Here's the flip side of the same question. I had this come up last night.
You are defending a contract, and you see a sure set. You signal pard accordingly, yet pard takes a tact that seemingly lets declarer slip the contract home, if declarer holds hand "a", but leads to multiple undertricks if declarer holds hand "b".
How much do you trust pard?
Expert Opinion and Knowledge Requested Same topic, different tact
#22
Posted 2006-July-31, 20:03
pclayton, on Jul 31 2006, 08:01 AM, said:
Here's the flip side of the same question. I had this come up last night.
You are defending a contract, and you see a sure set. You signal pard accordingly, yet pard takes a tact that seemingly lets declarer slip the contract home, if declarer holds hand "a", but leads to multiple undertricks if declarer holds hand "b".
How much do you trust pard?
You are defending a contract, and you see a sure set. You signal pard accordingly, yet pard takes a tact that seemingly lets declarer slip the contract home, if declarer holds hand "a", but leads to multiple undertricks if declarer holds hand "b".
How much do you trust pard?
I guess now in retrospect in is not so much a matter of trust - if you don't trust you shouldn't be playing - but a matter of whether or not you believe he is focused. If focused, you play for the multiple set; if not, try to steer back to the sure thing.
Your views?
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Help
