Defend 2Dx

[Finch]

Simple decision for you: what's the right card to play at trick two?

RHO is Duboin, LHO is Teresa Lavazza. You're quite pleased that she is playing the contract rather than he!

 

(note you are South, East is dummy, partner leads to trick one)

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&e=sqhk107da2ca1097542&s=sj53haq985djckq86]266|200|Scoring: MP

1♣ 1♥ 1♠ P

2♣ P P x

P P 2♦ x

P P P[/hv]

 

Partner leads the HJ, king from dummy, ace from you.

[whereagles]

I don't think they're going to setup anything, so I'm playing back the ♦J.

[ArcLight]

Pard made a penalty double, I don't see many trumps in my hand or Dummies, I have defense against dummies 2 suits, lets play no trump.

Lead the ♦ Jack.

Do NOT continue hearts forcing pard to ruff.

[mikegill]

If pard had enough to reopen, we're expecting some decent stuff over there. Pard is short in clubs too, so probably heart isn't a stiff and I have at least one entry later (s J is probably an entry too) to give partner ruffs or trump promotions at a later date. For now, lets keep them from ruffing spades.

[inquiry]

♦J looks so obvious. Can we talk ourselves out of it given it is a problem hand?

 

Parnter has nice hand, but failed to take action over 1♠ (no 1NT, no snapdragon), and partner has at most 2♥ we are sure.

 

That means WEST has 3♥, maybe 4. Could west have two clubs? Absolutely not. Could WEST have one club? Barely. So west has 3 to 5 cards in hearts and clubs. Did 1♠ promise five? We have no info on that here. West had enough for a free bid, and had diamonds and spades, but clearly doesn't have very much, so we will need to find out if 1♠ is bid with 4 and the negative double denies 4♠. For this "talk me out of a the obvious ♦" rationalization I will assume 1♠ promised five spades or more. So west has 5♠-3/4♥-4/5♦-0/1♣.

 

What about partner? He (mixed pairs, right?) has 4♠ and at least 5♦. We think exactly 5♦, as if he had six, there is little chance we can go too far wrong. So a couple line of defense suggest themselves. 1) Let partner score his baby trump by ruffing to help keep him off endplay. And to play a forcing game. Since we play partner for 5 diamonds, we will guess the West hand to be 5-3-5-0. If west is 5-4-4-0 or 5-3-4-1 I think we are in good shape anyway.

 

Now for stregth. Partner had ♥J and ♣J according to our calculations. What else can he have? Surely with five good diamonds and Jx of hearts he might have made a snap dragon double. So I suspect he has good spades and weakish ♦.

 

So this suggest a possible line of defense, involving a spade now, partner presumably wins, and returns a heart, we win, cash third heart to let partner shed a ♣, and lead a fourth heart allowing partner to throw his last club as dummy ruffs. This defense has some attractiveness to it. Can it go wrong? WEST wins ♠ Ace, ruffs a spade, cash ♣Ace for ♥ discard, ruffs a ♣, ruffs a ♠ for five tricks. But now, partner has long trump, and we have ♥ entry for trump promotion, and ♦ jack still can be very useful, not to mention our ♠J which must be a winner on this line. We will get 2♠, 2♥, and partner has long trump now and our position must be able to establish at least a trump promotion after the ♦Ace was used to ruff a ♠. How about if WEST has AKxxx of spades, the queen wins, ♣A, ♣ ruff, two ♥ pitches on the ♠'s, ♥ ruff. Can that hand exist? That leaves partner with Txxx Jx KQxxx Jx and we think he makes a snapdragon double with that hand, so at least that problem is avoided.

 

So let me stake out the spade back to get partner in for another heart through dummy. Would I find this play at the table? I really suspect not, I like everyone else would track the obvious ♦JACK allowing declerer to pitch one heart loser on the ♣ ACe like everyone esle, and to score one small club ruff easily.

[jdonn]

I'll stick my neck out and become the first vote for the heart queen. I fear a heart pitch on the ace of clubs or two on the AK of spades given that declarer looks to very likely be 5350, and maybe partner has a trump holding that will benefit from a ruff anyway, like KTxxx or worse. If declarer has the spade ace then we can't stop one ruff in dummy with the small trump anyway.

 

I suppose I'm playing partner for Txxx Jx KQxxx Jx

 

EDIT: Inquiry mentioned and rejected this exact hand, I hadn't noticed. I am not sure this defense will work best, and there are many hands partner can hold, but one thing I am sure of is partner would NOT have made a snapdragon double on this hand. It's enough of a stretch to even say he would have doubled 2♣, so maybe he does need a spade honor after all. I'll stick with the heart queen.

[Free]

I also think ♦J is so obvious there must be something wrong with it. However, I'm still playing it.

[Finch]

I played the 'obvious' DJ back, but partner does indeed have the hand inquiry and jdonn have suggested.

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=s10xxxhjxdkq98xcjx&w=sakxxxhxxxd10xxxxc&e=sqhk107da2ca109xxxx&s=sjxxhaq98xdjckq8x]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

The play went

HJ, King, Ace

DJ to the ace

Ace of clubs (heart discard)

Queen of spades

Club ruff low

AK of spades discarding hearts

Heart ruff

Club off, discarding a spade from hand (North discarded his last heart)

Heart.

 

Now declarer could have made by discarding her last spade, as North is forced to ruff and give a trick to the D10. But declarer ruffed low, and North over-ruffed, drew trumps and cashed the S10.

 

I think I should have got this right.

