Gerben42 Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 Yesterday we had a board where agreements on signals were important: Match Points. After opponents bid 1♠ 2♠ 4♠, you have: [hv=s=sxxxhxxxxxdakt5ca]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] and lead ♦A (Ace from AK). Dummy has ♦764. To get the top result you have to determine if you can reach your partner in ♦ to give you a ♣ ruff. After the ♦A you cash ♣A and... Now what? Did partner help you decide? How do you play from these three positions. Position A: [hv=n=s764&w=sakt5&e=s92&s=sqj83]399|300|[/hv] Position B: [hv=n=s764&w=sakt5&e=s92&s=sqj83]399|300|[/hv] Position C: [hv=n=s764&w=sakt5&e=s92&s=sqj83]399|300|[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 Playing standard carding I play the 9 in A and B, and the 2 in C. As far as I know, there is no solution to this. Saying you should play the 8 in position B doesn't help because position A could just as well be 82. Nor does upside down carding help since then I play the 2 in both A and B. If opening leader anticipates the problem he might start with the ace of clubs and then switch to the king, not ace, of diamonds. In this case I will play the 2 in position A and the 9 in position B. Opening leader has pretty much put his eggs in one basket and so in position A he still attempts to give a ruff (having played his cards so that partner will signal only an honor, not a doubleton, he must just hope). Of course I would also play the 9 holding J982 so this may not be a great solution, at least at mps. At imps it may not matter since you presumably won't be setting 4S. I guess it's possible that there could be an agreement that when an ace is led in one suit and then the king in another, third hand encourages only with the Q and not the Jack on the reasonable assumption that something strange is (well, perhaps) going on. I am highly open to hearing better ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 We use attitude in these situations - as most experts in Norway do. Thus, using UDCA, partner plays the ♦2 in A and B, the 9 in situation C.But there's still a problem. You need partner to be able to tell you how to reach him. In A you need to cash the king and give partner a ruff, while in B you need to underlead the king to put him on lead with the queen. Since in most circumstances, partner will know that the ♣A is a singleton lead, his signal in ♣'s should distinguish between doubleton and the Q in ♦. My solution would be that a low ♣ tells you that he's got the queen, while a high denotes a doubleton. A 4th variation is also possible - partner having Q92 and declarer J83 or equivalent. Of cource, then it doesn't matter how you play the suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 Any system that has you playing the same card in A and B (2 if u/d, 9 if std) leaves you with this problem. I agree that A of diamonds, then Ace of clubs asking for a signal that clarifies the diamond holding, then the appropriate diamond is a better solution than what I proposed. I have no agreement with any of my partners as to what club would mean what, but I guess I should have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 you just have to figure it out, partner would encourage with either of the first 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 What Justin said. There are other similar situations. You decide to lead ace of clubs vs notrump from AKxx, dummy has Txx and partner encourages. Does he have Qxx and you must underlead or Jxxx and you must cash K? Sometimes you just have to do your best to figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 What Justin said. There are other similar situations. You decide to lead ace of clubs vs notrump from AKxx, dummy has Txx and partner encourages. Does he have Qxx and you must underlead or Jxxx and you must cash K? Sometimes you just have to do your best to figure it out. That one is so impossible and so easily fixed by changing methods I would recommend a method change :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 BTW it may help to lead the Ace of clubs at trick one and not a D? Against suit contracts you are playing attitude so partner plays 9 of d on the ace of d and the Q of clubs on the Ace of clubs in A. B and C I need to know the bidding and dummy and the rest of my hand to know what to play to trick one but still think you should lead the Ace of clubs first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 Against No trumps this is what I play and thought it was pretty standard? ACE LEADS Against no trump, you'll lead an unsupported Ace when it is in partner's suit, or perhaps you are defending 7NT, or even 6NT on a very unusual auction. But normally, an ace lead means you have a very very good suit, and your only concern is whether or not you can run it by yourself (or should shift at trick two). Therefore, it demands that partner play an honor if he holds one, otherwise he gives count, playing his highest card with an even number, and his lowest card with an odd number.... The most common holdings are: AKJT(xx) AKQT(xx) Example, you lead A from AKJTx...dummy has XXX. If pard plays the queen, you run the suit. If pard plays a high spot implying a doubeton, you know to shift, and hope partner later can lead through declarer's queen. Finally, if pard plays a low spot, you can play pard for three of them, and can bang down the