Declarer play

[remnart]

I spotted this hand in one of the Camrose Trophy matches over last weekend. After an auction in which S had shown a strong hand with a long ♣suit and W had pre-empted in ♥ NS ended up in 7♣. W led the 10♥ which went A, J, ♦A. S led the ♣Q from dummy, E played the 7 and, after considerable thought, S played low and lost the trick to W's singleton ♣K. Did declarer play correctely?

 

♠A42

♥AK542

♦Q

♣Q965

 

♠KQ9

♥-

♦AK6

♣AJ108432

 

Full auction was:

 

E S W N

P 1♣ 3♥ X

P 5♣ P 7♣

P P P

 

The 1♣ opening bid was Precision, showing an opening bid of 17 or more points.

N's X showed at least a game going hand.

[MrAce]

At which level did W preempt? 2?3?

 

Anyway, assuming that W preempted at 2 level, showing 6 card suit, due to number of vacant places finesse is correct imo. I may be wrong, because I don't know how to calculate the odds due to vacant places, but my instincts tell me that having shown at least 6 card in the preempted suit while RHO has one or two of them makes RHO hold K7 more probable.

[eagles123]

I guess the preempt is on a very bad suit so is likely to have a bit of shape which might be another reason to finesse?

[mikeh]

A note to the OP: always, always give the forum the information that would be available to a declarer in real life, even if you think that the information shouldn't matter. Maybe it won't, but since you are asking what others would do, and why, you have to give them all of the information.

 

Thus we need to know the exact auction, including initial passes, if any, and the vulnerability. Saying that W 'pre-empted' is of limited help. Knowing that he bid 2 or 3 or 4 would be information available to a declarer. Knowing he was red v white or white v red, etc, would be known to the declarer.

 

Posting incomplete information is akin to giving us a hand and saying: the opps are in 7N...what card do you lead? Nobody would answer that question without knowing how they got there.

 

[/rant]

 

As for the OP question, assuming West bid 3♥, I think the hook is correct. If West bid only 2♥, and we infer a 7 card suit, then I think that I'd play for the drop if West were white, on the basis that with a void he'd be more likely to bid 3♥ even on a crap suit, and more likely to bid only 2 if he held the club K, stiff. While there are too many variables to deal specifically with all other combos (see rant), I think that I would tend to hook on most other layouts.

[MrAce]

Ok, I just checked the suit play, with vacant places. Assuming that W showed a 6 card suit. After 1st round of hearts, W is known to have 7 vacant places and E 12 vacant (is this true?) If so, the odds for finesse is %38 while drop is % 24 after Q is played and and RHO played 7. (or is it E vacant places 11 after ♦7, which does not make much of a difference in the outcome though up to S.P, I tried both)

 

So it is not even close. Even if W showed only 5 cards, odds are still significantly better for finesse. Even when W has shown no suit at all, odds are in favor of drop only by %2. (after Q is played and we saw 7 from rho)

[PhantomSac]

Declarer should at least try the HK at trick 2. Sometimes people cannot avoid the temptation to ruff a winner with their stiff trump.

[MrAce]

Declarer should at least try the HK at trick 2. Sometimes people cannot avoid the temptation to ruff a winner with their stiff trump.

 

Damn good point!

 

And if they don't ruff, from a stiff 7, pretending like he holds K7, he deserves to beat me, which I would have finessed anyway.

[Trinidad]

Declarer should at least try the HK at trick 2. Sometimes people cannot avoid the temptation to ruff a winner with their stiff trump.

I agree, in principle, but that play doesn't work when you just discarded the ♦A on the first heart (as declarer did, according to the OP). If he would have discarded an innocent ♦6 it could work, though.

 

Rik

[wanoff]

Normally you'd finesse, because otherwise you'd be playing E to have passed with a probable 11 cards in 2 suits.

But it costs nothing to cash ♥K first. If he's false carded with Jx and so trying to encourage the finesse, I'd do the opposite.

I can't see anyone ruffing the ♥K but you never know.

[PhantomSac]

I can't see anyone ruffing the ♥K but you never know.

