Holy **** This match is amazing.

sick match though

Yeah Q6 and Q7 were great, and Q8 was super drama

Great match, ul fmk. Curious to know what post game analysis is like at elite level. Do you go through all the hands the next day with your partner, or by yourself?

It really depends on the people. During the tournament, my teammates other than kevin and me would go to dinner and have hand records and discuss all the hands etc. I personally find that to be too much while the tournament is going on, I prefer to rest when it is the trials of the nationals. That said if I am not sure about a hand I bid or played (ie, a judgement thing), I may talk about them while having a drink to get lots of peoples opinions etc and to get it out of my mind.

The judgement types of decisions (either bidding or play), there is not a clear right answer so I think hearing lots of peoples opinions is the best way to learn and get better.

The hands that you need to talk specifically to your partner about are defensive carding or bidding hands, especially if you were on a different page. This is generally done ASAP (like after the set you played, or even at the table if you have no bidding agreement or forgot something).

There is a lot of "I think I could have made 4C if I did x" "no you couldnt because of y" etc, with both the opponents and your partner or teammates, and depending on the opps sometimes them also just to analyze what the par result is or what would have happened if you competed or led something different etc. This happens during comparisons, between sessions, smoke breaks, at the table with your opps, at the bar etc haha.

Sometimes things come up that make you change your system or re work something, but the time for that is generally between tournaments. For people who are full time bridge pros and play all the time I think it is different, for instance half the people from that match are playing in a regional tomorrow, then the next week etc (I think pepsi said hes playing 5 weeks in a row).

Personally I never talk to my partner or teammates about hands I think they misdeclared or judged differently than I would and it didnt work unless they ask my opinion. Especially if its just like losing your mind, you just say sorry and theres no need for a discussion. I try to be a good and supportive teammate and bringing up someones bad boards and grilling them on it is not conducive to that imo, and unnecessary... Im not trying to teach my teammates how to play bridge lol. If they ask of course I'm happy to offer my opinion though. It is important to be on the same wavelength as your partner and know how they are thinking through spots so knowing why they bid something instead of something else or played a certain spot card etc is def something that all pairs are talking about all the time during a tournament.

Some people like zia like to talk about hands all the time even during the tournament, but I think it's because he is not a full time bridge pro so he probably doesnt get tired of it as quickly as people who play so much haha.

Sorry that got really long and disjointed haha, but hope that answers your question!

Awesome post FMK

The above applies to elite level, only needs some finetuning for it to apply to lower levels.

For amateurs, who have much more to learn, I think it is critical for your own improvement to analyse every hand and classify things that went wrong:

• Brainfart. No need to discuss this one much, it only makes the player feel bad
• Declarer play error. It can usually be objectively agreed upon what the best way is to play the hand. Whoever played the hand can potentially pick up something from seeing what (s)he did wrong
• Defensive error. This is a bit like declarer play errors that can allow someone to improve his/her defensive play as well as a discussion whether the signaling between both players has been correct and effective.
• Bidding disagreement. Here the emotions can run high, so try to identify each player's position and leave it there for the time being. A couple of days later tackle it again. it is much easier for someone to admit a bidding mistake two days after the match then directly after. Bridge players often have a huge ego. Bidding disagreements must be weeded out of a partnership, so do not make the mistake of ignoring it or the problem will return.
• Bidding system flaw. You found out that your system failed you. This is much likelier to happen at amateur level, where the bidding system isn't as well thought out. So identify suboptimal conventions and improve on them. Sometimes it can be done on the fly during the match, but the more complete your system is, the more time it takes to discuss and make changes.

Gabe

Thanks for the detailed insight!

My partners and I are definitely more in the camp to go to dinners after sessions at tournaments to analyse every board, assign blame constructively, talk some Bridge at the bar later and write post mortem emails in some partnerships.

I've noticed that a lot of errors occur from fatigue and its interesting how you prioritise preserving your mental energy, although it sounds like a lot of it is wanting to discuss something other than Bridge. Most tournaments I play are 1-2 days long so the tiredness factor is lessened, but in the last longer competition I played I could tell our team was getting a bit tired towards the end and perhaps it might be wiser to use the breaks in between matches to stay fresh.

Kudos to you for never pointing out your partner's or team mates's errors, that must be quite difficult sometimes. I try and have the dynamic with my friends to encourage mistakes to be discussed, but it has to be with the intention of being constructive. I guess you don't need that at top pro level because its obvious to everyone what could have been done.

