Mrs. Guggenheim's defense

[ralph23]

♣♦♥♠

 

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=saq7haj987dk32c65&e=st84hkqt6d87ckt32]266|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

North opens 1♥ and South bids 2♦.

 

North bids 2♥ and South bids 2NT. You inquire and are told that South shows 11-12 HCP, holding 2♥ and a good ♦ suit, and that his bid is not forcing.

 

North raises to 3NT ending the auction.

 

Partner leads the Queen of ♣ and you signal encouragement with the ten.

 

Then, Partner leads the 8 of ♣ and you win with the King.

 

On trick 3, you lead a low ♣ and declarer wins the Ace of ♣. Partner plays the 9 of ♣.

 

Declarer now pauses for a few moments, clearing thinking about his line of play. After a little bit, he leads a low ♥ toward dummy. Partner plays low and declarer plays the 7 of ♥ from the board.

 

Before you play, I am going to show you declarer's ♦ suit. It is:

 

♦ AQJT9

 

And, I will ask: How will Mrs. Guggenheim defend this as East? Oh you know Mrs. Guggenheim. She's the worst player at the club. She plays by nursery rhymes, not by using her head. She and her partner giggle with delight when they set a 3♠ contract by four tricks, not doubled and not vulnerable, when they can make 6♥ vulnerable their way. And she never falsecards.

 

Then, after thinking about Mrs. Guggenheim's defense, how are you going to defend it? Use all your information....

 

Adv & Exp pls hide your answers.

[ralph23]

Extra hint:

 

Who has the Jack of ♠ ?

 

What is declarer thinking ?

[Quantumcat]

Declarer has 5 diamond tricks and a club, so wants 3 tricks in spades and hearts. If she had the jack, she would just take the spade finesse not caring if it lost because then she'd have 2 spade tricks in the bag plus ace of hearts. If she didn't have the jack of spades, and the spade finesse lost, she would still only have the 1 trick she started with. Because declarer is not finessing spades we assume she does not have the jack of spades. She is trying to get some heart tricks and doesn't want to lose more than 1 trick. If her 7 loses to my ten her only hope is that partner has both king and queen which probably isn't so likely, so now she'll try the spade finesse, which we know will work. We want to encourage her to take another heart finesse. If I play the ten I could have both the king and queen left, queen I might have the king, but king I definitely do not have the ten or the queen. So I play this, declarer thinks partner has them and happily finesses for the ten again, oops big mistake :-)

 

P.S. Mrs Guggenheim (who is that anyway?) would take the ten, then declarer would have to try the spade finesse, and win.

 

P.P.S Declarer can't have the king of spades because that would give her 14 pts. Put she could have the jack for 12 (otherwise 11)

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

P.S. Mrs Guggenheim (who is that anyway?) would take the ten, then declarer would have to try the spade finesse, and win.

<snip>

A character from S.J. Simons Book ("Why you loose at Bride"

and "Cut for Partner" the sequel, she repesents the old lady

type.

In "Cut for Partner" Simon says, she got sharper, being able

to hit back, if her partner nitpick (?!) her to often, and she

executes her first squezze.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[ralph23]

We want to encourage her to take another heart finesse. If I play the ten I could have both the king and queen left, queen I might have the king, but king I definitely do not have the ten or the queen. So I play this, declarer thinks partner has them and happily finesses for the ten again, oops big mistake :-)

♣♦♥♠

 

Great analysis! One more question: When you win the King of ♥, what do you lead back ? And more importantly, why ?

[DWM]

Play the diamond back.

 

Playing a spade is silly as it gives an undeserved trick, likewise for a heart.

Playing a club back would put P on lead, when relying on a mistake I much prefer Ops to have the first chance

[vuroth]

Even without showing south's diamonds, we were a safe bet, from the explanation of the bidding, that south had at least 5 diamond winners. Add in the 3 aces, and south is only 1 trick away, at best. (A king or a 6th diamond, and there's no defense).