 

Depends on the level of the opps of course, but even if they don't ruff you might gain something based on how long they think about ruffing (I suspect it would take an average defender a lot longer to pitch with a stiff trump than with Kx of trumps). Also obviously agree with trinidad, pitching the ace of diamonds was not good... pitching a spade is best imo (like we are going to pitch 2 spades, of course this is not possible since we woulda pulled trumps first, but the defender would have to figure it out which might take them a little bit, again depending on their level). Anyways if nothing interesting happens we can just revert to the finesse but seems like a cost free way to maybe gain something as you say.

[gszes]

xxx Txxxxx(xx) xx(x K)

is still a heck of a lot more likely to open 2h 3h 4h than xxx xxxxxx(xx) xx void

 

Once it looks like the heart QJ are at best split there are no more HCP for lho to hold aside from the club K. Vacant spaces is fine but hcp requirements are usually better.

 

I echo MIKEH /rant about entirely too much information is missing.

[MrAce]

xxx Txxxxx(xx) xx(x K)

is still a heck of a lot more likely to open 2h 3h 4h than xxx xxxxxx(xx) xx void

 

Once it looks like the heart QJ are at best split there are no more HCP for lho to hold aside from the club K. Vacant spaces is fine but hcp requirements are usually better.

 

I echo MIKEH /rant about entirely too much information is missing.

 

I love this comment. Stiff K makes it a reasonable preempt, but void does not. Why did I not think of this?

[nige1]

OXO ♠ A 4 2 ♥ A K 5 4 2 ♦ Q ♣ Q 9 6 5

YOU ♠ K Q 9 ♥- ♦ A K 6 ♣ A J T 8 4 3 2

(_P) 1♣ (3♥) _X

(_P) 5♣ (_P) 7♣

(_P) _P (_P)

The 1♣ opening bid was Precision, showing an opening bid of 17 or more points.

N's X showed at least a game going hand.

I spotted this hand in one of the Camrose Trophy matches over last weekend. After an auction in which S had shown a strong hand with a long ♣suit and W had pre-empted in ♥ NS ended up in 7♣. W led the 10♥ which went A, J, ♦A. S led the ♣Q from dummy, E played the 7 and, after considerable thought, S played low and lost the trick to W's singleton ♣K. Did declarer play correctely?

Phantomsac's line seems best: ♥A. chuck ♦6 (as Trinidad suggests). Then ♥K hoping for a tell from RHO.

Unless RHO ruffs ♥K, take MrAce's advice to finesse ♣Q

[gszes]

I love this comment. Stiff K makes it a reasonable preempt, but void does not. Why did I not think of this?

 

When was the last time you preferred to open a weak 2 with say Jxxxxx xxx xxxx void ? would you make the same case for Jxxxxx xxx xxx K. IMHO one is much more likely to open a weak 2s with the latter. The former contains a couple of surprises that is beyond anything partner might suspect in a bidding situation. The realm of probability becomes so wide (and that is just a weak 2) that essentially even opening a weak 2 becomes a game of chance much more than a technique for expressing a hand. When we extend that our to the 3 level Jxxxxxx xx xxx K vs Jxxxxxx xxx xxx void the range of hands now includes anything from AQJxxxx xx xx xx to xxxxxxx x(xx xx)xxx void with no room left to explore how is it even close to reasonable for your partner to ever make anything but a WAG no matter what kind of bidding there is. This same principle does not hold as much sway when one opens at the 4 level because a wide variety of holding becomes reasonably probable there and at least the partnership is in game.

 

I do not pretend to say one method is superior to the other. My contention is that hughmongous ranges take away from one of the greatest aspects of this fine game and that is the use of brain power. If every bid is a crap shoot we might as well take up backgammon or just retire to a casino rather than waste time pushing cards around the room. So this becomes more a decision based on what you think your opps are normally going to do rather than strictly a case of open spaces. If you are playing against me play for the drop:)

[Zelandakh]

My contention is that hughmongous ranges take away from one of the greatest aspects of this fine game and that is the use of brain power. If every bid is a crap shoot we might as well take up backgammon or just retire to a casino rather than waste time pushing cards around the room.

