Walddk

At least I got the lead right. However, it's time to tell South what a !!%*^#!" idiot she is. And then I rest my case because I need some time to find a new partner :wacko: Roland

Doesn't the headline suggest that partner is stupid? Why else name it "Important lead"? If she has a trump trick, it doesn't matter what you lead. I strongly suspect that she has an ace and that it is not the ace of diamonds. Which ace then? I don't know, but I will find out regardless. I can hardly wait till Matt presents us with the full hand. I am not sure that partner deserves TLC after that! Roland

Any decent player will not be taken by surprise when declarer leads low towards KJx. Either you have made up your mind in advance or you do it in tempo. It's as simple as that. I agree wholeheartedly with all Mike said. Roland

I strongly disagree. Either you give honest count or you don't. You have absolutely nothing to think about as far as bridge is concerned with three small under the exposed KJx. Roland

I am known to be a very aggressive opener, but there comes a day .... It has come now. Pass! Reverse the lengths in the two suits and I may consider 1♠. Never a weak two of some sorts. Roland

Which trump stack? Unless your opponents are complete lunies, they have a least 9 spades between them, sometimes 10. Roland

Getting to the wrong strain every time partner is 2-3 and 3-3 in the minors (why would he bid diamonds with 3-3?). You are right when he is 1-4. How do you fancy your odds? Roland

Yes, I will act, but I am biased because I know the hand. I don't like double with a doubleton heart and 4NT for the minors is not ideal with 6-4. So I guess I need to introduce my diamond suit. 5♦ it will be, but I accept that it can be horribly wrong. Last night I gave the hand to Danish international Søren Christiansen (sac on BBO), one of my assistants at the bridge centre. He voted for 5♦ too. "Scary", he said, "but I've got to do something. I like pass, double and 4NT even less". Roland

Not quite. White blasted an unbeaten 116 off 53 balls, while Langer marked his first ever game of Twenty20 with 90 off 46 deliveries in an astonishing total of 250-3. Langer needed 10 off the final over to follow his partner to three figures, but was bowled by the first ball from Ian Harvey (also an Aussie), who finished with 3-46. It ended with a 117-run demolition of Gloucestershire at Taunton. Roland

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sj97h964da7cak984&w=s106532h53d532c1052&e=sq84hkj72d9864cq7&s=sakhaq108dkqj10cj63]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] They were in slam at all six tables, either 6♣ or 6NT. Some made 12 tricks, some all 13. In the Scotland vs. England match (6NT) both declarers advanced ♣J at trick 2. Jason Hackett got a spade return and a show-up squeeze materialised. John Armstrong switched to a heart and the Scottish declarer had to rely on the heart finesse. Flat board. Roland

We were all agreed up to this point, but I would have thought that over 5D, North has an easy 6C bid. He is, I hope, implying a two suiter with longer clubs: if he had a strong enough 1-suiter to want to cue last round, he has enough to do more than bid a slam this time! I agree with 5♦ as well as 6♣. Advancer can hardly have better cards. Frances, Mike and I all agree that North should have bid 4♥. Then 5♦ by doubler and 6♣ by advancer (Mike prefers 5NT). I am not so sure that we will be able to play in 6♣, Frances. Like Mike I think we will end up in 6♥. People who know me can confirm that I have been in considerably worse slams. Yes, 6♣ and 6NT are laydown, but if you can't get the one you love, you've got to love the one you get :) Roland

If I have the right singleton with 5-5 for example, I don't need much for 4♦. Kxxxx Kxxxx x xx Game has play (and is sometimes even cold) opposite many minimum take-out doubles. Roland

It's very difficult to get to the top spots: 6NT and 6♣. The heart slam needs trumps to break, but it's still ok to bid it. I wouldn't have bid 4♦ with your hand. That would imply equal length in the majors in my book. A jump to 4♥ is what the hand is worth, and after that it's not easy to stop South. Even over 4♦ South could have done a little more; perhaps 5♦ to show both majors and a very strong hand. If that's enough for North to leap to the heart slam I don't know though. Roland

A heart, and whether that is right or wrong I am going to ask her why on earth she doubled 7♣. It's plain stupid. Roland

