[awm]

Scoring: MP

---

Playing in a very strong MP field, you reach the contract of 3NT by east via the auction:

1♣(1) - 1♠(2)
1NT(3) - 3NT(4)

(1) Strong and artificial
(2) Semi-positive or better, balanced or primary diamonds
(3) 17-bad 19 balanced
(4) Not bothering to stayman given the 4333 shape, bad hearts, slow cards

The lead is the club ten (standard honor leads) to the queen and ace. North returns the club eight and south pauses a moment before playing the three (udca). Over to you. Remember that it's MP scoring.

[helene_t]

The field will be in 4♥ so if the diamond finesse is on and hearts are 3-2 I am bound for a bad score. Unless I can steal a spade trick for +1.

I think I win the trick with ♣J and play a spade.

[Fluffy]

hearts 4-1 to the rescue?, we want the cards to be as badly as possible, so that we score less downs than 4♥.

Play a spade and pray.

[y66]

Spade. Not going to try for 4 diamond tricks.

Will the field really be in 4H?

[Fluffy]

y66, on Mar 15 2010, 07:50 PM, said:

Will the field really be in 4H?

1♦-1♥ start seems like yes

[gwnn]

I don't like 1H with this hand. I learned bidding 1NT with xxxx and quacks everywhere from reading jdonn.

[y66]

Fluffy, on Mar 15 2010, 02:57 PM, said:

y66, on Mar 15 2010, 07:50 PM, said:

Will the field really be in 4H?

1♦-1♥ start seems like yes

Yes, of course. Thanks.

[karlson]

I would basically play for -1 here. I could play a spade now, but I kind of doubt it will work, and even if I steal one spade trick I don't think I'm going to risk the diamond finesse now (the downside is the same, and while the upside is now a full board if it's Qxx onside, if it's Qxxx or Qx onside, I'm still losing with 400 vs 420.) I don't see anything wrong with cashing a couple of hearts first though. If they don't break, we know for sure to play for -1. If they break, maybe south will have some difficulty with his discards. 95% of the time he'll pitch a couple of spades with no problems, but might as well try it.

[Cascade]

gwnn, on Mar 16 2010, 09:19 AM, said:

I don't like 1H with this hand. I learned bidding 1NT with xxxx and quacks everywhere from reading jdonn.

What has he written?

But seriously even if 1NT is a reasonable alternative will the field be bidding that way?

[jdonn]

Cascade, on Mar 15 2010, 08:32 PM, said:

gwnn, on Mar 16 2010, 09:19 AM, said:

I don't like 1H with this hand. I learned bidding 1NT with xxxx and quacks everywhere from reading jdonn.

What has he written?

But seriously even if 1NT is a reasonable alternative will the field be bidding that way?

I have written lots and lots of posts. And some will bid that way but most won't.

[Codo]

A spade seems obvious. IF clubs are 4-4, I have a sure road to nine tricks, else to 8.

The players in 4 heart may get defeated by a losing diamond finesse or hearts 4-1, so no need to try for + 430.

[Free]

Codo, on Mar 16 2010, 11:16 AM, said:

A spade seems obvious. IF clubs are 4-4, I have a sure road to nine tricks, else to 8.

The players in 4 heart may get defeated by a losing diamond finesse or hearts 4-1, so no need to try for + 430.

I only see 8 sure tricks if ♣ are 4-4 (2♠, 3♥, 2♦, 1♣). We have good chances for 9, but ♥ may still be 4-1 and ♦Q may still be offside.

[Codo]

Free, on Mar 16 2010, 07:44 PM, said:

Codo, on Mar 16 2010, 11:16 AM, said:

A spade seems obvious. IF clubs are 4-4, I have a sure road to nine tricks, else to 8.

The players in 4 heart may get defeated by a losing diamond finesse or hearts 4-1, so no need to try for + 430.

I only see 8 sure tricks if ♣ are 4-4 (2♠, 3♥, 2♦, 1♣). We have good chances for 9, but ♥ may still be 4-1 and ♦Q may still be offside.

You are right, but in this case - diamond offside, hearts 4-1, the 4 heart bidder are two down, so we have a great result with our 8 tricks anyway.

[karlson]

If clubs are 4-4, then the opponents are falsecarding. Otoh, it's perfectly plausible that they are doing so, since this is kind of a classic situation for it.

[cherdanno]

Congrats to making it to the final 34 btw, that truly looks like a gooood field.

[nige1]

awm, on Mar 15 2010, 11:33 AM, said:

Scoring: MP


Playing in a very strong MP field, you reach the contract of 3NT by east via the auction:
1♣(1) - 1♠(2)
1NT(3) - 3NT(4)
(1) Strong and artificial
(2) Semi-positive or better, balanced or primary diamonds
(3) 17-bad 19 balanced
(4) Not bothering to stayman given the 4333 shape, bad hearts, slow cards
The lead is the club ten (standard honor leads) to the queen and ace. North returns the club eight and south pauses a moment before playing the three (udca). Over to you. Remember that it's MP scoring.

---

Scoring: MP

My guess: most pairs will be in 4♥; I think LHO has 5 ♣, so win ♣Q, ♥AK and run ♦J. cash ♥ winners. If the defender with long ♣ has 4♦ he may be squeezed.

• If LHO discards a ♣, then set up a ♠ winner.
  
• If LHO discards a diamond, then run ♦.

---

[nige1]

Rubbish (deleted)

[awm]

Scoring: MP

---

I'm not sure what the "right answer" on this hand is, or even whether there is one. Partner was declaring; he figured the field would be in hearts and started by cashing two top hearts to see if they broke. When they did, he played a spade hoping that the diamond finesse would be off and down one would be a normal result. Since the diamond position was favorable, it was not a good score.

The scores across the field were:

650x2
630x5
620x6
170x3
100x1
-100x1

Our -100 was worth zero matchpoints. It seemed weird that there were so many 630s; I do not think many people are failing to duck the second club in this field (although that seems the most logical route to 630). Perhaps people are talked out of leading a club by a "could be short" 1♣ opening?

[nige1]

awm, on Mar 17 2010, 10:18 AM, said:

Scoring: MP


I'm not sure what the "right answer" on this hand is, or even whether there is one. Partner was declaring; he figured the field would be in hearts and started by cashing two top hearts to see if they broke. When they did, he played a spade hoping that the diamond finesse would be off and down one would be a normal result. Since the diamond position was favorable, it was not a good score.
The scores across the field were:
650x2
630x5
620x6
170x3
100x1
-100x1
Our -100 was worth zero matchpoints. It seemed weird that there were so many 630s; I do not think many people are failing to duck the second club in this field (although that seems the most logical route to 630). Perhaps people are talked out of leading a club by a "could be short" 1♣ opening?

---

On reflection, your partner played correctly and with the odds but your partnership was unlucky. Even had partner played diamonds for 4 tricks, he would still have earned a below average score.

[655321]

awm, on Mar 17 2010, 10:18 AM, said:

It seemed weird that there were so many 630s; I do not think many people are failing to duck the second club in this field (although that seems the most logical route to 630). Perhaps people are talked out of leading a club by a "could be short" 1♣ opening?

Perhaps some Wests played 3NT (and escaped a club lead) after an auction like 1♦-1♥;3♥-3NT, or some Wests responded 1NT, or maybe when East played it one or two Souths tried a spade lead instead?