[AL78]

I'm currently going through a major bridge slump at the moment with not much end in sight.

My last session at the club in a variable field partner and I finished with 42.3% which follows on from my result last week with an inexperienced partner of 36%. Some might see the funny side of this but I am finding it increasingly frustrating and embarassing. I am going to end up the whipping boy of the club before long at this rate.

The evening in question started off badly and got worse, mainly because there was possibly the worst hand bias I have personally experienced. My average HCP was 7.71, partner's was 9.19, so on average over 21 boards the opponents had game invitational values. There is a correlation between the level of hand bias and my final score which is (I think) a combination of my sub-optimal defence and because it is hard to generate anything when you are passing and following suit most of the time (we will get most of our good scores from opps mistakes). I declared twice and averaged 68% so that is one good thing I guess.

The question is, given I start off a session looking forward to a good game of bridge and inevitably finish it feeling rubbish, does anyone know of any psycholoogical techniques to improve mood and become more mentally resiliant to getting hammered at the table over and over again in a session.

As an example, this is the sort of thing that chips away at me and happened several times over the evening:

---

We didn't beat it and it was a bottom when no-one else finds a game.

[eagles123]

When you play in small fields with and against weak opposition you're bound to have a few random results. 4S here is not a good contract at MP, needs club and spade onside and hearts to be guessed correctly. I would either seek a better standard game/partner, or just ignore the results as really in such a weak field they're pretty meaningless.

[DavidKok]

Some thoughts:

• Regarding psychological techniques, I would focus on trying not to tie your score and your feelings about the game together so much. I'd recommend focusing on personal improvement instead, trying to find situations where you have new ideas to try at the table during the bidding or play, or insights regarding distribution or crucial issues regarding the play of the hand which you might not have found in the past. It is frustrating to lose for sure, and I am not even convinced it is desirable to get rid of that feeling, but your field seems small enough that results are a lot closer to random than many others have to contend with.
  
• Matchpoints, a small field and also looking at individual boards can lead to near random outcomes. Don't focus overly much on individual boards. If you have the time (and memory) and are willing to put in the effort, instead go over every single deal. Every bid made by you, partner and the opponents, if possible even every card played. The goal should be to understand what constitutes a good action and a bad one, good results are downstream from this.
  
• Picking up lots of weak hands can be a killer, especially in a weak field (sorry). Most people are better at declaring than defending, and better at bidding strong hands than weak ones. Even if you personally are world's best defender the opponents will still statistically profit from good hands simply because you can't exploit their lousy defensive skills. Teams scoring compensates for this, but sometimes there is just nothing to be done.

If you have a set of multiple hands from a session and would like to go over them I'd be happy to give some feedback. Your previous posts all suggest that to some extent these are the unavoidable downsides of a small field, though.

[wuudturner]

Defending one hand after another is really hard on your mind. Far easier to declare every board if I could, as then I usually have control of what happens to whatever extent possible. Defending when I have one weak hand after another means I need to stay focused, even if I can see what I do may have no impact on the result.

A good thing to do there to maintain focus is to make it into a mental exercise. Even on a hand where absolutely nothing will change the result, I'd suggest seeing how quickly you can completely place the cards in declarer's hand. A virtue of that is IF there is some possibility of setting the contract, then you will be able to find the best chance. And practice at counting out a hidden hand is a hugely valuable thing.

My point is to make a hand a success in your eyes, even if you get an unhappy result on a board where you have no control over the result. That makes it into a positive thing for you, and if you feel positive about what you are doing, then you will be more confidant and more able to perform well on the rest of the set.

On the boards that feel bad, consider if that contract and the result was actually almost certainly duplicated at other tables. (This becomes more difficult in small, weak fields, where anything can happen.) If so, then just shrug your shoulders and go on to the next board. Even if it was something you did wrong, just shrug your shoulders anyway. Don't worry about results in the past.

[AL78]

eagles123, on 2022-December-09, 10:59, said:

When you play in small fields with and against weak opposition you're bound to have a few random results. 4S here is not a good contract at MP, needs club and spade onside and hearts to be guessed correctly. I would either seek a better standard game/partner, or just ignore the results as really in such a weak field they're pretty meaningless.

I agree 4♠ is a poor contract and was aggressively bid, although when declarer drew trumps and played ace and another heart, partner flew up with her king which eliminated the guess. The problem partner has is that I play the two under the ace (playing the jack giftwraps the suit for declarer) so she might think I have three hearts and will go to bed with the king if she doesn't win. The diamond ace was knocked out at trick one so dummy has no entries but I'm not sure I can blame partner for not playing low on the second heart.

[pilowsky]

Associating your own mental state with success or failure at the Bridge table (or anything else in life) is something that we are trained to do from an early age.
The association of reward and performance is pervasive in many societies.
It isn't necessary to 'win' to enjoy what you're doing, but it is necessary to fail in order to gain enjoyment from the experience of winning.

