Advanced Defensive Play THREE (advanced, not expert)
#1
Posted 2011-October-01, 08:53
#2
Posted 2011-October-01, 09:15
Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
#3
Posted 2011-October-01, 15:15
(of course declarer doesn't have that because Ben wouldn't have selected the hand.)
- hrothgar
#4
Posted 2011-October-01, 15:18
Could declarer have AQxxxxx - Q10 Qxxx and squeeze partner after a non-diamond play? Then all hands are more in line with the bidding.
- hrothgar
#5
Posted 2011-October-01, 15:19
- hrothgar
#6
Posted 2011-October-01, 15:42
han, on 2011-October-01, 15:19, said:
It's unexpected to partner. We also have unexpected extra offence. The two together make this a double.
#7
Posted 2011-October-01, 17:48
han, on 2011-October-01, 15:18, said:
Could declarer have AQxxxxx - Q10 Qxxx and squeeze partner after a non-diamond play? Then all hands are more in line with the bidding.
You are correct that my construction isn't too likely. I do prefer yours better. I did not intend to suggest that mine was the only where a squeeze was possible, I was just offering one possible one.
Despite your construction where a heart shift is necessary, I find
Or I'm just saying this because it's a puzzle on a forum. I dunno. I do think that I'd lead a diamond at the table (right or wrong).
This post has been edited by BunnyGo: 2011-October-02, 00:49
Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
#8
Posted 2011-October-01, 22:01
Why would S 'lie'? Possibly to dissuade W from leading another diamond to a void in E. The A♦ when lead revealed to S that the king wasn't in dummy but 3 small ones were. W's double and lead further suggests that W holds the K♦ and would probably lead it next. And quite possibly another♦ for the road. If W hasn't got the A♥ because S has it, S knows that this will make W reticent about leading a heart. It definitely gives more weight to the 5♠ bid. Even if S is void in ♥ it's the♦ that will bring him down and the T♦ Q♦ discard is all about discouraging the third ♦ lead.
#9
Posted 2011-October-01, 23:08
#10
Posted 2011-October-02, 06:43
gnasher, on 2011-October-01, 15:42, said:
I am not disputing the double, I'm disputing the term unexpected defense. Usually this qualification is used when the cards are lying badly for declarer.
- hrothgar
#11
Posted 2011-October-02, 21:09
Both 7024 and 7123 seem like pretty reasonable 5♠ bids to me. There are a couple things that convince me to play a heart. First, consider partner's diamond plays. He seems to have discouraged the suit, then played another high diamond (he apparently has the 2, and played the 6). If he really needed me to play diamonds, he might've encouraged the suit. If he doesn't think he has a heart trick, he might've played the ♦2 at the second trick (a suit preference card, or to "trick" me about the count so I play another diamond and take him off the squeeze, if we play count as a secondary signal rather than suit preference). Partner's play suggests he may have a heart entry. Second, we have declarer's choice of opening. If declarer lacks the club jack this gives him some ten count (♠AQ, ♦QT-tight, ♣Q). He has enough shape that he certainly might open 1♠ on that hand, but the fewer points you give him the more likely it is that he might've selected 3♠ or 4♠ (we are, after all, assuming seven-card spades).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#12
Posted 2011-October-04, 01:54
awm, on 2011-October-02, 21:09, said:
Both 7024 and 7123 seem like pretty reasonable 5♠ bids to me. There are a couple things that convince me to play a heart. First, consider partner's diamond plays. He seems to have discouraged the suit, then played another high diamond (he apparently has the 2, and played the 6). If he really needed me to play diamonds, he might've encouraged the suit. If he doesn't think he has a heart trick, he might've played the ♦2 at the second trick (a suit preference card, or to "trick" me about the count so I play another diamond and take him off the squeeze, if we play count as a secondary signal rather than suit preference). Partner's play suggests he may have a heart entry. Second, we have declarer's choice of opening. If declarer lacks the club jack this gives him some ten count (♠AQ, ♦QT-tight, ♣Q). He has enough shape that he certainly might open 1♠ on that hand, but the fewer points you give him the more likely it is that he might've selected 3♠ or 4♠ (we are, after all, assuming seven-card spades).
Shouldn't partner play the ♦J on the second round if he has the ♥A?
#13
Posted 2011-October-04, 02:21
But maybe that's what Ben meant by "advanced, not expert".
#14
Posted 2011-October-04, 02:23
hatchett, on 2011-October-04, 01:54, said:
That would be rather expensive if declarer had a heart void and a club loser.
#15
Posted 2011-October-04, 03:59
gnasher, on 2011-October-04, 02:23, said:
Oh yes obviously it matters if declarer started with exactly AQTxxxxx - QT xxx
but that would mean east was looking at - Axxx J8xx Qxxxx and on a good
day he might work out there was no urgency for a ♥ switch.
#16
Posted 2011-October-04, 04:49
hatchett, on 2011-October-04, 03:59, said:
but that would mean east was looking at - Axxx J8xx Qxxxx and on a good
day he might work out there was no urgency for a ♥ switch.
Or if he had AQxxxx - QT Qxxx
Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
#17
Posted 2011-October-04, 04:51
hatchett, on 2011-October-04, 03:59, said:
but that would mean east was looking at - Axxx J8xx Qxxxx and on a good
day he might work out there was no urgency for a ♥ switch.
So you think he should play ♦J to say he has no club guard, and therefore the defence's only hope is to try to cash a heart? That seems reasonable.
#19
Posted 2011-October-05, 16:33
Fluffy, on 2011-October-05, 14:25, said:
If declarer is 7132, he won't be playing ♦Q on the second diamond, so ♦J isn't a winner.