Did declarer go wrong? If so, where?

[jschafer]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk976hak62d8ckj94&w=s53hj87dqj32cqt85&n=sat82h5dakt964c62&e=sqj4hqt943d75ca73&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1n(14-16)p2cp2hp3dp3sp4sppp&p=c5c6cac4c7ckc8c2d8d2dad7dtd5s6d3sks3s2sqs9s5s8sjc3c9ctsa]399|300[/hv]

The bidding is certainly not a thing of beauty but ignoring that (try to :) ), did declarer play it wrong? Opps are strong players, std attitude and count, 2/4 leads.

[l milne]

Yes.

 

One unsophisticated line would be to cash the top two spades and all the red top tricks, for 7 top tricks. Now declarer simply needs to score a small ruff in each hand, and the last two trumps will be good for the 10th trick.

 

So, 2. K♣; 3. K♠; 4. A♠; 5. A♦; 6. K♦; 7. A♥; 8. K♥; 9. small heart ruffed; 10. small diamond ruffed; 11. small heart.

[Fluffy]

running ♠9 was the mistake, losing to a very simple layout, winning the king and ruffing a diamond in hand makes dummy high as long as trumps are 3-2

[A2003]

[hv=pc=n&s=sk976hak62d8ckj94&w=s53hj87dqj32cqt85&n=sat82h5dakt964c62&e=sqj4hqt943d75ca73&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1n(14-16)p2cp2hp3dp3sp4sppp&p=c5c6cac4c7ckc8c2d8d2dad7dtd5s6d3sks3s2sqs9s5s8sjc3c9ctsa]399|300[/hv]

The bidding is certainly not a thing of beauty but ignoring that (try to :) ), did declarer play it wrong? Opps are strong players, std attitude and count, 2/4 leads.

You can click on GIB to see where you went wrong.

At trick 6, running 9♠ shows wrong play.

 

when you click on GIB,

Red square with number means if that card is led, that many tricks will go down based on the contract level.

Green square with number means if that card is led, that many tricks available based on the contract level.

Green square with equal sign (=)means, if that card is led, that NO over tricks available.

Gib numbers are based on declarer point of view always.

[rhm]

Letting the ♠9 run was not so much an error because it lost against the actual layout.

The error was that letting the ♠9 run, hardly ever gains. (Not overtaking the ♠9 with the ♠T was even worse)

 

The ♠Q must be either from ♠QJ or ♠QJx or the ♠Q is singleton.

We have already seen that it looses whenever the ♠Q is accompanied by the ♠J. So let's assume the ♠Q was singleton and you go up with the ♠ ace on the second round.

 

Now you ruff another ♦ with your last ♠ in hand. If West over-ruffs , dummy has trump control and ♦ are established --> 11 tricks.

 

So West will follow or discard. You now ruff a ♣ in dummy and assuming West is out of diamonds, cash ♥AK and ruff another ♥ en passant in dummy. You make 6 trump tricks, the ♣K, 2 high ♥s and one high ♦ --> 10 tricks.

This line looses only if West can ruff one of the top ♥. For this West must have 4♠s and 5♣s, which is far less likely than that the ♠Q is accompanied by the ♠J in the East hand.

 

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

deleted

[gnasher]

deleted

The trick is to read RHM's answer before typing out your own answer.

[dburn]

A thing that always puzzles me: why do people instinctively play ace of diamonds and ruff a low diamond in positions like this? Why not play ace and king of diamonds (if the suit was 5-1, you weren't going to set it up anyway)? Running that nine of spades was a blunder, it is true - but ruffing that second diamond was a more serious blunder.

[rhm]

A thing that always puzzles me: why do people instinctively play ace of diamonds and ruff a low diamond in positions like this? Why not play ace and king of diamonds (if the suit was 5-1, you weren't going to set it up anyway)? Running that nine of spades was a blunder, it is true - but ruffing that second diamond was a more serious blunder.

 

I agree with your assessment that it would have been better to cash both top ♦ before ruffing a ♦, in particular since West choose a ♣ lead. But I disagree that this was a more serious blunder.

Among others this blunder was anything but fatal and West could have had a singleton ♦, in which case there are a lot of layouts , where you may now have trouble coming to ten tricks single dummy even when trumps break.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Finch]

A thing that always puzzles me: why do people instinctively play ace of diamonds and ruff a low diamond in positions like this? Why not play ace and king of diamonds (if the suit was 5-1, you weren't going to set it up anyway)? Running that nine of spades was a blunder, it is true - but ruffing that second diamond was a more serious blunder.

 

We aren't told the form of scoring, but at matchpoints I quite like not cashing the second diamond. If trumps are 3-2 and diamonds 4-2 you are better off ruffing the second diamond, A and K of spades, in case LHO is, say, 2425.

At imps the AK of diamonds feels better, I agree.

 

Having started with DA, D ruff, Ace of spades, it does still feel right not to run a spade next, because you can see you are going down if the queen is from QJ or QJx, while you can still be making as described if the queen is singelton.