Frustrating Match - Hand III

[Finch]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sa97652h1053d5c763&e=skj4h642dj106ca954]266|200|Scoring: IMP

1♥ P 1♠ P

2♣ P 2♥ P

3♦ P 4♥ P

4NT P 5♣ P

6♥ all pass[/hv]

 

1H was in a 4-card major, weak NT style

2C was nominally non-forcing

3D was 'fourth suit'

They aren't sure if 4H showed more or less than 3H would have done

5C was 1 keycard

 

LHO is a known fairly random bidder.

 

Partner leads the 8 of diamonds (3rd from even, bottom from odd) to declarer's ace.

Declarer ruffs a diamond in dummy, and plays a club to the king and partner's 2. Partner would give standard count, if she could be bothered to give anything.

Declarer cashes the King of diamonds, discarding a club from dummy (you are pretty certain that partner started with 6 diamodns).

Declarer crosses to the ace of spades (partner playing a low one)

Declarer leads dummy's last club.

 

Well?

[hotShot]

This looks like a setup for a crossruff, so I'll win and play trump.

[whereagles]

If I win, declarer will ruff a club and claim. If I duck, declarer might either misguess the club jack and/or be unable to ruff two clubs in dummy (pard may have Jx or Qx of hearts).

 

Seems like ducking might work. But I dunno if I could reason like this in a split-second at table, so as to duck smoothly. I'd probably end up playing the ace and giving it all in.. yuck :)

[bid_em_up]

At this point declarer is known to have started with at least 5 hearts, 1 spade, and 3 diamonds. Surely he doesnt not have more than 1 spade, and you have placed partner with 6 diamonds, meaning declarer cannot have any more.

 

So, does declarer have 5, 6, or 7 hearts? And are they solid? Surely they must be.

 

 

x AKQxx AKx KQxx

x AKQxxx AKx KQx

x AKQxxxx AKx KQ

x AKQJx AKx KQxx

 

Its hard for me to imagine someone not opening any of the above hands with whatever game forcing bid their system allows. So I rule them out. I think this leaves declarer with one possible hand that is consistent with the bidding and play to this point.

 

x AKQJx AKx KJ10x

 

Assuming we semi-trust declarers bidding to have 4 clubs, why did partner play the 2? She must have a doubleton and the only holding that makes any difference that I can see is Q2. You must duck and let partner win the Q and return trump, limiting declarer to one club ruff in dummy and scoring your A later. (Winning and returning a trump at this point is fruitless, as declarer will have no losing clubs remaining).

 

So I duck. But, I've been wrong before too :)

[Codo]

Sitting at the table, there seems to be the following lines of success:

1. They bidded much too much and will fail anyway.

2. Opener has 4 Clubs and we can give pd a ruff.

3. Opener has 3 Clubs and has a loosing option.

 

In case 1, the hand would not be in a thread.

In case 3, he surely had run all trumps to get a better picture of the hand, so case 2 should be dealt with, I win the ace and give pd a ruff.

And: Nr. two is very consistent with the bidding.

[winkle]

I'd win the ace and return a club. Declarer is marked with 1534 and AKQ of hearts so this gives me a 50% chance of beating the contract when partner has the HJ. Hoping for a club misguess seems worse than that: declarer can have no guess, or he can guess right.

 

And I am never playing declarer to have hopped the CK from KJTx.

[mikeh]

'random' seems to be an accurate description of LHO's bidding: he bid a quiet, non-forcing 2♣!

 

If declarer has x AKQxx AKx KQxx or x AKJxx AKx KQxx, we must win and lead a ♣. If we duck, declarer wins and leads a ♣: partner can ruff high ahead of dummy, but even a trump return leaves a trump in dummy to ruff the last losing ♣

 

If declarer is x AKQJx AKx KJxx then we must duck and let partner win the ♣ and return a ♥.

 

The only clue I have from partner is the ♣2: while against this contract, partner may be playing cards more or less randomly, the 2 from xx is no more than 50% probable while the 2 from Q2 is 100%

 

I think we have discovered a new application of the principle of restricted choice :)

 

I duck.

 

 

As for the ♣ K from KJ10x, admittedly, this seems oddish.. but declarer may have reasoned that the J was slightly less than 50% if (as I know Frances would have done) east played low on the 1st round in tempo. Anyway, I'll take my clue (cue/) from partner, not from a declarer who bids like this one did.

 

Edit: it just occurred to me, as I was leaving the computer, that declarer might hold x KQJxx AKx KQxx... and now the duck is horrendous: they bid and make a slam off 2 aces... and I had to duck mine twice!

 

That thought is enough to make me chance my mind.... of course, at the table, undo might not be accepted :)

[whereagles]

declarer might hold x KQJxx AKx KQxx... and now the duck is horrendous: they bid and make a slam off 2 aces... and I had to duck mine twice!

