shyams

How can you find this single dummy? How do you know that the promotion of the trump queen was not the setting trick? Give declarer F.E. A,AKJxxx, KJxx,xx and you will look quite silly after you unblocked the queen of hearts. If holding DA, East does not overtake the CQ but instead signals with a low club (asking for a D switch). I think once East overtook the CQ, he will not have an outside entry.

Did you give us the right auction? Oh, no! Terribly sorry. I feel stupid for not noticing the blunder despite having looked at the post at least 5 times! :unsure: The typo in my first post renders is a major flaw. The opening bid was 1C :( My mistake, don't know how I never noticed it at all :( I apologize to all. Oh, no!

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sa98762hjt3daj94c&w=skhk96dkt3cq98653&e=sqjt43ha75dq2ckj2&s=s5hq842d8765cat74]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] The actual hand is above. We played in 1NTx by South. Most Wests did not open the bidding, so the actual result on the board may be irrelevant. Some points / follow-ups: 1. Before I posted the hand, I thought the only logical action for South was XX. But many of you said 1NT embeds an option to partner to remove. 1a. Should North take-out to 2D after 1NT is doubled by East? 1b. Would North not expect South to have 5 clubs & 1 spade (after all 1C can be 3-cards)? In such a case, North still risks playing in a 4-3 fit. 2. I thought XX is better than 1NT also due to reasons listed by DHL. Occasionally (rarely) partner may choose to play and may even make it (or at worst be -1 when opps have game) 3. Some of you chose pass. Isn't "do something" a winning strategy in the long run? Thank you all for the responses.

How about a "thunder" of Directors? Persistent sound, fleeting illumination :)

Here's my non-expert answer: I think these are hands where the defenders need to have precise agreements in advance. IMHO, playing back the 4th best does not help! You are the only one who knows that declarer has 2/3 cards (if partner's lead is truly 4th best). So, I think the partnership agreement should be to return 2nd or 5th best (and not 4th best) In case 1, if you held C. A87 you would return C8 which is indistinguishable from 4th best return from AJ987. If partner does not have a side suit entry to hand, he will duck declarer's (doubleton!) Q. To protect this, I think the correct return is either CJ or C7 (but not C8). CJ works when declarer has CQ; but C7 works better when declarer has CK (partner is unlikely to find a reason to unblock from CQTx2 on your CJ and declarer's CK) In case 2, I think the correct return is HJ but I am not sure...

I have some thoughts on the Stop card similar to jillybean & cherdanno. The problems are in situations (some examples below): A. Pass - (1NT) - Pass - (2C); Pass - (2D) - Pass - "Stop" (3NT) ... to what purpose? B. (1M) - Pass - (1NT forc) - Pass; (2x) - pass - (2M/4M) ... If 4M, a Stop card is brandished (assume 4M shows game values) but the next player is least likely to act. Obviously the 2M (2-cards + 6-9 HCP) does not need "Stop", yet the 2M bid is more likely to require the person time to think. C. (Opps passing) 1M - 2C(GF); 2x - 2M; 3Y - 3Z (both cue); "Stop" 4NT ... helps opponents or partner? D. Purely hypothetical example (though I suspect may have happened to someone): (Opps passing) "Stop" 2NT - 3C; 3D - (forgets stop card) 4NT; all pass. Declarer makes 12 tricks cold, then tells partner "I thought you bid 3NT. Why didn't you put the Stop card?". E. Time is relative (at least, to me). When I have nothing to think, 5-6 seconds feels like 10 seconds. When I have a decision to make, 10 seconds feels like 5-6! Until today I have been in the "interpret the stop procedure" camp. I rarely pull out the STOP card in 1NT - 3NT sequences; or in 1NT - 2C - 2any - 3NT sequences. If I was a defender in A) above, I'd even occasionally pass in <10 seconds (not always). Having read other people's posts, I may change my attitude for the sake of compliance with the law but I am yet to be convinced. The people who post here are experts and highly ethical people; I'd never worry about your usage of Stop cards. It's just that not every player I encounter in clubs is as ethical and knowledgeable as you lot. PS: I'd really like to know what to do if D. above ever happened at my table. Do I call the Director and ask him to take action (which could be severe)?

