[kenrexford]

Scoring: MP

---

[Layout Corrected.] After East opened 1♦, I (South) ended up declaring a contract that should make an overtrick, and yet I botched this so remarkably that I was set one trick. I noted, at the time, that Belladonna would have a hard time throwing this hand.

The lead, BTW, was the diamond Queen.

What contract (bonus -- what auction?)? How did I manage down one?

[gnasher]

It's slightly surprising that you weren't defending 1D - As east has only four diamonds, I'd expect him to have at least a 12-count, which doesn't leave much for West. Here is my guess:

You played in 2H. East had Kx QJ98 109xx AQx. You can make an overtrick by winning in dummy, leading a club up, cashing two trumps, and cross-ruffing. You make three diamonds, a club, a spade, two top hearts and a ruff in each hand. It doesn't help them to take a diamond ruff at trick three.

Instead, you won trick one in hand and played two rounds of spades. They took SK, a diamond ruff, CA, and another diamond ruff, then West exited with a spade, allowing East to throw a club and so avoid the trump coup.

Unfortunately, I can't construct an auction to 2H.

[kenrexford]

gnasher, on Feb 24 2008, 12:32 PM, said:

It's slightly surprising that you weren't defending 1D - As east has only four diamonds, I'd expect him to have at least a 12-count, which doesn't leave much for West. Here is my guess:

You played in 2H.  East had Kx QJ98 109xx AQx.  You can make an overtrick by winning in dummy, leading a club up, cashing two trumps, and cross-ruffing.  You make three diamonds, a club, a spade, two top hearts and a ruff in each hand.  It doesn't help them to take a diamond ruff at trick three.

Instead, you won trick one in hand and played two rounds of spades.  They took SK, a diamond ruff, CA, and another diamond ruff, then West exited with a spade, allowing East to throw a club and so avoid the trump coup.

Unfortunately, I can't construct an auction to 2H.

Wow. So pessimistic, and so far from the actual contract, or the trick-taking power of this air of hands in the context of the auction.

As a clue, I'll note that every Honor is where you want it, no relevant Queen is protected, and no relevant Jack is protected, and that the opponents do not have the stomach for the wildly exotic (but correct). And yet, I still failed on this lead!

[Winstonm]

1D-1N-P-3N

You ducked the diamond in both hands, allowing a spade switch. They took 3 spades, a diamond, and a club.

In reality, diamonds were 3/2 all the time.

[kenrexford]

Scoring: MP

---

[Layout Corrected.] The auction:

1♦-1NT-P-2♣-
P-2♥-P-4♥-all pass

♦Q lead, won by Ace in dummy.
Small club hopped upon by Opener, small around.
Diamond back, ruffed by West; I played low, resulting in a blockage of the suit because of the early play of the Ace from dummy.
Spade back, won by Ace.
Small club (???), Queen falling as I ruffed in dummy.
Heart Ace (Jack from East)...Heart to King (Queen from East)
Club Jack (desperate foolishness), ruffed by West, as I pitched a spade.
Spade to Queen.

In contrast, had I not been a raging idiot:

Diamond won by King on opening lead.
Heart to Ace, noting drop of Jack.
Club toward hand, presumably same hop.
Diamond back, ruffed, but ruffing air.
Spade back, won by Ace.
Ruff a club (for good measure), noting drop of Queen.
Heart to King, dropping Queen.
Heart 10, pulling trump.
Club King, ditching spade.
Club Jack, ditching last spade.
Diamond to dummy, claiming an overtrick.

[gwnn]

OK I'll bite. why would anyone bid 2♥?

[the hog]

Ken, sometimes i really believe you make up these hands in your fevered brow. Why would anyone bid 1NT?

[hrothgar]

The_Hog, on Feb 25 2008, 04:49 PM, said:

Ken, sometimes i really believe you make up these hands in your fevered brow. Why would anyone bid 1NT?

The more interesting question is what did the 2♥ response to 2♣ show?

[cherdano]

More to the point: You bid like this, and then you think the play is the hilarious part?

[kenrexford]

As to the first Question ("Why overcall 1NT?"), I realize that I posted the top heart honors in the wrong spot. I held A10x, not K10x. That explains the 14-count.

As to the second Question ("What the Heck is 2♥?"), I firmly believe that this is the correct way to bid in this situation. With a single diamond stopper (not two), an Ax or xx side major, and a good fragment in the other major, I think winning bridge is bidding that major fragment in response to Stayman. I do that quite frequently even when there is no opposition bidding. But in the context of opposition bidding, this seems, IMO, quite sound when the parameters are right.

