[gnasher]

---

You're East, sitting over dummy.

Partner leads ♣9, J, Q A. Declarer plays ace and another heart, partner winning the king as you give suit-preference for diamonds. Partner switches to ♦5, and declarer plays low.

What do you do?

Edit: Sorry, some people seem to be missing the explanation of 2♠, so I'll repeat it here: 2♠ was 5+ spades with a 4+ card minor.
1NT was 15-17.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-September-13, 07:30

[paulg]

Declarer seems to be 3=5=2=3. I think it's right to win the king of diamonds and switch to a spade. This seems to work on most hands where partner has any two spade honours. In this case the diamond position is irrelevant since declarer cannot untangle sufficient tricks even with the diamond finesse.

The alternative line is win the king of diamonds and give a club ruff. This is needed when partner only has the ace of spades.

Can partner know enough about the hand to give suit preference on the diamond switch or to cash the ace of spades before switching to the diamond? He is pretty sure the clubs are not running otherwise declarer is probably home, so cashing the ace of spades is safe if he thinks I have three spades - given declarer bid four hearts and not three notrump, he will probably work this out. Suit preference on the diamond shift looks more dangerous.

So I will stick with winning the king of diamond and switching to a spade.

[rhm]

gnasher, on 2012-September-13, 03:00, said:

---

You're East, sitting over dummy.

Partner leads ♣9, J, Q A. Declarer plays ace and another heart, partner winning the king as you give suit-preference for diamonds. Partner switches to ♦5, and declarer plays low.

What do you do?

I must be missing something.
It looks normal to put up the ♦K and switch to the ♠8, hoping for a trick in every suit.
partner having ♠KJxxxx,♥Kxx,♦Qxx,♣9
If partner held ♦QT5 I trust him not to switch to the ♦5

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

rhm, on 2012-September-13, 04:32, said:

I must be missing something.

2♠ showed spades and a minor.

[lamford]

I presume 1NT was 15-17. The only reason for declarer's play in hearts seems to be that partner has KQx. I would play for the layout to be something like South: ♠AQJ ♥Axxxx ♦10x ♣Axxx. Now a spade beats it easily, but a club is a disaster. Declarer won't have AKx in spades or he would have ruffed one first. Would partner have led a singleton with KQx in hearts? The other leads look horrible.

[Hanoi5]

♦K and a high ♠. If partner holds ♦T he should have probably played it. Declarer will have a discard on the diamond, but I don't think itll be much use to him.

[MrAce]

lamford, on 2012-September-13, 05:52, said:

I presume 1NT was 15-17. The only reason for declarer's play in hearts seems to be that partner has KQx. I would play for the layout to be something like South: ♠AQJ ♥Axxxx ♦10x ♣Axxx. Now a spade beats it easily, but a club is a disaster. Declarer won't have AKx in spades or he would have ruffed one first. Would partner have led a singleton with KQx in hearts? The other leads look horrible.

Unless pd is sadist, he would have won the ♥ with Q not K.

I predict something like

---

You can give pds ♠ Q to declarer and J to pd, it wont change much, you can even give ♦ T to pd, i think we should win K and play ♠ and only ♠.

If pd has ♠ A we dont have to worry about defense i think.

[Fluffy]

If south has ♠AQJ ♥AQxxx ♦87 ♣A72 the only defence is to win ♦9 before playing a spade.

But if declarer has ♠AQx ♥AQxxx ♦xx ♣Axx winning ♦K an playing a spade back for a third trump also does the trick, and this doesn´t require south to not have ♦10. It also works if he has ♦10 and ♠AJ wich seems odd but possible. So I think winning ♦K is better.

This post has been edited by Fluffy: 2012-September-13, 07:00

[MrAce]

Fluffy, on 2012-September-13, 06:53, said:

If south has ♠AQJ ♥AQxxx ♦87 ♣A72 the only defence is to win ♦9 before playing a spade.

I thought about this too, but i ignored this because if that was the case declarer was cold anyway.

He would go up with ♦ A, clear trumps, and simply duck a club to us and claim (if you take club, his clubs are set, if you duck he gives up on clubs and ends up losing 1 heart + 1 spade+ 1diamond

[rhm]

deleted

[MrAce]

rhm, on 2012-September-13, 07:41, said:

deleted

Dont be shy Rainer, it is unlike you, i will let you go off the hook this time since you deleted it. Just passing the favour Aguaman did for me

[paulg]

MrAce, on 2012-September-13, 07:14, said:

Fluffy, on 2012-September-13, 06:53, said:

If south has ♠AQJ ♥AQxxx ♦87 ♣A72 the only defence is to win ♦9 before playing a spade.

I thought about this too, but i ignored this because if that was the case declarer was cold anyway.
He would go up with ♦ A, clear trumps, and simply duck a club to us and claim (if you take club, his clubs are set, if you duck he gives up on clubs and ends up losing 1 heart + 1 spade+ 1diamond

I thought about this first, initially thinking that declarer would have been cold if only held ♠Axx. But in this case you can duck the club if he has risen with the ace of diamonds. Even when he holds two spades honours (AQ, KQ, AJ) switching to a spade after winning the king of diamonds is good enough.