There is a psychological defence mechanism called "external locus of control" that is extremely common in Bridge.
With this mechanism our personal failures are always characterised as the fault of someone else or some other outside force over which we have no control.
"...my partner played badly..."
"...I was dealt very poor hands..."
"... the dealing machine is biased..." etc etc.
Nobody likes to believe that a bad result is because their own skill level is below their expectations.

Have you ever noticed that when the teacher plays in the beginner classes the pair with the teacher almost always wins?
Even the very best athletes tend to have coaches because this psychological tendency to not see our own flaws and to instead believe they are caused by outside factors is pervasive.

Bridge - like all team sports - attempts to simulate that element of humanity that requires us to get on with each other in order to succeed.
Even a team where all the individuals are skilled will be less successful than another team where the individual skill level is much lower but the team members understand each other.

Anyway, the short answer to your question is that if you are looking to Bridge for affirmation of your personal worth, forget it.
The life lesson that Bridge - and all other games teaches you - is humility.
Aim for improvement not 100%.

[AL78]

pilowsky, on 2022-December-09, 16:16, said:

Nobody likes to believe that a bad result is because their own skill level is below their expectations.

I tend to start with that assumption but a bad run of hands can be verified as can getting hit with the only opponents to bid a cold game or slam. I will never deny a good portion of bad results are down to my sub-optimal play.

[smerriman]

That's why as others have mentioned, you simply have to change your definition of bad. You should be happy with a hand like the above where you played your hand perfectly and scored 0% due to factors out of your control.

[LBengtsson]

My dime's worth. Winning is not everything. Look upon the bridge as a social event. I cannot see - well, I certainly cannot see myself - how you can get so frustrated playing a small number of tables against usually weak opposition, as you say, in your local British provincial club.

I play chess, I teach a few juniors, friends children. I allow them to win now and again. The boost they get when they beat me. If I won all the time, it would be boring against weaker opposition.

Do you tell your fellow members that you write on these forums, AL78? Wow, they would be impressed with your contributions. The bridge knowledge that you have. But not the ones where you cry into your handkerchief about being on defense so often due to having a lower-than-average point count per session. S*** happens, even at the bridge table.

[AL78]

LBengtsson, on 2022-December-10, 01:26, said:

My dime's worth. Winning is not everything. Look upon the bridge as a social event. I cannot see - well, I certainly cannot see myself - how you can get so frustrated playing a small number of tables against usually weak opposition, as you say, in your local British provincial club.

I play chess, I teach a few juniors, friends children. I allow them to win now and again. The boost they get when they beat me. If I won all the time, it would be boring against weaker opposition.

I can explain the frustration:

1. If I am playing in a weak field and struggle to break 50%, that doesn't say much about my ability at the game.
2. I used to get much better scores many years ago when the club was stronger and better attended. Regression is never a good thing.
3. The occasional gloating or the pair of near beginners that claim to be nervous because they think I am an expert then proceed to get a 70% board or two against me which comes across as mocking, even if that is not the intention.
4. The apparent inability to perform to the level that I think I am capable of, which really means in a weak field I should break 50% in all but the most unlucky sessions.
5. Long periods of poor performance which cannot be written off as s**t happens but with no clear reasons.
6. Low self esteem, and validation of being a poor player through the poor results, when I would like to think I am at least somewhat competitive at my two clubs.

Chess is different from bridge in that it is easier to analyse a game (because it is a game of complete information with no luck) and if you lose at chess, it is because you blundered or were outplayed and you can usually find out where you could have doen better and what you missed on the board.

[DavidKok]

Talk about this with your partner. If you feel you are stagnating or regressing it might be time to shake things up - reassess what you are trying to achieve and how to achieve it. Maybe switch up your system, or make a standing appointment with partner to go over the hands, or practice bidding and defence, maybe look for regular time to practice online. More than anything else the partnership nature of bridge make this nearly impossible to achieve solo.

Personally I got a lot of mileage out of reading bridge books and then discussing the key ideas with my partner at our monthly system and results evaluation, but it takes a real bookworm to absorb all the knowledge just from reading through one.
I also took one evening a week to go over all the hands we played in that week's competition (usually we played 3x9 boards), comparing scores (available online) and checking whether I would have done the same in the bidding. I didn't have the memory to go over all the cards played, but usually I could remember the key moments in the hands where we scored better or worse than the field and mark them (sometimes even during the play, a small mark on the score sheet as a reminder to go over that hand later). It basically turned my club play into a 2 days a week affair, but I improved by leaps and bounds.

