[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

P - P - P - 1♠
P - 2♦ - P - 3♣
P - 3N - P - 4♣
P - 4♠ - P - 6♠
P - P - Dbl - All Pass

---

You make a lightner double as south and partner (an expert) leads the ♠4 to dummy's A and your 2. Although you are disappointed with the lead, you are surprised when declarer next leads the ♣T off of dummy. Do you ruff?

[TylerE]

Ruff and switch to a ♦

Probably wrong.

[pclayton]

Apparently pard thought his clubs were better put to use to not give us ruffs.

It's difficult to balance a West hand that drives to slam opposite a passed hand with a pard that doesn't lead a club. For instance I think the non club lead would imply HHxxx in clubs, but that seems really unlikely here.

I will credit declarer with 6 spade tricks, two heart tricks and the AK♣. Declarer either has the ♦A or a void. Lets give declarer the ♥K too. We guard the hearts over dummy, so a squeeze won't operate in this instance.

I'm having a hard time constructing a hand where my play matters. It seems that we are scoring either two clubs or a club and a ruff no matter what I do. If the purpose of this hand is to extract -2 or -3 then I don't think its a big deal either way.

I will pitch on general principles.

[dake50]

D-void scared them off 6NT, partner has SQ single + C-bothering honor. Pitch and witness this masterful play if it makes.

[Codo]

Sorry if I have to ask, but:
Why exactly did the double ask for a club lead?

I thought that there are two (shortend) definitions for Lightner X: Lead the first suit from dummy OR lead something unusual.
Without discussion I had belived that partner will lead diamonds after my double.

But if I had known that my double just asked for something unusual, I would surely discard now. I will trust partner.

[ewj]

Count me in for not ruffing in as well.

[gnasher]

Codo, on Mar 5 2008, 08:35 AM, said:

I thought that there are two (shortend) definitions for Lightner X: Lead the first suit from dummy OR lead something unusual.
Without discussion I had belived that partner will lead diamonds after my double.

But if I had known that my double just asked for something unusual, I would surely discard now. I will trust partner.

I prefer to play that double simply says "give me a ruff", and leaves your partner to work out which suit it's in.

[uday]

My P led a trump after a lead-directing double. I won't quibble with his self rating but now declarer is doing something odd as well.

Unless P and declarer are regular partners, declarer at knows I'm void in C and doesnt mind the ruff, so it seems prudent to discard.

Luckily the discard will have to come from a red suit so P will realize that I'm out of clubs

[cherdano]

uday, on Mar 5 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

Luckily the discard will have to come from a red suit so P will realize that I'm out of clubs

Good point I missed that.

[Fluffy]

Its hard to imagine how ruffing might cost, I will ruff if LHO is not good.

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Mar 5 2008, 05:33 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Mar 5 2008, 11:27 AM, said:

Its hard to imagine how ruffing might cost, I will ruff if LHO is not good.

Maybe you will rectify the count for some squeeze?

I can't see how he couldn't achieve the same effect by drawing trumps and ducking a club.

One risk is that we're ruffing with a trump trick, say when declarer has K109xxx K A AKJxx and partner Qx xxx Kxx Qxxxx. In that case partner has done astonishingly well in ignoring our demand for a club ruff, which would have let it through.

It seems natural on general principles to discard, but I'd be uncomfortable about doing so without being able to think of any believable layout where's it right.

[Fluffy]

Jlall, on Mar 5 2008, 04:33 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Mar 5 2008, 11:27 AM, said:

Its hard to imagine how ruffing might cost, I will ruff if LHO is not good.

Maybe you will rectify the count for some squeeze?

Good, I knew there should be an excuse not to ruff when LHO is good , but I don't know why declarer has some urge to do it at this point as Gnasher points.


Gnasher, I think blowing a trick in trumps is impossible, partner led a trump, with ♠Q4 I don't think he would, at least none of my partners do.

[cherdano]

Fluffy, on Mar 5 2008, 02:18 PM, said:

Gnasher, I think blowing a trick in trumps is impossible, partner led a trump, with ♠Q4 I don't think he would, at least none of my partners do.

It seems also highly unlikely that declarer would go up with the ace if he has KT9xxx. (A trump lead from Jx doesn't seem impossible.)

[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

---

Ruff or not, still goes down... unless you let it make.

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on Mar 5 2008, 09:18 PM, said:

Gnasher, I think blowing a trick in trumps is impossible, partner led a trump, with ♠Q4 I don't think he would, at least none of my partners do.

Good point. Now that I remember how trick one went, I can't think of any layout where ruffing costs.

[mikeh]

Echognome, on Mar 5 2008, 05:58 PM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ T4 ♥ K542 ♦ 54 ♣ Q8652 ♠ KQ9863 ♥   ♦ AK ♣ AKJ93 ♠ A5 ♥ AQ83 ♦ J873 ♣ T74 ♠ J72 ♥ JT976 ♦ QT962 ♣

Ruff or not, still goes down... unless you let it make.

you're kidding, right? declarer led the club 10????? Before cashing the ♥A... which would at least rendered your play relevant Oh, I forgot.. this declarer would probably have pitched a diamond on the heart A

Where do you find these opps?

[han]

I was watching, I didn't get your play at all Justin.