[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

---

After a bidding misunderstanding, you play in 6NT. How do you plan to play the hand?

Hint 1:

Spoiler

If you lead towards hearts twice, the ace doesn't appear. The 10 falls, but the 8 doesn't.

Hint 2:

Spoiler

A Morton's fork will be your only play if the hearts don't break.

I will post the actual hand later. I hope I am right on the analysis!

[Walddk]

No need to apologise; as you all know, my average slam is considerably worse than this one. I have gone down before, and I will probably do it again.

Hearts must come in for 4 tricks, so they either have to break 3-3, or I shall have to find West with Ax. 108 doubleton in either hand is also ok. Then I will take the diamond finesse.

Too simple? Perhaps, but I can't find anything better.

Roland

[Free]

Lead?

[Walddk]

Free, on Apr 12 2005, 04:33 AM, said:

Lead?

♥A and switch to a diamond. Automatic!

Roland

[MickyB]

I led the 2♠.

[Echognome]

Hmm... there is another shot. Suppose hearts are A10xx onside. Try it on that assumption. (The line you take overall can take this into account as a possibility.)

Edited to say that I'm not suggesting you finesse in hearts.

[the hog]

You can play as Justin suggested, but if ATxx H are on side, you can lead H up twice; if both H are ducked, play rho for Kxx of D - lead twice towards AQxxx and duck if rho plays the K.

[Walddk]

Echognome, on Apr 12 2005, 06:45 AM, said:

Hmm... there is another shot. Suppose hearts are A10xx onside. Try it on that assumption. (The line you take overall can take this into account as a possibility.)

Edited to say that I'm not suggesting you finesse in hearts.

Not sure I understand. Do you want me to play RHO for 8x? Sorry, but I didn't peek. I would never do that.

Roland

[Walddk]

The_Hog, on Apr 12 2005, 08:50 AM, said:

You can play as Justin suggested, but if ATxx H are on side, you can lead H up twice; if both H are ducked, play rho for Kxx of D - lead twice towards AQxxx and duck if rho plays the K.

Instead of playing for hearts to be 3-3? Why would I play against the odds? I thought the best line was asked for. Hearts breaking is now well above 50% after we have eliminated the 4-2 breaks with Ax and 108.

Roland

[pclayton]

Echognome, on Apr 12 2005, 03:45 AM, said:

Hmm... there is another shot. Suppose hearts are A10xx onside. Try it on that assumption. (The line you take overall can take this into account as a possibility.)

Edited to say that I'm not suggesting you finesse in hearts.

Yes, there in lies the rub. A competent defender will DUCK the 1st two tricks holding Axx, just as he will holding ATxx.

Even if hearts come home, you still need the diamond hook for 12 (3♠+ 4♥+ 3♣+2♦). But, just the same, I can scamper home with 2♥+ 4♦. So - after I win the 2 heart, I will hook the diamond.

Here's the moment of truth.

Cashing the A♦ works ONLY when LHO has ♥ATxx and ♦Jx or xx.

Playing the 3rd ♥ works when hearts are 3-3.

I think you need to be at the table, but unless I'm getting some heavy confidence tells out of LHO, I'll play for ♥'s to be 3-3.

[inquiry]

Walddk, on Apr 12 2005, 10:17 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 12 2005, 08:50 AM, said:

You can play as Justin suggested, but if ATxx H are on side, you can lead H up twice; if both H are ducked, play rho for Kxx of D - lead twice towards AQxxx and duck if rho plays the K.

Instead of playing for hearts to be 3-3? Why would I play against the odds? I thought the best line was asked for. Hearts breaking is now well above 50% after we have eliminated the 4-2 breaks with Ax and 108.

Roland

You have also elimated the AT8 tripleton in either hands as well, this reduces the chances for the 3-3 split somewhat, but the odds are still slightly better than for 50/50 diamond hook. But is the diamond hook 50/50?