I remember in one of Galfond's training videos for poker he said that the worst mistakes a player makes are one's that he doesn't realise are mistakes, and that's the best value coaching can provide to point these out. I had that recently with my regular partner pointing out to me I was over competing in some part scores spots at IMPs, but I was a bit blind to it until I tried to analyse and understand why it was a losing strategy. It would be a shame to not have this kind of dynamic imo because opportunities to improve one's game might get missed.

I’d keep in mind that Justin is on the level where mistakes are either really tiny/on the edges (which need proper analyzing in detail after the fact) or are so dumb that they mostly think “we’ll that was dumb” and already know why.

I do think some discussion is a good idea for us mortals, partly to figure out where partners head is at, and partly because things worth discussing in terms of agreements haven’t been hashed out over hundreds of hours already.

For sure talking about your hands and mistakes is the most important way to improve.

I'll give you some more concrete examples of what happened after the last set. The first hand my partner and I talked about was a hand that we actually won a bunch of imps on. We missed a very good slam, but meckwell got to 7 and went down. This was definitely the most important hand to talk about because something clearly was lost in the translation of our auction to miss a 90+% slam.

The auction was 1C(strong) p 1H (8-11 any shape less than 5 spades), p 1S p 2D p 3C X 3S p 4S AP. My hand was AQxxxx AK --- KT8xx. His hand was Kxx Jxxx AKT87x --.

My thinking was, with the double of clubs on my left, my hand is extremely bad now since I have no tricks, dummy will get overruffed etc. change one of his hearts into a club for instance and slam is very bad on a trump lead, and that is a good 11 count with a third spade.

When I said "with a third spade" he realized I did not think he promised 3 spades, and could be on a doubleton. He thought he would always bid 3H with a doubleton spade (like 4th suit/punt whatever), whereas I thought something like KJ doubleton of spades and nothing in hearts would bid 3S, and something like Jx of spades and Qxxx of hearts would bid 3H (since that hand shouldn't bid 3N immediately but should leave it in the game). When we have a known 8 card fit, we play that 3N would be a non serious slam try, so since he thought he had shown 3 spades, he thought we had a known 8 card fit, and thus my 4S bid was a really strong signal that I hated my hand (which must be a LOT of club wastage, and only 5 spades). I, thinking he could have a doubleton spade, thought 3N was in the game and that I'd often have 6 spades (or 5 good ones of course).

I also thought he might bid 4C over the X of 3C with his actual hand (not an agreement since this auction has never come up, but was logical to me), so we discussed that, and also what the implications of him PASSING the X were (we both agreed that would just be leaving open the option of 3C XX being a contract, but not being able to demand it). So that cleared up the system part of that hand and that was the most important thing for us as a partnership.

Whether or not he should start with 1H or 2D is a judgement thing, and obviously either can be right, IMO it is not my job to offer that opinion unless I have a strong feeling or he asks.

The hand I talked about most after having done system work was a judgement thing, one which I had no clue which is right and thus I want to ask as many people as possible what they thought. I held xxx KQxxxx xx xx. It went (1D) 2S (3N) and I was on lead. My thought process was, I can play for them to have 1 spade stopper and partner to have a minor suit entry before they have 9 tricks, or I an play to run hearts (Ax or Axx with partner), with the back door of Jx or Jxx which at least gives us time to get some tricks in then perhaps shift, or if hearts are 2-2, if we can get a minor suit trick and run hearts.

Which is percentage? the auction 1D 2S 3N is a strong favorite to contain 2 spade stoppers. However, when you hold 3 spades and you hold 6 hearts, that makes 1 stopper hands somewhat more likely. They won't be able to make a neg X (less than 4 hearts) more because you have 6 hearts, and they will be shorter in spades than normal since you have 3. They won't want to cuebid 3S with a fit and a spade stopper sometimes because there isnt a lot of room. Still, they would probably bid 3 of the other minor with length there and 1 stopper in spades.

I made the lead that lost (a heart), and of course it cost 12 imps to lose by 11 haha. But really I just want to make the percentage choice next time something like this happens or learn, so I asked a bunch of world class people to help me audit my thinking on this spot, and my choice. This is akin to talking to your partner or teammates or network about hands that youre not sure of, and you should be doing that always. Anything that comes up that youre unsure of and think you can learn. But it doesn't have to be your partner or teammate that you talk to about these, the more the better, and in fact sometimes your teammates or partner will be too impartial or alternatively want to be nice and supportive if its a spot like this haha (that is def not the case with my partner, he is super objective).

I think most people considered my lead anti percentage but reasonable, a few considered it percentage. I do keep in mind that there is old school bias to "lead your partners suit because you cant get yelled at/look stupid" haha, its what we all learn when we start playing and its silly, but thats why you need a lot of opinions.

