowed to play in 2♠. 32.9%

This is over a 12 board session.

It is very demoralising continuously getting sub 50% results when years ago I could confidently get over 50% on a club evening and often over 55%. I'm not sure whether it is worth it to keep plugging away as I don't know how to stop my own careless mistakes or to generally get better at reading the cards.

[smerriman]

I'd suggest you focus on getting better at interpreting the results, rather than reading the cards.

On board 2, you're in the right contract, so you should be happy regardless of the score you get. You can't control what happens at other tables.

On board 3, you did nothing wrong as North; 6♠ is laydown. Clearly you can't take into account those pairs who were able to steal the contract at the 5 level. Of the rest, South bidding hearts is the only chance you have at finding the true par score (sacrifice in grand); without that, 5♠ is a good result for you. By what you're saying, 7♣x would probably have scored "badly" too - despite being what experts would reach.

On board 4, again you obviously did nothing wrong as North; unless it's your style to open such hands 2♠ in second seat (it certainly isn't mine, nor clearly your partner's), South also did nothing wrong. You can't control what happens at other tables.

On board 6, your analysis is wrong; it makes no difference at all what you discard. You can't control what happens at other tables.

On board 7, obviously you did nothing wrong as North. Not only that, but if everyone else was in 2♠ going down 1, then passing out 2N would have gotten you an equally bad score. You can't control what happens at the other tables, or your opponents.

OK, on board 1, you made a mistake. Board 5 was a small gap in knowledge; it's standard to lead the second highest from four small for this type of reason. Now you know.

If you'd rather get a good score from playing badly, that's one thing. But assuming that a below average score must mean you made a mistake - even if it happens time and time again - is not good for your game, especially if you get demoralised by it.

Analysing these hands properly - and ignoring things that you don't have control over - should result in the complete opposite mindset. You learnt 1 thing about leads, made one other mistake, and should be happy with the rest.

[sfi]

I took a look at board 6, and I think it's clear that partner has the SK (if declarer has it they just cut themselves off from an extra trick for no reason). Therefore you should start discarding small hearts.

Of course they're cold for 5, but if they forget to cash their last club then you're not in a position where you have to return their trick.

But yes - what smerriman said. Many times you simply don't have control over whether you get a good score or not.

[smerriman]

PS - I had a look at the actual travellers and had two more points to make on the hands where you made mistakes:

Board 1: if you had cashed your tricks your score would have skyrocketed from 12.1% to .... 42.14%. The only way to get a better score would be for your opponents to not be playing a weak notrump. You can't control what happens at other tables.

Board 5: if you had led second highest your score would have jumped from 16.4% to ... 39.29%. You cannot control what happens at other tables.

So the result would be scoring less than 50% on all 7 boards, even with optimal play. And that would be a result you should be extremely happy with.

[sfi]

AL78, on 2020-December-06, 09:18, said:

Third board

One of these high level partscore battles. What do I do when opps bid 5♠ over me? I decided not to risk pushing them to a making slam or even taking a phantom, but evidently I should have done, those who bid six were allowed to play there, and several were allowed to play in 5♣ or 5♥, only seven pairs in a spade slam. Partner asked if she should have bid 3♥ instead of 3C, I thought her hand was good enough, what do you think? 41.4%

Yes, I think her hand is good enough for 3H. It looks like a suit worth mentioning and the club fit helps protect you. If 3H gets the side overboard, it's very likely the opponents are making something (like 6S here). I get the lack of aces and only 8 hcp, but the upside of bidding 3H is pretty good. It may not have helped you here - the opponents may simply have bid the slam on a different auction

More generally, there is a lot of luck in matchpoints. I've long believed the best you can score playing perfectly is about 60% - anything else is due to gifts from the opposition. And some of my better sessions have scored up below average. When that happens, you simply look at what you did and work out whether it's reasonable. If not, learn from it. If so, move on.

