[geofspa]

Scoring: Rubber

Bidding

1♣ x p p?
p

---

The could we do better will come a little later

The other day playing high stakes rubber bridge (not really it was social bridge) I converted my partners takeout double into a penalty.


My question here is - should I convert partners T/O double ?

I have a weak hand but my clubs are nice ... even if sitting under opener.

I believe I should here bite the bullet and bid 1♥

Scoring: Rubber


The play
1 n ♣Q 8 2 5
2 n ♦Q 2 6 T
3 n ♦K 3 ♣3 7
4 s ♥9 J Q 2
5 n ♦A 8 ♥7 9
6 n ♥A 4 3 8
7 n ♥T 5 ♣6 K
8 s ♠3 7 A 4
9 n ♥6 ♠8 ♣7 ♣T
10 w ♠K 5 9 T
11 w ♣A 9 ♦J J
12 w ♣4 ♦4 ♦5 K
13 s ♠Q 6 2 J

---

Honestly I do not know why West opened the bidding - we were playing the first game in a rubber so there were no part scores on the board.

In the play my partner berated me for trumping her ♦K at trick 3 (Never trump partners winners?). Although I did argue that if I trump this I can lead hearts through declarer.

We managed to take 10 tricks for a nice little 800 above the line.

Did we do as well as we could have expected, and could declarer have done better than he did?

[matmat]

i think you can keep declarer to 2 tricks, maybe 1?

three rounds of diamonds, pitching spades, spade ace, spade ruff, heart through, spade ruff, heart through, third heart

---

now comes north's last diamond. you ruff high

declarer can either underruff, at which point you lead through their ATx into p's Q9
or oferruff, in which case they lead out of Txx into p's Q9 and your Jxx, you winning the rest of the tricks...

so 1CX-6? what is that? 1400?

[cherdano]

Passing looks right.
You shouldn't ruff the ♦K but rather pitch one of your possible losers, i.e. a heart. (If ruffing and leading a heart through gains a trick in the heart suit, you did nothing more than breaking even compared to pitching a heart.)

[whereagles]

passing is ok, but 1♥ is fine as well.

[ArtK78]

I would pass. If passing is right, you win big. If not, you have not doubled them into game, so if you do go minus, it will not be a huge minus.

[bid_em_up]

matmat, on Oct 3 2007, 02:41 PM, said:

i think you can keep declarer to 2 tricks, maybe 1?

three rounds of diamonds, pitching spades, spade ace, spade ruff, heart through, spade ruff, heart through, third heart

Dealer: ????? Vul: ???? Scoring: Unknown

♠   ♥ 6 ♦ 4 ♣ Q9 ♠   ♥   ♦   ♣ AT54 ♠ J ♥   ♦ J8 ♣ 8 ♠   ♥   ♦   ♣ KJ76

now comes north's last diamond. you ruff high

declarer can either underruff, at which point you lead through their ATx into p's Q9
or oferruff, in which case they lead out of Txx into p's Q9 and your Jxx, you winning the rest of the tricks...

so 1CX-6? what is that? 1400?

While you would hold declarer to 1 trick on your given defense, once partner led the club Q, it is no longer possible.

The club Q is not an unreasonable start for the defense and once it has been led, the best you can down is hold declarer to two tricks for +1100. Partner should continue with the club 9 at trick 2.

[matmat]

bid_em_up, on Oct 4 2007, 10:08 AM, said:

The club Q is not an unreasonable start for the defense and once it has been led, the best you can down is hold declarer to two tricks for +1100. Partner should continue with the club 9 at trick 2.

given a holding of AKQx in a side suit, i think the queen of trump can wait until at least trick 2 at which point it becomes clear that dummy is not ruffing anything, so why lead trumps into declarer?

[Quantumcat]

Yeah because partner obviously has a few trumps, probably your queen and even the nine will be made into tricks. And you have control everywhere, so unless each of the opponents has a void somewhere, you have to be given control back very soon and you can always lead the trumps then if it looks right.

I like your defence matmat, well thought out