[rogerclee]

Scoring: IMP

---

RHO opens 3♦, and with no more opposition bidding, you get to 7♣. LHO leads the ♦9, plan the play.

[vuroth]

Easiest thing to hope for would be ♥3/2, but after I ruff the third heart I'll be stuck in my hand.

Another option would be hoping [SP ]are 4/3. Not the most likely of outcomes, especially with 7 diamonds on my right. With transportation issues, I'd need ♣ to be 4-1 or better. If this line fails, I would actually have a second chance - if someone holds Qx of ♥, I can make even if ♠ don't split.

Up til here, that's as far as I feel comfortable going. The rest is just madness.

I have 11 top cards - 6 clubs, 2 hearts, 3 spades. If I ruff a spade high and hope for a 4-1 club break, that would give me 12 winners. One winner short, and a very good chance LHO holds the queen of hearts and spade length (I doubt RHO bid 3♦ with a 4 card major, although I got burned by that assumption last week....). So a squeeze, then?

Diamond ruff, Ace of spades, spade ruff high, run trump. AK spades, if not all spades are gone, AKJ hearts?

[FrancesHinden]

vuroth, on Nov 24 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Another option would be hoping [SP ]are 4/3. Not the most likely of outcomes, especially with 7 diamonds on my right. With transportation issues, I'd need ♣ to be 4-1 or better. If this line fails, I would actually have a second chance - if someone holds Qx of ♥, I can make even if ♠ don't split.

You are definitely on the right lines.

One question to consider is whether to guard against 5-0 clubs (play the queen of clubs before taking a spade ruff) or 6-1 spades (take a spade ruff high).

[jdonn]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 24 2008, 10:07 AM, said:

One question to consider is whether to guard against 5-0 clubs (play the queen of clubs before taking a spade ruff) or...

Won't you lose control this way if clubs are 5-0?

[vuroth]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 24 2008, 10:07 AM, said:

vuroth, on Nov 24 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Another option would be hoping [SP ]are 4/3.  Not the most likely of outcomes, especially with 7 diamonds on my right.  With transportation issues, I'd need ♣ to be 4-1 or better.  If this line fails, I would actually have a second chance - if someone holds Qx of ♥, I can make even if ♠ don't split.

You are definitely on the right lines.

One question to consider is whether to guard against 5-0 clubs (play the queen of clubs before taking a spade ruff) or 6-1 spades (take a spade ruff high).

It may depend on your line. Maybe the safest way to play clubs is ruff low, cash the queen, then return to hand using spades. Of course, if you just ruffed spades, you can't do that.

I could try returning to hand in diamonds, but is a 1-8 split MORE unlikely than the club split?

Lacking an outside entry to hand, I felt that ruffing with an honour (or ruffing low, and overtaking the queen - same deal, more risk) was the way to go.

V

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Nov 24 2008, 04:19 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Nov 24 2008, 10:07 AM, said:

One question to consider is whether to guard against 5-0 clubs (play the queen of clubs before taking a spade ruff) or...

Won't you lose control this way if clubs are 5-0?

Yes. If clubs are 5-0 you won't take a spade ruff.

[jdonn]

Anyway I thought about it a while and I can't come up with anything better than ace and ruff a spade high, ace of hearts, and run clubs. The only close choice was whether or not to play off ace of hearts early, but I believe singleton Q offside is more likely than 5-0 hearts.

Edit: Of course in that case I should draw trumps before playing ace of hearts, and ruffing a diamond back to hand, so that was silly of me.

[kgr]

jdonn, on Nov 24 2008, 06:37 PM, said:

The only close choice was whether or not to play off ace of hearts early, but I believe singleton Q offside is more likely than 5-0 hearts.

Yes, but I think you should compare:
♥Q singleton and ♠'s not 4-3
versus
♥void
...I would think it is better not to play the ♥A then?

Edit: and yes..the edit

This post has been edited by kgr: 2008-November-24, 10:51

[awm]

Seems like there are three lines:

(1) Ruff, cash spade ace, ruff spade high, run clubs. This fails if clubs are 5-0. If the clubs break, then you will make if spades are 4-3; otherwise you can create a squeeze position against LHO (who must hold the long spade and therefore discard down to doubleton heart on the run of the clubs) and make any time RHO did not start with ♥Qxx(x).

(2) Ruff, run trumps. Go to dummy with heart ace and return with spade ace, then run spades. Finally take the heart finesse. This simply requires the heart queen onside (or singleton). Suit breaks are basically irrelevant, since if LHO had 4♥ he will presumably be forced to pitch down to 3♥ on the run of the clubs (in order to guard the spades).