 

The bad news is that the spade finesse is on for south (either that, or south has the king of spades, and the contract is safe).

 

The only thing I can see is to play either the Q or K of hearts on the heart trick. This may give the illusion that the heart honours are split, prompting south to repeat the heart finesse, rather than the spade finesse.

 

So king of hearts, return a club to partner's jack.

 

Hopefully, we'll take 3 club tricks and 2 heart tricks.

[ralph23]

♣♦♥♠

 

vuroth, On what to lead back: We are after all trying to create the illusion for declarer, that it is safe (and that it is a good idea !!) to try the ♥'s again, and to leave the ♠'s alone.

 

What card can we lead back, after winning the K or Q of ♥, that will help to foster and reinforce that illusion ? What can we lead that will help us (East) to look like a "safe" (not a "dangerous") opponent .... even if we do hold KQ of ♥ ??

[vuroth]

What card can we lead back, after winning the K or Q of ♥, that will help to foster and reinforce that illusion ? What can we lead that will help us (East) to look like a "safe" (not a "dangerous") opponent .... even if we do hold KQ of ♥ ??

I'm actually a bit more concerned with making sure we get our setting trick than trying to embellish the story I've already told.

 

Hearts and spades are suicide leads. Clubs is indicated from the opening, and tells nothing. Sure, I could lead a diamond, too, and probably still get my 5 tricks, but I don't see a whole lot more info for declarer if I lead a club and partner exits a diamond (which, given the board, he's almost sure to do....)

 

EDIT - ok, the only thing I see is that parnter not leading a spade back may make it look more like he has the king. Actually, if partner felt we had both a spade and diamond honour, spades would be a MUCH better lead considering the bidding. Ok, I see it now. That's a lot deeper than I usually think at the table, though.

 

V

[ralph23]

♣♦♥♠

 

But what's the real reason for leading a ♦ here, instead of the ♣ ? What else are you trying to sell declarer on, other than your partner having the missing high honor in ♥ (just in case he doesn't wholly believe that story) ?

[vuroth]

All I can think to say is that we really want declarer to believe we have the king of spades.

 

As a bonus to not leading clubs, declarer may decide that West has 5 clubs and try to keep him off the lead. Not sure that applies in this case, though.

 

If I'd thought this long at my usual table, my opponents would have gotten up to make nachos by now. :lol:

[ralph23]

declarer may decide that West has 5 clubs ....

Yes, exactly. When you lead a ♦ back, declarer may believe that you have no more ♣ and therefore it's "safe" to lose the lead to you. He may not credit you with being tricky enough to avoid cashing your winning ♣ (there's no way you'll lose it if the plan goes right, is there?) when you have the chance.

 

Also, as someone pointed out, leading the ♦ also has the virtue of keeping partner off the lead. Which is just as well.

[TimG]

The club carding so far makes it look very much like they are 4-4. Might declarer get suspicious if you don't put partner on lead for a major through dummy?

 

I think best might be to put west on lead with a club so he can lead a spade (or heart) through, making declarer commit to one finesse or the other immediately. Whether or not west should lead the suit declarer has the winning finesse in is probably a matter of psychology.

[ralph23]

This problem's all about psychology, isn't it ?

 

We have so many technical posts, I think it's good that we're reminded sometimes that there's a huge amount of psychology involved, and B/I players need to think about "being cagey" both as declarer and as defender.

[TimG]

Play the diamond back.

 

Playing a spade is silly as it gives an undeserved trick, likewise for a heart.

Playing a club back would put P on lead, when relying on a mistake I much prefer Ops to have the first chance

What mistake can partner make?

[Quantumcat]

If you put partner on lead and he does not lead a spade, declarer will get suspicous that the finesse works (afterall we seem to have exhausted the tricks we can get out of clubs and hearts. Why would we not try to get another in spades? thinks declarer) Unless declarer is psychic he won't switch to the spade finesse when it is so obvious hearts are lovely for him so our club isn't running away anywhere. Diamond not cashing and club must be the way to go as so many others have said.

