[y66]

Scoring: IMP

-- -- -- 1N
P 2C P 2H
P 6H AP

West leads SK

---

Hat's off to B/Is who get this one.

[rogerclee]

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

[Jlall]

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

cleeeeee?

[rogerclee]

Jlall, on May 5 2010, 12:48 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

cleeeeee?

Maybe it wasn't worth noting. Anyway yes, they are

Spoiler

the same

. (hidden)

It's true that my first post was made without thinking much about the problem though.

[Simplicity]

I think saying the lines in 6 and 7 are the same is misleading. While the correct line for 6 may be a correct line for 7, not all the correct lines in 7 are correct in 6 .

[manudude03]

(edited)

There is a way to almost guarantee this contract barring an unlikely ruff. You can pick up all 3-2s and 4-1s, though the spade situation means that you have to play it slightly differently than what the textbooks would say.

As others have hinted, remember you are only in 6, not 7.

[Free]

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 09:02 AM, said:

Jlall, on May 5 2010, 12:48 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

cleeeeee?

Maybe it wasn't worth noting. Anyway yes, they are

Spoiler

the same

. (hidden)

It's true that my first post was made without thinking much about the problem though.

Seems to me that the lines are nowhere near the same when you're in 6 or in 7!

[helene_t]

Agree with that, it makes a difference whether you play the trump suit for one loser or zero losers.

[manudude03]

I guess the slightly more interesting question with this hand is how to play this hand at matchpoints, especially if you suspect the field is MP greedy and some play in 6N. 6N declarers may well just lay down ♥KA hoping for Qx or stiff Q somewhere on the basis that if that doesn't happen, you're only -1. Other declarers may try the line for 7 and hook the ♥J, but going down a lot if that fails. In this case, you've already lost the board against these people (indicating safety play). Of course, the best line for 6♥ means you will almost certainly only make 12 tricks (and losing the board against everyone making 6N).

[pooltuna]

Free, on May 5 2010, 06:46 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 09:02 AM, said:

Jlall, on May 5 2010, 12:48 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

cleeeeee?

Maybe it wasn't worth noting. Anyway yes, they are

Spoiler

the same

. (hidden)

It's true that my first post was made without thinking much about the problem though.

Seems to me that the lines are nowhere near the same when you're in 6 or in 7!

you've gotta lead the B/I astray sometimes to make it interesting (BTW not surprisingly I agree with you)

[Cyberyeti]

OK, I'm slightly lost, the standard safety play for this suit doesn't work due to the fact that they can inconveniently force you to ruff a spade so colour me confused.

Hidden text

Spoiler

So you cash the K♥, play small towards the 9, RHO shows out, so you rise, play a 3rd heart and LHO steps in with his Q and leads a spade to promote his 10.

[vuroth]

I'm slowly working through the level 3 problems, and loving them. I intend to buy them all, and repeat them all until I can instantly recognize the "theme" of the hand.

I thank the various posters here for recommending them.

That said, I won't be reading the OP. BBO is selling these problems as a business, so repeating the hand on their free forums seems kind of crass to me.

0.02, ymmv

[y66]

Hey, don't be that way. This is a beautiful problem.

[Jlall]

I think you all got this problem wrong, or I did Ok it was me!

This post has been edited by Jlall: 2010-May-05, 12:06

[manudude03]

Cyberyeti, on May 5 2010, 02:04 PM, said:

OK, I'm slightly lost, the standard safety play for this suit doesn't work due to the fact that they can inconveniently force you to ruff a spade so colour me confused.

Hidden text

Spoiler

So you cash the K♥, play small towards the 9, RHO shows out, so you rise, play a 3rd heart and LHO steps in with his Q and leads a spade to promote his 10.

That's the textbook safety play. There is another way of playing the suit that picks up all the holdings (except means losing a trick when it started xxx Qx).

Hidden:

Spoiler

cash K, cross over and play low to the J. If LHO started with stiff, you can still finesse against the T. While if RHO started with stiff, LHO can't tap you effectively, you will be able to ruff with a small card, cash the J and cross back to hand to cash the A.

There are 2 main reasons why K, low to 9 is published as the safety play:
1. You don't lose a trick to xxx-Qx while picking up all 3-2s and 4-1s for 1 loser.
2. The other method means there's more strain on entries. You can do the published method without any extra entries while the alternative requires 1, maybe 2 extra entries.

