Trumpace

Sorry for the off-topic post, but that is what happens when you reply to an off-topic post. JustADummy, your attitude amazes me. People are willing to spend time and effort to post instructive content _and_ followup to any questions you might have, for free!, and here you are, taking their efforts for granted. The point about well constructed quizzes: Do you really think that having a person there to answer your queries is the same as reading a book? If you see differing opinions posted in a thread, all you have to do is say you are a N/B and ask if there was a resolution/agreement, ask people to elaborate etc. Even experts make mistakes, and by nature, many bridge situations don't have a single right answer. As for people attacking each other, that is a rare occurrence, and usually involves the same set of people. That is a given in any internet forum, and it would be quite silly if that is the reason a N/B chooses not to participate. (Frankly, I have been surprised that the personal attacks are so few on BBF!) If you want to learn, expect to put in some work yourself. Don't expect to be handed everything on a platter, especially when people are doing this voluntarily. Asking questions(not just starting new threads, but posting in existing ones) is a great way to get involved and show that you are interested in learning (and, that way, you will learn more than passive lurking). If the N/B forum does not flourish, I would predict it would be because there aren't enough N/B willing to ask questions, rather than experts bickering among themselves. btw, I really don't want to discuss this any further, so please pardon me if I don't respond to a reply/PM.

Well, all I wanted was to have the "best" line to be part of the spoiler. In fact, once you had done that, I would have requested moderators to delete my post(maybe I should have made that clear, I apologize for that). I didn't expect to see any discussion or to have to actually make posts justifying that line! That itself is an indication that this hand (note: the hand, not the theme of the hand) might not be appropriate for the N/B forum. I agree, tangential topics are to be avoided. That makes it important that the hands posted here are to the point, and made up so as to try and prevent such discussions (for instance, in this case, make the contract 5H, add DK and CT). Sometimes it is unavoidable, inefficient or just plain difficult to try and modify the hands in such a manner, but in that case you can always say this is the main theme of the hand, and there are other possibilities which we would not want to discuss in the N/B forum etc. Fortunately for N/B hands, this is less likely to be an issue. I hope you agree that the proposed solution ought to be "complete" (or at least mention that it does not consider some issues) in order not to confuse/mislead the N/B readers. If there is some mistake/incompleteness in the proposed solution, there will be some discussion. That should be expected. You just cannot say, this is N/B forum, please stop the discussion. That is not the solution, IMO. We ought to put in more effort in constructing the hands to avoid such discussions in the first place (or preempt such discussions by specifically addressing the more advanced posters in the first post). Note: I am not trying to discourage you. You have done a great job!

As you noted, it is unlikely that a good LHO will switch to clubs after winning the first D. Where is declarer's club loser going to go? The point about two club leads from RHO is not relevant, as in your line, after losing the third round of diamonds and RHO leading a club, you are going to play a club yourself and finesse the T/Q. Yes singleton D is unlikely, but that is not the main reason to win the first diamond. Your D play matters when LHO holds the QT of clubs (otherwise barring the unlikely singleton D, you take a double finesse after forcing opps to lead clubs). Now if he holds KJ, QJ or KQ tight of diamonds, you must win the first diamond. He could also hold the Kx (or KQx as you noted) and fail to unblock on the A. He might also hold the Qx and RHO might fail to overtake the second round (which is unlikely). Saying that this is counterbalanced by the chances of an unlikely club shift is an overstatement,IMO.

Instructive hand, but shouldn't we win the first round of diamonds rather than the second?

A hair for that nose :P : Add to that JT doubleton heart + SQxxx with RHO.

Agree with JillyBean. This seems a bit too advanced for beginner/novice players.

Reminds me of a hand from Logical Bridge Play by Kelsey. Great book. In the hand in the book, in a similar situation he gets additional style points by plonking down the SK!

Very interesting Hand. I think the following works (didn't read what the others wrote, so pardon me if there is a repeat). (EDIT: I see Hanoi and Fred have a similar line). Win the club, spade to K, cash heart A, Diamond K,Q and then A. Then play clubs throwing 3 hearts. Play heart K throwing the diamond (if not a winner already). Basically, we have cashed our winners in clubs, diamonds and hearts, one spade for 10 tricks and are left with QT9 in North opposite Axx in hand. At this point, I claim that we have enough information to play spades correctly. This is how I tried to prove it without a (more)cumbersome case analysis: There are 21 cards of clubs+diamonds+hearts outstanding, and so at least one of the opponents must have 10 or more cards in those three. That opponent cannot be the one who holds four spades. Now, if we know how the clubs, diamonds and heart suits split, we will have a perfect count of the hand and know exactly which (second) spade honour to cash(first being the K or Q in North) and who to finesse. Thus, let us assume for the moment that there is no singleton heart about, and each has at least two hearts. We play the heart AK, so we can confirm that. The diamond and club suits are such that by playing 3 rounds of diamonds and 4 rounds of clubs, we will exactly know how they split. Now there are 14 clubs and diamonds outstanding. So, if any opponent has at least 8 or more of the minors, then that person has at least 10 cards in minors+hearts, and so we can guess spades. So assume each person has exactly 7 cards in the minors. Now consider the guy with 4 or more diamonds (if they split 3-3, the T will be a winner). Since the only problem case is when he has exactly 7 cards in the minors, he has 3 or less clubs. On the last club, he cannot un-guard the diamond stopper (we haven't cashed diamonds yet) and is forced to throw a heart (if he throws a spade, we are done). Now when we cash the heart K on trick 10, if he throws a diamond, then we know how the hearts split, and have an exact count. So we can assume he follows to the heart K. Thus he will have at least 3 hearts and exactly 7 cards in the minors so no more than 3 spades. We know how to play spades in that case.

