HighLow21

Discard A♠. If partner then leads a spade, throttle him! ;-)

2♠ only because I can't not -- and I have every reason to expect we will get 1 level too high.

<deleted, duplicate>

Agreed, this would be a good system for goulash, but then again, goulash is a much different game than contract bridge. The frequency of these crazy distributions is so small that any system that tries to incorporate it is likely to do one of two things: (1) Unslot other bid meanings that have much higher frequency (think for example strong vs. weak 2s) (2) Lead to such complexity that when they do occur, there is no effective defense for the other side (or lead to confusion for the partnership that uses the convention once every 10,000 deals). (1) is a much more important problem, in terms of best methods for the partnership. (2) just means that any hands that could use the new system will sometimes lead to problems of their own. Better, I think, to have one opening bid for all powerhouses (2♣) and have an extremely well developed system from that point forward. Out of curiosity -- the original hand has about 2.5 or 3 losers. What is the frequency of 3- loser hands? Has Pavlicek or anyone looked into this?

I believe I was the one vote. East is almost completely to blame here. EDIT/CORRECTION: I gave East 90% not 100%.

Yeah the more I think about it, it's not even close. A♦ by a mile. The disadvantage of open-leading A without K has been way overblown (in **most** cases) in both the literature and in conventional bridge defense wisdom. Especially with a trump control and when the A is not known to be in a strong suit of theirs.

If I double, they (spoiler). If I don't double, they make 3NT. If partner has a killing lead he's free to ignore me... but on the auction, he won't. There's no choice but double here.

I agree that 2♦ is a big misdescription. But how is 1♦ misleading? The rebid should be 2♦ no matter what partner replies with. No one ever said a 1-level minor suit opening is a good lead indicator. Not even after the 2♦ rebid is it necessarily going to be good. And you do have 6 of them in case they become trumps, plus 2 quick tricks. I don't see any disasters looming. Only once in a blue moon will they have a penalty double below the 3-level, and if they do, it's almost certain they have a game somewhere. (Note: at MPs, this is a big difference, but at IMPs it's marginal.) There is a ton of preemptive value in opening in this position--it suits out clubs at the 1 level and it hands the initiative in the bidding to our side. If partner forces to 3NT on 13 random points, he's going to make 3NT.

This hand isn't the same as ♠Q2 ♥AK9 ♦Q9864 ♣743 or ♠T2 ♥AK9 ♦T98642 ♣74. It has 11 HCP (maybe reduce 1 for the Q♠ doubleton) but it has a 6-card suit, 2 quick tricks and nearly full values for opening. It also opens the bidding for our side, taking the initiative away from LHO. Any expert would open with ♠Q2 ♥AK9 ♦Q98642 ♣J4. You're going to let a random jack be the deciding factor?

You'd lead a low club from KQ♣ against a suit contract?

But we may lose the diamond suit! ;-)

With a trump control, I'd start A♦. Depending on partner's signal I would then either play for a diamond ruff myself or a club ruff with partner. Note, however, that in many cases a club ruff with partner won't add a trick for us.

I like the diamond game, but I hate the slam. It depends on way too much.

<Edited a few times, after a lot of thought> So it sounds like either declarer played hearts wrong or acted on a funny feeling and was right about the K♥. Maybe intuition based on the first 2 tricks got the better of declarer. (The diamond lead and continuation, assuming partner has signaled in diamonds on Trick 1, subtly suggests the hopes of another trick somewhere... and what could that be but the K♥?) Note my point about diamonds if N/S play in 5♣. Declarer can draw trumps and eliminate the majors, later running the 9♦ to ensure the loss of only one trick. At matchpoints this is massive, because they will beat any pair that sells out to the heart game. Only if a spade to the ace/jack is led at opening and the singleton diamond returned will this elimination/throw-in fail.

Ask yourself what you rebid would be with the following and decide for yourself :-) ♠873 ♥J6 ♦AJ ♣AQ9875 Is the actual hand a trick or more better than this minimum club rebid? Absolutely. It's more like 2 tricks better. (This assumes you would not support spades at your first rebid with this minimum hand, and many would.)

You can play the clubs for Q(x) with West OR Q to any length with East simply by drawing trumps. Then AK♣ and ruffing finesse against East if needed. This requires spades 3-2 OR 4-1, and the contract almost definitely can't survive 5-0 spades anyway. (They would have to be with East plus a lot of luck besides.) Odds: Spades not 5-0 (96%) times the sum of: Q♣ with East = 50% Q♣ with West, single: 1.2% Q♣ with West, double: 8% Total: 56.97%, so call it 57%. There may be an additional half percent to this line if East has all 5 spades (2%), but it would require the heart finesse, 3 club tricks, a diamond or heart ruff, a double finesse in spades, and a trump coup at the finish. Note that without the diamond lead the contract is much better, because there is a much better line of play overall if spades are 3-2, given that there are 2 outside dummy entries.