 

There's another important point I don't think anyone has mentioned: you have to think about and decide your plan of attack as soon as you see dummy and the lead and never waver, if you sit there and think for a few seconds and play your card very hesitantly when declarer does take the finesse he will know what you're up to.

[TimG]

If you put partner on lead and he does not lead a spade, declarer will get suspicous that the finesse works (afterall we seem to have exhausted the tricks we can get out of clubs and hearts. Why would we not try to get another in spades?

So, the right thing to do is put partner on lead to play a spade. When declarer sees the spade, he will think that the finesse must not be working and resort back to the heart finesse which looks like it is working.

 

There are times when it is important to put partner on lead to play a major (think about what happens on the run of the diamonds if the club is not cashed and a major played through). By playing a passive diamond, you're just telling declarer that one of the major suits lies favorably and you expect to get your trick. Nothing different, really, from what you tell declarer when you play a club and partner plays a major. Right?

[ralph23]

What mistake can partner make?

Oh no, what DMW means is, we're relying on declarer to make a mistake and try the ♥'s again. After all, he pondered before playing the ♥ the first time, as you recall.... suggesting he's come up with a plan. And we love his plan !

 

DMW's just suggesting, let declarer get the lead back and continue with his doomed plan. Don't let partner get the lead and run the risk of partner playing cutely, e.g. leading away from his King of ♠. Or away from his "imaginary" Queen of ♥. Just let declarer stew in his own juices. We've got the stage all set for this little deception. Just give the lead back to declarer.

 

It's all psychology at this point anyway so who knows what the "right" answer is, if there is one.

[ralph23]

There's another important point I don't think anyone has mentioned: you have to think about and decide your plan of attack as soon as you see dummy and the lead and never waver, if you sit there and think for a few seconds and play your card very hesitantly when declarer does take the finesse he will know what you're up to.

Great point. This comes up so much.

 

Often, it's just as bad to sit and fidget and then make the right play, as it is to make the wrong play. You will notice this a lot with B/I players holding up their Ace when they are second hand, with the KJ in dummy behind them. You must learn to play low smoothly.

[ralph23]

By playing a passive diamond, you're just telling declarer that one of the major suits lies favorably and you expect to get your trick.

Or, you're telling him that you don't have any more danged ♣ :), because if you did, you'd be leading it to put partner on lead to play a ♠ to your King !

 

That's the thing about the psychological questions: there are always several right answers!

[TimG]

What mistake can partner make?

Oh no, what DMW means is, we're relying on declarer to make a mistake and try the ♥'s again. After all, he pondered before playing the ♥ the first time, as you recall.... suggesting he's come up with a plan. And we love his plan !

 

DMW's just suggesting, let declarer get the lead back and continue with his doomed plan. Don't let partner get the lead and run the risk of partner playing cutely, e.g. leading away from his King of ♠. Or away from his "imaginary" Queen of ♥. Just let declarer stew in his own juices. We've got the stage all set for this little deception. Just give the lead back to declarer.

 

It's all psychology at this point anyway so who knows what the "right" answer is, if there is one.

If both major suits are wrong for declarer, the defense has to cross in clubs and play a major now or declarer might run the diamonds and read the position correctly (if RHO lets a club go, declarer is almost sure to make even if he takes a losing finesse, because RHO will be endplayed -- if RHO holds onto a club, he has to give up his guard in one of the majors). But, the point is that playing a club and getting a major through dummy eliminates this possibility.

 

If both major suit cards are right for declarer, it doesn't really matter what the defense does -- declarer will "guess" right.

 

You are suggesting that when one major suit card is right and one wrong, and declarer has started down the wrong path, the defense should be passive.

 

Does this mean that if declarer had started down the right path, the defense ought to cash the club and present declarer a losing option by leading the other major?

