toothbrush

oops suppose dummy has 543

Suppose opponents bid 1NT-3NT, partner leads A of a suit. The dummy has three small cards in the suit: 432. Do you unblock with the Q? Suppose that you play with a good player, and your agreements about leading and signalling are 'standard'. My father came to me with this problem. He thought it was obvious to play Q because against a NT-contract partner belongs to have AKJx(x). I told him I would play low, because I think partner can also lead A from AKTx(x),AK9(x), or even AKxx(x). I've thought about this for some time and I started to think that it may be necessary to make a special agreement about this. I wonder if there are players who have special agreements about this.

This is a question of partnership agreement. How I would handle this: 1) Pass, of course: you don't want to play in a 5-1 fit at 3-level while you know about a 6-1 fit at 2-level 2) After a double, I play SOS redoubles, so I still believe you have to pass. I think 2♥ is makeable! With a void ♥ and a weaker hand, I may rdbl for sos. 3) For me, 3♣ promises a good suit (6+♣) and opening values. You are stronger than promised but you don't have the suit you promised. I don't know what you have to do after 4♣ because I will never be in this situation. 3♣ is forcing imo, so you forced partner to bid. Now you have to guess.

I was planning to play ♠5 from dummy, and go on every card East plays, as low as possible.

About WEST: I really don't like these people who open 1NT as much as possible, with 'almost' 15hcp and 'almost' a balanced hand (but may be my opinion about this is going to change). About EAST: 2♣??, 3♣??????? I blame West for 1% and East for 99% for this absurd bidding.

If RHO has ♦Kx, LHO played the queen from QTx... Hmm indeed, that would've been silly by LHO... I didn't think about that. So that makes you have only the extra chance of LHO having ♦KQ and RHO ♦Txx.

This is an interesting situation: Dbl by south would be penalty now, no doubt. A dbl by north would be takeout, sitting before the ♥-bidder. North can't have a penalty dbl because South has a stopper and opps a fit! In this situation I believe North has a better takeout double than south having a penalty double. South is unable to dbl because he does not know how strong his partner is. However I don't think this contract should be doubled, playing IMPs. At matchpoints, I think North should dbl (takeout) and South passes it.

Line 1a for me. I believe this is a clear 50% chance! I have no idea who has ♣Q. I do think LHO has ♦K because with 3-4-2-4 he would've led ♣ imo. So LHO has: xxx-xxxx-KQx-?xx And RHO: Kxx-xxxx-xx-?xxx Of course I cashed ♦A, because I want to take the chance of ♦K to fall (LHO KQ or RHO Kx). ♣-finesse can wait until i have more information. I don't like to take a finesse too early in the game. After 4♥, 4♠, 2♦, ♣K and a small ♣ from dummy (RHO following low), RHO remains with 1 card, obviously a ♣. LHO remains with 2 cards: the supposed ♦K and a ♣. Exactly 50% chance! BUT when you take a losing finesse, you make 1 trick less than the others, for a zero-score... At matchpoints I prefer playing for a moyenne than to take a 'top or zero' 50% chance. With 51% (or more) I would take the finesse :) btw I presume you played it against good players because they gave nothing away by playing ♠ again and again.

I bid 3♦. Partner can chose between pass with a minimum, or bid 3NT or something in ♦ with extra values, or even 3♥ with a 5-3-4-1 (best response you can get, but unlikely because this gives opps 10 clubs). Bidding 5♦ immediately might work, but I don't like a ♣-lead. Big chance that opps start with two ♣-tricks. The singleton ♠A is not as valuable as it looks imo.

Too risky to bid imo, V vs NV NV vs V I would dbl

About the bidding: I wouldn't have bid 3♦ with this minimum hand. Partner is supposed to bid something when the bidding ends ...-(2♥)-p-(p)-?

I would cash ♥AK, dropping a ♣ in my hand. Then play on ♠ and try to make as many trump-tricks as possible. If opponents don't play trumps, you can go for a ♠ ruff. If they do play trumps, I hope that LHO does and not RHO, because then I don't have to guess.

I pass because I don't want to push opponents to a making game.

That's the way I would play it too.

