Its relevance to bridge is that one often has to decide whether two adjacent honours are touching or not, particularly when the opponent plays one. The principle of restricted choice is a key one in bridge; it states that when someone plays one of two touching honours, their partner is twice as likely to have the other touching honour. When I got this wrong this week at the Woodberry, I scored a complete zero.
We bid, P-(P)-1H-(2H)-3H-(3S)-4H-(4S)-P-(P)-5H-(All Pass). I expected a bit more for my partner's 3H bid, but we would have had a bad score for defending 4S, which only one other pair bid. Malcolm Morris, East, and Matthew Hendrickson, West, did well to push us to Five Hearts. East led the queen of diamonds which was interesting, and I thought that this was more likely to be QJ doubleton than a singleton, and definitely was not Qx. It is not clear that the rule of restricted choice applies here, as players very rarely lead the jack of a side suit when they have QJ doubleton as partner is likely to be confused. Also a singleton queen, on this auction, is a dangerous lead which might save declarer a guess. To cut a long story short, I drew trumps and when I discovered that East had one trump, I played for East to be AJxxx x QJ AQxxx, or the like, unsuccessfully. Had East led a normal jack of spades, and provided the defence cashed their club winner at trick two, I might well have gone off anyway. It seems normal to play for West to have QJx or QJxx in diamonds. In the end, virtue had to be its own reward, a phrase that seems to have originated from Cicero.