King dropping the Queen (of course if pard had a singleton, you won't run the suit, but you can't anyway if you shift). Example, you lead A from AKJTx...dummy has XX. If pard plays the queen, you run the suit. If pard plays a low spot implying a tripleton, you know to shift, and hope partner later can lead through declarer's queen. Finally, if pard plays a high spot, you can play pard for four of them, and can bang down the King dropping the Queen (of course if pard had a doubleton, you won't run the suit, but you can't anyway if you shift). Similar logic applies when the leader or dummy have different lengths in the suit. KING LEADS If you, as the leader, don't have 4 honors yourself, you probably should avoid leading the ace, as you don't want to set up a trick out of nowhere for declarer (or dummy) when they hold 4 cards in the suit. In fact, if you know that declarer does in fact have 4 cards in the suit, you should probably go ahead and underlead any holding that has less than 4 honors--particularly if you are lacking in side entries. But normally with 3 honors, you just make the standard lead of one of the touching honors, such as the King from: AKJx(x)AKTx(x)KQJx(x)KQTx(x) Across, from a King lead, your third hand does whatever is right for the given situation---meaning if from the lead, the bidding, what appears in dummy, and what his play will reveal to leader, if it is possible (to the leader) for third hand to have a good attitude, he plays attitude. and the rest of the time he needs to give count....or in the rare case, where the suit led can have no future (like a bunch of stoppers appear in dummy), he should play suit preference. So most of the time, across from a King lead, you'll give attitude. Don't throw an honor if you have one, just play your second highest card in that case to encourage. With doubleton honor, you'll have to decide if unblocking will help of hinder the defense....Do NOT unblock, if you are setting up an extra stopper for declarer--which will often be the case if dummy or declarer holds 4 cards in the suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 BTW it may help to lead the Ace of clubs at trick one and not a D? Against suit contracts you are playing attitude so partner plays 9 of d on the ace of d and the Q of clubs on the Ace of clubs in A. B and C I need to know the bidding and dummy and the rest of my hand to know what to play to trick one but still think you should lead the Ace of clubs first. I was thinking the same thing. Lead the AC and continue the KD. Pard should signal possession of the Queen. If there is no other possible entry, then West has to try for ruff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenberg Posted March 26, 2007 Report Share Posted March 26, 2007 BTW it may help to lead the Ace of clubs at trick one and not a D? Against suit contracts you are playing attitude so partner plays 9 of d on the ace of d and the Q of clubs on the Ace of clubs in A. B and C I need to know the bidding and dummy and the rest of my hand to know what to play to trick one but still think you should lead the Ace of clubs first. I was thinking the same thing. Lead the AC and continue the KD. Pard should signal possession of the Queen. If there is no other possible entry, then West has to try for ruff. I was also thinking the same thing. Oh. I said the same thing. But I still think there is a rub. After ace of clubs and king of diamonds, will partner know he should not encourage holding the J982? With that holding we won't be beating 4S but at matchpoints we don't want partner underleading to our non-existent queen. Maybe I, if third hand, could think out on the fly to play small from J982 but I am guessing I would play the 9 expecting partner is leading from KQx. Not good. What a partner should be able to work out and what he actually will work out are two different things. Especially if it's me. I think it is an unsolvable problem absent some sort of agreement that, after the ace of diamonds, the ace of clubs then asks for clarification of the encouraging diamond, an agreement that I have never even considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulven Posted March 27, 2007 Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 http://viewsfromthebridgetable.blogspot.co...ence-logic.html Read my post from March 2nd on a very similar situation (right, Harald!). /Ulf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted March 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 Hi Ulf, how did you and your partner figure out that a HIGH ♣ suggested the Q and not a low one. I don't see the logic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulven Posted March 27, 2007 Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 Gerben,I don't have a good answer to that one. I guess it just seemed more natural, to the both of us, that a high card should suggest a high card entry. That's logic in some form, isn't it ;-) I guess it bodes well for the partnership that we reasoned the same way. I have another defensive post coming up tomorrow, btw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 I discussed this position with my regular partner today. We agreed that a high ♣ implies a high card (queen) in ♦'s and a low ♣ implies a doubleton. The logic is like Ulf said above: High ♣ = high card entry, low ♣ = low cards (ruff). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.