(3) Ruff, cash a top club. If they are not 5-0, then ace of spades, ruff a spade with the club queen, and ruff a diamond back to hand (small). This fails if diamonds are 8-1 (over-ruff). Otherwise you are in the same position as line 1. However, if you discover that clubs are 5-0 you can continue by playing a club to queen, cash a top heart, and spade back to hand to pull trumps. This gives you the same odds of making as line 2.

It seems clear that line 2 (heart finesse) is just not very good. So you can ask, which is more likely, clubs 5-0 (in which case Josh's line 1 fails) or diamonds 8-1 (in which case line 3 fails).

If we assume that RHO would always open 3♦ with eight of them (far from sure) then the odds of diamonds 8-1 are about 1/5. The odds of clubs 5-0 are about 1/6 given the diamond break. So line 1 is slightly better if RHO always opens 3♦ on eight-card suits, but line 3 is better if RHO would open something else with ♦AQJTxxxx.

Assuming that RHO is a mostly unknown quantity ("normal" bridge player) I would lean towards line 3. If opponents play something like namyats then line 3 is basically marked. If RHO is known to be a very sound preempter or to often bid 3-minor on hands with strong eight-card suits to "keep 3NT in the picture" then things swing towards line 1.

Edited: Okay, I miscalculated, the 5-0 club break is more like 1/9. However, I still don't think most people open 3♦ with strong eight-card suits, so I will lean towards line 3.

[jdonn]

Adam you were very kind to point out I was guarding against 1-8 diamonds instead of pointing out that you simply found a better line. The difference is slight but clear.

[matmat]

i see noone found the fawful line i took at the table. not really a surprise.

[vuroth]

Hardly fair. Even though I don't get most of these puzzles "right", I still do far better here than "at the table".

[rogerclee]

matmat, on Nov 24 2008, 02:49 PM, said:

i see noone found the fawful line i took at the table. not really a surprise.

Yes, the point of this problem was to not take the awful line. If any B/I player saw to play for the spade-heart showup squeeze rather than try to ruff a bunch of things or take finesses, I'd basically give that answer full credit.

Crunching through the percentages will yield that line 3 by awm is best (though there is no reason to cash the top heart). The point is to combine chances and not lose to 5-0 clubs while not paying off to 6-1 spades.

[dburn]

awm, on Nov 24 2008, 02:09 PM, said:

Edited: Okay, I miscalculated, the 5-0 club break is more like 1/9.

Is that right? If West has two diamonds and East seven, the chance that West has five clubs and East none is roughly 7.466063348%. This is a little less than one in 13, not one in nine.

[awm]

My calculation comes to more than David Burn's because I allow for east possibly having eight diamonds. Also there is a small chance of clubs 5-0 in the other direction.

[dburn]

If East has seven diamonds and five clubs, then he has a major-suit void and the final contract would have been doubled. Not that it would necessarily have been defeated, of course - if East has a heart void, West will probably lead a spade anyway (unless North has indicated his heart length during the bidding). However, the chance that East has five clubs to go with his seven diamonds, a priori a far from negligible 0.096961862%, drops to 0.000000000% given the actual circumstances.

Still, the point about East's possibly having eight diamonds is a good one, and in any case the problem appears to have been not to play the hand accurately down to the last percentage pip, but merely not to play it awfully. In that resepct, awm's analysis is very sound.

[FrancesHinden]

A few points.
I started without giving detailed analysis because this is supposedly the B/I forum, but...

- This is definitely not a B/I hand, as you can tell from those giving comments

- If the hand were fractionally different, so that South had the 9 of clubs instead of the 3, it would be getting a little closer to an intermediate/advanced hand. Even then, there are some points to the hand which are not always easy to get:

i) seeing that you might be able to establish spades with a ruff in dummy
ii) remembering to check for 5-0 trumps before taking a spade ruff
iii) working out how to get back to hand to draw trumps
iv) Do you cash the ace of hearts early to cope with singleton HQ offside?

If RHO had Qxx in hearts and LHO four clubs, so you only make 13 tricks by setting up spades, then a lot of people at my local club would go off, some of whom who have been playing for years. Most would either ruff two spades in dummy (going off with trumps 4-1) or take the heart finesse.

- Anyone who actually gets to 7C, rather than either 6H or 6C, after a 3D opening is not a B/I bidder, unless they get there by accident.

[vuroth]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 25 2008, 09:16 AM, said:

- This is definitely not a B/I hand, as you can tell from those giving comments

Ahh, if only I could tell the dealer to stop giving me those hands, until I have more experience.

[han]

Don't agree that this is not a B/I hand. Seems like a very good hand for B/I people to think about.

[matmat]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 25 2008, 09:16 AM, said:

- Anyone who actually gets to 7C, rather than either 6H or 6C, after a 3D opening is not a B/I bidder, unless they get there by accident.

I am fairly sure it was an accident.