[mike777]

"EDIT: Inquiry mentioned and rejected this exact hand, I hadn't noticed. I am not sure this defense will work best, and there are many hands partner can hold, but one thing I am sure of is partner would NOT have made a snapdragon double on this hand. It's enough of a stretch to even say he would have doubled 2♣, so maybe he does need a spade honor after all. I'll stick with the heart queen."

 

 

This seems close to a snapdragon bid, 5D, 2h and moderate values? Perhaps partner needs a bit more values or what?

[jdonn]

I was a bit too harsh, I guess I shouldn't have used big letters in NOT. I still think that hand isn't enough though, I don't know what you consider moderate values (or where you even get that idea from) but I would think it shows about 9+ to essentially force an overcall to the two level when we may not have a fit.

 

Lets put it another way. The proof is in the pudding. The snapdragon double on that hand was not made at the table.

[mike777]

Ya I was not sure what moderate meant, you cleared it up thanks.

[inquiry]

I was a bit too harsh, I guess I shouldn't have used big letters in NOT. I still think that hand isn't enough though, I don't know what you consider moderate values (or where you even get that idea from) but I would think it shows about 9+ to essentially force an overcall to the two level when we may not have a fit.

 

Lets put it another way. The proof is in the pudding. The snapdragon double on that hand was not made at the table.

True, snapdragon wasn't made, to the detriment of the defense/offense. Think how much easier the hand is with a snap dragon double. And after snapdragon, NS can rest peacefully in 1NT. I think you will not get a chance to use snap dragon very often if you turn it down on hands like this. Give me one less heart, I pass, even with xx of hearts I would tend to pass.

 

But if you can not eliminate hands like this, then it makes guessing the defense so much harder. Here clearly, cash second heart and give partner a heart ruff is right. Easy to find with snap dragon, but of course you then play 2Cx doubled not 2D.

 

Still, how light to go with snapdragon is up to each partnership. I guess I can't think of an authority to quote on the value necessary. We all can agree that a snap dragon double occurs after the first three player bids different suits (as here) and a Double by fourth player shows 5 cards in unbid suit useful values, and at least 2 cards in partner's suit (and generally if partner bid a major 2 cards only or bad 3).

 

The key phrase here is "useeful" values and in the case ealier, "moderate" valuse. After an opening bid, an overcall, and a forcing FREE bid, "useful" and "moderate" are very resticted terms. After all, how much can 4th seat really have here. a strong KQ-fifth and a fittign jack-small for partner clearly falls into my definition of useful values. PArtner can not expect much more. Seems not everyone agrees this is useful, but that is what makes bridge fun.

[Finch]

But if you can not eliminate hands like this, then it makes guessing the defense so much harder. Here clearly, cash second heart and give partner a heart ruff is right. Easy to find with snap dragon, but of course you then play 2Cx doubled not 2D.

Which would, of course, be an even worse result as 2Cx is unbeatable.

 

I would have doubled 1S on the North cards NV, and I imagine partner would have done as well. But vul against not is not the time to get too creative in the partscore area. Partner has a non-minimum overcall and you want to play in 2H NV, but not V.

[mike777]

Hardy gives these 2 hands as examples:

(1c)=1d=(1s)=x

 

 

Q85,,,AT9763...763...4

K43...QT975...K6...754

[jdonn]

Those example seem ok, the first one is obviously safe since you can pull back to diamonds with real support. The second one seems minimum to me but I certainly accept it.

[jdonn]

True, snapdragon wasn't made, to the detriment of the defense/offense. Think how much easier the hand is with a snap dragon double. And after snapdragon, NS can rest peacefully in 1NT. I think you will not get a chance to use snap dragon very often if you turn it down on hands like this. Give me one less heart, I pass, even with xx of hearts I would tend to pass.

 

But if  you can not eliminate hands like this, then it makes guessing the defense so much harder. Here clearly, cash second heart and give partner a heart ruff is right. Easy to find with snap dragon, but of course you then play 2Cx doubled not 2D.

 

Still, how light to go with snapdragon is up to each partnership. I guess I can't think of an authority to quote on the value necessary. We all can agree that a snap dragon double occurs after the first three player bids different suits (as here) and a Double by fourth player shows 5 cards in unbid suit useful values, and at least 2 cards in partner's suit (and generally if partner bid a major 2 cards only or bad 3).

 

The key phrase here is "useeful" values and in the case ealier, "moderate" valuse. After an opening bid, an overcall, and a forcing FREE bid, "useful" and "moderate" are very resticted terms. After all,  how much can 4th seat really have here. a strong KQ-fifth and a fittign jack-small for partner clearly falls into my definition of useful values. PArtner can not expect much more. Seems not everyone agrees this is useful, but that is what makes bridge fun.

It's true, it's hard to find it clearly stated in any reliable reference what strength range is suggested, other than to look at examples. I am not persuaded by the apparant values shown around the table though. If the hands were these shapes and everyone is minimum for their bids then you have AQ of spades to west, remove about 3 points from east, and removing about 5 points from south, which would leave 9 more for north, a 16 count. I think he could have even more since in practice the actual bare minimum with which people open, overcall, and respond freely on shapely hands is more like 10, 6, 4 (east - Kxx Kxx AT9xxxx, south Jxx AQ98x x xxxx, west Axxxxx xxx xxxx -).

 

And the point about making the defense easier swings both ways. On hands where we would both double, the defense is tougher when snapdragon double has a lower minimum since partner has a wider strength range. In fact that was the basis on which I (somewhat luckily) made the right defensive play in this problem. It was easy to figure out partner's shape even without the double, only his highcards are in question, and if he had doubled we might play him for too many.