Off 2 aces? Declarer used blackwood. He shouldn't be missing two aces. I agree sometimes people misplay, but they usually count to 4 properly :(

[mikeh]

Goes ot show, not for the first time, that I should NEVER post this early inthe am: I saw the auction when I did my first post, abut promptly forgot it en route to the shower, and panicked :(

 

Now I have had my caffeine (well, I've started the iv drip) and it is all becoming so much clearer. I undo my undo and duck (smoothly) again :)

[jdonn]

I would have won the first club to play a trump, and think not doing so was an error. Although if I could read it from partner's card, I might just be able to give him a club ruff instead, but I lose both chances by ducking the first club.

[bid_em_up]

I'd win the ace and return a club.  Declarer is marked with 1534 and AKQ of hearts so this gives me a 50% chance of beating the contract when partner has the HJ.  Hoping for a club misguess seems worst than that: declarer can have no guess, or he can guess right.

 

And I am never playing declarer to have hopped the CK from KJTx.

Why did partner not give count on the club?

 

Surely they would holding the heart J and a small doubleton club, or 10x (and possibly Jx). While it says, partner would give standard count, if they could be bothered to give anything; they are defending a slam, and it is imperative to give count here if you can overruff the 3rd round of clubs.

 

Since partner did not, either, A) they cannot overruff the 3rd round of clubs, or B ) it is because they hold Jx or Qx with or without the heart J or C) they were just too lazy to defend properly.

 

In the case of A) the worst ducking can cost is an overtrick, in the case of c) partner should apologize immediately for not giving count holding Jx of hearts (sorry, I expect my partners to defend properly in this situation), so the only remaining viable case is B ). When partner holds Qx or Jx, ducking wins 100% when partner holds Qx and rates to break even when he holds Jx (assuming you duck both clubs smoothly). If you cannot duck it smoothly, now you're forced to play the Ace and another club hoping partner has the heart J, as declarer will not misguess.

 

And I still think declarer would open whatever g/f bid his system allows on:

 

x AKQxx AKx KQ10x

 

As always, jmoo.

[sfbp]

That NorthEast feature is cool, thanks for using it, I never even noticed before!

 

I conclude that declarer has a useless spade holding, presumably 1. If he has 2 then they're going down no matter what. His heart-club shape must be 5-4 or he wouldnt have bid 2C. He cannot be 6-4 or 5-5 (why not cash the A of spades?).

 

The fact he didn't draw trumps suggests the hearts are good and he can see twelve tricks as follows:

 

KQ clubs and a club ruff

AK diams and a diam ruff

A spades

5 trumps

 

Partner might have J7, J8 or J9 in trumps. But I cannot promote the J if I rise and play a fourth club, he ruffs high and draws trump. Where's the Jack of clubs? If partner has that card it just got toasted, and if he doesnt....... well now all is clear!

 

This is starting to look like the hand i posted, where declarer overbid his 1NT opener. I think declarer hasn't got the Q of clubs.

 

Duck, like a chicken (said Bloodnok).

 

I almost changed my vote there while I wrote that essay!

 

Stephen

[Finch]

I had your partner's hand, and I could have given this as an opening lead problem - for the reason why, see below.

 

I agree that the two main ways to beat the contract are

i) duck, and hope partner has Qx or that partner has Jx and declarer mis-guesses

ii) rise, and play a club to make partner's presumed HJ or (singleton) HQ.

 

Which is right? Originally this KJxx holding in declarer's hand hadn't occurred to me, and I thought you had to chose between a genuine line (ii) and a play-for-a-misguess line (i); if they are equally likely the genuine line is going to work twice as often. Now, would declarer really play this way with KJxx? It's quite a cute idea: the CK is quite likely to get ducked. But against that it's basically playing for a misdefence; with KJ10x the club to the J is a genuine line.

 

Anyway, my partner rose with the CA and tried to give me a club ruff on the basis that if it was a guess, declarer might get it right anyway, and that I might have led a trump from 2 low but more likely not to have done from Jx.

 

This let the contract through. Declarer has

 

x

AKQJx

AKx

KQ10x

 

We told ourselves he would have got clubs right anyway.

 

(team-mates opened this hand 2C at the other table and didn't bid the grotty slam)

[sfbp]

Anyway, my partner rose with the CA and tried to give me a club ruff on the basis that if it was a guess, declarer might get it right anyway, and that I might have led a trump from 2 low but more likely not to have done from Jx.

 

This let the contract through. Declarer has

 

x

AKQJx

AKx

KQ10x

 

We told ourselves he would have got clubs right anyway.

 

What did i miss? If the hearts are solid declarer, after I duck, can ruff 2 clubs and a spade before being left with only high trumps, surely.

 

Stephen

[inquiry]

Anyway, my partner rose with the CA and tried to give me a club ruff on the basis that if it was a guess, declarer might get it right anyway, and that I might have led a trump from 2 low but more likely not to have done from Jx.

