[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Whether you run the J or hook the T, you lose to Hx on your left.

If you run the J 1st round, you lose 2 tricks vs. everybody with Hx. If you hook the T, you only lose to those good enough to duck with Hx.

Quote

If both missing honors are onside w/ that opponent short (but not KQ tight), they are going to split their honors most of the time no matter what and again you are limited to 2 tricks because of your limited dummy entries.

Huh? If KQ(xxx) is onside, the opponent is not supposed to split, and if they do, you have the T98 so you get your 3 tricks by winning A and driving out their other honor.

Quote

Your best chance for 3 tricks when both honors are on side and you are short dummy entries is to put the J on the felt and hope for xxx:HHx, xx:HHxx, or x:HHxxx and for RHO to Do The Wrong Thing.

Low to the T, then crossing back to run the J if it wins, works equally well vs. all these holdings. Running the J pays off to LHO holding the stiff Q or K, which low
to the T does not. Plus low to the T puts pressure on LHO to find the duck with Hx.

Quote

That odds are against "fooling" Them. So play the suit "by the book".

The book play is low to the T, then cross back & run the J if it wins.

[jdonn]

foo, on Jun 22 2006, 04:44 PM, said:

Whether you run the J or hook the T, you lose to Hx on your left.
Clearly, it also does not matter what you do if the suit is split Hxx:Hxx

Also, if both missing honors are offside and protected, you are only taking 2 tricks regardless of what you do.
Even KQ:xxxx rates to make you lose 2 tricks unless you somehow know that is the layout.

You are in Dummy =now=.  You are only getting back once more.

If both missing honors are onside w/ that opponent short (but not KQ tight), they are going to split their honors most of the time no matter what and again you are limited to 2 tricks because of your limited dummy entries.

Your best chance for 3 tricks when both honors are on side and you are short dummy entries is to put the J on the felt and hope for xxx:HHx,  xx:HHxx, or x:HHxxx and for RHO to Do The Wrong Thing.

That odds are against "fooling" Them.  So play the suit "by the book".

Foo...I've missed you Now let me try this again, very very slowly.

---

Dummy has Jxx, you (declarer) have AT98. You are in your hand with two outside entries to dummy. You use one of them to go to dummy now. And here the paths diverge.

Your way:
If you next lead the jack, it will go low, 8, king. Now you get in again. You use your second and final dummy entry. Now this is the position

---

You lead another, it goes low, ten, low. You are now stuck in your hand with no more dummy entries, so you can't finesse again. You end up taking two tricks in the suit, which consist of your one winning finesse on the second round, and the ace.

Now back up the train to....

The correct way:
Instead of leading the jack on the first round, you lead low, low, 8, king. Now you get in again. You use your second and final dummy entry. Now this is the position

---

The oh so crucial difference here is the jack still remains, so when you lead that card and it goes low, low, low you have HELD THE LEAD IN DUMMY to repeat the finesse one more time. You end up taking three tricks in the suit.

Do you see it now? I didn't make up an imaginary point about fooling the opponents. I didn't make reference to a nonexistant book. I simply demonstrated why leading low toward the ten on the first round of the suit is superior to leading the jack.

Note that both methods work equally well or badly when the KQ are both onside, both offside, Kx/Qx on your right, and Kxx/Qxx on your right. The critical case is the above one, with Kxxx/Qxxx on your right. (I am ignoring breaks worse than 4-2 but the solution does not change.)

Do you see it now?

[foo]

EDIT: deleting post