Then you miss the point about wide-ranging preempts. It is not about making every hand a crap shoot but rather making it a crap shoot when the odds would otherwise be against us and thereby improving the odds in our favour when they might otherwise have been even. I would not open a 1st/2nd seat weak two with the hands you posted either because the odds are not right for it. But 3♠ in 3rd might well go through my head at green as would throwing out an overcall over a strong artificial opening. Sometimes you use your brain power deciding whether to throw the dice rather than on something at the 4 or 5 level. Treating such a style as thoughtless is more than a little insulting.

[cherdano]

When was the last time you preferred to open a weak 2 with say Jxxxxx xxx xxxx void ? would you make the same case for Jxxxxx xxx xxx K. IMHO one is much more likely to open a weak 2s with the latter.

Strongly disagree - I'd much rather have the former hand.

[lackeman]

First we take the A of heart and then playing the K of heart... Then (if our dreams come true) E steal from x. If nothing of that happens we atleaste know if W has 7 whitch is likley... Remember in my veiw if E has single h and cl he mostly will steal the h... Possible eaven w Kx(worser play have been made "missclick", but that would bee a clear misstake ofcause)..

Further if E have x only in club and J only in hearts then many of those hands will open preempt and that further reduce (since it didnt happend) that E have x only in cl...If he have for ex 5-1-5-2 he vill prob s and probably not ruf the hK.. And finally we know more about W cards ie those heart he have that is not cl K.. Say if he got 7h he has if we think in "probability"(Dont like it:)) he has 6 places (unknown cards) and E has (after 2 trick first ha, then hK) 11 unknown cards.. so thinking in that way 2/3 chance to have the cl K, from that aspect.

I think we nshould throw spades instead of d because after the heart we will play for finesse ie we have and should then assume E have the K... Then it will be no danger att all to take the the S (A,K,ruff)... If w have the K we would go down anyway if we play clubs instead and finesse.. So we can spare 1 spade in hand and 3 dimonds and also ruff those and then we can get a read in some cases when w have the cl K... Atleaste it is no danger to do like that U get mor information before playing Clubs..In practise they can do wrong also...

We are "waiting" for more information simply(often this will not change the way,but it does anyway allways lead to a better grounds, argument for our play)..then

In this hand E can discard on hearts also, it may bee possible to get the exact distribution..And when it is calculated one cl for W (ie the king) then we can change our play some times so we can make som of the K single..

Remember the reason that we can do this is that it can not (well if not E steal over dummy in d (very unlikeley) and eaven if so that E overruff it could also happenes that he proved not to be able to overruff and in this cases we naturally places the K of cl to W..

I think that I misses and take "decition" instead of waiting for more info/grounds´, them lacking it will bee hard to be "wise", to do the best play, to get a better plan, better ideas...

Thx for mee... Probably i have missed some points here also...

Edit:We can eaven play a third heart in 3 trick and observe what E does/throw... Think this is best line to start... Finito.. thx

[gszes]

SIGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHWhen I first answered this OP I read the description of the bidding (there was none) and in conjunction with MIKEH description of the various contingencies I based by decision to play for the drop based on LHO opening a preemptive heart bid of unknown value 2h was the most logical guess given the ability of south to show a strong hand with clubs. I then answered the remainder of the questions about my post based on the original assumptions. After reading several other posts which seemed to draw unwarranted information (zelandahk) I went back and looked at the OP and lo and behold a TON of new information was available. Given that rho was a passed hand and things like game and slam were of minimal to non existent consideration (a situation that was completely within the realm of probability if w were the opening bidder as I guessed and wrote about consistently if erroneously)

 

I Completely AGREE WITH all that chose to take the losing finesse.

[Zelandakh]

Absolutely gszes - re-edits can easily make someone look foolish or wrong when that is unjustified. I am glad to hear this was all based on a misunderstanding. B-)

[Aardv]

This hand was played 6 times in the Camrose (Weekend 2, Match 5, Stanza 1, Board 3), twice in 7♣. The other auction was 1♣-(4♥)-5♣, 5♥-5♠, 7♣, and ♦4 was led.

 

Both declarers ran ♣Q at trick two.

 

It's an interesting bidding problem after 1♣-(3♥), for various meanings of the 1♣ opening.