This is where it gets tricky. If you are certain that EAST would not duck with the heart ACE twice (of course, it is great defense with Axx), then you can place at least three hearts with west and only two with EAST. This actually changes the odds on the diamond hook (vacant space principle), increase the likelyhood of both the thrid heart and the diamond King. I think the odds that hearts are 3-3 in now 52.380. The odds on vacant space that the king of diamonds is on the right has gone up to 52.381. Them pretty darn close. But, you need so much more than king on right, you need King third or king doubleton on right, and only two hearts. Even with vacant space theory, this is a very poor proposition (something like 35%). I am afraid I will just trott out the third round of hearts myself

Ben

[Walddk]

It's even more complex than that. After spade to the hand and a heart up, we may just as well take the diamond finesse now. Another heart up and no ace. We don't even know who we want to keep off lead!

LHO will always duck with A10xx, but so will RHO with the same combination in order not to give us the chance to test hearts.

Consequently, another heart is clearly better than playing on diamonds - unless LHO followed with the jack when we finessed! That will make things even more interesting. Is the jack an honest card? It depends on who you play against, doesn't it?

Roland

[Echognome]

You always need the diamond hook. But at least the crux of the problem is coming up. Do you play for hearts 3-3 or 4-2 with ace onside? I'm not sure what the best line is, but after two hearts you can take the diamond hook and lay down the ace. Then you have a choice of lines and hopefully you will have enough information by then to make the right decision.

[pclayton]

Not quite right.

If the hand with the 3rd diamond holds the heart A, you are down even if hearts were 3-3 all along.

[Free]

There's no way to play ♦s for 0 losers (I think), so ♥s have to split 3-3 to make this.

[Winstonm]

Another possibility is to lead toward the KQJ of hearts twice, and if it holds the second time switch to diamonds. This could win when the hearts are 4/2 and diamonds 3/2 with the King onside and the long diamond with the short hearts.
I do not think this best, though.

WinstonM

[Walddk]

Winstonm, on Apr 12 2005, 05:28 PM, said:

Another possibility is to lead toward the KQJ of hearts twice, and if it holds the second time switch to diamonds.  This could win when the hearts are 4/2 and diamonds 3/2 with the King onside and the long diamond with the short hearts.
I do not think this best, though.

WinstonM

It's even far from being the best line. Not only do you need diamonds to break 3-2 (68%), but you also need ♦K on side (half of the 3-2 breaks). So your overall chance is 34%.

As I pointed out earlier, playing for hearts to break 3-3 is above 50% now that you know that Ax and 108 were not among the doubletons when they break 4-2. Ben added that A108 in either hand has also been ruled out, so we shall have to deduct a little. The chance of finding a 3-3 heart break is still more than a 50/50 shot and therefore the best line by a mile.

Roland

[Winstonm]

Absolutely right, Roland, and not my line of choice. I bank on the heart break myself.

WinstonM

[awm]

I think this is closer than people believe. It seems as though there are two lines:

(1) Play for hearts 3-3 and the ♦K onside. Note that if the diamond is off, you have only four hearts, 3 spades, 3 clubs, and 1 diamond (and you're losing 2 tricks as soon as you try to develop the second diamond).

(2) Play for hearts 4-2, with diamonds 3-2 and the long diamonds hand having two hearts.

The odds of (1) are:

hearts 3-3: 20/64
hearts T8 doubleton or Ax onside: 7/64
overall: 27/128 because also need DK onside.

The odds of (2) are:

hearts 4-2: 42/64
diamonds 3-2: 20/32
long diamonds with short hearts: substantially better than 50%
multiplying these: 420/2048 = 105/512 or 26.25/128
overall: well we can't pick up ALL 3-2 diam breaks with long diams and short hearts together; on the other hand we can pick up some 4-1 diamond breaks (like stiff jack offside with the long hearts) and long diamonds and short hearts together really is better than 50-50.

So I don't have an exact calculation here. My feeling is that line (1) is still better, but it's not a LOT better, and some "tells" at the table might swing it one way or the other.