Jump to content

how to continue here


Recommended Posts

my only real concern is declarer having Kx AKQJxxx A xxx he will make this contract becase I will switch to diamonds.

 

To fromage: if you are switching to diamonds regardless of coun maybe you should not play J

I guess knowing we use 3/5 leads wouldn't help us if declarer is that lame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my only real concern is declarer having Kx AKQJxxx A xxx he will make this contract becase I will switch to diamonds.

 

How likely do we think it is that partner led from unsupported K rather than KQJ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How likely do we think it is that partner led from unsupported K rather than KQJ?

 

A key point I think.

 

I already erased a couple of things that I said so I was staying quiet until I thought more, but last night it occurred to me that this must be the first question: Why did partner lead a club at all? Partner is leading from a shaggy holding, hoping that some of my meager values are in the suit he chooses. I did bid 2 in response to his double. This doesn't promise much, but when looking to find values in my hand, it seems reasonable to turn to diamonds. The usual reason for partner not starting diamonds would be that he has the ace and fears, especially after the diamond cue by declarer, that the King is on his right. Maybe this is so. At any rate, I now think I am leading a diamond.

 

 

And I get this hand is a strong reason for playing 3/5 against suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Declarer also plays :)

 

A good point. But if declarer has the 3 then partner has led from four, declarer has two cards in the suit, and he can/will play a spot higher than the 3. If declarer does not have the 3, he won't play the 3. So one way or the other, declarer will, presumably, follow with the non-3. Still, it would be good to know what in fact happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely we cash the other club. If that is the wrong move, and it is just barely possible that it is, the game is too tough for me. But we need three tricks not two, so some thought is still required. Say we cash the club ace and then shift to a diamond. Declarer goes up with is ace. If he has eight running trump and a diamond honor, or maybe AKJ of diamonds and and seven running trump, the stage is now set for a diamond spade squeeze against partner. We could refuse to rectify the count by not cashing the second club but I would hate to have to explain this brilliant play later if it turns out badly.

 

Otoh, if partner has the ace of diamonds I worry about just how I will explain not leading a diamond at trick 3 after I cash a second club at trick 2. [Aqua's correction below applies to a now deleted and really stupid remark]

 

I think I play the ace of clubs and watch partner's spot. If he has the KQxx of spades and lacks the ace of diamonds, I need to play a spade at trick 3. I expect him to inform me of this at trick 2.

 

Btw, this worry about explaining myself is a way of speaking. I don't play with people who expect me to justify my every choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Otoh, if partner has the ace of diamonds I worry about just how I will explain not leading a diamond after I cash a club. Leading the club 7 is out of the question. Partner would win the King and return a third club expecting me to ruff.

Was thinking about leading that club 7 at trick two and letting partner figure out what she is holding in spades or diamonds. Seems to knock off the squeeze value of the club queen, and I don't believe pard will imagine declarer ducking twice with Ace third of clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was thinking about leading that club 7 at trick two and letting partner figure out what she is holding in spades or diamonds. Seems to knock off the squeeze value of the club queen, and I don't believe pard will imagine declarer ducking twice with Ace third of clubs.

 

Right. I deleted that from my comment, even before I saw what you said. I simply forgot I still would have the ace. Partner knows where the ace is, as you say.Really I think if partner is thinking, he should notice the discard problem and realize taking the spade ace off the board is a good idea.

 

In fact taking the spade ace off the board might be right even if declarer holds Qx. Clearly he has two spade tricks available then, but if by any chance that does not bring him up to 11 tricks, an early spade play might be just right. Say declarer has seven running hearts and AQx of diamonds. After Jack then Ace of clubs and a diamond, he plays the spade Q, this must be covered, he ruffs a club back to his hand and runs trump. Again partner must guard spades and can't.

 

It's really tough to understand what is going on. Has declarer really bid this way holding only the AK of hearts as key cards? With two small clubs? It makes little sense.

 

Maybe Aqua is right, lead a club back to partner's King. Partner knows whether he is holding the KQ of spades or the ace of diamonds, let him make the right play.It shouldn't be that hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before this hand slides into forum history, can you tell us what W actually had? His partner bid at the 1 level and was forced to bid over the 3 cue. Apparently W thought slam worth exploring. On what? With two small clubs and no club cue, he could safely bid slam only if, in response to 4NT, partner showed all the remaining aces. Certainly E did nothing to suggest that he might have three aces, so I think that W must have AKQxxxx or so in hearts and the ace of diamonds. There is also an issue of whether trumps were ever agreed. W bid 3 on the second round, E having bid spades, and 4NT on the next round, over 3.. Just when did hearts become trump? OK, W has the King of hearts so as long as E doesn't think spades are trump we are ok.