Double. Hopefully partner has a stack of diamonds and will know to lead one rather than a spade. His choice of diamond will also tell me what to return, although I don't think it matters. Either he has a trick or he hasn't. I have seen my opponents score 1660 before. Roland

Enter Michael Rosenberg ... This would be pretty tough at the table. Here's a quick answer. Let's look at some lines: 1) Safety play clubs. Basically needs H finesse - obviously we can do better. 2) Club to A and H to Q. If ♥Q loses then try to drop Qx of clubs. If ♥Q wins then ♣J makes unless E has Q10xx (no triple squeeze against E possible). 3) Run ♣J. If loses, finesse ♥Q. If covered then H to Q, and if that loses then C to 9. If ♣J wins.....? Some other thoughts before analysis: If C to A produces Q from W, cannot assume stiff Q (any decent W plays Q from Q10 doubleton). West appears not to have D length based on lead (probably led from ♠10 - why if 3+ small D?), so more attractive to play him for club length. Line 4) creates most problems for everyone. Can W cover with Qxx (if he does you can be pretty sure he has ♥K)? Will he even cover from Q10x (you could have Jxxxx, and presumably have already guessed suit)? With Q10xx, he would want to cover if you are going to finesse 9 if he ducks, but are you? Usually to lead J you would have Jx, in which case probably not too relevant. The strict percentage play for 5 tricks is AK, not ♣J (about 30-26). But it is tempting to stick it out there, especially with the lead inference. That's what I would do in practice, I think. Exit Michael Rosenberg. ..... I will give you the complete layout some time Wednesday. In the meantime, feel free to comment on Michael's thoughts. Roland

Debbie. She is indeed attractive! Roland

Confident? Cashing AK is best for 5 tricks (30-26). Part of Michael's analysis by the way. I am sure he knows all that by heart. Roland

That's the problem, isn't it? When a heart comes back, you don't know if clubs come in for 4 tricks. If they don't, you need a double finesse in hearts, but you can't test clubs now. David Greenwood forwarded the hand to Michael Rosenberg for analysis. He replied already, and I'll let you know what he came up with. But not before others have had the chance to analyse. Roland

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sj97h964da7cak984&s=sakhaq108dkqj10cj63]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] This hand from the Camrose Trophy in England over the weekend created some debate among the commentators as well as the players after the session. You have arrived in 6NT after, effectively, 2NT - 6NT. West leads ♠2 (3rd/5th), you insert the 9 from dummy and RHO follows with the 4 (count presumably). Take over please. How do you proceed from here? Roland

5♣ non vul against vul. Roland

54-4 now. After this match they will likely rename the format when England are involved, batting last. 20/12 ;) Roland

You mean beers? ;) What a misery for England. 44-3 now with Flintoff and Pietersen out. It's all over. All sorts of records in Australia's innings: 14 sixes, the highest number in 20/20 internationals. And Anderson now holds the record of having conceded most runs: 64 in 4 overs! That takes some effort. The Aussies' 221 not a record though. Somerset made 250 last year. Roland

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sk5hj54daq63cq1097&w=sj87643hk873dcak5&e=sa109hq92d954cj632&s=sq2ha106dkj10872c84]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West: 4♠ Lead: ♦A South passed, 1♠ by West, pass, 2♠ and 3♦ from South before West raised to game. Although 3♦ was "somewhat scary" at this vulnerability, it did help North to find the safe lead of a diamond. I don't think many would have found a diamond lead without the overcall. Most players would lead a heart or club and either would give the contract. Declarer ruffed the diamond and led a low spade to the 9 and South's queen. Back came an "automatic" diamond. On this layout this is the end of the defence. West ruffs, draws the last trumps, ruffs a diamond and exits with a heart to the queen and ace. No return from South beats the contract from here if declarer reads it correctly. mikeh was right for the wrong reasons. South must switch to a club at trick 3 (trump will work equally well). The point is that South must not give declarer the opportunity to eliminate diamonds. Whether South exits with a heart or club when in with ♥A, declarer prevails. North is welcome to unblock ♥J in order not to get endplayed, but if he does, West can endplay South instead after having cashed the top clubs. A cute hand in many respects. Did declarer get it right when South continued diamonds? No, but that doesn't make the hand less interesting. Roland

Sorry for leaving it out. Should be ok now.