[gwnn]

Also opps should place their cards horizontally for that particular trick.

[Trinidad]

I witnessed this clueless comment while kibitzing the Bermuda Bowl(!) last year. The auction had started 1NT-Pass-2♠.

The 2♠ bid was alerted, an explanation was asked and the explanation written down was: "MSS". The opponent asked what that meant and the player wrote out: "Minor suit Stayman". Then the following whispering conversation started.
"Does it promise a four card major?"
- "No, it is minor suit Stayman. I can be weak with diamonds, weak with both minors or GF with both minors."
"But does it promise a major?"
- "No, it doesn't. It is minor suit Stayman. It asks for the minors."
"So it doesn't ask for the majors?"
- "No, it asks for the minors."
Then visibly offended and not so much whispering anymore:
"Then you shouldn't call it Stayman. It is very misleading to call it Stayman. Stayman asks for majors, not for minors."

The explainer looked at me, didn't say anything, but I interpreted his facial expression as: "I thought I had seen it all.". Then he shrugged his shoulders, seemingly concluding that there was no hope for this opponent.

I think this shows that there is clueless/hopeless at every level.

Rik

[Lord Molyb]

---

This post has been edited by Lord Molyb: 2014-October-01, 21:06

[Vampyr]

Trinidad, on 2012-November-22, 20:46, said:

I witnessed this clueless comment while kibitzing the Bermuda Bowl(!) last year. The auction had started 1NT-Pass-2♠.

I think that the problem was that this:

Quote

The 2♠ bid was alerted, an explanation was asked and the explanation written down was: "MSS". The opponent asked what that meant and the player wrote out: "Minor suit Stayman".

Instead of this:

Quote

I can be weak with diamonds, weak with both minors or GF with both minors."

was given in explanation. Especially when the opponent, from a different country, may well, and apparently had not, heard the word "Stayman" used for a convention that does not ask for major-suit holdings.

[blackshoe]

I was told once that if our 2/1 response to an opening 1 bid is GF, we must call our system "2/1 GF". "Any other name (on the system card) is misleading."

[mycroft]

Which, especially because there's a checkbox right on the top of the card where the system is labelled, seems really odd (says the K/S player, who plays 2/1 GF unless suit rebid).

I wonder what that person thinks our Precision w/GF 2/1s should be called.

[sfi]

mycroft, on 2012-November-26, 11:24, said:

I wonder what that person thinks our Precision w/GF 2/1s should be called.

How about 'Strong Club, 2/1 GF'? I would expect 2/1 somewhere in the system description if that's part of the system.

[CamHenry]

My own favourite clueless comment comes from a low table in a Swiss Pairs. Partner and I had found our level for the day, and were playing against a pair of LOLs. We play an artificial system: strong diamond, multi-way openings, reversed majors; basically anything the EBU would permit. We played six of the seven boards, handing them as many tops as they handed us (it was that kind of day), and then on board seven I held a non-descript balanced 10-count first in at favourable. I opened 1NT, announced as 9-11; everyone passed; partner puts down a non-descript 3-count and I managed two tricks for -250. One of them said to the other "I think we can make slam in spades" (true; it's about 75% and comes off). Her partner agreed, and offered an excuse for her lack of action on a 17-count:

"I'm sorry partner, they blinded me with science!"

[RSClyde]

I had this auction:
2♠ 3♦ 3♥ P
4♥ AP
This made and when we whipped out the traveler, the diamond bidder, who couldn't analyze the hands, looked at it wrong and the following conversation ensued:
Opp1: I knew it! We can make 5 diamonds!
Opp2: I had 2 points.
Opp1: It's not all about points! It's about distribution!
Opp2: I had 2 points and 2 diamonds.

[RSClyde]

1♣ 1nt X P
2♣ P 2nt P
3♣
How many clubs does opener have? Why 3 of course.
The X was alerted at "a relay to 2♣" though they weren't playing that in this auction. Then when dummy came down she said, "I'm sorry, I thought 2nt was for the minors"

[Lorne50]

Not a comment but certainly a pretty stupid play. My partner got locked in dummy with 6 tricks left playing NT, dummy had:
♦AKQJ5
♥8

RHO had:
♣A
♦xxx
♥J10

The other hearts had gone so a normal person would claim their diamonds and give up a heart (and maybe a diamond) but my partner knew the oppo better than me. He cashed his 5 diamonds and RHO kept the ♣A !!!

[olegru]

2 weeks ago.
Opponents bidding:
East- West
1NT - 2♣
2♦-4♥
pass

West: "I thought your 2♦ was transfer to ♥."

They played 4 ♥, down 2 on 36 points and 2-2 fit.

There were 3 lines in protocol, our was in the middle. Both other pair played 7NT. One re-doubled made, other just doubled, down two. The only picture card on our line was Ace.

[blackshoe]

My favorite is the woman who, in the post mortem, told her partner "I didn't come here to think, I came here to play bridge!"

[diana_eva]

blackshoe, on 2013-November-23, 01:25, said:

My favorite is the woman who, in the post mortem, told her partner "I didn't come here to think, I came here to play bridge!"

This happened to me too. As a beginner I liked to go over the hands with my partners who were also beginners. Several of them told me they just like to play, not think or analyze. Never thought of it as a hopeless comment, rather as an attitude.

[helene_t]

Robson wrote about a newcommer in a snobbish male only club in London, who in the postmortem told an opponent how the latter could have made the contract by "counting the hand"

The response: "My dear boy, I don't count. I consider counting a vulgar middle class habit"

[OleBerg]

My partner was asked:

"Does 2♥ show anything about the spade lenght?"

"Nothing at all. Except that it shows exactly three."

Best Regards

Ole Berg

[Lord Molyb]

apparently it's less clueless than me, so never mind

This post has been edited by Lord Molyb: 2013-November-29, 21:03

[OleBerg]

True story, a competent player to his teammates:

"You let East play 1♣??? How did the bidding go???"

Not so trye story about Stalin playing with three generals:

The bidding goes:

1♣ -3♦ - 3♠ - 4♥
1♣ - pass - pass - pass

Best Regards

Ole Berg

[GreenMan]

OleBerg, on 2013-November-26, 14:52, said:

True story, a competent player to his teammates:

"You let East play 1♣??? How did the bidding go???"

A teammate of mine once got as far as "How did the" before he caught himself.

[ArtK78]

OleBerg, on 2013-November-26, 14:52, said:

True story, a competent player to his teammates:

"You let East play 1♣??? How did the bidding go???"

I have heard the same story with passed out, but that was only as a joke.