[FrancesHinden]

I was surprised to see (at least) two pairs let this game through at the weekend in the English county-teams-of-eight qualifying round. It was close to the last hand of a long weekend so tiredness may have had something to do with it, but I'm sure everyone here can do better.

South is declarer. I am showing here your hand (west) and dummy (north)

Scoring: IMP

1♣ 1♥ 1♠ P
2♠ P 4♠ all pass

---

You lead your singleton heart, and unless/until you ruff one of his winners, partner is going to play three rounds of the suit, Jack, Ace, King. What do you discard? Or do you want to ruff one of them, and if so play back what?

[HeartA]

Ruff the 3rd ♥ and shift to diamond.

[pclayton]

HeartA, on Nov 27 2006, 10:09 AM, said:

Ruff the 3rd ♥ and shift to diamond.

Spoiler

Ditto. Partner is showing interest in diamonds.

Well (you ask); where is our diamond trick going? If declarer has AKJxxxx, xxx, Qxx, void, pard will be in an awkward position after winning the 3rd heart.

[FrancesHinden]

If you are ruffing the third heart, what did you discard on the second heart?

[1eyedjack]

Perhaps ruff the second heart and play a Diamond? If that is right I reckon I would get it wrong unless presented as a problem

[EricK]

If partner wanted us to ruff the third ♥ wouldn't he have lead a low one?

[jikl]

Partners don't always play the easiest cards

Sean

[pclayton]

EricK, on Nov 27 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

If partner wanted us to ruff the third ♥ wouldn't he have lead a low one?

Because we may have a natural trump trick; pard doesn't know for sure.

[pclayton]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 27 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

If you are ruffing the third heart, what did you discard on the second heart?

A discouraging ♦ I think; Declarer could be 6=3=2=2.

[neilkaz]

pclayton, on Nov 27 2006, 06:29 PM, said:

EricK, on Nov 27 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

If partner wanted us to ruff the third ♥ wouldn't he have lead a low one?

Because we may have a natural trump trick; pard doesn't know for sure.

On this layout there is a slight chance of PD being void in ♣ in which case his 3rd ♥ should be his lowest one as suit preference so you ruff and return a ♣.

.. neilkaz ..

[plaur]

Here is my try. I feel so humble when stuff like this gets posted in Beg/int and its so difficult - lol. Would appreciate comments or hints!

I have troble finding a decl hand without the ♦K that jumps to 4♠. Decl must have at least 2 ♦'s, else E would have 6 ♦'s and he does not have that for his bidding. Anyway, even if decl does not have the ♦K, his ♦ loser will not go away (unless I let him ruff raise his clubs)
If partner is void in clubs decl has 3, and then he has a ♣ loser that wont go away. So I do not want to get in and lead a club.
Decl is marked with
AKxxx
xxx
Kx
and 3 cards missing
If he is 2-2 in minors he will never go down.
If he has single ♣ then he may need to ruff two red loosers. Hmm, dont think I can prevent that.
What if decl is void in ♣? He still only needs two ruffs as he can discard one on ♣A.
So im stuck with
AKxxx
xxx
Kx
Jxx
and it does not matter what I discard. All I need to do is not get in and lead a ♣.

[HeartA]

plaur,

If pd was void in clubs and wanted me to return club for him to ruff, he would not play that way. First, he played HA instead of HK (or Q), which means he preferred a higher rank suit instead of clubs. Secondly, pd shd know I am not void in trumps. If he wanted club return, he would cash HQ at trick #2 and return small H for me to ruff. That would be clear for me to return club.

Finally, declarer's bid of 4S could based on strength or length of trumps.

[kenberg]

Thanks, Plaur, I share your frustration at finding this stumper on the Beginner list. Some comfort can perhaps be found in the fact that apparently the non-beginners who played it didn't find it so clear either.

It seems to me that declarer cannot have three clubs since, as others have said, surely partner's third card would have been a small heart to force me to ruff, and in fact his smallest heart to make sure I return a club. On the other hand, if declarer has the Kxx in diamonds I don't see how to stop him from taking five spades, two diamonds, a diamond ruff and two clubs. That's ten tricks.

On the third hand, if pard has the king of diamonds (which seems unlikely) then I don't really see why he can't just cash his hearts, get out with a trump, and sit and wait for his king. If by any chance a club hook would allow declarer to dispose of his loser (seems unlikely to be not enough) he will do it whether I do or do not ruff and shift.

I guess I just have a blind spot here. Put me back with the beginners. Perhaps I need to assume that declarer, not partner, has a club void. At least that would kill the finesse. Still, I don't see what to do.

[plaur]

Thx HeartA. Read pclaytons hidden too. Guess decl can have a hand without the ♦K. Can it be:
AKJxxxx
xxx
Qxx
-
After the 3rd heart partner cant lead without giving a trick away. So I must ruff the 3rd ♥ and lead a ♦. I still dont see why it is important what I discard on the 2nd ♥.

Kenberg, im not frustated with hands like these in the beg/int. Its a good hand to discuss.