B) Very interesting game indeed! There's a lot of information, but very difficult to decide what to do... :rolleyes: I think it's more likely that ♥ are 7-2. Opps play strong jump overcalls, so LHO should be weak, so RHO should have at least 5hcp. Why didn't he bid 2♥?? Besides, why does LHO play a third round of ♥, when he thinks it's in double void? This is probably a triple void ;) Another important fact: when ♣ are 4-0, you have no chance of making. ♠ could be 3-3, but very unlikely. I ruff with ♠9, probably overruffed, and I overruff with ♠A. Now I play first ♣A. When LHO follows with an honour, I'm planning to hook the other honour (restricted choice). If not, then LHO should have 2 clubs to have a chance of making (I think LHO would have switched to a minor with 3-7-(21) instead of playing in triple coup, so i give him rather 2♠ than 3 --> then there's a certain trump loser) If ♣Q or J falls, I will play ♠K and Q and take the ♣ hook, hoping LHO had 2-7-3-1. If ♣Q or J doesn't fall, I will play ♠Q. When LHO follows with J/T/8 I have a huge problem: take the finesse in ♠, hoping LHO had 1-7-3-2 OR cash ♠, hoping he had 2-7-2-2... I could be totally wrong with my analysis, but I'm really interested at the full distribution. I believe your partner had good reasons to think 8 minutes on this game :D

I believe I chose exactly the way inquiry plays it ;)

You have 7 toptricks: 3♠, 2♥, 2♣. You can't afford to lose a trick before you have your 9 tricks because of the ♦-problem. I believe I'll start with 3 rounds of ♠ and then cash ♣AK. When nothing funny has happened (by which you can count the play), I'll play ♥A and then take the finesse. Chance is bigger that ♣Q will fall than that ♥Q will fall by cashing AK.

I open this 1♠. May be this can be opened 2NT also, right-sided.

♥, absolutely. No reason to lead agressive here.

Difficult. I chose transfer and pass at matchpoints, transfer and 2NT at imps. This is absolutely no GF-hand for me: you don't know about a fit and ♣K could be worthless.

May be it is because I'm used to play dutch acol, but I would open this 1♣. I'm unable to find any rebidding problems (strong enough to reverse). Finding a minor game (without control ♠) or a minor slam seems much easier to me after opening 1♣. If my partner would often open these hands with 1NT, I would think that he tries to avoid letting me play. If you have agreed that these hands are opened, I have no problem with it if you alert that it may be 5422. I agree that it is a style issue.

I bid 2♠, but after 3♦ I believe you cannot pass. I don't know if a double would mean penalty or some kind of 'pass/correct'. If double is penalty, 4♣ seems the right bid to me. For 2NT immediately you are far too weak, without knowing about a fit. The only contract you want to play in first place is 2♠.

LHO is as dangerous as RHO as he can play ♥... It's obvious to me that RHO has the ♥A. btw I said I didn't want ANY comment about the bidding

This is a very nice summarize of everything there is to this hand imo. But if the ♣ finesse looks too attractive and loses, you still have to gather more information about the hand before finessing ♦ blindly one way or another. If you take your first shot at 9 tricks with ♦, you'll be lucky not to have these problems with this deal, but if ♦s only provide for 5 tricks, you can still take a good guess (after running them) which finesse will work (or if you need to cash). I like this analysis MUCH more than our first conversation, Free. :D I totally agree that it would have been better cashing 2 rounds of ♣ before to decide how to play ♣ (not 3 rounds because then you have communication problems) After that, I think it is likely that you can make a view of RHO's hand, especially when he would have dropped 2 hearts (but -as he is a good player- i think it's more likely he would have dropped two spades): ♠QTxxxx ♥Axx ♦??? ♣K Does RHO need ♦Q for his bidding? No, since he promised a weak hand. Can he have ♦Q? Yes, because ♣K isn't worth much: he could have downgraded that... So, in fact, the problem is: does west have the Q doubleton or the T doubleton??? :( Seems like a blind guess to me (50% chance for winning). It remains obvious to me that you start with taking the ♣ finesse, as the chance of ♣K singleton at RHO is much smaller than ♦T falling doubleton at LHO. I mean that you should have much more certainty for playing ♣ unusual than for playing ♦ unusual. You need the ♣ finesse anyway when you get only 5 tricks in ♦. Once you know that ♣K is at RHO, the only problem is to take a good decision in ♦.

The way Winstonm explained is exactly the way I thought, so that's how I played it. I started with ♣8 for easts K, who proceeded ♠. Right now I immediately took the ♦-finesse to the J... As you can see all the cards, you understand that I went 3 down... :) Are there any reasons why you should play ♦ otherwise now (not the normal finesse)? I agree that it may have been better if I first cashed another ♣ to know about the 4-1 split. Imo even then it is still much more likely that east has shorter ♦ than west and I see absolutely no reason why east should have ♦Q. Anyway, after the game I was blamed for bad play by my partner and my opponents. :P I fell really insulted because I thought -and still think- I had taken the best chance. That's why I need to know: did I play bad or was I just having bad luck? [hv=d=n&v=e&n=sj93hk852dajcat92&w=s75hqjt93dt6c7654&e=sqt8642ha64dq74ck&s=sakh7dk98532cqj83]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]