 

Now for tricks. Where was W thinking of finding 12?. Well, he stopped in 5. If W has ten tricks in his own hand then the spade ace on the board makes eleven and the hand is over after we take the clubs. I can't imagine W bidding this way with only eight tricks in his own hand. So W has a nine trick hand, most of them in hearts of course. This all seems like bizarre bidding for a guy with xx in clubs and K or Kx in diamonds, but maybe that's what he has. I think he has the diamond ace. AQ maybe. If so, Club, Club, Diamond won't work, Club, Club, Spade might, and even Club, Diamond might work.

 

Anyway, I am curious. West held what? I have further speculative thoughts but it would be sort of pointless to list them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that if you cash the A there is a decent chance partner will be exposed to a squeeze. I haven't got a Scooby Doo how partner came up with the club lead after we forgot to double 5, but well done them.

 

I'm playing a diamond. Declarer could have Qx AKQJxxx AQ xx giving pard KTxx xx KJx KTxx. He's allowed to make terrible doubles if his leads are that good.

 

Anyway, there are other plausible layouts where partner does have his double where I beat the contract as long as I don't cash the club ace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this hypothetical W hand. Although I still think the bidding is aggressive, it appears that if we trade the Club Q for the Club A, we get a response of two keys from E and a bid of 6 from W, and I think it makes. For example, win the club lead, draw three trump, duck a club, win the Diamond, play the Queen of Spades forcing a cover, ruff a Club back to hand, run the squeeze.

 

I think it comes in with any lead, with the hand Phil shows and with E holding the Ace instead of the Queen of Clubs.

 

 

Bidding 4NT, hoping partner has two aces and then planning on bidding the slam, trusting that partner will produce the Jack of Spades so that I can run the squeeze is a bit deep for me, but it would work. Well, I think so.

 

This is actually a great hand. Fairly often, and this hand would be an example if the cards lie as Phil shows and if a second Club is cashed, a squeeze almost runs itself. Club Jack, Club Ace, small Diamond. Hop up, draw trump, run the Queen of Spades forcing the cover, ruff a Club back to hand, what else would anyone do other than run the trump and hope? Refusing to cash the second Club is another sort of play altogether.

 

Question: Did West deliberately show that he had two Clubs to induce South to cash a second one?

 

Is it time to bury this hand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, sorry I have been very busy.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st4ht73dt8742caj7&e=saj852h9d965cq652&w=skq6hakqj854d3c93&n=s972h62dakqjckt84&d=e&v=0&b=8&a=pp1hd1s2d3dp3sp4np5cp5hppp]300|300[/hv]

 

After the winning the first trick with the J, south switched to , north won and tried to cash a second .

 

South: why didn't you return a club, you know I have the ace!!!

North: why did you switch to before cashing the ace!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, if you play 3/5 leads also in the middle of the hand then north would have known that south held 5 diamonds. That way north could get it right also when south had 10xxx AJxx in the minors.

 

Wait a minute, did north really play south to have bid 2D voluntarily on 10xxx of diamonds while holding AJxx of clubs? That makes no sense!

 

Bizarre lead by the way, I hope that you were south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this makes it clear why North was not hoping to find diamond values in the South hand. It sort of makes our previous thoughts that clearly North cannot hold KQ of diamonds because then he would have led one in preference to a club seem sort of quaint.

 

Suppose North leads a diamond at trick 1. South has shown diamonds and there are three in dummy, declarer has cued diamonds. Perhaps his card should confirm count, not attitude?

 

It's not our job to instruct opponents, but it would be interesting to know what West was planning to do if his partner had shown two aces in response to 4NT. Bid 6 and hope the ace is in clubs rather than in diamonds?

 

At any rate, surely at trick 3 Han is right. If another minor suit trick is available it is in clubs, not diamonds.

 

This is a bit of a shaggy dog story, or shaggy dog hand, because they should never have been at the five level and never should have made it when they were. Surely after a cue of 3 and then 4 over 3 partner can be trusted to move if he has the sort of extras needed for a slam. E has shown enough to respond at the 1 level, W says fine, hearts are trump, I have at least second round control of diamonds, and we can take ten tricks.. After that, it's East's choice and clearly he would pass here.

 

 

But then there would be no story.

 

Thanks for posting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...