gnasher, on Jul 17 2008, 03:10 AM, said:
Declarer probably has only five hearts, because partner didn't bid.
♦K would be necessary if declarer had something like Kx KQ10xx A10x xxx. That would give partner Axxx Jxx Qxx Axx, which makes the lead believable.
I can't see any benefit to playing low - it doesn't look like we're going to force declarer off, and there's no risk of partner being endplayed.
I play ♦K.
Problems of this kind seem to draw a very limited response, one to be exact so far, so I'll spoil it for anyone who was holding out just to test me
Yes, my thoughts were similar although not as exhaustive at the table. It didn't seem reasonable to play low as we might end up with no Diamond tricks at all. From declarer's failure to try the
♦9 at T1, partner hasn't led from QT3, probably Q63 or T63. So I too played the King. Disaster, as partner had led from T63

Partner's hand was Axx Jxx T63 Axxx.
Declarer's hand: Kxx KQTxx AQx xx. He discarded a
♣ on the 13th
♦, so defense wound up with the two black Aces.
It occurred to me later that when declarer has Kx KQTxxx ATx xxx, partner's hand would have been Axxx Jxx Qxx Axx. Would he try balancing with 2
♠ with that ?
Several people led a trump on the go and did better. Unfortunately so did the Ace-bangers regardless of which suit they chose to plunk down. I think partner's lead wasn't totally unreasonable as in so many of these auctions dummy puts down something like KQJxx of clubs and you wish you could take back your trump lead.
Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..."