[Free]

manudude03, on May 6 2010, 01:41 AM, said:

cash K, cross over and play low to the J. If LHO started with stiff, you can still finesse against the T. While if RHO started with stiff, LHO can't tap you effectively, you will be able to ruff with a small card, cash the J and cross back to hand to cash the A.

I don't think anyone would play it this way in 7, although some seem to think they need the same line...

[awm]

Maybe I'm crazy here, but consider the following alternate line. Win the spade ace and play a heart to the jack. If it loses to the queen, then when we get back in play a heart to king and pick up a possible QTxx offside. Comparing this line to the "safety play in hearts" line:

(1) If the position is exactly stiff queen offside, then the safety play in hearts line makes and my line doesn't. This happens about 1/32 times, and it's win 17 for the safety play at vulnerable or win 14 at NV.

(2) If one defender has Qx of hearts and a six-card diamond suit, then on the safety play line this person wins the heart queen and then gives partner a ruff (assuming we got back to hand with a diamond to lead up to the jack of hearts). This situation comes up about 1/128 times on each side, for 1/64 in total. This time it's win 17 for my line if vulnerable, or win 14 at NV.

(3) If the heart position is Qx or Qxx onside, then my line makes an overtrick whereas the safety play does not. This happens about 10/32, and is win 1 for my line regardless of colors.

Adding this up, my line seems to win 3/64 IMPs at vulnerable or 6/64 IMPs at nonvuln in expectation. Of course, this changes a bit if you think a person with singleton diamond would lead it (not clear to me, especially holding a sequence in spades, but it does depend on the auction). And it would change if you aren't sure the other table (or the field at IMP pairs) is going to be in 6♥, although given the overall values in these hands it seems like a decent field would bid the contract.

It's at least close. I fairly frequently see people recommend these safety play lines based on considering a suit in isolation and assuming that overtricks are totally irrelevant, when neither is normally the case in real bridge. I expect that BridgeMaster is calibrated to require the safety play.

[the hog]

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 03:02 PM, said:

Jlall, on May 5 2010, 12:48 AM, said:

rogerclee, on May 5 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

The correct play in 7H is also worth noting.

cleeeeee?

Maybe it wasn't worth noting. Anyway yes, they are

Spoiler

the same

. (hidden)

It's true that my first post was made without thinking much about the problem though.

They are not the same lines by a long way. I think you answered this too early in the morning, or too late at night.

[Free]

awm, on May 7 2010, 03:38 AM, said:

Maybe I'm crazy here, but consider the following alternate line. Win the spade ace and play a heart to the jack. If it loses to the queen, then when we get back in play a heart to king and pick up a possible QTxx offside. Comparing this line to the "safety play in hearts" line:

(1) If the position is exactly stiff queen offside, then the safety play in hearts line makes and my line doesn't. This happens about 1/32 times, and it's win 17 for the safety play at vulnerable or win 14 at NV.

(2) If one defender has Qx of hearts and a six-card diamond suit, then on the safety play line this person wins the heart queen and then gives partner a ruff (assuming we got back to hand with a diamond to lead up to the jack of hearts). This situation comes up about 1/128 times on each side, for 1/64 in total. This time it's win 17 for my line if vulnerable, or win 14 at NV.

(3) If the heart position is Qx or Qxx onside, then my line makes an overtrick whereas the safety play does not. This happens about 10/32, and is win 1 for my line regardless of colors.

Adding this up, my line seems to win 3/64 IMPs at vulnerable or 6/64 IMPs at nonvuln in expectation. Of course, this changes a bit if you think a person with singleton diamond would lead it (not clear to me, especially holding a sequence in spades, but it does depend on the auction). And it would change if you aren't sure the other table (or the field at IMP pairs) is going to be in 6♥, although given the overall values in these hands it seems like a decent field would bid the contract.

It's at least close. I fairly frequently see people recommend these safety play lines based on considering a suit in isolation and assuming that overtricks are totally irrelevant, when neither is normally the case in real bridge. I expect that BridgeMaster is calibrated to require the safety play.

This 1 little imp you gain in a team match won't always translate into a VP, so it will be irrelevant in a lot of situations. Going down in that 1 little case however, will lose several VP's.

I'd love to see you explain to your team mates that you've gone down in a laydown slam, deliberately, so you could make 1 overtrick and get the best result "in the long run". Although you're mathematically correct imps-wise, you may be wrong about the VP's. And this is an area which is dominated by psychology.

Note that you won't get to play hundreds of similar slams, so you won't reach your long run result anyway.

[gwnn]

This is the thread where this has been discussed in quite a detail.

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=29706