BBO Discussion Forums: Defense Plan - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Defense Plan

#1 User is offline   frank0 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 472
  • Joined: 2011-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US, Irvine CA

Posted 2012-January-12, 00:22

I just saw this hand on BBO(played by other people).



NS are regular partner, playing precision, 1NT was alerted as 17~19 balanced, may have 5 card major. EW are pick up and is assumed to play standard carding.

W led 5, won by South's Q. South played AT, West's K was dropped and pitch 2(assmue it's discourage), E won the T by Q. After that E returned a , South made 1NT in the end(34).

I am interested in the return. When East won with Q declare is marked with 7 tricks and it looked like shifting was necessary. However, the careful analysis by E may end up in the conclusion that the contract is not beatable.

From East's perspective, 6 tricks in + is required to defeat the contract and partner, from the bidding, cannot have more than 8HCP on +. Partner cannot have 5(otherwise why lead weaker ?), 5(1NT with stiff ?), or AKQ so defender can take at most 2 tricks in . Therefore the minimum combination to defeat the contract is AQQJ which added up to 9HCP, impossible. From this analysis it seems a passive return, even in IMP, is the correct play on this hand.

Question:
1. Is the analysis above correct?
2. If you're East, do you trust your analysis and play to reduce overtrick, or you still want to defeat the contract based on the assumption that partner makes a bad lead or declare makes aggressive upgrade in bidding(e.g. treating K984AKQ93AT93 as 17HCP).
3. What's your play, after winning Q, in IMP, if 1NT shows 16~18?
4. What's your play, after winning Q, in MP, if 1NT shows 16~18?
0

#2 User is offline   bluecalm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,555
  • Joined: 2007-January-22

Posted 2012-January-12, 01:30

This is difficult imo lack of spade switch might cost a trick if declarer has:
K9x AKQ QJx AT9x because we need to play spades twice to establish them before he establishes 10th trick in diamonds.

Pitch in hearts shouldn't be discouraging, it should be lavinthal (you would never discard a heart from Kxxxx, so you may just as well convey some information from your xxxxx) and W should've dropeed the nine showing prime spade values.
0

#3 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2012-January-12, 03:25

View Postbluecalm, on 2012-January-12, 01:30, said:

This is difficult imo lack of spade switch might cost a trick if declarer has:
K9x AKQ QJx AT9x because we need to play spades twice to establish them before he establishes 10th trick in diamonds.

A heart continuation holds declarer to seven tricks - we get a long heart before he gets a pointed-suit trick. A spade switch gives him eight.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#4 User is offline   bluecalm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,555
  • Joined: 2007-January-22

Posted 2012-January-12, 03:42

Yes right, I was trying to construct a hand when switch is necessary changing it all the time and I managed to confuse myself.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users