K♣ or a trump. Over the long haul the heart lead is probably a big loser at any form of scoring.

Wow, 5 tricks lost in 5♣. So I take it spades are 2-2 and diamonds 4-4? Because declarer would have to lose 2 spades, 2 diamonds and a heart to go down 3. If my inferences are correct, that means: (1) In 5♣, the declarer failed to take a safety play in diamonds to avoid the loss of 2 tricks. (2) North is probably 2-1-4-6, and I'm willing to bet that that singleton is the K♥. No matter, dropping the singleton K♥ is still quite against the odds. If that's how the making slam was brought home, that declarer either misplayed the hand and got lucky, or was "swinging." (I suppose, if the hand was played in person, the "table action" might have suggested the blank K♥.) Show us the full hands when you're ready :)

Did declarer sigh heavily with West's discard on the first round of spades? I bet he did. The hand is almost certainly cold otherwise. Looks to me like S is 7-0-4-2 and will be next leading to dummy in spades to get to the AK♥. He could also be 7-0-3-3 and I'm misreading the meaning of the 7♦ discard. (Why else would declarer throw you in with a spade if he has a dummy entry?) I cannot see how leading anything but a heart would be a problem. But, my choice would be Q♣ to let partner know I control them, for the upcoming rain of spades. Partner clearly knows only he can control diamonds, and may be wondering which other side suit to keep guard on. (Then again, whatever I lead, this information should be available to both of us soon enough.) My guess for declarer's hand: ♠AKQ9xxx ♥-- ♦AKxx ♣A9 It's just barely possible he holds something like K9 in clubs. NB: If my analysis is correct, taking the J♠ was a wrong move. It could cost 2 tricks.

It's tough to analyze without knowing what the opening lead was (and if it was a diamond, what was led at trick 2). But finesse is the better play regardless. The finesse is 50-50 and the drop is 26%, even with the info given by the auction and whatever info is given by the opening lead. Believe it or not, you're not certainly dead if it fails, unless they've already cashed a diamond honor. (North, holder of the hypothetical K♥, may not hold the diamond ace and may fail to lead a diamond. Not likely, but possible. He'd certainly be wary of leading away from a blank K♦ if he wasn't 100% certain West holds a singleton.) Also, the point about matchpoints--you're either getting a shared top or a poor score (maybe some tables will sell out to 4♣, maybe you'll have company with 5♥ -1 or 5♥x -1), so you usually should take the best line for the contract. Agreed about the Q♠ being more interesting.

I posted the middle one on my facebook wall as a reminder. People quickly forget why all this started, as they become embroiled in the small (very small, in the grand scheme) problems with the Obamacare rollout.

OK. then I fault East for not understanding 3♦ as a cue. Either that, or I fault their system for being ambiguous.

How is it that East thought 4♣ was a cuebid while his response was 4♠ (I assume either intended as a cuebid or a response to minorwood)? Without more information, my assumption would be that East was either (1) cueing spades to try to avoid a spade lead, or (2) responding to minorwood, in which case he's being dishonest that he thought it was a cuebid.

The Kill Point is the original title of Auken's tip. Nothing unseemly about it, the OP is just repeating it. Auken's tip simply referred to a point in time where a defender has control and the right play to the next trick kills the contract while the wrong play surrenders the contract. I can combine my chances by playing a club now. If partner has either the K♣ (declarer with 2 of them, possible unless declarer has 10+ pointed suit cards or was falsecarding in hearts... also possible) or a diamond honor (regardless of declarer's shape) we are a cinch if I lead a low club now. Granted, there are layouts where this leads to a squeeze, but there are also tons of layouts where it kills the contract.

You need 10 tricks and have them -- without a heart ruff. You can't guard against everything. Some things you have no hope of guarding against if they play correctly, so they can be ignored. I would probably take the simple line of trying to protect against spades 4-1 and assume that I can guess the diamonds (if it comes to that, and if they are guessable). My play is K♠, low to the J♠. This technique has the advantage of starting early and not allowing any additional signaling. If someone cares to explain the mathematics behind all the relevant lines of play to determine which one is probabilistically best, I'm all ears.