[pclayton]

Scoring: XIMP

---

Here's a hand from yesterday that my partner got wrong.

North opens 1♦, you double and LHO tries 1♥, pard passes and RHO tries 4♥. The sight of dummy isn't exactly what you would expect.

Pard leads the ♠7 (3/5) and you win the K.

At T2 and 3, you cash the K-A of ♣ (pard plays the 8 and 4 (standard carding)).

How do you continue at T4?

[sceptic]

A spades

[ArcLight]

>How do you continue at T4?

Force dummy with a club.

Maybe I can promote a trump trick, or maybe Declarer is void in diamonds.
How will declarer enter hand from Dummy? It would be a shame if he had Jx in Diamonds.


Playing a high spade may establish a spade winner for declarer.
I assume Spades are 4-4-4-1.

If pard had 5 he might have bid 1♠ in response to your TO X.
South may 5 hearts, at least 4.

Trust pard that he has a reason to hi-low in Clubs.
Besides he can ruff the Q if he doesnt have it.
And that means South has 5 Clubs, 4 hearts, 4 spades and is void in Dimes.
Or maybe 4=5=0=4

Kill a club, if declarer gets to dummy, he will still get a couple of discards.

[Impact]

Cute hand as a lot depends on the S pips with an expert partner and declarer (who will endeavour to conceal position if he can afford so to do).

Both S4 & 6 are missing - and I assume that even if broke partner would tend to bid 1S over 1H with 5- hence assume S are 4441 (which would probably afford fewer options to declarer).

Partner also holds 4C I assume on the play (or is that standard encouraging) and we need him to hold at least either H8x or xxx to beat the contract.

The only certain way to make declarer ruff in dummy is by playing a second S (otherwise if CQ he can win in hand and then play trumps overtaking....or DA and ruff then drawing trumps in dummy).

Partner appears tobe 4-2-3-4 or 4-3-2-4 - in latter case we need him to hold DJ, and in former some C/S Honours

[pclayton]

Forcing dummy with a club is the correct defense. Pard could have discouraged holding a ♠ card (or even a ♦ void).

However, the hand isn't over. You play a 3rd ♣, J, Q, ruffed in dummy. Declarer doesn't decide to draw trump, but plays on diamonds. She pitches the ♠2 from her hand on the 2nd high ♦ and calls for the 3rd. The position is now:

Scoring: XIMP

---

Do you:

--ruff with the 3?
--ruff with the 10?
--pitch a spade?
--pitch a club?

[ArcLight]

I discard a CLub see reasoning below
-----------------------------------------


So south has 1 Diamond, yes?
So pard has 3.

Pard passed over 1♥

For South to now be void in Spades means that pard, in response to your take out double had 6 spades and didn't bid. No way.

Would pard have bid 1♠ earlier with 5 spades, over 1 heart?
He has shown up with the Dime J, and the Club Q.
I think pard would overcall 1 Spade, even with 2 working HCP with 5 spades.

>Pard leads the ♠7 (3/5) and you win the K.
Pard doesnt have 3. With 5, that would mean 7 was his lowest Spade.
[5 of] 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - J - Q Would pard lead the 7 in this case, or instaed top of a sequence? Assume South has the Q.

So pard has 4 Spades and 3 Diamonds.


South can discard a spade, and still has another.
She can't play a 4th Diamond because pard will ruff.

What to discard? Does it matter?
Just Dont ruff. (Unless you KNOW pard has 3 hearts to the 8, and then you can ruff with the 9 or 10). While its possible pard has the 8, I have no proof of that)



I discard a club.
pard can ruff if they continue dimes, their hearts are longer and they have to ruff before I do anyway.

[kenberg]

Oops. If I hold four hearts he always goes down and he knows it. So the stuff below is trash. I thought I would leave it up for amusement. It seems any small black pitch is fine. If he is 4-6-1-2 he must play me for three hearts and if he does so he makes it. If he is 4-5-1-3 I don't see that it matters whether I pitch a club or a spade spot. If he draws my partner's two trumps I will save my spade winner, if he leaves partner's trumps and ruffs to his hand and then ruffs out my spade he has to get off the board and cannot afford an overtake. If h plays another diamond (after ruffing the spade) I play the 9 of hearts and wait for my heart trick

Trash starts here:

Perhaps this is far-fetched but what's wrong with a little far-fetchedness. First it seems as if another ruff on the table will doom declarer, as he cannot get off the dummy without me being able to establish a heart. Next, I think declarer has four spades. Partner's lead is probably from QT7x. That 7 cannot really be from five. He probably would have bid them and with say, QT987 he would have led the T or 9 depending on agreements. So partner and declarer have four spades.

