Defending Against A Slam

[gurgistan]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=skq42ht97432d94c8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

The auction is contested. It goes:

 

I am dealer (East) and I pass. South bids 1♦. Partner bids 1♥. North bids 2♣. I bid 4♥. South bids 5♦. Partner bids 5♥. North passes. I pass. South bids 6♣. Partner Doubles. North bids 6♦. I pass. South passes. Partner Doubles. All pass.

 

Partner leads the A♠. North plays 7♠.

 

I intend to throw K♠. I want partner to lead another spade. I want to kill this slam on trick 2.

 

Time is everything in a slam.

 

Is my intention to throw the K♠ correct or incorrect?[/hv]

[manudude03]

Knowing what dummy is might be nice, if theres JT in dummy, i'd just encourage normally, otherwise K seems fair enough.

[gurgistan]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=st87h65d53caqj432]133|100|Scoring: IMP

This is Dummy (North).[/hv]

[bid_em_up]

The King is correct.

 

Let me guess, partner tried to cash his heart A next and it got ruffed and the slam rolled home as declarer pitched his remaining spades on the clubs.

[jjbrr]

Ya the K is obv on this hand.

 

If the hand were different (JTx of ♠ in dummy), obv you should just encourage.

 

If you had a void in ♣, for example, you should play the ♠Q, which can never be encouraging in ♠, since partner should lead the K from AK against a slam.

[gurgistan]

Let me guess, partner tried to cash his heart A next and it got ruffed and the slam rolled home as declarer pitched his remaining spades on the clubs.

A consensus seems to have emerged on the play so I will post the result:

 

Partner won the first trick and lead a small spade. I won the second trick.

 

Game over, as they say.

 

However. looking at the hand afterwards it is clear that I gave up a trick in spades. So, instead of setting them by two we only set by one.

 

And yes, there were no winners in hearts as South was void in hearts.

 

For me the question is, did I give up a trick needlessly or is it just hindsight making me think so?

[jjbrr]

You posted the scoring as imps. The difference between taking 2 tricks and 3 tricks against a slam is so small that it is almost negligible compared to the difference between taking 2 tricks and 1 trick.

 

If the other table bids and makes the slam, 2 tricks and 3 tricks are no different. If the other table stops in game and makes it, the difference is one imp at most.

 

If you let the slam make, you're losing ~15 imps.

 

Would you rather have accuracy in taking the most tricks but not gaining any imps or in losing some accuracy but winning imps or at least not losing 15ish imps?

[gurgistan]

You posted the scoring as imps. The difference between taking 2 tricks and 3 tricks against a slam is so small that it is almost negligible compared to the difference between taking 2 tricks and 1 trick.

 

If the other table bids and makes the slam, 2 tricks and 3 tricks are no different. If the other table stops in game and makes it, the difference is one imp at most.

 

If you let the slam make, you're losing ~15 imps.

 

Would you rather have accuracy in taking the most tricks but not gaining any imps or in losing some accuracy but winning imps or at least not losing 15ish imps?

Thanks for so clearly pointing out the cost/reward ratio of my play.

 

My understanding of the scoring nuances of duplicate is poor.

[jjbrr]

Even at MPs I think a plus score on a hand like this will just in general be really, really good that you can't risk the disaster of letting the slam make.

 

With such a distributional freak as this hand, it's impossible to predict how often the other tables will play in this contract, undoubled. A score of your side being +100 or +200 at lots of tables exactly is so small that the MP difference between the two rates to be very small. Of course MP scoring rewards achieving extra tricks, but on hands like this it is often the bidding that will win or lose MPs rather than the cardplay, assuming you don't blow two tricks on defense!

[cherdanno]

Playing upside-down carding I would play the ♠2 here, I see no chance that partner can go wrong.

[pooltuna]

Playing upside-down carding I would play the ♠2 here, I see no chance that partner can go wrong.

and you see a problem with the ♠K? Does that mean he is switching to a ♥? :)

[gurgistan]

Playing upside-down carding I would play the ♠2 here, I see no chance that partner can go wrong.

and you see a problem with the ♠K? Does that mean he is switching to a ♥? :)

IF we had been playing UDCA then holding the hand I do I preserve the very small chance of winning 3 tricks in spades whilst guaranteeing the return of a spade by playing the 2♠.

 

Also, whilst playing UDCA, if I discard the K♠ because I don't hold the 2♠ then Partner should read me for a spade void and so also return a spade.

[Flameous]

Playing UDCA, I'd play 2 here but I'd play the K to show count from KQxxx, cause it might be relevant information. Although now that I think of it, it might also be good to try to give count in Hs there... Hmm... many possibilities.