[gwnn]

no no no Ken, you surely don't mean

you said:

I do that quite frequently even when there is no opposition bidding.

as in "I'd open 1NT and over partner's 2♣, stayman, the convention that asks for a 4 card major, I'd bid a 3 card major every now and again".

[kenrexford]

gwnn, on Feb 25 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

no no no Ken, you surely don't mean

you said:

I do that quite frequently even when there is no opposition bidding.

as in "I'd open 1NT and over partner's 2♣, stayman, the convention that asks for a 4 card major, I'd bid a 3 card major every now and again".

Yes, and very much so.

I don't understand how...

(1.) people understand that sometimes you have to raise partner's 4-card or longer suit with three cards, even thogub partner will expect four,

(2.) people will occasionally respond 1♠ to a 1♥ opening with a three-card suit,

(3.) people will occasionally rebid as Opener's first rebid a three-card major, knowing that partner will expect four of them,

and yet,

(4.) people find the idea of responding to Stayman with a three-card suit ridiculous.

I mean, what makes the most sense when partner bids Stayman and you have something like: ♠xx ♥AJx ♦Axx ♣AKxxx? You don't mind and in fact often desire the Moysian, you fear a spade lead, Aces-and-spaces, especially with side sources of tricks possibly needing establishment, blah-blah-blah.

The usual response is that partnership harmony is negatively impacted. The usual rebuttal is that harmony is not affected if partner expects this possibility.

[Cascade]

kenrexford, on Feb 26 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

gwnn, on Feb 25 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

no no no Ken, you surely don't mean

you said:

I do that quite frequently even when there is no opposition bidding.

as in "I'd open 1NT and over partner's 2♣, stayman, the convention that asks for a 4 card major, I'd bid a 3 card major every now and again".

Yes, and very much so.

I don't understand how...

(1.) people understand that sometimes you have to raise partner's 4-card or longer suit with three cards, even thogub partner will expect four,

(2.) people will occasionally respond 1♠ to a 1♥ opening with a three-card suit,

(3.) people will occasionally rebid as Opener's first rebid a three-card major, knowing that partner will expect four of them,

and yet,

(4.) people find the idea of responding to Stayman with a three-card suit ridiculous.

I mean, what makes the most sense when partner bids Stayman and you have something like: ♠xx ♥AJx ♦Axx ♣AKxxx? You don't mind and in fact often desire the Moysian, you fear a spade lead, Aces-and-spaces, especially with side sources of tricks possibly needing establishment, blah-blah-blah.

The usual response is that partnership harmony is negatively impacted. The usual rebuttal is that harmony is not affected if partner expects this possibility.

How often do you play a 3=3 fit when partner raises on three?

Or is that a 'no no' in your style?

[gnasher]

kenrexford, on Feb 25 2008, 03:55 AM, said:

In contrast, had I not been a raging idiot:

Diamond won by King on opening lead.
Heart to Ace, noting drop of Jack.
Club toward hand, presumably same hop.
Diamond back, ruffed, but ruffing air.

I think you're assuming quite a lot here. That's two misdefences on successive tricks.

I don't think you can assume the same defence when the play has gone quite differently, especially if you've told the opponents about your agreement that South might have only three hearts.

[gnasher]

kenrexford, on Feb 24 2008, 09:46 PM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 24 2008, 12:32 PM, said:

Here is my guess:
[snip]

Wow. So pessimistic, and so far from the actual contract, or the trick-taking power of this air of hands in the context of the auction.

I wasn't that far out: you played in hearts; you lost one more ruff to West than necessary; any game requires a miracle or a misdefence; you could and should have defended 1D; and the auction was one that I couldn't hope to construct.

[kenrexford]

Cascade, on Feb 25 2008, 10:47 PM, said:

How often do you play a 3=3 fit when partner raises on three?

Or is that a 'no no' in your style?

Rare. To declare a 3-3 "fit," you need to have each partner have the rare hand pattern justifying showing a four-card suit with a mere fragment, at the same time, both with the weak version (such that it passes out), and without interference.

I cannot remember the last time I declared or sat as dummy with a 3-3 fit, but I do remember it happening. If I recall correctly, however, the score is usually good, strangely. What typically happens is a cross ruff, the opponents' trumps crashing under Ace-equivalents and together with each other toward or at the end of the play.