If declarer is 4-5-1-3 I think we are always beating this as long as I pitch a black spot. Suppose he is 4-6-1-2. He has options. The winning option as the card lie is to play off one of his hearts, drawing partner's last hear. He then runs diamonds at me, pitching until I ruff. He overruffs, leads back to dummy's last trump, and resumes diamonds. This plan will fail however if I hold four hearts. If I hold four hearts he should begin diamonds right away, overruff when I ruff, return to dummy with a trump and repeat running diamonds.


This means I had better not tell him how many hearts I have. Pitching a club shows him that I started with four clubs. Two diamonds he has seen, meaning I am 4-3 in the majors for my double. He can also assume partner would have bid spades holding five, so he knows, with fair certainty, my shape. If I pitch a spade he may well play me for 4-4-2-3 originally and take the wrong line.

[pclayton]

The pitch doesn't matter, as long as you don't ruff. At the critical point the hand is:

---

The defense must come to one more trick in this position.

[kenberg]

You were asking on another thread about B/I suitability. I think this hand is exactly right. I recall some comment in a Reese book along the lines that knowing about squeezes and such is not nearly as important as staying alert to what's going on. Here, if defender thinks for just a moment he can predict with confidence what will happen if he ruffs, assuming declarer started with five hearts. Staying awake is the key to success, and falling asleep is the key to failure as I have often found to my regret.

[pclayton]

kenberg, on Dec 2 2006, 09:35 AM, said:

You were asking on another thread about B/I suitability. I think this hand is exactly right. I recall some comment in a Reese book along the lines that knowing about squeezes and such is not nearly as important as staying alert to what's going on. Here, if defender thinks for just a moment he can predict with confidence what will happen if he ruffs, assuming declarer started with five hearts. Staying awake is the key to success, and falling asleep is the key to failure as I have often found to my regret.

I thought about 'upgrading' the middle game to the A/E section, since its a little more complex than the 1st few tricks. But in the end it seemed simpler to just continue it here

[ArcLight]

>You were asking on another thread about B/I suitability. I think this hand is exactly right. I recall some comment in a Reese book along the lines that knowing about squeezes and such is not nearly as important as staying alert to what's going on. Here, if defender thinks for just a moment he can predict with confidence what will happen if he ruffs, assuming declarer started with five hearts. Staying awake is the key to success, and falling asleep is the key to failure as I have often found to my regret.

No way. Those shifting entry squeezes come up once every 3 hands. Thats what separates Meckwell from us.

I think it was Hugh Kelsey (or maybe Frank Stewart) who wrote that the really hard hands don't come up often enough to make a difference. Its the non-trivial hands where the experts make by using sound technique.


Reese wrote that its one player in 100 (or 1000?) that tries to place the unseend cards. That one begins to advance not when they make an end play or squeeze but when they count and place unseen cards.


Here is what I liked about Phils example:

- there was a choice early on - spade or club force - (does it make a difference? Yes)

- This involved thinking about pards response or lack of one to your TO X.
What could teh unseen shapes be?

- making assumptions. If south has XYZ then the contracts cold, so assume W

I find that reading defense problems forces you to think about all this.

[kenberg]

As far as staying awake is concerned I notice that I was allowing for a 4-6-1-2 distribution. Since declarer followed to three rounds of clubs, this isn't likely. In fact, the 4-5-1-3 distribution is a virtual certainty given the lead (or the auction). However, just thinking along the lines of "what happens next" after a ruff gets you to the right answer. The boards diamonds will be good, declarer will over ruff and play two more trumps ending on the board and claim. This requires only the realization that dummy's diamonds are good and trumps can be drawn after the overruff. So if something can't work, don't do it. Something all of us need to remind ourselves of from time to time.

It's hard to know what is B/I, what isn't, and it probably isn't good to get too hung up on this. But this is, to me, a clearly useful hand for many of us to think about. When I first started playing I would try to read Kantar's stuff in the Bulletin. Usually it was beyond me but not always, and by trying I got better.