Sorry, no bidding, as this wasn't actually played. I am still not fully convinced playing low to J will be better, but which is better, does depend on your reading of LHO, I suppose.

Do you consider it better than low to Q?

You are not relying on the mistake. Just that, the chances of success of your line go up, because of that (very real) possibility.

I agree. Playing low to CQ seems best. This allows you to cater to many CK onside, as well as many CK offside, when lefty continues trumps (which might be likely defense), allowing you to pitch and ruff a heart in dummy, in some cases. You can't expect defense to always be double dummy accurate, and if they do find it, bad luck. I was going to title this as "Not all finesses are the same" but thought it might be too much of a give away. There are other ways of playing the suit, like running the CJ or playing toward the CJ, but low to Q seems the best, allowing playing to the J and then towards Ax, giving RHO two losing options. Even if LHO always found a heart switch, playing low to Q is still better than low to J (for eg, singleton K with RHO). I just found it interesting enough to post it here. (Of course, I probably could have modified the hand a bit to make it clearer, like maybe giving declarer Kx of hearts and AQ of diamonds instead of Ax and xx)

No, I don't think there is a 100% line. Can you please post your line?

You are in 3S, on a trump 7 lead. [hv=pc=n&s=sqjt98ha2d32caq32&n=sak2h43d87654cj54]133|200|Lead S7[/hv] Plan the play. Adv/+ please refrain from spoiling too early (but please feel free to comment if you think this is inappropriate for B/I, or has some flaws).

From the lead it looks like diamonds are no worse than 5-3. Win the diamond A. Cash trump Ace. If both follow to trumps, heart to A, and heart ruff low. Diamond K, low diamond ruffed in hand low and heart ruffed high. Small trump to hand to draw trumps and claim. If trumps prove to be 4-0. Heart to A and heart ruff low, and draw trumps. Third round of hearts. If hearts are 4-3 claim, else guess spades with DK as entry to good spade.

Thank you :) By badly formed I meant not being able to put the point across in a compelling way, (For eg: With 3334 and AQx hearts, declarer has a 100% line, no matter what you do) and the point of interest could likely be dismissed as irrelevant on this hand (in fact, I suppose it was, by a couple of posters).

Apologies for the badly formed problem.

IMPS/Rubber. [hv=pc=n&w=sQT92h93dKJT876c3&n=sAK43h245dA32CK42&d=s&v=n&a=1N(15-17)2C(single suited)Xpp2D3NTppp&p=dJd3d9dQS5s2sAs6s3s7sJsQdKdAh6d5sKh7s8s9c2c7cAc3cQ]399|300[/hv] What are your discards on the clubs, and why?

I guess the mistake is this: *C[6%2Cn]}%2C{n%2C0%2C6}]"]Wolfram Alpha Table

Playing IMPS you reach 3S. [hv=pc=n&s=sa982hq87dkj5ckq6&n=sj764hk2d962caj52&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1n(15-17)p2cp2sp3sppp]266|200[/hv] Plan the play on the heart Jack lead.

I believe jmcw already mentioned the heart underlead to beat 4S. The defense was not as crazy as the play, so "no better" is an overbid. After the 3S bid, it would be hard to get to 5C, I suppose.

4S was perfectly fine. The 3S bid was quite bad but the play was really atrocious! Playing the spade A and spade to J is ~100% play for down two. You lose a trick to the SQ, while conveniently removing dummy's trump for defense to cash a heart! Given the bidding and play South should probably make it (assuming IMPS). LHO bid 2H and didn't have the CA. It is reasonable to play LHO for the SQ (though the singleton lead with Qxx spade might confuse matters a bit). So after LHO wins the HA and switches to diamond, declarer should with the Diamond in _hand_ and bang down the AK of spades. When the Q drops, the T draws the rest and the DK serves as an entry to the good clubs. (You cater to Qxx or Qx with LHO) You could also try to play RHO for the SQ, in which case you win the diamond shift in hand again, take a heart ruff and run the SJ. You can then come to hand with a diamond to draw the rest of trumps and get to dummy with the DK.

Do you really think VM1973 is a beginner-type? And do you really think there is a problem and the reason for the problem is 'attitude'? I don't see any problem with the three statements you quoted. Posts (from people who know better) in B/I forum which bring up strange bidding scenarios with random BBO partners are pointless (and might even be harmful to beginner-types) and really deserve some stern responses. Posts (from people who know better) in B/I which advocate focusing on losing bridge deserve worse. Of course, this is just my opinion. Sorry, if that sounds harsh.

So your aim is to make IMPs/MPs playing with random people on BBO? In real life, hopeless contracts do occur. Even Adv/Exp can be clueless when it comes to playing hopeless contracts well, but there is a reason for that: they are not as frequent as you think they are. At least, not enough for people to shift their focus to that. (Besides, how would one try to come up with practice hopeless hands which one can expect to occur at the table?) If hopeless contracts are frequent for you, your focus should be on bidding properly to avoid them, rather than trying to learn to play them well. In any case, you can always post the hands and you will get advice...

Do the club discards really matter?