[dave_w]

rhm, on 2011-November-16, 07:28, said:

I do not really see why a world-class LHO needs to be 1=4=3=5 or 1=3=4=5.
Why could that ♦ discard not be from 1=2=5=5?

You make a valid point. However, 1=4=3=5 is more likely than 1=2=5=5 (a priori and we have no evidence to suggest otherwise) AND 1=3=4=5 is mor likely than 1=2=5=5. So the combined chance of 1=4=3=5 and 1=3=4=5 must be much greater than playing for specifically 1=2=5=5.

[Fluffy]

So did declarer get -300?

[JLOGIC]

whereagles, on 2011-November-17, 04:04, said:

I've scored many tricks because of people crediting for being more clever than I was.

I'm sure it happened to you as well

Sure but it cuts both ways, I would still much prefer going back to being an 11 year old who's feet could not touch the ground and people having Axxxx opp KJ9 needing 0 losers, and when they cash the ace it goes low low ten by me and they try to drop my queen next But, it is nice when I have QT these days that it doesn't just get picked off!

[FrancesHinden]

RHO had 9x of hearts, so you don't need the squeeze (and hence there was no reason for him to try and break it up). But I thought it interesting at the table.