 

I think you should do the same thing whether or not declarer has started down the right path. Otherwise, you will be giving declarer information. In this case, I think declarer can read into the passive defense (return a diamond) that the defense is happy with the goings on and perhaps declarer should rethink.

 

Maybe there is some reverse psychology possibilities -- that is if declarer starts off with hearts and that is right, maybe the defense should be passive to lull declarer into thinking that the defense is happy with the way things are going. But, I think that's a bit too deep.

 

I think the defense should always cash the club and play a major through to avoid giving anything away.

 

Now, maybe the real question is which major should LHO return: declarer's winning option or declarer's losing option? I tend to think that the return should be in the suit declarer did not play, spades in this case. Again, rather than get into the psychological guessing game, just play the other suit and avoid the possibility that declarer can read something into the choice.

[kenrexford]

Devil's advocate time!

 

Mrs. Guggenheim is my client, and my client is always right. She pays me for that. All I must do is to prove why. Let's see if winning the heart 10 might be right...

 

This AJ9 combination is one that has been analyzed to the nth degree. The common hook is the 9, catering to Q10x or K10x to the left. The common counter to that play is for LHO to pretend to split his honors with K10x or Q10x, to create the illusion of KQx, such that Declarer, on the second round of the suit, leads up to J9 and has what appears to be a 50-50 guess. If LHO knows that Declarer will stick in the 9 if he plays low, the honor pop is critical, as the only chance.

 

Of course, Declarer also knows this ruse and should not be fooled by the pop of the King or Queen. He sticks to his guns. However, this causes Declarer to wonder, when LHO plays low, as to why LHO did, in fact, play low. Very strange.

 

You get into bluff-and-double-bluff conspiracy theory after a while.

 

So, let's try this bluff-and-double-bluff scenario out further. If RHO wins the heart, however they win the heart, and fire back a club (the Guggenheim defense), Declarer has a rectified count, right? So, he has a few major-suit squeeze options.

 

He might be able to run a spade-heart squeeze against his LHO. He wins te heart return, runs the diamonds. LHO is caught in a major squeeze. If LHO has all but one spade, the King, Declarer might drop the stiff King.

 

Or, that same squeeze might also work against RHO.

 

What about LHO's first play on hearts, then? Had LHO held K10x or Q10x, he might have hopped. So, the winning of the honor by RHO sounds like it is more likely from KQ, or from KQ10 as a falsecard.

 

Further, had LHO held honor doubleton, even without the 10, he might pop it, to give Declarer a false sense of security with regard to hearts, to dissuade the spade hook. LHO would not make that play if he lacked the spade King.

 

So, it may well appear that RHO has the heart KQ and the spade King, and hence vulnerability to a major-suit squeeze, if Mrs. Guggenheim wins the 10.

 

Of course, that requires Declarer to have a third heart, but she did pay me for this excuse.

[TimG]

I don't think there is a squeeze against east when the clubs have been played and west plays a major through (as the pro would surely do), since dummy must discard before east.

[kenrexford]

I don't think there is a squeeze against east when the clubs have been played and west plays a major through (as the pro would surely do), since dummy must discard before east.

You are right, so long as Declarer really does have only two hearts. If he has a third heart, and the spade Jack for that matter, then he has a two-way Vienna Coup major squeeze against East.

[ralph23]

If he has a third heart, and the spade Jack for that matter, then he has a two-way Vienna Coup major squeeze against East.

♣♦♥♠

 

If declarer had the Jack of ♠, he would be saved all this cogitation because he would have tried the ♠ finesse as soon as he got the lead. He has the AQ in dummy and has 8 tops from the get-go. :D

 

Also by hypothesis (per the initial write up) declarer has precisely 2 ♥. Yea, he could have misbid, but not in this forum :D. Even this declarer would raise ♥ with three pieces when opener bids and rebids them.

 

Poor Mrs. Guggenheim .... she sure has to put up with a lot... I trust she pays well ?? :rolleyes: