( Bigot-Johnson had really over-stepped the mark this time, by turning on his errant partner in a most savage and barbaric way to the utter shock and distress of onlooking members. A short extract from the hearing's transcript can be seen below . )
Chairman ( C ) : Is it true Bigot that you dragged your partner outside......stripped him bare....tied him to a tree....shaved his head..........and then tarred and feathered him ?
B-J : Correct.....
C : Don't you think that your behaviour was a bit over the top ?.......A slight over-reaction ?... An extreme form of retribution for such a tiny mistake ?
B-J : Tiny mistake !......... Are you stark raving mad.....this mistake is the mother of all f-ing mistakes......it outranks every kind of mistake ever committed at a bridge table. A mistake that beggars belief. A mistake that was so gross, so hideous, so outrageous, so sinful......it really warranted death by hanging. In fact the bugger got off really lightly.......
C : Well......what did he do ?
B-J : What did he do ?.......I'll tell you what he did.......and it isn't a pretty story
C : Go on then....enlighten us ....
B-J : Well, our opponents ended up in 3NT despite my overcall of 1S. As it happened declarer held 98 in spades opposite dummy's 52, but were we able to make 5 spade tricks....along with my Ace of hearts to beat the contract ? ....Not on your life.............especially if you have a numpty of a partner like mine.
Holding AKQ43 in spades I lead the king at trick one ( system agreement ), and my partner correctly played the jack from his J1076. This of course promised the 10. Declarer meantime played the 9 !
C : So why the tar and feathering ?
B-J : Reading him correctly for having the 10, I played at trick two my fourth highest spade....namely the 4......expecting my partner to win the trick... and then to continue the suit to harvest five lovely tricks. BUT NO.....muppet features was on another wavelength. He foolishly believed that I had started out with five spades to the KQ, convinced that declarer was holding the A9........and so he played low, allowing declarer to win the trick with the measly 8. And that was that for the defence. Somehow he figured that by playing the 10 his 76 might block the suit......
C : A fair assumption ?
B-J : Are you as insane as he is ? If partner bothers to read the cards properly instead of the count, declarer must have started out with either A9 or 98. If on play of the 10 and the Ace takes the trick, communication between the two hands poses no problem with Q83 opposite 76. If the 10 happens to swallow the 8 then the 7 can be played at trick 3 before using the 6 to put me in with my Q3.
C: By God....you're right....your partner was a complete prat after all...
B-J : Too right....
C : And we understand now why you got so miffed...
B-J : Miffed ! I was livid.....to make just one trick from a combined holding of AKQJ107643 has to go down the worst example of bad bridge ever to be recorded in the history of the game
C : I agree....but you're still going to be suspended for 6 months for ungentlemanly conduct
B-J : Bugger me.....am I the only who can dispense proper justice in this world ?
B-J : Correct.....
C : Don't you think that your behaviour was a bit over the top ?.......A slight over-reaction ?... An extreme form of retribution for such a tiny mistake ?
B-J : Tiny mistake !......... Are you stark raving mad.....this mistake is the mother of all f-ing mistakes......it outranks every kind of mistake ever committed at a bridge table. A mistake that beggars belief. A mistake that was so gross, so hideous, so outrageous, so sinful......it really warranted death by hanging. In fact the bugger got off really lightly.......
C : Well......what did he do ?
B-J : What did he do ?.......I'll tell you what he did.......and it isn't a pretty story
C : Go on then....enlighten us ....
B-J : Well, our opponents ended up in 3NT despite my overcall of 1S. As it happened declarer held 98 in spades opposite dummy's 52, but were we able to make 5 spade tricks....along with my Ace of hearts to beat the contract ? ....Not on your life.............especially if you have a numpty of a partner like mine.
Holding AKQ43 in spades I lead the king at trick one ( system agreement ), and my partner correctly played the jack from his J1076. This of course promised the 10. Declarer meantime played the 9 !
C : So why the tar and feathering ?
B-J : Reading him correctly for having the 10, I played at trick two my fourth highest spade....namely the 4......expecting my partner to win the trick... and then to continue the suit to harvest five lovely tricks. BUT NO.....muppet features was on another wavelength. He foolishly believed that I had started out with five spades to the KQ, convinced that declarer was holding the A9........and so he played low, allowing declarer to win the trick with the measly 8. And that was that for the defence. Somehow he figured that by playing the 10 his 76 might block the suit......
C : A fair assumption ?
B-J : Are you as insane as he is ? If partner bothers to read the cards properly instead of the count, declarer must have started out with either A9 or 98. If on play of the 10 and the Ace takes the trick, communication between the two hands poses no problem with Q83 opposite 76. If the 10 happens to swallow the 8 then the 7 can be played at trick 3 before using the 6 to put me in with my Q3.
C: By God....you're right....your partner was a complete prat after all...
B-J : Too right....
C : And we understand now why you got so miffed...
B-J : Miffed ! I was livid.....to make just one trick from a combined holding of AKQJ107643 has to go down the worst example of bad bridge ever to be recorded in the history of the game
C : I agree....but you're still going to be suspended for 6 months for ungentlemanly conduct
B-J : Bugger me.....am I the only who can dispense proper justice in this world ?
No comments:
Post a Comment