Results merchants wanted

[Jinksy]

[hv=pc=n&w=saq82hjt85dkt98c6&e=s6hakq962dj7542cq&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1h3c4c4s5hppp]266|200[/hv]

 

T1: 9♠, A, 4 6

T2: 2♠, 5, A♥, 3

T3: K♥, 3, 5, 4

T4: 2♥, 4♣, T, 7

T5: 6♣, 2, Q, K

T6: T♣, 8♦, J, 6♥

T7: J♦, 3, ?

 

Would you have done anything differently so far?

 

Given that I'm asking this, you can probably guess that the Q♦ was offside and stiff. Is there any reason I should have played for N's shortage to be the stiff Q?

[Zelandakh]

I think you should have finished eliminating the spades, not so much for the usual reasons so much as to get additional information as to the suit layout. You probably fine out that North has 6 spades to go with 2 hearts and 4-5 clubs. At the end of the day though, even if you can ascertain that North has a single diamond you still have to guess whether it is the queen or the ace and to me it seems more likely for it to be the ace at these colours - ♣AKTxxxx + ♦A is a bit rich for a NV weak jump in second. Of course if the overcall is not weak it is easy... (did you ask?)

[PhilKing]

♣AKTxxxx + ♦A is a bit rich for a NV weak jump in second. Of course if the overcall is not weak it is easy... (did you ask?)

 

I doubt South has the club ace.

[Zelandakh]

True, it is ♠93 ♥3 ♦Ax3 ♣KTxxxxx - not a bid the LOLs at most clubs would find. I am still not sure that brings us closer to pinpointing the lady though. South actually having the ♣A in an IJO would have been though. :D

[rhm]

Given that I'm asking this, you can probably guess that the Q♦ was offside and stiff. Is there any reason I should have played for N's shortage to be the stiff Q?

No, not in a good game.

 

In fact ♦A lead beats you outright and that would have been more attractive from Axx than AQx

Psychology wise,an intermediate opponent, however, will often put up the ace in this position when the jack is led holding AQx, even though declarer is an open book. (North is unlikely to hold the diamond ace in addition to his other goodies and pass over 5♥)

So there would be more reason to put up the king in a weak game.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Jinksy]

This was from the BBF tournament. I don't remember who was who, but it was individual, so nobody knew for sure what anyone meant (though I don't suppose 3C would be non-weak). IIRC E/W were both good players as far as I am/was aware.

[gszes]

Out of all the possible holdings NS can have for this bidding

 

KJTxxx xx Q (A or K)xxx

xx x Axx (A or K) xxxxxx

 

seems to fit the best making sure s prefers a 3c vs a 2c bid

and allowing for n to give up the bidding holding 4 clubs after has

partners preempt.

 

Sure slight variations are possible (forget about south holding the club

AK and not leading one when their p has never supported the suit).

 

south holding xx x AQx KJTxxxx will probably overcall 2c vs 3c :)

[bdegrande]

I would have eliminated the spades but it doesn't matter much on this hand.

 

The opening leader doesn't have AK of clubs or he would have led one. Given that, it is reasonable to play him for AD and playing a diamond to the K, hoping for N to have either stiff Q or QX. I don't know if it's any better a play than taking the finesse, but it's not ridiculous.

[Jinksy]

He can't have Qx unless something very funny is going on - he has 6Ss*, 2Hs, and probably 4, maybe 5Cs.

 

The relative likelihood of N having a D void was what finally persuaded me to finesse.