I am not sure which forum this should be in. Anyway, in 4th seat / none vul / MPs, you hold: 5 Q842 8765 AT74 The bidding starts inauspiciously as follows: LHO Part. RHO You 1H 1S pass pass Dbl pass pass ???

The full hand is as below: [hv=d=n&v=n&n=saq52hq76dt3c8732&w=s93h943d8642ckt95&e=skt86hjt52dqj7ca4&s=sj74hak8dak95cqj6]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] Quantumcat would have got this right at the table (except hearts were 4-3 and not 5-2 as you assumed). West did have 3 points (CK) as you guessed, and if you play diamonds the way you stated, you will make 3 diamond tricks + you can use the dummy entry to play clubs. If you were at the table, the play to various tricks till then would help you know that hearts were 4-3 -- enabling you to avoid playing a third round of spades and preferring to play clubs. (If at the table, you'd ask if 1NT can be with 5-card major) kenrexford would probably go down in this contract. The play in clubs at trick 6 creates the setting for an eventual club winner but defense makes 5 tricks before you make 9. Either opponent (I'd guess West) wins the club and returns a third heart. Now you have 3 diamonds, 2 spades, 3 hearts and can set up a club winner. Unfortunately, opponents have an established heart, SK, CA plus the 2 tricks lost (CK, DJ). vuroth, in his first post, said "leading the SJ will do". I think this is probably the best thing to do at trick 2 as long as you do not repeat the spade finesse if it wins. If East wins the SK at trick 2, you have 3 entries to dummy and should be able to use them to make your contract easily! nigel_k's points are valid. This is a deal where being at the table (e.g. to ask opps about their run-outs, or if 5-card major is possible in 1NT) makes a big difference. I played for 3-3 in spades (tricks 2-3-4 were S to A, S to J and Sx from hand) and then lost my way fairly quickly to go down. This was the last deal of the day and I have noticed I play worse than my usual poor standard on the first and last deals of every club session. Please feel free to comment / criticize.

Consolidated reply: Let me apologise for the 'to-and-fro' nature of the deal. I will try and provide some points here that should help you all decide the next line / best line of play. I tried some of the things suggested and the response at the table is listed -- e.g. RHO did actually duck the 2nd spade holding the SK kenrexford's line of play: H9 - H6 - H2 - HK S4 - S3 - SA - S6 S2 - S8 - SJ - S9 D5 - D6 - DT - DJ H5 - ??? - H4 - ??? Now if you win in dummy and repeat the finesse in diamonds, it will win. But you still have to decide how to play the other suits for 9th trick. vuroth's line of play: If you plop down the C6, LHO wins with the C9 as RHO ducks. They continue attacking hearts... And in response to your question, the 2C did mean the C suit.

Well I am sure RHO would duck the second spade and your J wins.

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=saq52hq76dt3c8732&s=sj74hak8dak95cqj6]133|200|Scoring: MP North East South West pass (1NT)* dbl (2C)** dbl* (pass) 3NT all pass *1NT is 11-14 balanced; ** 2C is 'to play' (escape from dbl) * Partner's dbl was penalty Opening lead H9[/hv] 1. Your choice of line of play? I think there are many choices ... sadly at the table, I found one that resulted in -1. 2. Do you agree with the 3NT or would you have preferred to defend 2Cx?

I think the 12th trick will still materialise for declarer. East's duck at trick 2 is followed by heart finesse, HK, CA and H to A. East has to hold at least C K98 at this stage. The other four cards will most likely be DQ94 & SJ. The same line as mentioned by louisg applies - Cashing two top tricks in unguarded suit (here spades) ending in hand creates the same problem for East; either he unguards clubs or diamonds. South has no discarding dilemma yet as both N&S have followed suit so far. There is a "guess" element in this though -- declarer has to still figure out if East held DQ or not. The results link for this board: http://www.ebu.co.uk/events/?eventid=11&match=8&board=6 (Note the diagram on EBU site has a small error. West D2 is shown as C2)

