[pclayton]

Scoring: IMP

---

South opens 3♣, West overcalls 3♠ and is raised to 4.

Standard carding.

North leads the ♥A, 4, 9, 5
2. ♣2, 5, K, 4
3. ♣A, 8, ♦3, 5
4, ♣J, Q, ♦J, ♥T

-420

ATB to NS

[jtfanclub]

They lead A from AK? Then South, IMHO.

[rogerclee]

What is south worried about? That north has 8 solid hearts, or that he blindly led an A without the K instead of his stiff ♣ in partner's suit?

I don't like north's defense either, but south for sure on this one.

[ArtK78]

South 90% for not playing a heart at trick 3 or 4, and North 10% for not holding the ♠10.

[Sambolino]

n should've ruffed cK, routine play isn't it?

talking percents 100% N

[ArtK78]

Sambolino, on Jun 19 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

n should've ruffed cK, routine play isn't it?

talking percents 100% N

Excellent point. Without a high spade, North should ruff and cash ♥A.

I have been swayed by the logic of the argument, concise as it was.

100% to North.

[mikegill]

I'm going to go with 20/80 to North/South.

If South trusts North, he should switch back to hearts, since the hA has to be from A/K else why didn't North just start by leading the singleton. He will likely get another chance to play the 3rd round of clubs after he overruffs dummy in hearts (unless North has 7 hearts which is surely possible).

North gets some blame since he can see what will happen if south plays another club, and he should just ruff his partner's trick and play a top heart just in case. Strictly speaking this does cost a trick but surely it's worth it to guarantee the set.

[Sambolino]

i'll go further - staying on the lead at trick 4 presents an agony for a thinking south who would bang his head with questions "why didn't he ruff?" and "why did he lead from empty ace instead of singleton".

[mikeh]

This is a spy v spy scenario. I like it!

Firstly: if S assumes or knows that N is an expert, S could deduce that N's failure to ruff a top club, to cash a heart and lead a 3rd round, is due to his possessing the ability to ruff higher than dummy.

But North can assume that S will realize that even if N can ruff effectively, declarer merely pitches a heart, and thus NS are trading tricks: that is, a 3rd club by S can never realistically win an extra trick.

But, N should then consider: what if S has a stiff heart? Now, S cannot play the 2nd heart: he HAS to play the 3rd club.

So N should ruff the second club in order to assure the set.

But, if S has a stiff heart, he can assure the set by NOT cashing the second club... the 2 is a clear stiff, so win the King and lead back the Jack, to ensure the set.

So when S cashes the second top club, North should realize that an expert S has a second heart, and therefore he doesn't need to ruff.

Therefore, from S's perspective, playing the 3rd club can never gain a trick and may lose a trick (or 2) if N has been the least bit asleep. Similarly, North should realize that failing to ruff the second club can never gain a trick and might, if S were the least bit asleep, cost the contract.

So I apportion the blame 50-50, if they are equal level players. If one is an expert and the other is not, then I blame the expert almost 100%

[pclayton]

ArtK78, on Jun 19 2008, 12:18 PM, said:

Sambolino, on Jun 19 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

n should've ruffed cK, routine play isn't it?

talking percents 100% N

Excellent point. Without a high spade, North should ruff and cash ♥A.

I have been swayed by the logic of the argument, concise as it was.

100% to North.

There's another opportunity for fence-building on this hand (and the inferences not to do so). What is it?

[ArtK78]

My head is beginning to hurt.

In any event, I still blame North for not having the ♠10.

[TimG]

jtfanclub, on Jun 19 2008, 03:08 PM, said:

They lead A from AK? Then South, IMHO.

I think in general that Ace followed by a club shift shows a singleton club, King followed by a club shift shows more than one club. Especially if your leads are standard.

Having taken this course, I think North must ruff the second club and cash the setting trick, because it could appear to south that an immediate trump promotion is the only way to beat the contract (the Ace lead suggesting that declarer has the King).

[mikeh]

There is an additional point that I did not cover in my earlier post, which analyzed blame in terms of trick 3 and thereafter. I pointed out concerns that North should have that S held a stiff heart, and therefore be compelled to lead a 3rd club.... and the reasons why each player could guard against that possibility.

Of course, the easiest path to avoiding this issue is to simply cash the second heart before leading the club.

This in fact is probably the best defence: cash 2 hearts, lead a club, and S wins the A and returns the Jack to force North to ruff and play another heart.

[kenrexford]

A♥...
AK♣...
♥ --> Q-K or J
♥.

If Declarer pops 9, win J, Club for trump promo.

So, in theory the hand might even be set -3. North's defense as played was required for the three-trick set.

North must have A-K in hearts to not lead his stiff club immediately. So, I'm assuming that the lead of the Ace may have been intended as a count signal. The diamond Jack was probably alse intended as a count signal.

Note, also, that North's line works even if Declarer guesses the spade 5 but South has the diamond Queen, because of the diamond pitch.

Declarer might counter by ditching a diamond on the third heart rather than ruffing in at all. But, this could be dangerous if South had held a stiff diamond. A fourth heart allows South to ruff with the Jack, but the 9 comes in handy.

Had South J10, though, West has no counter at all.

So, I think North did right and South dropped the ball.

[cherdano]

Note that North ruffing in on the second round of clubs can cost a trick - in the actual hand, declarer will probably try to ruff with the ♠9 in the 3rd round of hearts.
OTOH, there is really no excuse for the third club play by South.

[andy_h]

I would slap South.

[Apollo81]

This thread shoulda been called "Dude, where's my ruff?"

[TimG]

kenrexford, on Jun 19 2008, 11:06 PM, said:

So, in theory the hand might even be set -3. North's defense as played was required for the three-trick set.

Yes, but this is IMPs where the difference between making and down one (or two) is much more significant than the difference between down one (or two) and down three.

[pclayton]

To me, here's the germane issues:

1. When South echos in hearts, does this indicate an ability to overruff dummy?

2. When North doesn't ruff the 2nd club, does this indicate the desire to get a trump promotion? Its subtle, I know, but I would expect a competent (or alert) North to make this play.

I agree that South can just as easily return a low club. North can't go wrong. Similarly, why not try the 2nd heart as North?

Plenty of fence building available on this hand.

[jdonn]

I blame north 1000% Phil I don't see how you can suggest south should show an odd number of hearts, I hate when people do that in these situations unless they know partner's length in the suit. What if north has no clubs and switches suits at trick 3? What if north has 7 hearts and doesn't try to cash another? I really don't think south did anything wrong at all, once north doesn't continue hearts and doesn't ruff the second club I would absolutely conclude that he can get a trump promotion, and either of doesn't have the heart king or (unlikely as it seems) has 8 hearts.