manudude03 Posted August 6, 2015 Report Share Posted August 6, 2015 [hv=pc=n&s=s95h874d84caqj963&w=sk2h9632dj965c742&v=b&a=1h2s(11-15)3hpp3spp4hppp]266|200[/hv] MPs scoring.Partner is known to be somewhat frisky. He leads the ♠A. If it matters, you play reverse count here. Do you unblock or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted August 6, 2015 Report Share Posted August 6, 2015 I don't . He is trying to give me a ruff obviously and he believes he may have an entry. Pd is short in hearts, HE may as well be 6133 (if he has 7 spades it hardly matters whether we unblock or not) Which makes declarer may not enjoy his clubs.And how are we planning to defeat 4♥ anyway if pd does not have ♦A? Say 2 rounds of spade and then we get a ♠ over ruff ? Especially if declarer has 5 of ♥? We still need pd to hold ♦A in most cases, no? I mean declarer will raise ♦A, ♣ hook, and run clubs, will over ruff when u ruff. Or simply clear trumps and finesse clubs if he has 2 clubs. But look at the auction. It makes little sense to me. Pd should have 7th spade for his bidding but what does N have that he passed 3♥ and then bid 4? Something gave him hope when pd bid 3♠ which i am having hard time to construct. I don't think he bid 4 because his Qx ♠ improved! Maybe xxx? Something like xxx AKQJ5 Axx xx ? If so we can not set this. If he has 4♦ and 1]cl] then we can probably set by playing ♣ after our 3rd trick via overruff. Most natural defense to me seems like win ♠K play ♦ and hope to get a ♠ over ruff. Or pd takes a trump trick+ diamond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyC Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 Unblocking might be necessary if partner holds a 6142 with ♠AQJxxx and ♣Kx or similar. But that hand is unlikely for most people, even if they're described as 'somewhat frisky'. Declarer's delayed game bid and partner's balance make hands like [AJTxxxx J Ax xxx] or [AJTxxxx A xxxx x] more likely (where a trump promotion is our best shot). Finally, partner might actually have this beating in his own hand. Holding [AJTxxxx --- Axxx Kx] or [AJTxxxx --- KQxx Kx]. All we have to do is not give away a trick! On balance, not unblocking looks like the winner to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 Unblocking might be necessary if partner holds a 6142 with ♠AQJxxx and ♣Kx or similar. But that hand is unlikely for most people, even if they're described as 'somewhat frisky'.. I still can't see how unblocking will do any good for defeating with the above hand you constructed. Tell me a hand that unblocking works while blocking not. Declarer's delayed game bid and partner's balance make hands like [AJTxxxx J Ax xxx] or [AJTxxxx A xxxx x] more likely (where a trump promotion is our best shot). No, pd can not have those hands. Are you telling me that opener passed 3♥ initially with Qx AKQTx KQxxx K or Qx KQJTx AKQ K ? Come on. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif Finally, partner might actually have this beating in his own hand. Holding [AJTxxxx --- Axxx Kx] or [AJTxxxx --- KQxx Kx]. All we have to do is not give away a trick! Hmm...can you explain me how exactly are you planning to beat 4♥ when pd hold these hands? On balance, not unblocking looks like the winner to me. Now that I agree. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 I just win the second spade and play the diamond nine. If partner has the diamond ace without the queen, he will know the only chance is a third spade. Maybe partner's hand is AQJTxx x ATxx Kx, giving declarer xxx AKQJT KQx xx. Declarer bid 4♥ as a sacrifice, hoping we would not double. Unblocking is clearly potty, since pard can have seven spades and the ♦AQ. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyC Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 All of my analysis is rubbish because I had the deal rotated incorrectly. Please ignore :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 it is matchpoints so it's not quite so obvious, though playing to restrict the overs (Aqj10xx Q Kjxx kx would make sense for partner's hand for example) against a game you pushed them into would be a trifle negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 The key here is that you're playing MPs. If you unblock and partner ♠ holding is something like ♠ AJ9xxx(x), it unnecessarily gives away a trick to declarer. -450 instead of a normal -420, or, -420 instead of a normal +50 are terrible results at MPs -- likely near zeroes. Since you can't know what partner's ♠ holding is, you just have to play low and hope for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted August 8, 2015 Report Share Posted August 8, 2015 I might be being a bit thick, but when the opponents stop in part score and we push them into game, I don't set a premium upon stopping overtricks. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 9, 2015 Report Share Posted August 9, 2015 why didn't we double?, opponents don't thin they can make their contract why should we? My partners will not lead from AQ no matter what so I find unblocking pretty lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted August 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2015 On this occasion, it shouldn't matter in theory if you unblocked or not. I had the vulnerability wrong, the opponents weren't vulnerable. [hv=pc=n&s=s95h874d84caqj963&w=sk2h9632dj965c742&n=sj87hakqj5dkq7ct8&e=saqt643htdat32ck5&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1h2s3hpp3spp4hppp]399|300[/hv] I unblocked convinced partner wouldn't bid 3S without AQ. Unfortunately partner didn't find the third spade continuation. We got 60% for 4H= (comparing against 1NTx+5!! 4H+1 x2, 2S+2 and 2S+3) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted August 9, 2015 Report Share Posted August 9, 2015 On this occasion, it shouldn't matter in theory if you unblocked or not. I had the vulnerability wrong, the opponents weren't vulnerable. [hv=pc=n&s=s95h874d84caqj963&w=sk2h9632dj965c742&n=sj87hakqj5dkq7ct8&e=saqt643htdat32ck5&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1h2s3hpp3spp4hppp]399|300[/hv] I unblocked convinced partner wouldn't bid 3S without AQ. Unfortunately partner didn't find the third spade continuation. We got 60% for 4H= (comparing against 1NTx+5!! 4H+1 x2, 2S+2 and 2S+3) I misread this one badly by crediting partner with the spade jack in my initial answer. :( 1 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.