[mikeh]

I found this a very interesting hand.

We can infer a lot about this hand, but still be left with what is, in essence, a guess...albeit one in which some choices seem more probable than others.

I am winning the diamond K and returning a spade.

I think partner could have switched to the 10 from Q10xx, so playing the 9 seems like catering to a dubious play by partner...it is difficult to see a layout where, from partner's pov, the 10 would be the losing play in the suit.

I am not giving partner a ruff. The low diamond wasn't suit preference...the lead told us, on this auction, that partner held a stiff and he knows we know that (leaving aside the knowledge we have of the shape, having seen dummy and our hand). he was telling us he held the diamond Q and not, imo, the 10.

So we switch to a spade....declarer has to duck and partner leads his last trump. We get 4 winners in the fullness of time.

On these layouts, could/should declarer have done better? I don't cater to AQJ AQxxx xx Axx for several reasons.

1. that hand is too good for 1N, tho of course others may differ.

2. I don't think he has xx in diamonds for reasons given above

I am more inclined to think AQx AQxxx 10x Axx.

Yes, he could have risen with the diamond Ace, drawn trump and then ducked a club, but as paulg pointed out, we counter by letting him hold this trick....he is left with 2 spades, a diamond and a trump to lose.

maybe declarer could have tried a different line tho I am far from sure that he has any winning options on this layout....he can deduce the stiff club just as readily as we can so his best hope was probably a defensive error...tho note that if our spades were Jxx, and his were AQ9, we'd be the ones with no winning option on winning the diamond K.

[rhm]

mikeh, on 2012-September-13, 10:25, said:

I found this a very interesting hand.

I think partner could have switched to the 10 from Q10xx, so playing the 9 seems like catering to a dubious play by partner...it is difficult to see a layout where, from partner's pov, the 10 would be the losing play in the suit.

This was my initial reaction, but....
If declarer has 2 cards in diamonds you would have to overtake the ♦T to beat the contract, when declarer plays low in dummy. This is not so easy at the table.
Maybe partner wanted to avoid this disaster and make it easy for you to find the right defense and preferred to play his lowest diamond.
I appreciate this type of thinking by my partners

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

rhm, on 2012-September-13, 10:34, said:

This was my initial reaction, but....
If declarer has 2 cards in diamonds you would have to overtake the ♦T to beat the contract, when declarer plays low in dummy.

Why can't you just let ♦10 hold? If the spades are AQx-KJxxx, partner continues diamonds and later we duck the club; if they're KQJ-Axxxx he cashes the spade to tell us what's going on, then continues diamonds.

[rhm]

gnasher, on 2012-September-13, 11:14, said:

Why can't you just let ♦10 hold? If the spades are AQx-KJxxx, partner continues diamonds and later we duck the club; if they're KQJ-Axxxx he cashes the spade to tell us what's going on, then continues diamonds.

small hint: after ♦T, ♦A, ♥J, club duck to hand, declarer cashes one more trump and then plays a club to the king. Check the 4 card ending. It is pretty

Of course it needs a world class declarer

Rainer Herrmann

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2012-September-13, 10:25, said:

On these layouts, could/should declarer have done better? I don't cater to AQJ AQxxx xx Axx for several reasons.

1. that hand is too good for 1N, tho of course others may differ.

My experience with 5cM 1NT openings is very limited so you know better than me, but I would say that this hand is more likelly than AJx of spades, the jump to 4♥ over a simple take out double sounds like a great hand to me. Al in all AQx is getting more and more likelly.

[PhilKing]

K♦, ♠.

This looks right even if partner switches to the ♦T (which he should if he has it, since declarer could be 5332). We know declarer's shape, and this is our last chance to play a spade, breaking up the strip squeeze, so we must win the first round of diamonds.

Declarer can get rid of a spade or a club on the diamond winner, but not both.

Hoping South has ♠AQx ♥AQxxx ♦Tx ♣A7x or similar.

[gnasher]

Almost everyone seems to be playing declarer for AQx AQxxx 10x Axx rather than KQJ AQxxx 10x Axx. Is that just because it seems more likely on the bidding, or for the reason that PaulG gave in his first post, or for some other reason?

[rhm]

gnasher, on 2012-September-14, 09:35, said:

Almost everyone seems to be playing declarer for AQx AQxxx 10x Axx rather than KQJ AQxxx 10x Axx. Is that just because it seems more likely on the bidding, or for the reason that PaulG gave in his first post, or for some other reason?

It is more likely simply because there are many more AQx combinations than KQJ tight and the spade switch works also on other honor combinations, while the club ruff requires this particular layout.
The bidding is only a secondary indication but pointing in the same direction.
PaulG analysis looks thorough to me, though cashing the ♠A is a difficult play at the table.

Rainer Herrmann