MP results can be quite streaky as well. You might find that you have one good session and all of a sudden score in the mid-50s every time. My theory is that this is due to confidence - you stop second-guessing yourself quite so much and start picking up more of what the opponents are doing instead. But it's hard to force that mental shift, so give it a bit of time.

[akwoo]

I remember a few sessions where we could have played perfectly and not managed better than 40%. And a few sessions where we played pretty poorly but managed 60%.

Also, while more often than not there is more to look at from the boards where you did poorly, sometimes the reason for a poor game is the boards where you scored 60% but should have managed a top given the misplays your opponents made.

[AL78]

I've just had a look at board 6 again, and I did analyse it wrong. If declarer cashes their last club I only make the heart ace at the end anyway, declarer decided to be flashy and take the marked endplay, hence I was cursing myself after for not jettisoning the heart jack and holding onto one spade as long as possible. I knew partner had the spade king, I was thinking it doesn't matter because declarer will eventually have to lead a heart to my AJ, oops I forgot he can throw me in with that last diamond.

[AL78]

akwoo, on 2020-December-06, 18:36, said:

I remember a few sessions where we could have played perfectly and not managed better than 40%. And a few sessions where we played pretty poorly but managed 60%.

Also, while more often than not there is more to look at from the boards where you did poorly, sometimes the reason for a poor game is the boards where you scored 60% but should have managed a top given the misplays your opponents made.

I know what you are saying, and yes, I accept there is luck in matchpoints, especially in a 12 board session where getting fixed on one board can cost over 8%, but the reason I despair is that I don't like to put things down to luck, that feels too much like trying to duck responsibility, and secondly, long term results strongly imply I have regressed significantly over the last few years. The problem is I don't know why, and I don't know what to do about it. When I am getting below 50% over and over and over again, I have to take a look at myself, especially when there are one or two pairs who are in the high 50's-60's regularly, why aren't their results getting hammered by bad luck? It is because I am consistently doing something wrong, and I can't yet find something consistent to work on. I can't find a consistent flaw in my actions on my bad boards. It could be a bit like Rocky Balboa in Rocky III, I may have to retrain myself on how to play a good game of bridge (like Rocky had to be retrained to beat Clubber Lang).

[smerriman]

AL78, on 2020-December-06, 19:23, said:

When I am getting below 50% over and over and over again, I have to take a look at myself, especially when there are one or two pairs who are in the high 50's-60's regularly, why aren't their results getting hammered by bad luck? It is because I am consistently doing something wrong, and I can't yet find something consistent to work on. I can't find a consistent flaw in my actions on my bad boards.

It's already been proven that it would be *impossible* for you to score above 50% on these particular hands no matter how you played. As awkoo mentioned above, perhaps your "good" boards could have been improved slightly to increase your overall average.

But in reality, the "best" pairs are just as likely to have a week when it's impossible for them to score well, no matter how they play. With a large number of pairs, there are always going to be some who keep getting good "luck" many weeks in a row, just by the laws of probability. With 100 pairs, if you flip a coin 7 times, there's probably going to be one pair who gets a good set of boards 7 straight weeks, just as much as there will be one pair who gets a bad set 7 weeks in a row.

That "lucky" pair still needs to play well in the areas they can control, but there still is a factor of luck that will always be involved.

[mikeh]

on board 2, your partner made, imo, a very bad 4S bid. She has a 6=2=2=3 18 count with solid spades. Either 2N or 3N would be much more popular amongst experts.

as it happens, you raise 2N to 3N or pass 3N and the opening heart lead gives you a quick winner. Run 6 spades and it will likely prove impossible to beat 3N. West has to keep a heart or you can throw him in in one minor to give you a trick in the other. If he keeps a heart, he can't keep 4 diamonds without stiffing his club K, and if he throws a diamond, you give up a heart.

Most wests will give away a lot about their holdings when you run the spades

It is almost never right to bid 4S with a balanced hand, no raise from partner, and values in all suits.