 

This let the contract through. Declarer has

 

x

AKQJx

AKx

KQ10x

 

We told ourselves he would have got clubs right anyway.

 

What did i miss? If the hearts are solid declarer, after I duck, can ruff 2 clubs and a spade before being left with only high trumps, surely.

 

Stephen

If the ♣T is played, partner wins the ♣Jack and returns a ♥. South has 2 clubs loser and only 1 trump remaining in dummy.

[bid_em_up]

You miss that going up with the Ace gives you absolutely no chance of defeating the contract [edit]> when the hearts are solid.

 

If you duck, declarer has to decide if a strong defender on his left has ducked the club A the first time, leaving him to decide whether to play the Q the second time playing for Ace onside (in which case he will make) or the 10 (in which case he will go down).

 

If you can manage to duck the 2nd club off dummy smoothly, declarer is very likely to play for the latter. How many defenders are strong enough to do so when the stiff is led from dummy, without stopping to think about it?

 

If you hesitate, the show is over, and declarer will make.

 

And while I agree that it is unlikely that declarer is actually holding KJ10x of clubs and has played this way, I simply cannot understand his bidding on the hand that he is actually holding. So I was trying to figure out what problem there could be.

 

:)

[Finch]

You miss that going up with the Ace gives you absolutely no chance of defeating the contract.

If partner has the Jack of hearts, going up with the ace beats the contract.

[bid_em_up]

You miss that going up with the Ace gives you absolutely no chance of defeating the contract.

If partner has the Jack of hearts, going up with the ace beats the contract.

I was answering his question in regards to the statement "If the hearts are solid declarer, after I duck, can ruff 2 clubs and a spade before being left with only high trumps, surely"

 

 

If the hearts are solid, partner cannot have the heart J. :)

 

But i will edit my post to reflect that. :)

[sfbp]

If the ♣T is played, partner wins the ♣Jack and returns a ♥. South has 2 clubs loser and only 1 trump remaining in dummy.

 

Well, we have spent in excess of 12 hours figuring out whether to play the A or not :)

 

Somehow I think he's getting it right, today.

 

Also if declarer's LHO had A why would she duck smoothly the first time? (sorry FrancEs, I know you are a much better player than I am) Declarer still has to guess the JC whether or not LHO takes the first one. I think the overwhelming presumption is that I hold the Ace and that declarer will play the high club the second time. Especially with only one club left in dummy, as now declarer can drop 3-3 distributions and Jx by ruffing high.

 

Stephen

[bid_em_up]

Stephen,

 

Try defending the suit when declarer has no club pitch coming from dummy and you may see why the first club is ducked by LHO in the following layout:

 

[hv=n=sxxx&w=sax&e=sjxxx&s=skq10x]399|300|[/hv]

 

Remember, the defenders don't know that declarer is about to pitch a club from dummy on the other high diamond when the first club is played from dummy (although they may certainly suspect it).

 

If declarer does not have a pitch coming, declarer will be left guessing whether clubs are 3-3 and even if they are, is the Ace onside (play the Q the second time) or is the J onside (play the 10)?

 

If LHO wins the first club, declarer has no real chance other than to play the 10 the second time (dropping AJ tight doesnt count). You force him into a winning position by taking the first club. (Even if clubs are 3-3, if declarer plays the Q the second time, he has another club loser when he has no pitch from dummy coming). Since West knows from his holding that any finesse of the J is going to win, he needs to try to give declarer a losing option. Therefore, the first club has to be ducked by West.

 

Now....declarer takes his club pitch on the other high diamond. He then crosses to dummy via the diamond ruff, and leads dummy's last club.

 

Now it becomes a fascinating game of chicken and psychological warfare.

 

If the original holdings were as listed above, when RHO plays small on the second club lead, declarer will probably decide that no defender can possibly duck twice here and play the 10 losing to the A, and declarer will romp home but oops....if the original holdings were as they actually are, and you managed to duck the last club from dummy smoothly....

 

And if declarer decides that maybe, just maybe, you did duck it twice, so plays the Q but oops, partner did duck the A the first time.

 

And in the cases where clubs are 3-3? it wont matter as declarer just wins (or loses) this club to either hand, and then ruffs one in dummy and claims. Making either 6 or 7.

[hatchett]

Remember, the defenders don't know that declarer is about to pitch a club from dummy on the other high diamond when the first club is played from dummy (although they may certainly suspect it).

 

I think both defenders do know a pitch is coming in this hand. The opening leader has led from the Q and seen it go J, A. Partner of the opening leader can be pretty sure the lead is not from KQ!

 

The ♣K is probably not the correct card from declarer, the Q feels better would you duck from Ax if declarer's club suit might be QJxx?

 

The defender with ♣A is not likely to play declarer for KJTx since he has a reasonable line for his contract by finessing the J. His other consideration is that is there a possibilty that declarer has gambled in the bidding maybe he has x AQJxx AKx KQJx. Why should he in any case play declarer for a normal 2♣ opener?