[MickyB]

IMPs. You're not sure what trump suit they've agreed, if any - are you tempted to double in case they finish in hearts?

---

You didn't double, for fear that this might persuade them to play in a cold 6♣ with the ♠K on lead. LHO bids 6H, this ends the auction. Partner leads the DT, so you win[?] and return a...?

---

[ewj]

Think I would have played a ♦ back to be honest...not a very convincing auction...declarer might have a ruffing ♣ finesse to take, or a ♠ finesse so not going to harm his entries...

Would definitely have doubled rather than second-guessing and hoping that partner leads the right thing. Maybe it's quite sensible not to...but if I was on lead I wouldn't be thinking that smartly and just led the suit you didn't double .

[Cyberyeti]

Is Qxx, AQJ10xx, Kxx, x plausible for declarer ? no that's not a 3♥ bid and I can't see another holding where K♠ is necessary to kill the club suit.

If declarer has K♣ I can't see you're beating this unless partner has K♦, if declarer's void in clubs, I don't see that anything else is better than a diamond.

Your best chance appears to me that declarer needs a second club trick and has a singleton club, so not removing his potential spade entry makes this finesse 2 way.

I think I return a diamond.

[gnasher]

I would have doubled 4♠.

I can't think of any reasonable layout where my play makes a difference. When I saw dummy I assumed I was supposed to return ♠K, but that requires an unreasonable layout.

[gnasher]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-October-26, 05:10, said:

Is Qxx, AQJ10xx, Kxx, x plausible for declarer ? no that's not a 3♥ bid and I can't see another holding where K♠ is necessary to kill the club suit.

That doesn't work. He just ruffs a spade in dummy, crosses to ♦K, draws trumps, and takes a club finesse. For the Merrimac to work, I think declarer has to have Qxx AQ10xxx Kxx, which isn't even close to being plausible.

[ewj]

gnasher, on 2012-October-26, 05:14, said:

I would have doubled 4♠.

I can't think of any reasonable layout where my play makes a difference. When I saw dummy I assumed I was supposed to return ♠K, but that requires an unreasonable layout.

Tbh I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that declarer thought 4♥ denied a ♦ control, and hence 4♠ showed one...so it's possible partner has the ♦K

[MickyB]

Just realised I got the auction slightly wrong, sorry - opener bid 5N and heard 6D [one king] from responder. And yes, you do have an ace in your hand...

[rhm]

Good question.

Is the return of ♠K ever needed to drive out the ♠A in dummy as a late entry to the clubs when declarer has the ♠Q?
Probably not, because in this case declarer can ruff a spade and will not need the clubs.

♠Qxxx
♥AQTxxx
♦Kx
♣x

Here the ♠K would be needed, but this does not look to me like a jump rebid in hearts. Also if declarer has the ♠9 in this layout the hand can be made on a guard squeeze.
(Declarer simply cashes the ♥K, returns to hand via the ♦K and runs trumps. I leave the four card ending to you )

If your partner has the ♠Q, a low spade is better than the ♠K because partner may otherwise be subject to a black suit squeeze.
This works if declarer has a low singleton club

♠Jxx
♥AQJTxx
♦KQx
♣x

This looks a bit thin for a jump rebid in hearts, though Acol tends to have an aggressive bidding philosophy.
What about declarer being void in clubs?

♠Qxx
♥AQJTxxx
♦KQx
♣-

Now a low spade would be fatal. Simply returning a red card (preferably a diamond) and waiting for your spade king looks fine. The bidding here looks a bit agricultural.
A spade return could still be right when declarer has a void in clubs, for example

♠Jx
♥AQJTxxx
♦KQ63
♣-

If you return anything else declarer has a double squeeze with spades being the common threat
I guess I would return a low spade unless I knew West to be a conservative bidder, in which case I might play him for the third hand.

Rainer Herrmann

[Fluffy]

you don´t need ♥J in partner´s hand for ♠K to be right, declarer can also be 2641

Return a trump to give a losing chance on the more likelly: QJ AQJxxxx KQx x, this really is a 3♥ bid that drives to slam

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2012-October-26, 06:27, said:

you don´t need ♥J in partner´s hand for ♠K to be right, declarer can also be 2641

xx AQJ10xx KQxx x, you mean? ♠K is dangerous, because declarer may have the jack and it sets up a black-suit squeeze. If we're playing for this we should play a low spade back, and hope his spades aren't as good as J9.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-October-26, 08:10

[Fluffy]

no, I mean ♠Qx ♦Kxxx, but I would return a heart anyway to defeat when declarer has ♠QJ

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2012-October-26, 08:10, said:

no, I mean ♠Qx ♦Kxxx

That means partner led ♦10 from Jxxxx xxx Q10 Kxx. I suppose he might have done, though with his hand I'd have been nervous about being left in sole control of diamonds.


Anyway, I agree with your plan of defending passively and waiting for declarer to take the spade finesse. Given that we didn't double 4♠ or 5♠, that seems very likely to work if he has the right spade holding. In fact, it might work if he has Qx AQJxxxx KQx x too, because he might play for a black-suit squeeze.

But I also agree with Ed's plan of trying to cash partner's ♦K. Hence I would return a diamond not a heart.

[gszes]

return a heart

admittedly the odds are slim but in case declarer has something like

QJxx AQJTxx KQx void


we need to eliminate one of dummies entries so the club suit cannot be set up and used

leading a trump is a heck of a lot safer than trying a spade (k or small) and it will keep you
out of the newspapers for all the wrong reasons:)))))))))))))))))