South said "I have the rest of the tricks. I can draw the outstanding two trumps, two rounds if necessary..." . The TD assumes two rounds of trumps will follow at tricks 6 & 7. The rest of South's claim is irrelevant (cannot ruff a D + dummy has the lead after trick 7). TD uses bridge judgement to decide how play would progress from here. Here the TD could rule that the only lines of play for declarer (from trick 8 onwards) is a. to cash two top clubs and concede the diamonds for -2 OR b. to return to hand with CA and finesse the CQ at trick 9 for -3 As both lines are reasonable but line b. leads to a worse result for the claimer, TD should assign a result of down 3. If CQ was onside (Qxx), TD would have assumed line a. for the claimer (same result of down 3) I wonder how TD would rule if West had CQx doubleton.

The full hand: N/S make 8 tricks in H, 9 tricks in S, 10 tricks in C; E/W make 7 tricks in NT, 8 tricks in D. [hv=d=s&v=b&n=saq32h5dt2ckqt974&w=sjt85hk874dq6ca53&e=s97ht2dakj543c862&s=sk64haqj963d987cj]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] At the table, I felt partner's 2S bid was an overbid and her correct action was either passing 2H or bidding 3C (I prefer the latter). In any case, we had blundered into the right partial (3S) till partner bid 4C Feel free to criticize the bidding. I think a weak 2H is actually appealing with the South hand...

I think West has 4-card spade (almost all the time) and East has 4-card heart (sometimes 5-card). If East had 3-card spade and 4-card heart, he may have at least considered bidding (possibly NT). So partner should produce 1 or more spade cards. Running is not a bad option; and I am tempted to do it by bidding 2S. Who knows they might disagree on doubling 2S and play in 3N instead?

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sk64haqj963d987cj]133|100|Scoring: MP Playing with a pickup partner in the club. We play 5-card majors, 15-17 NT (something like SAYC) and 2/1 is NOT GF. As dealer, I opened this hand with 1H (please feel free to comment) South North 1H - 2C 2H - 2S 3S - 4C ??? [/hv]

Thank you. If I had faced this at a table, I'd pass :)A question: If the original condition was Red vs White @ IMPs instead of @MPs, would you still have overcalled 1H?

Agree with this, except I would drag partner to 5C not 4

Club K 1. If partner wanted a spade, he had to do nothing special. It would be our obvious shift. 2. There is a possibility that partner led the 3rd best (i.e. from H Qxx). Can't be certain of this; but it could be possibly to protect his tenaces -- e.g. AQxxx Qxx void Q98xx

I suspect I am the minority here and I could be wrong; I choose pass. 1. There is no guarantee that a heart lead will be the setting trick. We could easily be ruffing declarer's natural losers in the suit. 2. As far as I can see, a diamond lead could be equally effective. If partner is really weak, this could be the only time he gets to lead thru dummy's strength 3. My biggest worry is that opponents can redouble. 4Sxx = is not a nice score compared to 4S +1 at the other table

Thank you, Wesley, for the simulation I held the South hand. At the table, I thought I blundered by not switching to a low club. But after the event when I was going thru the hand records I felt it was too close to call. That's why the post.

3C. Partner is a passed hand; it seems unlikely that we make 9 tricks in NT

Dbl on both The first seems automatic The second is trickier because partner may bid 3D, which I will have to pass (I have no agreement to play my 3H rebid as no extra values) OR partner may bid 3S which i definitely have to pass

Partner may have a 7-8 count, and we could have 7-8 tricks. Even if the opening lead gives us a trick, it may be necessary to give up the lead once to develop the 9th trick I pass and hope for a push board

I am not a director and do not know the laws well enough. In this case, I think the director will typically say: * There is MI * However, there is no obvious damage from the MI. Bridge knowledge would require South to know that "strong" is incorrect; and therefore ignore it. * Therefore, the table results stand * The director may think it appropriate to warn E/W for misinforming. * The director could also warn declarer for not calling him at trick 1 (when it was evident there is MI)