[LBengtsson]

AL78, on 2022-December-10, 06:43, said:

I can explain the frustration:

1. If I am playing in a weak field and struggle to break 50%, that doesn't say much about my ability at the game.
2. I used to get much better scores many years ago when the club was stronger and better attended. Regression is never a good thing.
3. The occasional gloating or the pair of near beginners that claim to be nervous because they think I am an expert then proceed to get a 70% board or two against me which comes across as mocking, even if that is not the intention.
4. The apparent inability to perform to the level that I think I am capable of, which really means in a weak field I should break 50% in all but the most unlucky sessions.
5. Long periods of poor performance which cannot be written off as s**t happens but with no clear reasons.
6. Low self esteem, and validation of being a poor player through the poor results, when I would like to think I am at least somewhat competitive at my two clubs.

Chess is different from bridge in that it is easier to analyse a game (because it is a game of complete information with no luck) and if you lose at chess, it is because you blundered or were outplayed and you can usually find out where you could have doen better and what you missed on the board.

I am sorry that you feel so 'eaten up' with your poor results and performance, AL78 It cannot be good for morale. But I do get the impression - and I hope you do not mind me saying this as constructive advice - that you seem to dwell on your bridge misfortune, and you are perhaps guilty of perpetuating further misfortune as a result.

Some things you cannot change, like the amateurs getting a good result against you. Bridge is a game where amateurs bidding and playing off-road can defeat even the best in the game. Maybe that is something you cannot control at your club, and having shown us many instances of crazy bidding and plays on these forum pages, you are at a loss of how to deal with it. Interesting you say you got better results when the club standard was stronger.

Maybe you go into a session trying to play perfect or near perfect bridge, but because you are not playing against other players who adopt a similar attitude, you may be trying too hard to prove to these amateur players that you are a better player than them. That puts pressure on you, I guess. And when you do not play perfectly or as near as damn it, you feel instantly deflated.

I still think it is better, at the club level you play at, to treat the game more socially, to have a drink with your bridge companions at a bar or go to restaurant after a session. Getting too involved in the analysis of results, becoming a 'result merchant' is detrimental to one own's health, I feel. I hope things improve for you soon.

[AL78]

LBengtsson, on 2022-December-10, 10:43, said:

I am sorry that you feel so 'eaten up' with your poor results and performance, AL78 It cannot be good for morale. But I do get the impression - and I hope you do not mind me saying this as constructive advice - that you seem to dwell on your bridge misfortune, and you are perhaps guilty of perpetuating further misfortune as a result.

Some things you cannot change, like the amateurs getting a good result against you. Bridge is a game where amateurs bidding and playing off-road can defeat even the best in the game. Maybe that is something you cannot control at your club, and having shown us many instances of crazy bidding and plays on these forum pages, you are at a loss of how to deal with it. Interesting you say you got better results when the club standard was stronger.

Maybe you go into a session trying to play perfect or near perfect bridge, but because you are not playing against other players who adopt a similar attitude, you may be trying too hard to prove to these amateur players that you are a better player than them. That puts pressure on you, I guess. And when you do not play perfectly or as near as damn it, you feel instantly deflated.

I still think it is better, at the club level you play at, to treat the game more socially, to have a drink with your bridge companions at a bar or go to restaurant after a session. Getting too involved in the analysis of results, becoming a 'result merchant' is detrimental to one own's health, I feel. I hope things improve for you soon.

Thanks, that is a good psychological analysis. Regarding your third paragraph I am not trying to prove myself to the other players, I am trying to prove myself to myself. Lack of confidence in myself is triggering emotions that override logic so when I apply what I think is a sound strategy on a hand and get punished again and again it is kind of proving to myself I am a bad player hence the despair kicks in. I will try and go back to a strategy of avoiding looking at the result after I have entered it into the Bridgemate. I am less likely to slide into despair if I am ignorant of the result. I will try and encourage my partners to take turns sitting North/East.

[smerriman]

AL78, on 2022-December-10, 06:43, said:

1. If I am playing in a weak field and struggle to break 50%, that doesn't say much about my ability at the game.

Couldn't agree more If you replaced yourself with the best bridge player in the world, they would have scored 0% on this hand. Almost every hand you've posted on the forums are bad scores due to your opponents or partner (and not maliciously; just misguided belief that it must have been your mistake). That's very frustrating, but implies your ability at the game isn't in question.

[mikestar13]

Bad players luck into a fair number of good results, the effect is magnified in small/weak fields. A partner of mine had a tendency to dwell on mistakes and make further mistakes while dithering over the last one. I had a talk with him and we agreed henceforth we were allowed only one bad board per error. Our results improved significantly. Examine yourself and judge if dwelling on mistakes contributes to more mistakes (you might also solicit partner's opinion--sometimes partners can see weaknesses in our game that we have blind spots about). But the specific hand you cite is bad luck pure and simple: 4♠ is a bad contract that happens to make, always an undeserved good board for the bidders.