[neilkaz]

plaur, on Nov 28 2006, 04:02 PM, said:

Thx HeartA. Read pclaytons hidden too. Guess decl can have a hand without the ♦K. Can it be:
AKJxxxx
xxx
Qxx
-
After the 3rd heart partner cant lead without giving a trick away. So I must ruff the 3rd ♥ and lead a ♦. I still dont see why it is important what I discard on the 2nd ♥.

Kenberg, im not frustated with hands like these in the beg/int. Its a good hand to discuss.

We agree and unless I am missing something simple, this hand could have been put into the adv/exp forum !

What are we missing here ? .. neilkaz ..

[kenberg]

Yes, it's a good hand to discuss. While out raking leaves, I decided maybe declarer had exactly the hand you suggest. That would make it necessary to ruff and play a diamond. I guess it is also consistent with partner's play. I was thinking maybe to suggest diamonds he would take the first trick with the ace (an unusual play holding the AKQJ and then then Q and J, but maybe JAK is right.

I would not have gotten this right at the table since ruffing, at first, appears to allow declarer to draw trumps in two rounds and then ruff a diamond loser in peace. But once we realize he cannot be stopped from ruffing with a holding of Kxx then maybe the light shines through.

I thought you were lamenting, as I was, not being able to see in the time you would be allowed at the table what to do with a hand posted for beginners. I wasn't griping about the hand. Anyway, I apologize for jumping to conclusions.

Of course maybe this still isn't right, but at least it is a way that the hand might be set.

And now I see from hidden text that others are way ahead of me here. Oh well. Congratulations.

[FrancesHinden]

plaur, on Nov 28 2006, 11:02 PM, said:

Guess decl can have a hand without the ♦K. Can it be:
AKJxxxx
xxx
Qxx
-
After the 3rd heart partner cant lead without giving a trick away. So I must ruff the 3rd ♥ and lead a ♦. I still dont see why it is important what I discard on the 2nd ♥.

Kenberg, im not frustated with hands like these in the beg/int. Its a good hand to discuss.

I promise this is not a difficult hand to beat. I think everyone is trying to be far too clever!

The hand you suggest is certainly possible. You are definitely going in the right direction by trying to envisage what declarer's hand can be when it actually matters what we do. In fact this hand isn't the exact layout we had at the table, but keep going with this one because it's consistent with the auction, it matters what we do (and it'll lead us to the right answer anyway).

If that is declarer's hand, it does indeed make a difference what you discard on the second heart. As we have plenty of time away from the table to analyse the hand we can work it out the hard way, by thinking about how the play will go. You discard a club on the second heart, ruff the third and play a diamond. Declarer might run it and go off, but instead declarer could rise with the ace of diamonds and...

(At the table we may not have time first to deduce what the layout can be, and second how the play will go and have to fall back on our best guess)

[kenberg]

Yes, I had gotten that far. If I toss a club T2, ruff T3, and lead a diamond declarer can rise, ruff a club, after which declarer can get back to dummy three times in trumps, getting two more club ruffs and then, after winning dummy's last trump, cash the ace of clubs establishing his Q. So yes, it has to be a diamond pitch.

I agree that the hand is not all that hard providing we have the time (which of course we do in discussion). The problem is this: In trying to defeat the hand you go through scenarios that strike you as likely first. Eg Maybe I should ruff and return a club. No, partner would have led a low heart if that were right. Maybe I should toss diamonds and hop to ruff. No, too many diamonds. Maybe I should save all my diamonds in case the ten in Txxx is important. No, it won't be and anyway I can't afford a club. Maybe... There are several more I went through. Eventually I got to: I think we can beat this only if declarer has a club void and partner has the king of diamonds. Then it was time to deal with the leaves, since the last day of yard waste pick-up was this morning.

It's a good hand, and as I often feel I should have reached the solution sooner (if indeed I have reached the solution). Going through these things at leisure ups the chances of recognizing them at the table, no doubt. It seems simple in retrospect: If declarer holds the king of diamonds he will have no diamond losers. He cannot, on partner's play have three clubs (if declarer has three clubs but partner has no trumps then it is easy to count ten tricks for declarer) so he has no club losers. So we have to give partner the king of diamonds and we have to deny declarer the ability to finesse the club. Finally we have to envision a problem for partner that would keep him from simply waiting for his king of diamonds.


The other night I stupidly went down in a hand I should have made. Had I thought it out, I would have done fine. It was late, I was tired, I had had wine earlier, I went down. I should have made that hand, and the high level players defending this hand should have set it. I won't be throwing stones though.

[bid_em_up]

Since partner could (should even) always force us to ruff the 2nd (or 3rd) heart if he had a club void OR the diamond K, I really dont think it is possible for declarer to be 7-3-3-0, but then again, partners do make mistakes.

[bid_em_up]

Since partner could (should even) always force us to ruff the 2nd (or 3rd) heart if he had a club void OR the diamond K, I really dont think it is possible for declarer to be 7-3-3-0, but then again, partners do make mistakes.

At the table, I would pitch a diamond on the second heart, ruff the third one and lead a diamond. Partner has at least remembered to clearly signal diamond preference by his heart plays, even though he appears to have forgotten to force me to ruff the third heart.......