[Cascade]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South
Ackerley Balicki Burrows Zmudzinski
 -     1NT   Pass  2♥
 Pass  3♠    Pass  3NT
 Pass  4♦    Pass  4♥
 Pass  4♠    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

C5 CJ CQ C2
D4 DA D5 D9
S3 S4 SA S2
SK S6 S5 H3
S7 S8 ST H5
DK D3 DT D2
DQ D7 C9


This was an interesting underlead of my ♣A since I was leading around to the strong NT. Much more often an underlead is suggested when leading through a strong NT hand.

The underlead was suggested because North denied a club control and therefore implicitly South's 4♥ showed a club control so I was confident of getting the ♣K in dummy - 3NT had denied a singleton. Still the underlead could work out badly with Kxx in dummy and Qx in hand and a useful pitch. Nevertheless it looked like we would need miracles to beat 4♠ after they had made slam noises. I was hoping for Qx with partner and a ruff and then some other trick somewhere.

I learnt a valuable lesson on this hand. I strongly suspected that Balicki and Zmudzinski played first or second cue-bids but I wasn't sure. That meant I needed to ask before the lead. This question could have meant that declarer would have been able to deduce I had underled. It would have been much better if I had been more familiar with the opponents methods and had not needed to ask the question. Luckily it did not tip Balicki off and partner won his ♣Q.

Partner's diamond return did not cost as declarer rejected the heart finesse in favour of guaranteeing he could pitch all of the clubs off the dummy.

[MFA]

I wouldn't be too worried about giving away this underlead by asking about cuebidding style. This is helpful info with the ♣Q as well, and although these guys are good, they can't see through the cards.

[gerry]

coincidentally the last time i underled was against cascade's partner's son (!) on a similar auction.

dummy had KT9, pd had QJxx and i had a quick entry so 3 tricks in this suit were coming for 1 off until pd hitched after his J won. That was enough for declarer to get it right next time.

Oh well