[TMorris]

I would suggest you focus less on actual results and more on errors made by yourself and your partnership.

If you make less than 3 errors (that you can see afterwards) in an evening of 24 boards then, whatever your actual percentage, you have had a decent session. Everything else is just noise.

I also tend to do better in a stronger field. If you do so it shows IMO you are doing sensible things most of the time.

The main club I used to play in pre-Covid was, at that point the strongest local club I could get to easily. Now it is little more than a beginners club and I don't play there any more. Find the strongest field you can locally & make as few errors as you can in that field.

Having said all that I do play in the ACBL daily events a few times each week. I don't take them seriously. Most of the people there play a very poor standard of bridge and I get cheated every few weeks as well, usually by players who from their profile do know better. It is often quite blatent. On the rare occasions I play against a well known player it is very satisfying to get a decent board against them even if they are usually playing with a punter..

[blackshoe]

My approach:

1. Treat each hand as a microcosm. Once it's over, it's over. Ignore what happened and move on (I grant I'm not as good at this as I'd like to be).
2. During a hand, make note of your mistakes (yours, not your partner's -- leave that to him). After the last trick write them down.
3. NOW the hand is over.
4. After the session, spend time* going over the hands with your partner. Own up to your mistakes, let him own up to his (with the best will in the world, and even if you're supposed to be mentoring, if you're the one that brings up his mistakes, eventually he'll resent you for it**).
5. If you find yourself bidding and playing more quickly than is wise, slow down. Nothing says you have to bid and play like a speed demon.
6. Study. Read. Go over expert bidding and play. Make sure you know your defensive carding cold.

* Early in my bridge career, my mentor and I would spend as much time going over boards as we did playing them in the first place. It didn't help my headaches, but it helped my game. :-)
** If you're mentoring a rank beginner you really don't have much choice, but try to get him to recognize his own mistakes as early as possible.

[AL78]

Thanks everyone for the constructive feedback. I am playing in a club swiss teams this afternoon so will make an effort to reprogram my mental attitude. Scoring pairs across eight board rounds in a mixed field amplifies the effect of rogue boards.

DavidKok, on 2022-December-09, 11:22, said:

If you have a set of multiple hands from a session and would like to go over them I'd be happy to give some feedback. Your previous posts all suggest that to some extent these are the unavoidable downsides of a small field, though.

That is a very kind offer and I may take you up on that. Many hands I post on here have resulted in criticism of my partner but I know there are things I am missing in the defence, so I will try and post defensive situations where I had a choice of plays and got it wrong, which means I have to note the board and try to store the play of the hand in my memory.

Example of a recent mis-defence:

---

I decided to lead a club but didn't fancy a low one into what I suspected would be AJxx in declarer's hand and it doesn't look like suits are lying favourably for declarer, so I decided to lead a top honor hoping partner could get in an push the ten or high spot card through the jack, or at least hope it wouldn't be expensive. That brilliant play cost us a complete bottom as dummy comes down with a singleton ace and declarer holds JT983 so I set up his clubs for him. 3NT+2 on a hand where double dummy says we can hold it to eight tricks. Three out of the other five weren't in game and the other two made nine tricks in 3NT so we needed to get this down to get anything other than a poor score.

---

[DavidKok]

This is a difficult hand, the defence isn't readily obvious to me (well, establish diamonds. But single dummy it is hard to spot). The king of clubs is probably the percentage lead, with the jack of diamonds as my second guess. GIB can keep it to 8 tricks even on the king of clubs lead but at the table I would not have found this. I am struggling a bit to see how declarer gets to 11 tricks - 10 or 9 seem more likely, but 10 tricks would still have been a bottom score. As an aside I would not have opened the East hand, and for many players North's 1♠ bid shows 5. I think it is likely to get a bottom score taking only reasonable actions on this board, although maybe if West is sharp they can spot the need to establish diamonds and grab the spade ace early.

[AL78]

DavidKok, on 2022-December-11, 06:10, said:

This is a difficult hand, the defence isn't readily obvious to me (well, establish diamonds. But single dummy it is hard to spot). The king of clubs is probably the percentage lead, with the jack of diamonds as my second guess. GIB can keep it to 8 tricks even on the king of clubs lead but at the table I would not have found this. I am struggling a bit to see how declarer gets to 11 tricks - 10 or 9 seem more likely, but 10 tricks would still have been a bottom score. As an aside I would not have opened the East hand, and for many players North's 1♠ bid shows 5. I think it is likely to get a bottom score taking only reasonable actions on this board, although maybe if West is sharp they can spot the need to establish diamonds and grab the spade ace early.

I can't remember for sure but it is possible partner threw a heart when declarer established and cashed their clubs.