Tricky Contract

[Winstonm]

What is your line to make 4S?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skqj52ha973daqjc7&n=s987hk85d943ca832&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1s2c2sp4sppp]266|200|4S=Wolff game try - bid it and try to make it.[/hv]

 

Opening lead is the 4 of hearts. Standard leads.

[AL78]

Win in hand, play spades from the top, hope thay are 3-2 or singleton ten. Use dummy's two entries to take the diamond finesse twice. If it doesn't work the first time, hope for a 3-3 break in hearts.

 

That would be my plan at the table. I suspect I am completely wrong as my line looks too easy for this to have been posted as a problem.

[Winstonm]

Win in hand, play spades from the top, hope thay are 3-2 or singleton ten. Use dummy's two entries to take the diamond finesse twice. If it doesn't work the first time, hope for a 3-3 break in hearts.

 

That would be my plan at the table. I suspect I am completely wrong as my line looks too easy for this to have been posted as a problem.

 

You're not completely wrong but that line doesn't work. As far as I can tell, only one line works but I'm not sure if it is the best line to take.

 

Sometimes the most simple looking turn out to be tricky to get right. Looking at the hand, taking into account the bidding, there are 5 potential losers. 2 in spades, 2 in hearts, and 1 in diamonds. It is possible to hold the spade losers to 1 even with a bad split, but that is quite anti-percentage, and even if you played for 10xxx of spades onside and it worked you would still need the hearts 3-3 as there are not enough entries to repeat the diamond finesse. The diamond finesses may work, but the opponent on the left did overcall at the two level so I wouldn't count on that finesse working. So it should be assumed that spades are no worse than 3-2. And that leaves hearts...

[Winstonm]

For the curious:

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skqj52ha973daqjc7&w=sath42dkt5ckqj954&n=s987hk85d943ca832&e=s643hqjt6d8762ct6&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1s2c2sp4sppp]399|300|Lead 4H, standard leads[/hv]

The winning play is to duck the heart lead in both hands. Win a continuation and lead a spade to the king. Now you can play two rounds of spades and ruff the 4th heart without losing to the spade 10.

 

[AL78]

For the curious:

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skqj52ha973daqjc7&w=sath42dkt5ckqj954&n=s987hk85d943ca832&e=s643hqjt6d8762ct6&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1s2c2sp4sppp]399|300|Lead 4H, standard leads[/hv]

The winning play is to duck the heart lead in both hands. Win a continuation and lead a spade to the king. Now you can play two rounds of spades and ruff the 4th heart without losing to the spade 10.

 

 

Yes I should have said in my line duck the heart at trick one which avoids having to do it later. A bit fortunate the defender with two hearts only has two spades so a heart loser can be ruffed.

[Cyberyeti]

Yes I should have said in my line duck the heart at trick one which avoids having to do it later. A bit fortunate the defender with two hearts only has two spades so a heart loser can be ruffed.

 

This only matters because it's specifically A10, if it's Ax you can just play 3 rounds of hearts. I can't see any likely positions where it loses where something else works.

[Winstonm]

This only matters because it's specifically A10, if it's Ax you can just play 3 rounds of hearts. I can't see any likely positions where it loses where something else works.

 

My question about this hand has always been this: should you actually find the winning line?

 

Basically, my thinking is this. The diamond finesse is almost surely doomed to fail, so wasting entries there is folly. That leaves hearts and spades to worry about. The key card in spades is the 10: who has it and how many with it. Hearts need to be either 3-3 or the 4th heart ruffed. As the 4-2 heart break is the a priori expectation it seems that arranging a ruff is probably needed - and that means not being overruffed by the 10 or having too many spades played before the ruff.

 

This is where ducking the heart seems prudent. If the hearts are 3-3, it doesn't matter if you duck. But if the hearts are 4-2, ducking the heart retains control. If the opps switch to spade and a spade, there is still the opportunity to test hearts - if they are 3-3 pull the last trump and claim with a diamond loser. If they are 4-2, you can then ruff the 4th in dummy as long as the long heart and long spade are together.

 

If you win the first heart, you are screwed as the opps can arrange to play 3 round of spades or ruff with the 10 before you can arrange the ruff.

 

I think this play should be found if one is "in form", as they say. It is far-sighted and you have to work it out at trick one, as usual.

[gszes]

I would much rather force my opps to play world class or seeing eye defense rather than risk what can be an otherwise iron clad contract. IMHO I think a much better plan is to win trick 1 in hand and plunk down the spade Q. This gives the opps a miniscule chance to blunder by ducking. Assuming they win the lead and return their 2nd heart (ok it wasn't a singleton so shoot me). Win the King and take the dia finesse to the Q (pretty much forcing lho to take their K). If the dia finesse loses,

I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.

 

This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.

 

What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).

 

It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.

[Winstonm]

I would much rather force my opps to play world class or seeing eye defense rather than risk what can be an otherwise iron clad contract. IMHO I think a much better plan is to win trick 1 in hand and plunk down the spade Q. This gives the opps a miniscule chance to blunder by ducking. Assuming they win the lead and return their 2nd heart (ok it wasn't a singleton so shoot me). Win the King and take the dia finesse to the Q (pretty much forcing lho to take their K). If the dia finesse loses,

I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.

 

This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.

 

What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).

 

It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.

Thank you for the response! Btw, this hand was against robots.

[Cyberyeti]

I would much rather force my opps to play world class or seeing eye defense rather than risk what can be an otherwise iron clad contract. IMHO I think a much better plan is to win trick 1 in hand and plunk down the spade Q. This gives the opps a miniscule chance to blunder by ducking. Assuming they win the lead and return their 2nd heart (ok it wasn't a singleton so shoot me). Win the King and take the dia finesse to the Q (pretty much forcing lho to take their K). If the dia finesse loses,

I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.

 

This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.

 

What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).

 

It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.

 

The problem is not that he returns the second heart, the issue is that he wins and returns his second spade, and his partner plays a third when in with the heart. You can't objectively make if he has a stiff heart and 2 spades.

[Winstonm]

The problem is not that he returns the second heart, the issue is that he wins and returns his second spade, and his partner plays a third when in with the heart. You can't objectively make if he has a stiff heart and 2 spades.

And thank you for the response as this question has been bugging me for days: should this contract be made?

[Cyberyeti]

And thank you for the response as this question has been bugging me for days: should this contract be made?

 

I think it should, but I think you need some deep thought at trick 1 to realise you have to duck this, as you have to realise that where this fails, other things fail also.

[Winstonm]

I think it should, but I think you need some deep thought at trick 1 to realise you have to duck this, as you have to realise that where this fails, other things fail also.

 

Thanks again as your thinking coincides with mine.

 

This hand is the type that I would have figured out and made back in the day. It is hard for me to regain the concentration level I had as a younger man. With that lapse has come some self doubt. So again I thank you for helping me understand that my first thoughts - that I should have made this contract - was a valid thought.