[benlessard]

http://www.bridgehan...mbination_4.htm

its says that

AT9xx
Q8xx

for 1 loser
the correct play is to run the Q, and play low to the A.

this lose to

--+KJxx
x+KJx
Jxx+K

while the A and low.

You lose with

KJxx+--
KJx+x

This is very common suit combo and many good players seems to make the mistakes.

Even if you dont have the 8.

AT9xx
Qxxx

Its slightly better to play the A first.

[skjaeran]

The Official Encyclopeida of Bridge has it right, playing for one loser you should play the ace and low to the queen.

But adds that if you expect RHO to jump with the king from Kx, the right play is low from dummy and finesse the 8 if RHO plays low, then run the queen if the eight lost to the jack.

[ASkolnick]

In an A priori world, the reason to play Ace then Queen is it picks up KJ offside. But that is the single case of all cases which make it better than the double finesse. So if there is any information telling otherwise, it certainly may sway your decision how to play the suit combination.

[Lobowolf]

skaeran, on Mar 3 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

But adds that if you expect RHO to jump with the king from Kx, the right play is low from dummy and finesse the 8 if RHO plays low, then run the queen if the eight lost to the jack.

Works pretty well if you expect RHO to think from Kx, too.

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Mar 3 2009, 06:30 PM, said:

skaeran, on Mar 3 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

But adds that if you expect RHO to jump with the king from Kx, the right play is low from dummy and finesse the 8 if RHO plays low, then run the queen if the eight lost to the jack.

Works pretty well if you expect RHO to think from Kx, too.

Depends if you expect him to think from Jx or Jxx too. After all, he might forget where he parked his car no matter what his holding in the suit.

[nige1]

skaeran, on Mar 3 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

But adds that if you expect RHO to jump with the king from Kx, the right play is low from dummy and finesse the 8 if RHO plays low, then run the queen if the eight lost to the jack.

Lobowolf, on Mar 3 2009, 06:30 PM, said:

Works pretty well if you expect RHO to think from Kx, too.

jdonn, on Mar 3 2009, 06:34 PM, said:

Depends if you expect him to think from Jx or Jxx too. After all, he might forget where he parked his car no matter what his holding in the suit.

In the UK, the director might come to declarer's rescue
And he'd certainly clamp the defender

[dake50]

nige1, Is this another situation in this intellectual (brain using) game where any pause for thought cannot win? Director will adjust. Slawinski ranted on this 30 y ago.

[nige1]

dake50, on Mar 4 2009, 06:36 PM, said:

nige1,    Is this another situation in this intellectual (brain using) game where any pause for thought cannot win? Director will adjust.  Slawinski ranted on this 30 y ago.

Lawbook, on 2007, Law 73, said:

• 
  
  
• 
  
  
• 
  
  
• Variations in Tempo or Manner
  • It is desirable, though not always required, for players to maintain steady tempo and unvarying manner.  However, players should be particularly careful when variations may work to the benefit of their side.  Otherwise, unintentionally to vary the tempo or manner in which a call or play is made is not in itself an infraction. Inferences from such variation may appropriately be drawn only by an opponent, and at his own risk.
    
    
    
  • A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by means of remark or gesture, by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a singleton), the manner in which a call or play is made or by any purposeful deviation from correct procedure.
  
  
  
  
• Deception
  A player may appropriately attempt to deceive an opponent through a call or play (so long as the deception is not protected by concealed partnership understanding or experience).
  
  
  
• Violation of Proprieties
  When a violation of the Proprieties described in this law results in damage to an innocent opponent, if the Director determines that an innocent player has drawn a false inference from a remark, manner, tempo, or the like, of an opponent who has no demonstrable bridge reason for the action, and who could have known, at the time of the action, that the action could work to his benefit, the Director shall award an adjusted score (see Law 12C).

I'm no legal expert but for as long as I remember the law has been as above and it seems reasonable to me.