Hanoi5 Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 [hv=pc=n&w=sj82ht95dk94caq84&n=sakq7hkdat852ck62&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1d3hppdp3sp4sppp&p=hthkhah2hqh3h5s7sah4s3s2d2d7dqdk]266|200[/hv] What do you play at this point? It's MP's, do you plan to defeat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 [hv=pc=n&w=sj82ht95dk94caq84&n=sakq7hkdat852ck62&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1d3hppdp3sp4sppp&p=hthkhah2hqh3h5s7sah4s3s2d2d7dqdk]400|300[/hv] What do you play at this point? It's MP's, do you plan to defeat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 I can not see how you can beat this contract unless partner has bid 3♥ on a six card suit, which is possible with the void in spades. But how can it hurt to cash the ♣A before continuing hearts? This could also possibly work if partner has seven hearts and ♦J7 doubleton. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 I can not see how you can beat this contract unless partner has bid 3♥ on a six card suit, which is possible with the void in spades. But how can it hurt to cash the ♣A before continuing hearts? This could also possibly work if partner has seven hearts and ♦J7 doubleton. Rainer Herrmann Could partner have x, AQJxxxx, Qx, 109x where A or Q♣ switch might be good, is locking declarer in dummy with 2 rounds of hearts good ? S could have some 4234 hand, there is no need to assume partner is short in spades, simply playing hearts could give declarer a horrible guess on the second round of diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 Could partner have x, AQJxxxx, Qx, 109x where A or Q♣ switch might be good, is locking declarer in dummy with 2 rounds of hearts good ? S could have some 4234 hand, there is no need to assume partner is short in spades, simply playing hearts could give declarer a horrible guess on the second round of diamonds.Hit the NEXT button on the deal, before making your analysis and follow to the first tricks 4 tricks Certain options can be excluded that way. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 Hit the NEXT button on the deal, before making your analysis and follow to the first tricks 4 tricks Certain options can be excluded that way. Rainer HerrmannOK, in that case the best chance would seem to be to lead a heart. My best chance is that declarer's hand is 10xxxxx, xx, Qxx, xx and he views the diamonds incorrectly. If I lock him on the table he has no choice but to drop the J♦, so I'll give him a potentially useless ruff and discard. If he actually had 10xxxxx, xx, QJx(x), x(x) I get egg on my face at MPs as he now makes 11, so is probably best to cash A♣ before playing the heart. I think declarer should get this right if he is missing J♦ as with ♦Jx(x) left I would most likely just return a trump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 If declarer has ♠Txxxxx ♥xx ♦Qxx ♣xx, he really should never go wrong, since as has been mentioned, we could just exit a trump when we hold the ♦J. However, if that is his hand, he has already carved the play - he should have drawn trumps before playing a diamond to avoid the problem. So I will just play ace and another ♣ (not the queen, since I don't want to give a moderate player the idea that I have AQJ in case he is trying to place the ♦ jack by counting the wrong thing) - it is matchpoints, after all, and declarer still has time for another error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 If declarer has ♠Txxxxx ♥xx ♦Qxx ♣xx, he really should never go wrong, since as has been mentioned, we could just exit a trump when we hold the ♦J. However, if that is his hand, he has already carved the play - he should have drawn trumps before playing a diamond to avoid the problem. So I will just play ace and another ♣ (not the queen...Does the fact that declarer stopped drawing trumps not make it more likely that declarer might have a third ♥?If declarer has three diamonds, it must be better to assume declarer had a reason for his play instead of assuming he made a basic error. I can understand a jump to 3♥ over 1♦ with ♠-,♥AQJxxx,♦xx,♣JTxxx Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 In the real world we'd know how many hearts partner had, because he'd have told us with his discard on the spade. I agree with Rainer that he's quite likely to have only six. - AQJxxxx Jx J10xx looks like a 4♥ overcall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted February 15, 2013 Report Share Posted February 15, 2013 Does the fact that declarer stopped drawing trumps not make it more likely that declarer might have a third ♥?If declarer has three diamonds, it must be better to assume declarer had a reason for his play instead of assuming he made a basic error. I can understand a jump to 3♥ over 1♦ with ♠-,♥AQJxxx,♦xx,♣JTxxx Rainer Herrmann I'm not sure partner's carding is consistent with that - at best he's been extremely unhelpful. I guess it depends. I think 3♥ is OK with a 7-4 if partner lacks the club jack, although I would bid four myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alik1974 Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 My first thought was that partner should have 7 ♥, otherwise declarer would have chosen a better line of play instead of this one, which immediately sinks the contract. (There actually exist better lines of play if he holds 3 ♥) However, it is possible that declarer also believes that partner has 7 ♥ and he trusts that we don't have a third ♥ to promote a trump trick ! (Our lead of ♥10 and play of 5♥ next is consistent with this scenario, and he knows we rate to hold ♣A and ♦K) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.