Defence = counting + clear thinking

[Trumpace]

In a rubber bridge game, you are East and hold QTxxx, KT9xxx, Jx, x

 

No one is vul.

 

South is dealer and opens 1NT. Bidding proceeds:

 

1NT - P - 2C - P

2D - P - 3NT - All Pass

 

(

2C - Stayman, asking for 4 card major

2D - No 4 card major.

)

 

Partner leads the ♣T and you see

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=skh8xxxdkt9xxcajx&e=sqtxxxhkt9xxdjxcx]266|200|Scoring: Rubber

Lead ♣10.[/hv]

 

Declarer wins the ♣A in dummy, leads a ♦ to A (pard plays low showing an odd number) and then ♦ to 9. You win the ♦ J.

 

Now what?

 

(As usual Adv/Exp please don't post too early).

[vuroth]

Partner has:

- at most 8 points

- at most 2 hearts

- at least 4 spades

- exactly 3 diamonds

- likely, the king of clubs (if declarer has KQxx in his hand, then A on the opening lead is correct, but then I think 3NT is likely cold...)

 

Declarer has 3 diamonds, and has his entry so that he can run them.

 

Declarer's diamond play is really kind of inconsistent with him having the Queen. With AQx opposite KT9xx, I would expect A, Q, then the finesse for the J is still open if diamonds don't split. Let's guess that partner started with Qxx in diamonds, then.

 

That would mean that partner does not have an ace (KC,+QD+A? = 9 points, leaving declarer with 14)

 

Ergo, the best I can hope for from partner in hearts is the QJ doubleton. If I return the T all declarer has to do is hold up once with his Ax and, well, I'll need to win a space trick someday to ever run my hearts.

 

I think my best bet is to return a (4th best?) spade now. Hopefully, declarer will need to establish tricks in both hearts and clubs, giving us time to force out the AK of spades.

 

V

[Trumpace]

So you are playing declarer for something like

 

AJx

Axx

Axx

Qxxx

 

 

A spade return won't help in that case I think. Also, why didn't declarer run the club to his Q?

[vuroth]

That holding isn't possible. The 4 missing hearts are AQJx.

 

Declarer needs clubs and diamonds to make 3NT, so no real clear idea why he would chose clubs before diamonds, or vice versa.

 

If declarer is:

Axx

AJ

Axx

Qxxxx

 

Maybe partner will get in twice in clubs. That will be enough to open up the spades.

 

There's a lot to be read into what's going on here, but nothing is screaming to me "one clear path".

 

V

[rbforster]

With Kxx(x) or Qxx(x) in clubs, I think declarer would play low or finesse the J at trick 1. If partner had all the honors, the normal lead for KQT9(x) is the Q. I think declarer likely has KQxx(x) in clubs. Rising A opposite an insecure club stop seems really weird unless he's got his top tricks, which the diamond play clearly indicates is not the case.

 

Edit: my guess:

Playing parter for the Ax of hearts, leading a low heart. I need less from partner in hearts than spades to set up enough setting tricks.

 

[vuroth]

Ok, thinking about it some more, if partner has the K♣, then the ace on the first round does seem wrong. Might as well take the "finesse", by ducking to the queen. Ditto for partner having the queen.

 

So the good news is partner can have an major suit ace. Of course, either ace could help a great deal.

 

If partner has the ace of spades but not the jack, partner has to duck the first round of spades, then go ace small when he gets back in in clubs. When, or if.

 

If partner has the ace of hearts single, there's nothing we can do but cry. If partner has Ax of hearts, a heart return sets the contract outright.

 

Since I need ace plus something either way, this seems awfully close. Partner has 4 or 5 spades, so 3 or 4 slots of the jack under the ace. Partner has 1 or 2 hearts, but if 2 hearts I don't care what is lower heart is.

 

I think the odds slightly favour spades, but I'm not sure.

[NickRW]

OK, this is how I see it.

 

 

The opening lead might have been from QT9x(x), but in that case declarer might have tried the J from dummy. Seems unlikely.

 

The lead could have been from KT9x(x). But again declarer might have tried the J or let the lead run to his Q. In any case, if you read Reese on opening leads, he recommended low from KT9x or, better, find a less dangerous lead.

 

If pard had KQTx then the lead would have been K or Q depending on your lead style.

 

Therefore declarer has ♣KQ and, unless pard has at least 6 clubs, 4 or 5 club tricks to run. He also now has 4 diamond tricks to run. Further, declarer presumably has to have one of the major suit aces. So declarer is home and dry if we let him have the lead again.

 

Pard has 6 to 8 hcp and at least 4 spades and at most 2 hearts. It seems that he must have started with ♦Qxx and, we are assuming, no honours in clubs. So it seems that partner likely has one of the major suit aces - indeed if he has ♦Q, ♥QJ and ♠J we're certainly sunk.

 

We could play partner for ♥Ax and declarer for ♥QJ. But if this was the case declarer had 2 spades tricks, 2 top diamonds and, quite possibly, 5 clubs. If that is the case, given that it is rubber bridge and he is wide open in hearts, he wouldn't be mucking about with diamonds.

 

It is still possible that pard had something like ♣T9xxx - in which case declarer only had 4 clubs and therefore only eight tricks off the top and would have needed to get one more from spades or diamonds - but wouldn't he have tried the simple spade finesse in that case, rather than get the extra trick from diamonds where it was certain that he had to give up the lead.

 

So, on balance it seems better to play pard for AJxx J Qxx T9xxx and declarer for something like xxx AQx Axx KQxx. Therefore lead a low spade.

 

 

Nick

 

P.S. Later edit

In any event, if declarer had only 4 clubs and two hearts he must have had 4 diamonds (which it seem he didn't) or 4 spades (which he denied) - so you gotta go for the spade

 

[ASkolnick]

I disagree.

The most likely holding of partner is

 

4-1-3-5.

 

 

He chose to lead clubs, instead of spades. If equal length, spades makes more sense.

the duck in diamonds, indicates partner has 3.

 

So I am going to return a spade.

[NickRW]

Um. Isn't that what I said.

 

Nick