I am lucky that currently I have a whatsapp group of some really close friends, mostly young guys, and between us someone is always playing so we talk about hands every day and can all learn from each other. What I noticed most about that is that europeans have a lot of different ideas from americans so we can all become much better by crossing over our ideas and taking the best of each. Thomas Bessis just sent a message that he thinks a spade is clearly right, but he thought a heart at the time, and he had some new thoughts on it so there is discussion again.

So I would say if youre serious about improving always be talking about spots etc, and with as many people as possible. I always play national pair games with a different person because I like learning everyones system ideas and styles and what theyre doing also, so I'd say playing with lots of people can expose you to things. Obv have your main partner but try and be exposed to lots of ways of thinking, it can only make you better.

1C(strong)- 1H (8-11 any shape less than 5 spades)
1S-2D
3C- (X) 3S
4S - AP.

AQxxxx AK --- KT8xx

Kxx Jxxx AKT87x --

I'd say this is 90% on your partner. Firstly, after you open 1C and rebid 1S, he must have had an instantaneous erection, having Kxx support, AK in a strong side suit and a void. That is a MASSIVE hand and I personally would be thinking about slam right away. Now he has a problem, because he wants to both show his diamond suit en spade support, two strong features in his hand. 2D has the advantage that it might uncover a second fit and mass trick potential, but carries the risk of being unable to relay the full three card spade support. 2S directly shows spade support, but skips the diamond suit and is a little less economic bid. I think it is close. I think I prefer 2S, because it is very likely partner will respond with 3C (since you have none) and then I can show my diamond suit cheaply. When in doubt, support partner.

i disagree with him that he would always bid 3H with a hand that does not have 3S. 3H is primarily a signal saying: no fit partner, wanna venture 3NT or you got some more shape to tell? A hand with a bighonor-x of spades and a small doubleton heart is a hand that strongly suggests playing a 5-2 spade fit, unless partner can find a 3NT bid with a solid heart stopper. So I would bid 3H with Qx of spades and Qx of hearts, but 3S with Qx of spades and xx of hearts.

Anyway, after you bid 4S he MUST find another bid. He has an extra spade, and AK and a club trump finesse will work. His hand is severely underrepped and I think it is much more likely we will make 12 tricks when I pass now than that we go down in 5S or in slam if I give an extra push with my monster. I would feel really bad passing now and missing slam and I would feel really unlucky if this hand is going down vs a 1c opener when I push on. I prefer to feel unlucky rather than bad, so I bid.

The lead problem I would probably have done the same thing and lead a heart.

The old school bias is irrelevant at elite level. Every player will pick the percentage lead rather than the politically correct lead. My thinking is rather simple: they are sure to have a single spade stopper, at least. They are not sure to have any kind of heart stopper. With me having 6h and partner 6s, opponents are probably bristling with tricks in the minors, so we need to be fast. Even if we are able to set up spades, 3NT might be cold because partner can be kept off lead or they run 9 tricks. if partner has the Ah, we have got 6 before they have 9.

Lead problem seems more like a poker problem than a bridge problem

and that being said I truly love there is a small, but very significant poker in bridge

Is that the only implication of passing the X? I know its hard to have an agreement for a spot like this, but perhaps a direct bid can imply more certainty about strain than passing first. If you have 3H as tempoing out to 3N, and 3S as a variety of hands with 2-3 spades but not sure which, to me it seems like it could be useful to use the extra step that our opponents have offered, to split the range from a direct 3S to mean 3 card support, and an indirect 3S to be Hx.

If he had Jx of spades and Qxxx hearts then this seems like a hand that might benefit from partners next call whether it be XX 3D/3H/3S, rather than bid 3H first.

Thanks for the advice, I am serious about improving. I'm fortunate that my main partner is friends with many top UK players so if there's a spot we're not sure about, we will get some good advice about it. Its something I should do more myself - usually discuss hands with a handful of friends at similar level, ex junior coach and occasional poll on BW. I play pretty much every decent national tournament atm with a variety of players if my main partner is unavailable.

If partner bid 4S when they had non serious 3N available, then he's shown a REALLY bad hand and that should be respected. I think its higher ev to pass against this range because on a bad day partner might have something like AJxxx AKx x KJxx. Might lose 2 clubs and a spade on a trump lead that you know you are receiving. The issue was the misunderstanding about 3S.

Well that misunderstanding was an error on his part because 3S will almost always be a strong doubleton. His principal range after 2D will be hands with at most 2S. The range that has 3 spades in it just isn't big enough to make it profitable to reserve 3S in your system to show just that. You will much more often need 3S to show a strong doubleton and suggesting a 5-2 fit.

Even after the 4S signoff, you have a monster and should give one more push.

Having said all that, after the double on 3C what would pass and redouble have been? Both for business? I could imagine myself bidding 4C on this hand. That will wake partner about me having something pretty good. Partner will have a short WTF moment, but he will realize that it must be an advanced cue for something - probably spades, but maybe an autoplayable suit in diamonds, showing extremely short clubs.

That's a lot of words that I'm not going to read, but I understood the problem immediately, and to suggest one side is "90%" at fault is amazing. Gabe, you're a good player obviously, but "instantaneous erection" is exactly the sort of impulse that slow, methodical auctions are supposed to try to work out.

Like, I understand if the auction went 1C! 1H! 1S 6S or something stupid, you'd probably be in a pretty OK place usually, but you shouldn't actually be happy about that. I suspect you agree with me, even if you think they got this hand wrong for whatever reason is obvious to you now.

Just my own 2 cents from my own personal observations, I believe FMK posted a lot about a bidding sequence that he and Kev probably talked about for less than a minute. There is some meta involved that is relevant, but beyond that it's splitting hairs. With that said any sort of lead or carding or defense problem that requires a line of thought or judgment or detective work, I honestly believe he could easily ask 100 experts at the bar and genuinely engage in the responses. That seems totally normal to me at the highest levels, and I believe his professional success reflects his hunger for that sort of feedback. And so it is for the group of pros you'd group him with, like the hampson/greco/grue/levin/weinstein type guys.

Not sure if I contributed anything to this conversation (and I might be completely out to lunch anyway) but that's sort of my impression as an outsider looking in.

I stand by 90-10 because there is no round that fmk could have done better. He has heard nothing but bad news in the auction, partner bidding diamonds, clubs being stacked behind him. He was happy to learn that at least there was a spade fit, but with his black suits being full of holes, there is just no way he can expect a slam to be makeable, despite having some extra value in shape. I would not be surprised even to see 4S go down opposite a hand like Kx, Jxxx, KQxxxx, x

His partner's 3S was uninspired (I like 4C better every minute) and his pass over 4S was passive.

I really really thought I was done with this. But played with someone at the club who clearly thought he was better than me. I mean he might be better than me...

But

(1NT)-2D

we agreed this as H+D

He bid 2H with Hx Hx in the reds and caused me to go wrong.

1C-(p)-1NT He had a 4 card major and caused me to go wrong.

He was clearly trying to be declarer both times. **** off.

He is better off playing roulette than playing bridge, You are better off never playing with this guy again

The first one isn’t bad IMO because 1) in case both make 2H pays more and 2) if you have a monster and want to bid again at least he has a couple fitters.

Admittedly the second one is generally LOL and puts that in a bad context. I mean I might consider 1NT on like KJx 5432 QJx QJx or something.

There was also the hand where he held

AKxx/A987/x/KJ9x

and the auction went (opps silent) 1C-1D-1N-P

and its my fault we missed a 4-4 spade fit when my hand is QTxx/JTx/ATxxx/Q. Before you ask, the initial talk was I come with a convention card I was happy with. Show up with a convention card and he says hey here is the convention card we are playing. To be fair our cards were fairly similar, but both convention cards did not have frequently bypass 4+D checked.

all that being said, he is a good player

I've played against him quite a few times, and dont recall him making any sort of these bids against him. We were against C players when he bid the 1nt with AQxx of spades and the C players were confused by it. And we still finished first our direction. But after looking back at it, it really kind of pissed me off.

No, he isn't. Well, maybe he can PLAY, but he certainly cannot BID.

1NT on that hand is atrocious. If the bridgegods give you two aces, two kings and a singleton and you bid 1NT with that hand in this spot, you ought to be getting 3-3-3-4 8-counts for the rest of the session.

On that shape Chuck if you're a 1-bid hand you've gotta bid 1S, and if you've got an invitational hand and an invitational sequence (some sort of checkback) you can bid 1D first. You're close but I think shy if you're opening 11s. Part of the point is that with the 1c opener you're probably at best buying 3 diamonds, and diamonds has to play 2 tricks better than the major or NT to be right.

But also reading this thread you're playing with a complete joker. I have a partner with whom I play that we rebid 1N with all balanced mins, even burying both 4cMs after 1c-1d. But rebidding 1N on 4414 with a prime 14 - neither balanced, nor min - is not good.

That’s only if you’re playing Walsh (and thereby frequently bypassing diamonds).

The dude is a clown.